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 .
Application Status
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined in this application.
Claims 4-5 remain withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species (Sub-Species A), there being no allowable generic or linking claim
An information disclosure statement (IDS) has been filed on 01/31/2024 and reviewed by the Examiner.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/04/2025 has been entered.
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 13-20 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.
Claim 13 recites the phrase "one indicator" in line 34 and “another indicator” in line 35. These recitations are double inclusions of “indicator” in line 21 of claim 13. The Examiner suggests changing “one indicator” in line 34 to --the indicator--. Similarly, the Examiner suggests changing “another indicator” in line 35 to --the indicator--.
Claims 14-20 are rejected based on their respective dependencies.
Appropriate correction is required. Accordingly, the invention has been examined as best understood.
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.
Claims 1-3, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery et al. (WO 2015077567) in view of VM Products YouTube Channel (How to set the EZ Snap Rat | VM Products, Pub. Date 04/20/2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVKUYiVKrCU), Cink et al. (U.S. Pub. 20100319238), and Frederick et al. (U.S. Pub. 20080072475).
In regard to claim 1, Vickery et al. discloses a pest-management apparatus comprising: a base having a sidewall that defines an external perimeter of the base, a first opening, and a second opening (Figs. 1-6, where there is at least a base 14 having a sidewall 30 that defines an external perimeter of the base 14, a first opening 26, and a second opening 28); a lid coupled to the base such that the lid is movable relative to the base between an open position and a closed position in which the lid and the base cooperate to define a chamber (Figs. 1-6, where there is at least a lid 18 coupled to the base 14 such that the lid 18 is movable relative to the base 14 between an open position and a closed position in which the lid 18 and the base 14 cooperate to define a chamber 22); a separator coupled to the base and configured to divide the chamber between a first sub chamber and a second sub chamber, the first sub chamber defining a passage between the first and second opening (Figs. 1-6 and Abstract, where there is at least a separator 96 coupled to the base 14 and configured to divide the chamber 22 between a first sub chamber and a second sub chamber and where the first sub chamber at least defines a passage between the first 26 and second 28 openings); a divider disposed within the first sub chamber and configured to prevent a rodent from traversing an entirety of the first sub chamber (Figs. 1-6 and Abstract, where there is a divider 126 disposed within the first sub chamber and configured to prevent a rodent from traversing an entirety of the first sub chamber); a pest-capture device disposable within the second sub chamber (Figs. 1-6 and Abstract, where a pest-capture device (“snap-trap”) is at least disposable within the second sub chamber); the lid defining a third opening configured to allow passage of light into the chamber when the lid is in the closed position (Figs. 1-6 and Paragraph [0037], where the lid defines a third opening such that light is emitted into the chamber via removable window 78).
Vickery et al. is silent on the pest-capture device having a body and a capture element that is movable relative to the body between a set position and a capture position; an elongated, resilient indicator having a first end, a second end, and a first portion disposed between the first end and the second end; where the first end of the indicator is configured to be coupled to the capture element of the pest-capture device such that: the indicator extends through and is movable relative to the lid; if the lid is in the closed position and the capture element is in the set position, the first portion of the indicator is visible from outside of the chamber and the second end of the indicator extends above the lid and laterally beyond the external perimeter of the base; and if the lid is in the closed position and the capture element is in the capture position, at least a majority of the first portion of the indicator is not visible from outside of the chamber. VM Products YouTube Channel discloses the pest-capture device having a body and a capture element that is movable relative to the body between a set position and a capture position (Time 00:30-00:45, where there is a pest-capture device having a body and a capture element that is movable relative to the body between a set position and a capture position); an elongated, resilient indicator having a first end, a second end, and a first portion disposed between the first end and the second end (Time 00:30-00:45, where there is an elongated, resilient indicator having a first end, a second end, and a first portion (green portion) disposed between the first end and the second end); an opening in the lid for accommodating the indicator therethrough (VM Products YouTube Channel, Time 00:30-00:40, where there is at least an opening in the lid for accommodating the indicator therethrough); where the first end of the indicator is configured to be coupled to the capture element of the pest-capture device (Time 00:30-00:40, where the indicator is coupled to the snap trap) such that: the indicator extends through and is movable relative to the lid (Time 00:30-00:55, where the indicator extends through and is movable relative to the lid); if the lid is in the closed position and the capture element is in the set position, the first portion of the indicator is visible from outside of the chamber and the second end of the indicator extends above the lid and laterally beyond the external perimeter of the base (Time 00:40-01:00, where the indicator extends above the lid and laterally beyond the external perimeter of the base and the first portion of the indicator (green portion) is visible external to the lid when the snap trap is in the set position); and if the lid is in the closed position and the capture element is in the capture position, at least a majority of the first portion of the indicator is not visible from outside of the chamber (Time 00:30-00:40, where the first portion of the indicator (green portion) is not visible external to the lid when the snap trap is in the capture position). Vickery et al. and VM Products YouTube Channel are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include pest capture devices. 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 device body of Vickery et al. such that the pest-capture device having a body and a capture element that is movable relative to the body between a set position and a capture position; an elongated, resilient indicator having a first end, a second end, and a first portion disposed between the first end and the second end; where the first end of the indicator is configured to be coupled to the capture element of the pest-capture device such that: the indicator extends through and is movable relative to the lid; if the lid is in the closed position and the capture element is in the set position, the first portion of the indicator is visible from outside of the chamber and the second end of the indicator extends above the lid and laterally beyond an external perimeter of the base; and if the lid is in the closed position and the capture element is in the capture position, at least a majority of the first portion of the indicator is not visible from outside of the chamber in view of VM Products YouTube Channel. The motivation would have been to have an indication mechanism which allows the user to easily detect the position of the snap trap within the chamber, without having to open the lid of the device. Furthermore, the indicator of VM Products YouTube Channel is large and easily visible to the user and can be used to reset the trap to the set position (by pulling on the indicator until the trap is reset) without opening the lid.
Vickery et al. is silent on the divider defines one or more slots. Cink et al. discloses the divider defines one or more slots (Figs. 1B-5B and Paragraph [0178], where there is a divider 112 that at least has slots 141). Vickery et al. and Cink et al. are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include pest capture devices. 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 device body of Vickery et al. such that the divider defines one or more slots in view of Cink et al. The motivation would have been to allow light to pass through the entire rodent management apparatus so that a rodent can see straight through the apparatus through the entry openings (Cink et al., Paragraph [0178]). This would increase the relative probability of the pest entering the apparatus, as the pest can better see through the apparatus and therefore feel an increased sense of safety (motivation is known in the art as disclosed by Issitt (U.S. Pat. 6082042), Column 2 lines 13-16).
Vickery et al. is silent on where the lid includes a top portion and a sidewall that defines a perimeter of the lid, the sidewall of the lid defining a third opening configured to allow passage of light into the chamber when the lid is in the closed position. Frederick et al. discloses where the lid includes a top portion and a sidewall that defines a perimeter of the lid, the sidewall of the lid defining a third opening configured to allow passage of light into the chamber when the lid is in the closed position (Figs. 23-25 and Paragraph [0049], where the lid 360 includes a top portion and a sidewall that defines a perimeter of the lid 360, the sidewall of the lid 360 defining a third opening (holes in lid sidewall) configured to allow passage of light into the chamber when the lid 360 is in the closed position). Vickery et al. and Frederick et al. are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include pest capture devices. 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 device body of Vickery et al. such that where the lid includes a top portion and a sidewall that defines a perimeter of the lid, the sidewall of the lid defining a third opening configured to allow passage of light into the chamber when the lid is in the closed position in view of Frederick et al. The motivation would have been to allow for visual inspection from a side of the device, in placement scenarios where the top of the device is covered during use.
In regard to claim 2, Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 1, where, if the lid is in the closed position and the capture element is in the capture position, the second end is disposed outside of the chamber (VM Products YouTube Channel, Time 00:30-01:00, where if the lid is in the closed position and the capture element is in the capture position, the second end of the indicator is disposed outside of the chamber).
In regard to claim 3, Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 1, where: the indicator includes a second portion adjacent to the first portion and disposed between the first portion and the second end (VM Products YouTube Channel, Time 00:30-00:55, where the indicator also has a second portion adjacent to the first portion); and an upper surface of the indicator on the first portion includes a first color and the upper surface of the indicator on the second portion includes a second color that is visually distinct from the first color (VM Products YouTube Channel, Time 00:30-00:55, where the upper surface of the indicator on the first portion includes a first color (green) which is visually distinct from the color of the second portion (black/brown)).
In regard to claim 10, Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 1, where the apparatus is configured such that movement of the indicator from a first position to a second position moves the capture element from the capture position to the set position (VM Products YouTube Channel, Time 00:40-01:00, where the movement of the indicator from a first to a second position moves the capture element from the capture to the set position).
In regard to claim 12, Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 1, where the capture element is biased toward the capture position (VM Products YouTube Channel, Time 00:40-01:00, where the capture element of snap traps is at least biased toward the capture position).
Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery et al. (WO 2015077567) in view of VM Products YouTube Channel (How to set the EZ Snap Rat | VM Products, Pub. Date 04/20/2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVKUYiVKrCU), Cink et al. (U.S. Pub. 20100319238), and Frederick et al. (U.S. Pub. 20080072475) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Cristofori et al. (U.S. Pub. 20020167409) and Issitt (U.S. Pat. 6082042).
In regard to claim 6, Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 1. Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. is silent on at least one barrier member. Cristofori et al. disclose at least one barrier member (Figs. 1-3 and Paragraph [0042], where there is at least one barrier 8). Vickery et al. and Cristofori et al. are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include pest capture devices. 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 device body of Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. such that there is at least one barrier member in view of Cristofori et al. The motivation would have been to further prevent escape of the pest from within the apparatus, once the pest has entered the apparatus.
Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. is silent on wherein the divider is removable. Issitt discloses wherein the divider is removable (Fig. 2, Column 2 lines 16-18, where the divider 18 is at least removable). Vickery et al. and Issitt are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include pest capture devices. 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 device body of Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. such that the divider is removable in view of Issitt. The motivation would have been to allow for easy stacking of the bait stations in transit (Issitt, Column 2 lines 16-18) or to easily replace damaged barriers.
In regard to claim 7, Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., Frederick et al., Cristofori et al., and Issitt discloses the apparatus of claim 6, where the pest-management apparatus is configured such that light is emitted into at least a portion of the second sub chamber (Vickery et al., Figs. 1-6, where the pest-management apparatus is configured such that light is emitted into at least a portion of the second sub chamber (via window 78)).
In regard to claim 8, Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., Frederick et al., Cristofori et al., and Issitt discloses the apparatus of claim 6, where the divider is transparent (Issitt, Fig. 2, Column 2 lines 13-16, and Claim 4, where there is a divider 18 which is transparent) and defines a plurality of slots (Cink et al., Figs. 1B-5B and Paragraph [0178], where there is a divider 112 that at least has a plurality of slots 141).
In regard to claim 9, Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., Frederick et al., Cristofori et al., and Issitt discloses the apparatus of claim 6, where, when the lid is in the closed position, the separator extends only partially upward in the chamber such that a rodent may access the second sub chamber by climbing over the separator (Vickery et al., Figs. 1-6, where when the lid 18 is in the closed position the separator 96 extends only partially upward in the chamber such that a rodent may access the second sub chamber at least by climbing over the separator 96).
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery et al. (WO 2015077567) in view of VM Products YouTube Channel (How to set the EZ Snap Rat | VM Products, Pub. Date 04/20/2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVKUYiVKrCU), Cink et al. (U.S. Pub. 20100319238), and Frederick et al. (U.S. Pub. 20080072475) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Allbright, Jr (U.S. Pub. 20150033614)
In regard to claim 11, Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. discloses the apparatus of claim 1, where the sidewall: defines the first opening in communication with the first sub chamber (Vickery et al., Figs. 1-6, where the sidewall 30 defines a first opening 26 in communication with the first sub chamber). Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. is silent on an angled portion that is adjacent to the first opening and angularly disposed relative to the first opening at a first angle that is obtuse. Allbright Jr. disclose an angled portion that is adjacent to the first opening and angularly disposed relative to the first opening at a first angle that is obtuse (Figs. 1A-3, where there is at least an angled portion 22 that is adjacent to the first opening and angularly disposed relative to the first opening at a first angle that is obtuse (at least relative to the base)). Vickery et al. and Allbright Jr. are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include pest capture devices. 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 device body of Vickery et al. as modified by VM Products YouTube Channel, Cink et al., and Frederick et al. such that an angled portion that is adjacent to the first opening and angularly disposed relative to the first opening at a first angle that is obtuse in view of Allbright Jr. The motivation would have been to further prevent escape of the pest from within the apparatus, once the pest has entered the apparatus.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments (filed 02/02/2026) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Vickery et al. (WO 2015077567) in view of VM Products YouTube Channel (How to set the EZ Snap Rat | VM Products, Pub. Date 04/20/2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVKUYiVKrCU), Cink et al. (U.S. Pub. 20100319238), and Frederick et al. (U.S. Pub. 20080072475) discloses the applicant’s claim 1, as specified under Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103 above.
As specifically challenged in the most recent arguments, Frederick et al. teaches where the lid includes a top portion and a sidewall that defines a perimeter of the lid, the sidewall of the lid defining a third opening configured to allow passage of light into the chamber when the lid is in the closed position in Figs. 23-25 and Paragraph [0049], where the lid 360 includes a top portion and a sidewall that defines a perimeter of the lid 360, the sidewall of the lid 360 defining a third opening (holes in lid sidewall) configured to allow passage of light into the chamber when the lid 360 is in the closed position. The disclosure of Frederick et al. cited above at least supports the motivation to have a lid with openings on a sidewall of the lid to allow light into the device. Frederick et al. shows a lid, which at least encloses a portion of the pest capture device, which enables the visual inspection of the interior of the device. The office maintains that this is not impermissible hindsight, as all of the relied upon components and structure is clearly shown in the cited art. The structure of a lid, as shown in Frederick et al., is being relied upon and does not teach away from a combination utilizing those specific structural features of the lid of Frederick et al. on the lid of Vickery et al. The other features of Frederick et al., which are noted in the Applicant’s arguments, are not being relied upon to teach the aforementioned lid limitations.
Therefore, the previous 35 USC § 103 rejections of claims 1-3 and 6-12 are maintained.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 14-20 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.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Particularly the references were cited because they pertain to the state of the art of pest capture devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN M DENNIS whose telephone number is (571)270-7604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 7:30 am to 4:30 pm.
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 on (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.
/KEVIN M DENNIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3647
/KIMBERLY S BERONA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Prosecution Insights