DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-19 are pending.
Claims 1-8 are withdrawn. Accordingly, claims 9-19 are examined below.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55 for Application No. CN202322919901.8 filed on 10/30/2023 and No. CN202323002857.0 filed on 11/07/2023.
This application is a CIP of 18/494,672 filed on 10/25/2023.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the text is too small, more specifically FIG. 5. 37 CFR 1.84(p)(3) requires that all numbers, letters, and reference characters measure at least 1/8 inches in height. The examiner asserts that at least some of the text in the drawings does not satisfy this requirement. Applicant is asked to print the drawings to measure and enlarge, where appropriate. Recall from 37 CFR 1.84(k) that drawings are reduced in size to two-thirds in reproduction. Hence, such small text will be difficult to read if not increased in size.
Claim Objections
The following claims are objected to for informalities, lack of antecedent support, or for redundancies. The Examiner recommends the following changes:
Claim 10, line 2, replace “the process of performing a waste cleaning action” with “the step of performing the waste cleaning action”
Claim 11, line 2, replace “a waste clearing action” with “the waste cleaning action”
Claim 12, line 2, replace “a pet” with “the pet”
Claim 13, line 2, replace “a pet” with “the pet”
Claim 13, line 10, replace “accummulatively” with “accumulatively”
Claim 16, line 2, replace “a second” with “the second”
Claim 17, line 4, replace “a timer” with “the timer”
Claim 17, line 8, replace “the first data” with “wherein the first data”
Claim 18, line 2, replace “a waste clearing action” with “the waste cleaning action”
Claim 19, line 2, replace “a waste cleaning action” with “the waste cleaning action”
Appropriate correction is respectfully requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) 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.
Claims 9-19 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 9 recites the limitation “the pet toilet further comprising a detection module electrically connected to the circuit board to detect get close of an object”. It is unclear what Applicant means by “get close” Appropriate clarification through claim amendment is respectfully requested. For purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as the pet toilet further comprising a detection module electrically connected to the circuit board to detect presence of an object.
Claims 10-19 are dependent claims of claim 9. The claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), and therefore, claims 10-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the number of times of entry is a serial number of a pet entering the roller within one waste cleaning cycle”. It is unclear how a number of times of entry can be a seral number of a pet entering. Appropriate clarification through claim amendment is respectfully requested. For purposes of examination, the limitation will not be given a patentable weight.
Claim 14 is a dependent claim of claim 13. The claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), and therefore, claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claim 15 recites the limitation “wherein after the step of identifying, through the identification module, that the pet has left the roller, … recording that the quantity of pets that have entered the roller for defecation is the actual quantity of pets that have entered the roller and defecated”. It is unclear how the pet leaving the roller leads to being able to record the quantity of pets that have entered the roller with the actual quantity of pets that have entered the roller. Appropriate clarification through claim amendment is respectfully requested. For purposes of examination, the limitation will not be given a patentable weight.
Claims 16-19 are dependent claims of claim 15. The claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), and therefore, claims 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claim 17 recites “The control method for the pet toilet according to claim 16, further comprising a weighing sensor …”. It is unclear how the method further comprises a weighing sensor. Appropriate clarification through claim amendment is respectfully requested. For purposes of examination, the recitation will be interpreted as “The control method for the pet toilet according to claim 16, wherein the pet toilet further comprising a weighing sensor …”.
The claim further recites “the first weight is an increased weight”. It is unclear what Applicant means by the first weight is an increased weight. For purposes of examination, the recitation will not be given a patentable weight.
Claims 18-19 are dependent claims of claim 17. The claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), and therefore, claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 9-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Regarding independent claim 9:
(Step 2A, Prong One) The claim recites, “wherein the control method comprises steps of: identifying, through the identification module, that a pet has entered the roller; identifying, through the identification module, that the pet has left the roller”
Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, if a claim limitation covers performance that can be executed in the human mind, but for the recitation of generic electronic devices or generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Under their broadest reasonable interpretation and based on the description provided in the Specification, such as paragraphs [0062] and [0098], for instance, the identifying function is a mental process that can be performed through observation, evaluation and judgement based on an acquired sensor data or image. That is, other than reciting an “identification module” (a generic electronic device or generic computer component), a person may perform, through observation, evaluation and judgement, the features enunciated above.
Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
(Step 2A, Prong Two) This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional limitations of, “performing a waste cleaning action to control the roller to rotate to discharge waste.”
The practical application requires an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. When so evaluated, the additional limitation of “performing a waste cleaning action to control the roller to rotate to discharge waste” does not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception of identifying functions as discussed in Step 2A, Prong One, above. Accordingly, the additional limitations recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
In view of the foregoing, the additional limitations are not sufficient to demonstrate integration of a judicial exception into a practical application.
(Step 2B) The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
The additional limitation of “performing a waste cleaning action to control the roller to rotate to discharge waste” does not impose a meaningful limit on practicing the abstract idea, as discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two, above.
Therefore, the additional claimed features do not amount to significantly more and the claim is not patent eligible.
Examiner respectfully recommends integrating the element(s) of identifying steps into the performing step.
Regarding claim 10, this claim recites “wherein in the process of performing a waste cleaning action, the control method further comprises steps of: receiving an electrical signal fed back by the detection module; and controlling the roller to stop rotating when the electrical signal fed back by the detection module has been received”. The receiving limitation is an insignificant extra-solution activity under MPEP 2106.05(g), without imposing meaningful limits. The limitation amounts to necessary data gathering. (i.e., all uses of the recited judicial exception require such data gathering or data output) The receiving a signal from a detection module represents a function that is recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, and does not amount to significantly more. As discussed in claim 9, the controlling limitation does not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception of identifying functions. Thus, claim 10 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 11, this claim recites the limitation “wherein before the step of performing a waste clearing action, the control method further comprises a step of: identifying, through the identification module, that no pet enters the roller within a first preset time period”. The limitation further defines the abstract idea as recited in independent claims 9. Thus, claim 11 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 12, this claim recites “wherein after the step of identifying, through the identification module, that a pet has entered the roller, the control method further comprises a step of: starting a timer, and forming first time”. The forming limitation is an insignificant extra-solution activity under MPEP 2106.05(g), without imposing meaningful limits. The limitation amounts to necessary data output. (i.e., all uses of the recited judicial exception require such data gathering or data output) The forming time from a timer represents a function that is recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, and does not amount to significantly more. Thus, claim 12 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 13, this claim recites “wherein after the step of identifying, through the identification module, that a pet has entered the roller, the control method further includes a step of: recording first data, wherein the first data comprises a number of times of entry and a quantity of pets that have entered the roller for defecation; the number of times of entry is a serial number of a pet entering the roller within one waste cleaning cycle; the quantity of pets that have entered the roller for defecation is an actual quantity of pets that have entered the roller and defecated plus 1; and the actual quantity of pets that have entered the roller and defecated is a quantity of pets that have accumulatively entered the roller within one waste cleaning cycle and stayed for a second preset time period”. The recording limitation is an insignificant extra-solution activity under MPEP 2106.05(g), without imposing meaningful limits. The limitation amounts to necessary data gathering. (i.e., all uses of the recited judicial exception require such data gathering or data output) The recording data represents a function that is recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, and does not amount to significantly more. Thus, claim 13 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 14, this claim recites “wherein after the step of identifying, through the identification module, that the pet has left the roller, the control method further comprises a step of: matching the first data”. Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the matching function is a mental process that can be performed through observation, evaluation and judgement based on a acquired data. That is, other than reciting an “identification module” (a generic electronic device or generic computer component), a person may perform, through observation, evaluation and judgement, the features recited in the claim. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. Thus, claim 14 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 15, this claim recites “wherein after the step of identifying, through the identification module, that the pet has left the roller, the control method further comprises steps of: stopping the timer; determining whether the first time is greater than a second preset time period; and if yes, recording that the quantity of pets that have entered the roller for defecation is the actual quantity of pets that have entered the roller and defecated”. The “stopping the timer” is directed to further applying the judicial exception to generic electronic devices. Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the determining function is a mental process that can be performed through observation, evaluation and judgement based on comparing data. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. The recording limitation is an insignificant extra-solution activity under MPEP 2106.05(g), without imposing meaningful limits. The limitation amounts to necessary data gathering. (i.e., all uses of the recited judicial exception require such data gathering or data output) The recording data represents a function that is recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, and does not amount to significantly more. Thus, claim 15 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 16, this claim recites “wherein after the step of determining whether the first time is greater than a second preset time period, the control method further comprises a step of: if no, subtracting the quantity of pets that have entered the roller for defecation by 1”. Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the subtracting function is a mathematical concept. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. Thus, claim 16 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 17, this claim recites “before the step of starting a timer, the control method further comprises a step of: detecting, through the weighing sensor, that a weight increases; before the step of stopping the timer, the control method further comprises a step of: detecting, through the weighing sensor, that the weight decreases; the first data further comprises a first weight; and the first weight is an increased weight”. Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the detecting functions are mental processes that can be performed through observation, evaluation and judgement based on weight data. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. Thus, claim 17 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 18, this claim recites “wherein before the step of performing a waste clearing action, the control method further comprises a step of: within the first preset time period, identifying, through the identification module, that a pet has entered the roller, and starting to perform the control method from the step of identifying, through the identification module, that a pet has entered the roller; or, within the first preset time period, detecting, through the weighting sensor, that a weight increases, and starting to perform the control method from the step of detecting, through the weighting sensor, that a weight increases”. Under their broadest reasonable interpretation, the identifying and detecting functions are mental processes that can be performed through observation, evaluation and judgement based on weight data as discussed in claims 9 and 17. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. Thus, claim 18 is not patent eligible.
Regarding claim 19, this claim recites “wherein after the step of performing a waste cleaning action, the control method further comprises a step of: clearing the first time and the first data”. The recording limitation is an insignificant extra-solution activity under MPEP 2106.05(g), without imposing meaningful limits. The limitation amounts to necessary data output. (i.e., all uses of the recited judicial exception require such data gathering or data output) The clearing data represents a function that is recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, and does not amount to significantly more. Thus, claim 19 is not patent eligible.
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.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2024/0206422 A1) (“Wang”), in view of Baxter et al. (US 2022/0322632 A1) (“Baxter”), further in view of HORI et al. (US 2020/0042780 A1) (“Hori”).
Regarding independent claim 9, Wang teaches:
A control method applicable to a pet toilet, the pet toilet comprising a circuit board, an identification module, a base, and a roller rotatably arranged on the base, wherein the identification module is electrically connected to the circuit board to acquire an image, and the circuit board controls the roller to rotate after the identification module identifies that a pet has left the roller; the pet toilet further comprising a detection module electrically connected to the circuit board to detect get close of an object, (Wang: [0010] “In order to achieve the above and other purposes, and according to the purpose of the present application, the present application provides a self-cleaning cat litter box and a method. The self-cleaning cat litter box removes cat excrement and smell through an improved separation and processing method. Cat waste and smells are eliminated and do not pose a danger to pets.”) (Wang: [0028] “Optionally, the integrated sensor is a combination of a weight sensor, a thermal imaging sensor, a light sensor, an LED lighting lamp, and a microprocessor controller. The weight sensor is used to detect the presence or absence of animals in the automatic cleaning cat litter box; the thermal imaging sensor is used to detect whether animals move in front of the automatic cleaning cat litter box; the light sensor is used to detect the ambient light brightness; The LED lighting uses signal feedback from the light sensor to determine whether to turn on for lighting; the microprocessor controller is used to process the sensor signal and start different setting programs according to different signals. The integrated sensor is at least one of a weight sensor, a microwave radar, an ultrasonic sensor, an infrared sensor, a camera, a thermal imaging sensor, a light sensor, a millimetre wave radar, a laser sensor, an LED lighting, a microprocessor controller, or two of them. A combination thereof is also possible.”) (Wang: [0029] “The self-cleaning cat litter box also includes a bottom housing connected to the rotatable chamber. Optionally, the self-cleaning cat litter box also includes a top housing and a bottom housing, wherein a garbage bag storage box is provided on the side of the bottom housing for storing garbage bags.”) [The self-cleaning cat litter box reads on “a pet toilet”. The integrated sensor with microprocessor controller reads on “a circuit board”, and being integrated reads on “electrically connected …”. Any sensor of the integrated sensor that captures image reads on “an identification module”, and any sensor of the integrated sensor that detects object reads on “a detection module”. The bottom housing reads on “a base, and the rotatable chamber reads on “a roller”.]
wherein the control method comprises steps of: identifying, … that a pet has entered the roller; identifying, … that the pet has left the roller; and (Wang: [0027] “The self-cleaning cat litter box also includes an integrated sensor. The integrated sensor is used to detect the presence or absence of an animal; when an animal is detected to move in front of the self-cleaning cat litter box, it can provide illumination in low light conditions; and to the microprocessor inside the integrated sensor provides one or more presence signals; the microprocessor controller inside the integrated sensor can process the sensor signals and start different defined programs according to different signals.”) (Wang: [0037] “The cat litter is placed in the rotatable chamber of the device. When the cat discharges its excrement into the cat litter and exits the rotatable chamber, the cat litter containing the excrement is screened and cleaned through various components.”) [When the cat discharges its excrement reads on “identifying … that a pet has entered the roller”, and when the cat exits the rotatable chamber reads on “identifying … that the pet has left the roller”.]
performing a waste cleaning action to control the roller to rotate to discharge waste. (Wang: [0038] “Specifically: the rotatable chamber is closed, and then the rotatable chamber is rotated in the first direction from the initial position, driving the screen to screen out the cat excrement and transfer it to the excrement collection bin by gravity; and then the rotatable chamber is rotated in the first direction. The chamber rotates and resets in the direction opposite to the first direction, and finally, under the action of the ventilation fan, the smell is discharged through the two ventilation openings.”) [The rotatable chamber rotating to transfer the excrement to the excrement collection bin reads on “performing a waste cleaning action …”.]
Wang does not expressly teach: wherein the circuit board controls the roller to stop rotating according to a signal fed back by the detection module; identifying, through the identification module, that a pet has entered the roller; identifying, through the identification module, that the pet has left the roller.
Hori teaches:
wherein the circuit board controls the roller to stop rotating according to a signal fed back by the detection module. (Baxter: FIG. 11) (Baxter: [0066] “The one or more fault algorithms may include one or more mass fault algorithms. The one or more mass fault algorithms may function to detect the presence of an animal within the litter device, detect a mass over a predetermined mass of the litter device, stop and/or prevent rotation of a chamber, prevent execution of a cleaning cycle, or any combination thereof. …”) (Baxter: [0068] “The one or more fault algorithms may include one or more pinch fault algorithms. The one or more pinch fault algorithms may function to detect the presence of one or more pinch conditions, stop and/or prevent rotation of a chamber, prevent execution of a cleaning cycle, or any combination thereof. …”) [Stopping the rotation of the chamber or pausing the clean cycle based on the pinch condition or the mass detection reads on “to stop rotating according to a signal fed back by the detection module”.]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Wang and Baxter before them, to modify the rotation control of the self-cleaning cat litter box, to incorporate stopping the rotation when pinch condition or animal detection occurs.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to do this modification because it would allow for stopping the rotation or cleaning cycle when anomalous conditions occur. (Baxter: [0065])
Wang and Baxter do not expressly teach: identifying, through the identification module, that a pet has entered the roller; identifying, through the identification module, that the pet has left the roller.
Hori teaches:
identifying, through the identification module, that a pet has entered the roller; identifying, through the identification module, that the pet has left the roller. (Hori: [0131] “S1: The cat identification processing unit 102 determines whether or not the cat has entered the cat toilet 10. As a determination method, for example, when a cat is recognized in the image captured by the camera 18, it can be determined that the cat has entered the cat toilet 10. In addition to the determination by the cat identification processing unit 102, it can be determined that the cat has entered the cat toilet 10, for example, when weight is detected by the body weight sensors 19a, for example.”) (Hori: [0134] “S4: The cat identification processing unit 102 determines whether or not the cat has left the cat toilet 10. According to the determination method, when a cat is recognized in the image captured by the camera 18, it can be determined that the cat has entered the cat toilet 10. If it is determined that the cat has left the cat toilet 10, the process proceeds to S5. If not, the process goes to S4 again and waits until the urination of the cat is completed until all the urination of the cat is completed.”)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Wang, Baxter and Hori before them, to modify the presence or absence detection of the pet by the self-cleaning cat litter box, to incorporate identifying the pet when the pet enters or leaves the self-cleaning cat litter box.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to do this modification because it would allow for associating data to an identified pet amongst multiple pets that share the same self-cleaning cat litter box. (Hori: [0012]-[0014])
Regarding claim 10, Wang, Baxter and Hori teach all the claimed features of claim 9. Baxter further teaches:
wherein in the process of performing a waste cleaning action, the control method further comprises steps of: receiving an electrical signal fed back by the detection module; and controlling the roller to stop rotating when the electrical signal fed back by the detection module has been received. (Baxter: FIG. 11, [0065], [0066] and [0068] as discussed in claim 9)
The motivation to combine Wang, Baxter and Hori as described in claim 9 is incorporated herein.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, in view of Baxter, further in view of Hori, further in view of Deasy et al. (US 2006/0081191 A1) (“Deasy”).
Regarding claim 11, Wang, Baxter and Hori teach all the claimed features of claims 9-10. Wang, Baxter and Hori do not expressly teach the recitations of claim 11.
Deasy teaches:
wherein before the step of performing a waste clearing action, the control method further comprises a step of: identifying, through the identification module, that no pet enters the roller within a first preset time period. (Deasy: [0080] “Having described the components of the apparatus 30, a general discussion of the self-cleaning cycle follows. Normally, the apparatus is at rest, which occurs whenever the apparatus has been filled with litter, turned on and is awaiting use by the pet. When the pet enters the apparatus, beginning at the ramp 39 and entering into the litter pan 33, the weight of the animal depresses the turntable 32, so that one of the weight sensors 66 makes contact with the rails 122, 123. In other words, the weight sensing mechanism 120; which comprises the weight sensors and the track assembly 121, is provided for the actuation of a pet-initiated cleaning cycle. The controller is preferably programmed to signal the timer after the weight of the animal has engaged a weight sensor with the rails for a minimum of 3 to 5 seconds. In other words, a brief contact between the sensor and rails will not cause a cycle to be initiated, because the pet would not have used the litter box. After the animal concludes its business and exits the apparatus, the turntable is again fully righted upon the spindle 86 and a signal is generated to the controller 259 to begin activation of a cleaning cycle, within a pre-determined time. Recognizing that the pet may return, a sufficient period is usually 30 minutes. Additionally, the apparatus employs self-clumping litter, which requires several minutes to absorb liquid waste and form a solid having sufficient integrity to be moved. Once begun, a cycle is completed in approximately two minutes and during this period, the sensors are no longer active.”) [The predetermined time reads on “a first preset time period”.]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Wang, Baxter, Hori and Deasy before them, to modify the self-cleaning cat litter box control, to incorporate the pre-determined time delay between the time when the pet leaves the self-cleaning cat litter box and the time when the self-cleaning cat litter box starts the cleaning cycle.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to do this modification because it would allow for time to ensure that the pet does not return to the self-cleaning cat litter box shortly after leaving. (Deasy: [0080] “Having described the components of the apparatus 30, a general discussion of the self-cleaning cycle follows. Normally, the apparatus is at rest, which occurs whenever the apparatus has been filled with litter, turned on and is awaiting use by the pet. When the pet enters the apparatus, beginning at the ramp 39 and entering into the litter pan 33, the weight of the animal depresses the turntable 32, so that one of the weight sensors 66 makes contact with the rails 122, 123. In other words, the weight sensing mechanism 120; which comprises the weight sensors and the track assembly 121, is provided for the actuation of a pet-initiated cleaning cycle. The controller is preferably programmed to signal the timer after the weight of the animal has engaged a weight sensor with the rails for a minimum of 3 to 5 seconds. In other words, a brief contact between the sensor and rails will not cause a cycle to be initiated, because the pet would not have used the litter box. After the animal concludes its business and exits the apparatus, the turntable is again fully righted upon the spindle 86 and a signal is generated to the controller 259 to begin activation of a cleaning cycle, within a pre-determined time. Recognizing that the pet may return, a sufficient period is usually 30 minutes. Additionally, the apparatus employs self-clumping litter, which requires several minutes to absorb liquid waste and form a solid having sufficient integrity to be moved. Once begun, a cycle is completed in approximately two minutes and during this period, the sensors are no longer active.”)
Regarding claim 12, Wang, Baxter, Hori and Deasy teach all the claimed features of claims 9-11. Deasy further teaches:
wherein after the step of identifying, through the identification module, that a pet has entered the roller, the control method further comprises a step of: starting a timer, and forming first time. (Deasy: [0080] as discussed in claim 11) [The controller signaling the timer to start timing for the minimum time upon weight of the animal has engaged the weight sensor reads on “after the step of identifying, … starting a timer, and forming first time”.]
The motivation to combine Wang, Baxter, Hori and Deasy as described in claims 9-11 is incorporated herein.
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL W CHOI whose telephone number is (571)270-5069. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Kamini Shah can be reached at (571) 272-2279. 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.
/MICHAEL W CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116