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 . Claims 1-12 are pending. Claims 1-12 stand rejected as set forth below.
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.
Claims 1 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being unpatentable over Castagno (US 8,683,741 B2).
In regard to Claim 1, Castagno discloses an exclusion device comprising: a tunnel having opposite first (bottom edge 128) and second ends (end with hinged top flaps 110) (Fig 1 & 2),
mounting tabs (foot panels 130 ) formed at the first end of the tunnel and projecting out from the tunnel; outer barbs (hinged top flaps 110) formed at the second end of the tunnel and bent relative to the tunnel so that the outer barbs converge toward one another at farther distances from the tunnel,
the outer barbs being tapered toward ends remote from the tunnel [Col 3, lines 36-37] (Fig 1 & 2); and intermediate barbs (ventilation flaps 108) having base ends connected to the tunnel at locations intermediate the first and second ends of the tunnel (Fig 1 & 2), the intermediate barbs (ventilation flaps 108) being bent inwardly so that the intermediate barbs converge toward one another at ends of the intermediate barbs remote from the base ends of the intermediate barbs [Col 3, lines 27-35] (Fig 1 & 2).
In regard to Claim 12, Castagno discloses the wildlife exclusion device of claim 1 as described above wherein the tunnel has opposite first (bottom edge 128) and second side (end with hinged top flaps 110) edges extending substantially adjacent to one another (Fig 1 & 2), side tabs (assembly tabs 104) projecting from the first side edge (first lateral edge 124) of the tunnel (Fig 1 & 2), and slots (assembly slot 114) being formed on the tunnel at positions spaced inward from the second side edge (second lateral edge 126) (Fig 1 & 2), the slots (assembly slot 114) being disposed in positions aligned with the side tabs (assembly tabs 104) and being dimensioned to receive the side tabs for holding the first side edge (first lateral edge 124) substantially adjacent to the second side edge (second lateral edge 126) (Fig 1 & 2) [Col 4, lines 56-67].
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 1- 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mascari (US D833567 S) in further view of Castagno (US 8,683,741 B2).
PNG
media_image1.png
731
570
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to Claim 1, Mascari (US D833567 S) discloses an exclusion device comprising: a tunnel having opposite first and second ends (See figure above), mounting tabs (See figure above) formed at the first end of the tunnel and projecting out from the tunnel; outer barbs (See figure above) formed at the second end of the tunnel and bent relative to the tunnel so that the outer barbs converge toward one another at farther distances from the tunnel, the outer barbs being tapered toward ends remote from the tunnel. Mascari does not disclose intermediate barbs connected to the tunnel between its first and second ends, each of the barbs being tapered toward the tunnel's second end and being bent inwardly to converge toward one another. Castagno discloses intermediate barbs (ventilation flaps 108) having base ends connected to the tunnel at locations intermediate the first and second ends of the tunnel (Fig 1 & 2), the intermediate barbs (ventilation flaps 108) being bent inwardly so that the intermediate barbs converge toward one another at ends of the intermediate barbs remote from the base ends of the intermediate barbs [Col 3, lines 27-35] (Fig 1 & 2). 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 body of the wildlife exclusion device as taught by Mascari (US D833567 S) to include the intermediate barbs of Castagno in order to allow for essential airflow that prevents heat and moisture buildup.
In regard to Claim 2, Mascari (US D833567 S) discloses the wildlife exclusion device of claim 1 as described above wherein each of the outer barbs (See figure above) has substantially linear side edges converging toward one another.
In regard to Claim 3, Mascari (US D833567 S) discloses the wildlife exclusion device of claim 2 as described above, but does not disclose wherein the linear side edges of each of the outer barbs meets at a convexly curved tip. 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 body of the wildlife exclusion device as taught by Mascari (US D833567 S) to have convexly curved tips on the outer barbs in order to minimize physical trauma and injury to the animals exiting and attempting to enter the device.
In regard to Claim 4, Mascari (US D833567 S) discloses the wildlife exclusion device of claim 2 as described above wherein the linear side edges of each of the outer barbs meet at a pointed tip (See figure above).
In regard to Claim 5, Mascari (US D833567 S) discloses the wildlife exclusion device of claim 2 as described above. Mascari (US D833567 S) teaches outer barbs (See figure above), but does not disclose intermediate barbs that align with the outer barbs. Castagno discloses wherein each of the intermediate barbs (ventilation flaps 108) align with one of the outer barbs (hinged top flaps 110) along an extending direction of the tunnel from the first end (bottom edge 128) to the second end (end with hinged top flaps 110) (Fig 1 & 2). 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 body of the wildlife exclusion device as taught by Mascari (US D833567 S) to align the intermediate barbs with the outer barbs as taught by Castagno in order to simplify the manufacturing process and ensure structural uniformity.
PNG
media_image2.png
611
584
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regard to Claim 12, Mascari (US D833567 S) discloses the wildlife exclusion device of claim 1 as described above wherein the tunnel has opposite first and second side edges (See figure above) extending substantially adjacent to one another, side tabs (See figure above) projecting from the first side edge of the tunnel, and slots (See figure above) being formed on the tunnel at positions spaced inward from the second side edge, the slots being disposed in positions aligned with the side tabs and being dimensioned to receive the side tabs for holding the first side edge substantially adjacent to the second side edge.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laseter (US 2023/0016989).
In regard to Claim 1, Laseter teaches an exclusion device comprising: a tunnel having opposite first (device base 1813) and second (end with primary palisades 1802) ends, outer barbs (primary palisades 1802) formed at the second end of the tunnel and bent relative to the tunnel so that the outer barbs converge toward one another at farther distances from the tunnel [0067], the outer barbs being tapered toward ends remote from the tunnel [0078]; and intermediate barbs (secondary palisades 1804) having base ends connected to the tunnel at locations intermediate the first and second ends of the tunnel, the intermediate barbs being bent inwardly so that the intermediate barbs converge toward one another at ends of the intermediate barbs remote from the base ends of the intermediate barbs [0078] in Figure 18. Laseter does not disclose the mounting tabs in Figure 18. Laseter does disclose mounting tabs (foot panels 130) formed at the first end of the tunnel and projecting out from the tunnel in the prior art embodiment (Castagno, US 20230016989 A1) shown in Figure 1. 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 body of the wildlife exclusion device as taught by Laseter to include the mounting tabs of Castagno in order to make the device easier to install and keep it secured.
In regard to Claim 2, Laseter teaches the wildlife exclusion device of claim 1 as described above wherein each of the outer barbs (primary palisades 1802) has substantially linear side edges converging toward one another (Fig 18).
In regard to Claim 3, Laseter teaches the wildlife exclusion device of claim 2 as described above wherein the linear side edges of each of the outer barbs meets at a convexly curved tip [0061] (Fig 18).
In regard to Claim 4, Laseter teaches the wildlife exclusion device of claim 2 as described above wherein the linear side edges of each of the outer barbs meet at a pointed tip [0061] (Fig 18).
Claims 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mascari (US D833567 S) in view of Castagno (US 8,683,741 B2) and in further view of Morris (US 2020/0396956).
PNG
media_image1.png
731
570
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to Claim 6, Mascari (US D833567 S) and Castagno disclose the wildlife exclusion device of claim 1 as described above, but does not disclose wherein the tunnel has a substantially polygonal cross-section defined by a plurality of side panels, each of the side panels being joined along a fold line. Morris teaches wherein the tunnel has a substantially polygonal cross-section defined by a plurality of side panels (the base 13, the top 14, and the walls 15, 16), each of the side panels being joined unitarily to at least one other one of the side panels along a fold line (line between the top wall 14 and the wall 15 in Figure 2) extending in an extending direction of the tunnel from the first end to the second end (Fig 2). 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 body of the wildlife exclusion device as taught by Mascari (US D833567 S) and Castagno to be divided into side panels to form a polygon as taught by Morris for easier manufacturing and installation. Further, the side panels forming a polygonal shape will provide the device with flexibility of the final shape of the device.
In regard to US D833567, Mascari (US D833567 S), Castagno, and Morris teach the wildlife exclusion device of claim 6 as described above. Morris teaches side panels (the base 13, the top 14, and the walls 15, 16) (Fig 2), and Castagno teaches outer barbs (ventilation flaps 108) and intermediate barbs (hinged top flaps 110) extending from the body of the device. Integrating the barbs onto the side panels results in the wildlife exclusion device wherein each of the side panels has one of the outer barbs extending therefrom and one of the intermediate barbs extending therefrom. This configuration is the logical and expected outcome of the combination of the elements. If the device of Mascari in view of Castagno and Morris is formed having side panels, naturally the barbs will be located on those side panels since the barbs will not be located on the fold lines.
In regard to Claim 8, Mascari (US D833567 S), Castagno, and Morris teach the wildlife exclusion device of claim 7 as described above. Morris teaches side panels (the base 13, the top 14, and the walls 15, 16) (Fig 2). Mascari (US D833567 S) teaches first openings (See figure above) at positions between the intermediate barbs and the first end (See figure above) of the tunnel. Integrating the first openings onto the side panels results in the wildlife exclusion device wherein a plurality of the side panels are formed with first openings at positions between the intermediate barbs and the first end of the tunnel. This configuration is the logical and expected outcome of the combination of the elements.
In regard to Claim 9, Mascari (US D833567 S), Castagno, and Morris teach the wildlife exclusion device of claim 8 as described above. Morris teaches side panels (the base 13, the top 14, and the walls 15, 16) (Fig 2). Mascari (US D833567 S) teaches second openings (See figure above) at positions between the intermediate barbs and the second end (See figure above) of the tunnel. Integrating the first openings onto the side panels results in the wildlife exclusion device wherein a plurality of the side panels are formed with second openings at positions between the intermediate barbs and the second end of the tunnel. This configuration is the logical and expected outcome of the combination of the elements.
In regard to Claim 10, Mascari (US D833567 S), Castagno, and Morris teach the wildlife exclusion device of claim 8 as described above. Morris teaches side panels (the base 13, the top 14, and the walls 15, 16) (Fig 2), and Mascari (US D833567 S) teaches wherein each of the second openings (See figure above) aligns with one of the first openings (See figure above). Integrating these aligned openings onto the side panels results in the wildlife exclusion device wherein each of the second openings is on one of the side panels that has one of the first openings and each of the second openings aligns with one of the first openings on the respective side panel. This configuration is the logical and expected outcome of the combination of the elements.
In regard to Claim 11, Mascari (US D833567 S), Castagno, and Morris teach the wildlife exclusion device of claim 6 as described above. Morris discloses wherein the body of the exclusion device has fold lines (line between the top wall 14 and the wall 15 in Figure 2), and Castagno discloses a plurality of slots (assembly slot 114) spaced from one another in end-to end relationship (Fig 1 & 2). Integrating these aligned openings onto the side panels results in the wildlife exclusion device wherein each of the fold lines has a plurality of slots spaced from one another in end-to end relationship. This configuration is the logical and expected outcome of the combination of the elements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See list of references on attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Audrey Fisher whose telephone number is (571)272-2849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7:30-4:30.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached at 571-270-3238. 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.
/Audrey Fisher/
Examiner, Art Unit 3635
/RYAN D KWIECINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635