DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the resilient lever configured to deploy the extendable telescoping conduit or retract the telescoping conduit in claim 4 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. A review of the specification shows support for a “release tab” 306, but it is unclear from the specification and the drawings how the release tab is configured to retract the telescoping conduit.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 8-9, and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 11,206,959 (hereinafter Schaaf) in view of US Patent Application Publication 2011/0004991 A1 (hereinafter Tai) and US Patent Application Publication 2020/0214514 (hereinafter Stearns).
Regarding claim 1, Schaaf shows a waterless toilet system (20), comprising: a main body (40) including, a toilet bowl (44); a tank (42) having at least one internal compartment (72) configured to retain composting material (74), an external lever (86) mechanicallytoilet bowl, a toilet seat (50) and a toilet seat cover (56) movably attached to the toilet bowl, and
Schaaf fails to show a deployable urinal system disposed within the toilet bowl. Attention is turned to Tai which shows including a deployable urinal system in a toilet bowl (fig. 3) to bring a urine receptacle closer to a standing user during urination to prevent splash back and enhance sanitary conditions (par. 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf to include a deployable urinal system disposed within the toilet bowl to bring a urine receptacle closer to a standing user during urination to prevent splash back and enhance sanitary conditions as evidenced by the teachings of Tai mentioned above.
Schaaf fails to show a urine compartment including a portion in fluid communication with the deployable urinal system. Attention is turned to Stearns which shows including a urine compartment (106) including a portion in fluid communication with a urinal system (118) for capturing and separating urine to create a better compost mixture (par. 5, 7, 8). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf to include a urine compartment including a portion in fluid communication with the deployable urinal system for capturing and separating urine to create a better compost mixture as evidenced by the teachings of Stearns mentioned above.
Schaaf fails to show a compost mixing system comprising at least one mixing wheel disposed within the compost compartment in communication with an external pedal that is configured to cause rotational movement of the compost mixing wheel when depressed. Attention is again turned to Stearns which shows including a compost mixing system with at least one mixing wheel (186) disposed within a compost compartment (102) in communication with an external pedal (188) that is configure to cause rotation movement of the compost mixing wheel when depressed (par. 78). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf to include a compost mixing system comprising at least one mixing wheel disposed within the compost compartment in communication with an external pedal that is configured to cause rotational movement of the compost mixing wheel when depressed to allow a user to easily start the composting process within the toilet system itself before removal as evidenced by the teachings of Stearns mentioned above.
Regarding claim 3, under the modification in view of Tai, Tai shows the deployable urinal system comprises a urinal head (21) connected to a telescoping conduit (22) that is extendable and configured to extend the urinal head beyond the toilet bowl (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, Schaaf shows the waste bin system includes a bottom sliding door (45) for removing material from the compost compartment (col. 7, ln. 1-3).
Regarding claim 9, under the modification in view of Stearns, Stearns shows the urine compartment (106) is detachable from the waste bin system (102) (par. 44).
Regarding claim 13, under the modification in view of Stearns, Stearns shows the urine compartment comprises a main receptacle body (148) including a top end opening (150) for receiving a portion (122) of the deployable urinal system (par. 63).
Regarding claim 14, under the modification in view of Stearns, Stearns shows the main receptacle body (148) includes a bottom end evacuation opening (154) for selectively receiving a sealing cap or a bypass conduit (180) (fig. 7).
Regarding claim 15, under the modification in view of Stearns, Stearns shows the main body (148) includes a substantially flat rear end surface (fig. 7, 8).
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaaf, Stearns, and Tai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent Application Publication 2021/0108401 (hereinafter Carter).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Schaaf fails to show the tank includes a compost material level viewing window slit, and the lower compartment includes a compost material and waste level viewing window slit. Attention is turned to Carter which shows it is common to include a viewing window slit in a tank or reservoir to allow a user to easily see the volume of contents within the tank or reservoir (par. 69). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf such that the tank includes a compost material level viewing window slit, and the lower compartment includes a compost material and waste level viewing window slit to allow a user to easily see the volume of contents within the tank or reservoir as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings above.
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaaf, Stearns, and Tai as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent 11,083,350 (hereinafter Slothower).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Schaaf fails to show wherein disposed at each side of the main body is a mounting member for securely receiving an accessory, wherein the accessory is a collapsible stool. Attention is turned to Slothower which shows including a mounting member (370) on each side of a main body of a toilet bowl assembly for securely receiving a collapsible footstool (340) (fig. 43-44). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf to include at each side of the main body is a mounting member for securely receiving an accessory, wherein the accessory is a collapsible stool to allow a user to easily deploy a footstool when needed as evidenced by the teachings of Slothower mentioned above.
Regarding claim 12, Schaaf shows the main body includes an interior compartment (45) ‘sufficiently sized’ for storing the collapsible stool (a user is capable of storing a collapsible stool in the drawer 45 if so desired due to the size of the compartment relative to a toilet).
Claim(s) 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaaf, Stearns, Tai, and US Patent 7,216,376 (hereinafter Samuels).
Regarding claim 16 and 19, Schaaf shows a waterless toilet system (20), comprising: a main body (40) including, a toilet bowl (44); a tank (42) having at least one internal compartment (72) configured to retain composting material (74), an external lever (86) mechanically
Schaaf fails to show a deployable urinal system disposed within the toilet bowl. Attention is turned to Tai which shows including a deployable urinal system in a toilet bowl (fig. 3) to bring a urine receptacle closer to a standing user during urination to prevent splash back and enhance sanitary conditions (par. 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf to include a deployable urinal system disposed within the toilet bowl to bring a urine receptacle closer to a standing user during urination to prevent splash back and enhance sanitary conditions as evidenced by the teachings of Tai mentioned above. Regarding claim 19 specifically, Tai shows the deployable urinal system comprises a urinal head (21) connected to a telescoping conduit (22) that is extendable and configured to extend the urinal head beyond the toilet bowl (fig. 3).
Schaaf fails to show a urine compartment including a portion in fluid communication with the deployable urinal system. Attention is turned to Stearns which shows including a urine compartment (106) including a portion in fluid communication with a urinal system (118) for capturing and separating urine to create a better compost mixture (par. 5, 7, 8). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf to include a urine compartment including a portion in fluid communication with the deployable urinal system for capturing and separating urine to create a better compost mixture as evidenced by the teachings of Stearns mentioned above.
Schaaf fails to show a compost mixing system comprising at least one mixing wheel disposed within the compost compartment in communication with an external pedal that is configured to cause rotational movement of the compost mixing wheel when depressed. Attention is again turned to Stearns which shows including a compost mixing system with at least one mixing wheel (186) disposed within a compost compartment (102) in communication with an external pedal (188) that is configure to cause rotation movement of the compost mixing wheel when depressed (par. 78). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf to include a compost mixing system comprising at least one mixing wheel disposed within the compost compartment in communication with an external pedal that is configured to cause rotational movement of the compost mixing wheel when depressed to allow a user to easily start the composting process within the toilet system itself before removal as evidenced by the teachings of Stearns mentioned above.
Schaaf fails to show at least one compartment configured to store one or more hygienic products. Attention is turned to Samuels which shows including at least one compartment (132) for storing hygienic products such as toilet paper, sanitary wipes or other hygienic products (col. 6, ln. 13-20; fig. 6). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf to include at least one compartment configured to store one or more hygienic products as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings of Samuels mentioned above.
Schaaf fails to show two mixing wheels. It has been held that the mere duplication of existing parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In the instant case, one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the device of Schaaf to work equally well whether one or two mixing wheels are present. Applicant has placed no criticality on there being precisely two wheels. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf to include two mixing wheels as a matter of design consideration (see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)).
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaaf, Stearns Tai, and Samuels as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Slothower.
Regarding claims 17-18, Schaaf fails to show wherein disposed at each side of the main body is a mounting member for securely receiving an accessory, wherein the accessory is a collapsible stool. Attention is turned to Slothower which shows including a mounting member (370) on each side of a main body of a toilet bowl assembly for securely receiving a collapsible footstool (340) (fig. 43-44). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf to include at each side of the main body is a mounting member for securely receiving an accessory, wherein the accessory is a collapsible stool to allow a user to easily deploy a footstool when needed as evidenced by the teachings of Slothower mentioned above.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schaaf, Stearns Tai, and Samuels as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Carter.
Regarding claim 20, Schaaf fails to show the tank includes a compost material level viewing window slit, and the lower compartment includes a compost material and waste level viewing window slit. Attention is turned to Carter which shows it is common to include a viewing window slit in a tank or reservoir to allow a user to easily see the volume of contents within the tank or reservoir (par. 69). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Schaaf such that the tank includes a compost material level viewing window slit, and the lower compartment includes a compost material and waste level viewing window slit to allow a user to easily see the volume of contents within the tank or reservoir as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: while a cover for a toilet bowl is known per se (see CN 111227700 A – there is a toilet seat, toilet seat cover, and toilet bowl cover; see fig. 10, 11) the combination of a toilet seat, a toilet seat cover, and a toilet bowl cover movably attached between the toilet seat and the toilet seat cover was not found alone in the most relevant prior art nor would a combination of the most relevant prior art have been obvious to arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: while controls for deploying a urinal are known per se (see Tai – a motor, driving gear set, or roller par. 13), a resilient lever configured to deploy or retract the telescoping conduit was not found alone in the most relevant prior art nor would a combination of the most relevant prior art have been obvious to arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: while controls for maintaining a urinal’s position are known per se (see Tai – a motor, driving gear set, or roller par. 13), the main body includes a lever mechanically connected to the deployable urinal system for securing the deployable urinal system in a fixed position was not found alone in the most relevant prior art nor would a combination of the most relevant prior art have been obvious to arrive at the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. CN 111227700 A is directed to the state of the art of waterless toilets with compost mixing materials.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANIE M LOEPPKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5208. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JANIE M LOEPPKE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754