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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 4, “he” should read –the--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 7-9, 12-14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Martin (U.S. Patent No. 1527056).
Regarding Claim 1, Martin discloses a hanging trash receptacle (Figure 1) configured to be attached to a main trash container (capable of) and further configured to receive pet waste (capable of), said hanging trash receptacle comprising: a body portion (Figure 1) having an opening (Figure 1) at a first end (Figure 1) and a bottom portion (Figure 1) at a second end opposite the first end (figure 1), the body comprising a plurality of walls (Figure 1) that taper inwardly from the first end toward the bottom portion such that the bottom portion is narrower than the opening (Figure 1); and a block 8 (Figure 3) disposed within the bottom portion of the body (Figure 3), the block defining a flat interior bottom surface (Figure 3, upper portion of 8) of the body that is configured to reduce a likelihood of pet waste becoming stuck within the bottom portion (Figure 3); and an attachment mechanism 2/4 (figure 1) attached at the first end of the body and being configured to be attached to a portion of the main trash container (capable of being attached, figure 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
588
656
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, Martin discloses the attachment mechanism is configured to be permanently attached to the main trash container (figure 1, capable of being attached permanently).
Regarding Claim 5, Martin discloses the body comprises a shape configured to be unobtrusive to falling trash and trash debris when the trash is being dumped from the main trash container (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 7, Martin discloses the plurality of walls comprises four side walls that meet at an edge at the bottom portion (Figure 1), and the block fills the edge to provide the flat interior bottom surface (figure 3).
Regarding Claim 8, Martin discloses the body comprises side walls that are configured to folded in (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 9, Martin discloses the body comprises a front wall configured to be folded in (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 12, Martin discloses a hanging trash receptacle (Figure 1) configured to be attached to a main trash container and further configured to receive pet waste, said hanging trash receptacle comprising: a body 11 (figure 1) having an opening (Figure 1) at a first end (Figure 1) and a bottom portion (Figure 1) at a second end opposite the first end (figure 1), the body comprising a plurality of walls that taper inwardly from the first end toward the bottom portion such that the bottom portion is narrower than the opening (figure 1); and a block 8 (figure 3) disposed within the bottom portion of the body, the block defining a flat interior bottom surface of the body that is configured to reduce a likelihood of pet waste becoming stuck within the bottom portion (figure 3); and a plurality of hooks 2/4 (figure 1) attached to a first end of the body, said hooks being configured to be attached to the main trash container (Figure 1; capable of being attached).
Regarding Claim 13, Martin discloses the body comprises two side walls 14 (figure 1) positioned between a front wall 11 (Figure 1) and a back wall 11 (figure 1), the walls forming a triangular shape of the body (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 14, Martin discloses the block is fitted at a location where the two side walls, the front wall, and the back wall meet at the bottom portion to provide the flat interior bottom surface (figure 3).
Regarding Claim 16, Martin discloses the body comprises a front wall configured to be folded in (Figure 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin (U.S. Patent No. 1527056) in view of Fleming (U.S. Patent No. 5170903).
Regarding Claim 2, Martin teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the attachment mechanism is configured to be removably attached to the main trash container. However, Fleming teaches the attachment mechanism is configured to be removably attached to the main trash container (figure 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Martin to include the above, as taught by Fleming, in order to allow for attachment to various objects.
Claim(s) 6 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin (U.S. Patent No. 1527056) in view of Lin (U.S. Pub. No. 20120118895).
Regarding Claims 6 and 15, Martin teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for one or more of the side walls of the body comprises one or more cutouts configured to hold a handle portion of a bag. However, Lin teaches the body comprises one or more cutouts configured to hold a handle portion of a bag 28A (figure 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Martin to include the above, as taught by Lin, in order to allow for easy attachment of a bag to keep the interior cleaner.
Claim(s) 10, 11, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin (U.S. Patent No. 5170903) in view of Campbell (U.S. Patent No. 7997543).
Regarding Claim 10, Martin teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for side walls of the body and the front wall are configured to be folded by spring tensions caused by springs formed on the body. However, Campbell teaches side walls of the body and the front wall are configured to be folded by spring tensions caused by springs formed on the body 52a/52b (figure 4A). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Martin to include the above, as taught by Campbell, in order to allow for the body to fold with the tension of the spring.
Regarding Claim 11, Martin teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the front wall comprises a beveled-out portion configured to counteract the spring tensions when the front wall and or the side walls are not folded in. However, Campbell teaches a beveled-out portion 44 (Figure 4A) configured to counteract the spring tensions when the front wall and or the side walls are not folded in (figure 4A). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Martin to include the above, as taught by Campbell, in order to assist in holding the body in place.
Regarding Claim 17, Martin teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the front wall is configured to be folded by spring tensions caused by springs formed on the body. However, Campbell teaches the front wall is configured to be folded by spring tensions caused by springs formed on the body 52a/52b (figure 4A). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Martin to include the above, as taught by Campbell, in order to allow for the body to fold with the tension of the spring.
Regarding Claim 18, Martin teaches all the limitations substantially as claimed except for the front wall comprises a beveled-out portion configured to counteract the spring tensions when the front wall is not folded in. However, Campbell teaches a beveled-out portion 44 (Figure 4A) configured to counteract the spring tensions when the front wall is not folded in (figure 4A). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Martin to include the above, as taught by Campbell, in order to assist in holding the body in place.
Applicant is duly reminded that a complete response must satisfy the requirements of 37 C.F. R. 1.111, including: “The reply must present arguments pointing out the specific distinctions believed to render the claims, including any newly presented claims, patentable over any applied references. A general allegation that the claims “define a patentable invention” without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references does not comply with the requirements of this section. Moreover, “The prompt development of a clear Issue requires that the replies of the applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims.” Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP 2163.06 II(A), MPEP 2163.06 and MPEP 714.02. The ''disclosure'' includes the claims, the specification and the drawings.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/29/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Martin does not disclose a block. However, 8 (figure 3) of Martin shows a block with a flat upper surface. Applicant argues that Martin does not attach to a main trash container. However, the claims do not require a main trash container only that the hanging trash container is configured to attach to a main trash container.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH J VOLZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11am-7pm est.
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, NATHAN JENNESS can be reached at (571)270-5055. 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.
/E.J.V/Examiner, Art Unit 3733
/JEFFREY R ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3733
Prosecution Insights