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 .
Election/Restrictions
No claims are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/09/2024.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11, 15, 17, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In regard to claim 11, lines 13-14, the phrase “detecting rapid movement that causes acceleration to exceed a pre-set acceleration threshold value” renders the claim vague and indefinite since the step of “detecting rapid movement that causes acceleration” is not being positively associated with the “accelerometer” recited as part of the signal unit which is the part of the desired invention that is actually able to detect acceleration to determine if it exceeds a pre-set acceleration threshold value.
In regard to claim 11, lines 11-12, the phrase “actuating the test mode control mechanism on the signal unit to send a test signal to the animal trap initiating a test mode” renders the claim vague and indefinite since paragraph 0066 of the present specification states that “When triggering test mode, e.g., by depressing test mode button 33…this may send a test mode signal via signal unit 30…if off-site receiver 34 receives signal 32…may indicate…sensor 20…may be operational” and paragraph 0085 states “FIG. 9 shows a method 90…optionally initiating a test mode and sending a signal to the off-site receiver (93)”, but the present specification does not disclose sending a test signal to the animal trap as claimed.
In regard to claim 11, lines 21-22, the phrase “actuating the test mode control mechanism on the signal unit to send a test signal to the off-site receiver when the animal trap is triggered initiating a test mode” renders the claim vague and indefinite since it appears to conflict with the previously recited step of “actuating the test mode control mechanism on the signal unit to send a test signal to the animal trap initiating a test mode” that is recited at lines 11-12 of claim 11. The latter recited phrase appears to more correctly claim that the signal 32 is sent to the off-site receiver 34 during test mode activation. The terms “a test signal” of both phrases are also unclear in that it is not clearly known whether the test signals being claimed are the same test signal or different test signals. If they are different test signals, then possibly these terms should be differentiated with “a first test signal” and “a second test signal”.
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) 1, 3, 4, 10, 21-24, 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen 2018/0249698 in view of Vickery et al. 2021/0022333 and Clifford 2013/0222146.
In regard to claim 1, Jensen discloses a method of trapping an animal comprising: providing an animal trap (4 in Figs. 3-4) having a proximal end (right end of 4 in Fig. 3) and a distal end (left end of 4 in Fig. 3), the animal trap comprises a base (7) and a moving portion (6) movably coupled to the base (see Figs. 1-2) and forming an enclosure (enclosure formed when 9 meets 9a) at the distal end with the base when the animal trap is triggered (see Fig. 2); disposing an animal trap sensor (generally 20,22) unto the animal trap, wherein the animal trap sensor comprises: a first portion (20) comprising a flexible arm disposed in (20 has an upper portion disposed within the jaw portion of 6 and a lower portion disposed between the rear sides of 6 in Figs. 3-4) the moving portion (6), and a second portion (22) comprising a responsive component (22 is responsive to movement of 20) disposed in (22 is disposed in the bottom portion of 7 as shown in Fig. 4) the base (7) opposite the first portion (20) at a first distance (see Fig. 3); providing a signal unit (10) comprising a power supply (switch 10 inherently has a power supply in order to send the signal to the IPhone 14); moving the first portion with respect to the second portion, when the animal trap is tripped (see Fig. 2), from the first distance (see Fig. 3), which generates an output property (output is generated when 21a-d contacts 21a1-d1), to a second distance (see Fig. 2), which is different from the first distance (contact between 21d & 21d1 indicate an open trap which occurs at the first distance), thereby changing the output property (contact being made between 21b-c & 21b1-c1) and causing the signal unit (10) to generate a capture signal (15 on 14 in Fig. 3; see para. 0026); and wirelessly sending the capture signal to an off-site receiver (14) to register a capture event (15), but does not disclose a first portion comprising a magnet disposed in the moving portion, and a second portion comprising a magnetically-responsive component disposed in the base opposite the first portion at a first distance. Vickery et al. disclose providing an animal trap (100); disposing an animal trap sensor (104 with 116 & 132) unto the animal trap, wherein the animal trap sensor comprises a first portion comprising a magnet (132) disposed on the moving portion (128), and a second portion comprising a magnetically-responsive component (116) disposed in the base (116 attached to 104 which is secured to 190 via 182) opposite the first portion at a first distance (see Fig. 3); providing a signal unit (transmitter of 118) comprising a power supply (power supply of 118); moving the first portion with respect to the second portion (302 in Fig. 3), when the animal trap is tripped, from the first distance (when trap is set; see para. 0071) which generates an output property, to a second distance (when trap is triggered; see para. 0071), which is different from the first distance, thereby changing the output property and causing the signal unit to generate a capture signal (switch 116 is in an on/closed state); and wireless sending the capture signal to an off-site receiver (network 550 coupled to server 552 and device 554) to register a capture event. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of trapping an animal of Jensen such that the animal trap sensor comprises a first portion comprising a magnet disposed in the moving portion, and a second portion comprising a magnetically-responsive component disposed in the base opposite the first portion at a first distance in view of Vickery et al. in order to utilize an alternative yet equally effective mechanism for detecting the motion of the moving portion with respect to the base when an animal has triggered the trap, wherein the mechanism does not rely upon physical electrical contact between parts to generate the output property and instead relies on magnetic field proximity which may be less prone to short circuiting than electrical contacts which can be short circuited by debris, dirt, or rodent remains thereon. Jensen and Vickery et al. disclose providing a signal unit (10 of Jensen; transmitter of 18 of Vickery et al.), but do not disclose providing a signal unit comprising a test mode control mechanism. Clifford discloses wherein the animal trap sensor (130) further comprises a test mode control mechanism (test switch 180) for initiating a test mode (a device to provide a remote visual signal that a trap has been sprung, along with a way to remotely verify the device is in good operational condition; see para. 0006). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of trapping an animal of Jensen and Vickery et al. such that the signal unit further comprises a test mode control mechanism for initiating a test mode in view of Clifford in order to provide a means for testing whether the animal trap sensor is operational and if the power supply has sufficient charge (see para. 0006 of Clifford).
In regard to claim 3, Jensen, Vickery et al., and Clifford disclose wherein the test mode control mechanism comprises a test mode button (180 of Clifford) for initiating the test mode.
In regard to claim 4, Jensen, Vickery et al., and Clifford disclose wherein the signal unit further comprises an indicator (screen of 14 of Jensen; circuitry 118 may include an indicator device 408 e.g. one or more LEDs; see para. 0085 of Vickery et al.; 170 of Clifford) configured to indicate that the animal trap is triggered.
In regard to claim 10, Jensen, Vickery et al., and Clifford discloses wherein the signal comprises a trigger message (15 of Jensen; message 556; see para. 0104 of Vickery et al.).
In regard to claim 21, Jensen discloses wherein the base (7) includes a first distal end (left end of 7 in Figs. 3-4) and a first proximal end (right end of 7 in Figs. 3-4).
In regard to claim 22, Jensen discloses wherein the moving portion (6) includes a second distal end (left end of 6 in Figs. 3-4) and a second proximal end (right end of 6 in Figs. 3-4).
In regard to claim 23, Jensen discloses wherein the animal trap (4) further includes an internal spring mechanism (moveable part 6 is connected to a not shown spring that gets the movable part to move towards the fixed part 7 when the step part 5 is touched; see para. 0022) configured to urge the moving portion toward the base when the animal trap is triggered (see Figs. 2, 4) such that the second proximal end is spaced away from the first proximal end when the second distal end (9) contacts the first distal end (9a; see Fig. 2 and the Examiner would like to indicate that Fig. 4 is not an accurate representation of the movable part in the tripped position of the trap and that Fig. 2 is a more accurate representation where the second proximal end is in a raised position with respect to the first proximal end of the base 7), and the second distal end is spaced away from the first distal end when the second proximal end contacts the first proximal end (see Figs. 2, 4).
In regard to claim 24, Jensen discloses wherein the second distance (distance between the right ends of 6 & 7 in Figs. 3-4; also see Fig. 2 for an accurate representation of the distance between the proximal ends when the trap is tripped) is greater than the first distance (distance between the proximal ends when the trap is set; see Figs. 1, 3).
In regard to claim 26, Jensen discloses wherein the animal trap (4) further includes jaws (9,9a) at the distal end (left end of 4 in Figs. 3-4).
Claim(s) 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen 2018/0249698 in view of Vickery et al. 2021/0022333 and Clifford 2013/0222146 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Howard et al. 2018/0235205 or Moran et al. 2009/0193707.
In regard to claims 6-8, Jensen, Vickery et al., and Clifford disclose wherein the magnetically-responsive component is a reed switch (116 of Vickery et al.), but do not disclose wherein the output property comprises a voltage, wherein changing the output property comprises lowering the voltage, or wherein the magnetically-responsive component is a Hall effect sensor. Howard et al. and Moran et al. disclose wherein the magnetically-responsive component is a Hall effect sensor (position sensor 84 may be a Hall-effect sensor; see paras. 0080,0083 OR sensor 110; see para. 0015), wherein the output property comprises a voltage (Hall effect sensors of Howard et al. or Moran et al. generate an output property of a voltage change when there is separation between the sensor and its associated magnet), wherein changing the output property comprises lowering the voltage (Hall effect sensor of Howard et al. or Moran et al. operate to cause a lowering of the voltage when the magnet is moved away from the Hall effect sensor). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the Hall effect sensor of Howard et al. or Moran et al. for the reed switch of Jensen, Vickery et al., and Clifford in order to provide an alternative yet equally effective form of magnetically-responsive sensor for detecting the change in relative position between the first and second portions of the animal trap sensor wherein the Hall-effect sensor of Howard et al. or Moran et al. may have more durability and longevity than the reed switch of Vickery.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen 2018/0249698 in view of Vickery et al. 2021/0022333 and Clifford 2013/0222146 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Borth et al. 2010/0134301.
In regard to claim 9, Jensen, Vickery et al., and Clifford do not disclose wherein the magnetically-responsive component is a magnetoresistor. Borth et al. disclose wherein the magnetically-responsive component is a Hall effect sensor or a magnetoresistor (operator-activated switch 76 of a magnetic form comprised of a magnetically-responsive component 77 such as hall-effect device or magnetoresistor to name a couple of nonlimiting examples; see para. 0024). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the magnetoresistor of Borth et al. for the reed switch of Jensen, Vickery et al., and Clifford in order to provide an alternative yet equally effective form of magnetically-responsive sensor for detecting the change in relative position between the first and second portions of the animal trap sensor wherein the magnetoresistor of Borth et al. may have a smaller size and a higher level of sensitivity than the reed switch of Vickery et al.
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen 2018/0249698 in view of Vickery et al. 2021/0022333 and Clifford 2013/0222146 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cristofori et al. 7,026,942.
In regard to claim 25, Jensen and Vickery et al. disclose wherein the signal unit (10 of Jensen; 118 of Vickery et al.) is electrically connected to the magnetically-responsive component (22 of Jensen; 116 of Vickery et al.---see Fig. 5), but Jensen, Vickery et al., and Clifford do not disclose wherein the signal unit is spaced apart from the animal trap. Cristofori et al. disclose the signal unit (signaling unit 30 may comprise a transmitter for sending the signal of presence of vermin in the trap to a remote console; see col. 5, lines 29-62) is spaced apart from the animal trap (trap 1), wherein when the trap is in a hidden place, e.g. under a piece of furniture, the signaling unit (30) is arranged according to Fig. 6A in a different location spaced therefrom. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the signal unit of Jensen, Vickery et al. and Clifford such that it is spaced apart from the animal trap in view of Cristofori et al. in order to dispose the signal unit at a different location from the trap such as when the trap is in a hidden place so that the signals being sent from the signal unit are not obstructed from being sent.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 15, 17, and 18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARREN W ARK whose telephone number is (571)272-6885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at (571) 272-6909. 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.
/DARREN W ARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
DWA
