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 .
Status of Claims
As per the submission to the Office filed on 04/01/2026, the following represents the changes from the previous claims: Claims 1-12 were amended. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the motor must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
For claim 9, the limitation “wherein the processor selectively enables one of the plurality of actuator targets to cause the food dispenser to dispense food upon actuation of the one of the plurality of actuator targets on a rotating basis.” (emphasis added) as the specification does not specifically state that the processor selectively enables one of the plurality of actuator targets and that the actuator targets are on a rotating basis.
For claim 10, the limitation “disables a remainder of the plurality of food dispensers” as the specification does not state that the processor disables a remainder of the plurality of food dispensers.
The amendment filed 04/01/2026 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows:
[0016] of the specification states “The processor may be set to enable one of the plurality of food dispensers to dispense food upon actuation of the actuator target and disables a remainder of the plurality of food dispensers.”
[0017] of the specification states “To achieve this, the processor selectively enables one of the plurality of actuator targets to cause the food dispenser to dispense food upon actuation of the one enabled of the plurality of actuator targets. Which actuator target is enabled can be set on a rotating basis.”
[0019] of the specification states “enables and disables food dispensers”
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, 7, 9, 11, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yin (US 20230363352 A1 as cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Yin (see embodiment of figs. 1-5 and [0060]) discloses an animal food dispensing system (300) for exercising domesticated animals comprising: an actuator target (104, 310, 330 and 340) constructed and arranged to be actuated by a domesticated animal (302 and [0049]), the actuator target comprising a wireless transmitter (132; [0036], [0038], [0047] and figs. 1 and 3 as the wireless module 132 sends wireless transmissions that include a dispense signal to the dispenser) and a sensor (140), in communication with the wireless transmitter, selected from the group of weight sensor, pressure sensor ([0041]), temperature sensor, presence sensor ([0041]), infrared beam, ultrasonic sensor, or any combination thereof, an animal food dispenser (102 and 320) spaced apart from the actuator target (fig. 3), the animal food dispenser comprising a wireless receiver (114 and [0047]) constructed and arranged to receive a signal from the wireless transmitter (fig. 3 and [0035] and [0047]);
wherein the actuator target, via the wireless transmitter, transmits the signal to the animal food dispenser upon activation by the sensor (fig. 1 and [0030] and [0041-0042]) and the signal transmitted from the wireless transmitter of the actuator target to the animal food dispenser actuates the food dispenser to release animal food from a reservoir (120) of the food dispenser ([0036], [0038] and [0047]).
Regarding claim 4, Yin discloses the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, wherein the actuator target is constructed and arranged to be positioned on a floor of a building (fig. 3) and the actuator target senses a presence of a domesticated animal to actuate the food dispenser ([0041]).
Regarding claim 5, Yin discloses the animal food dispensing system for exercising animals as described in Claim 1, wherein the actuator target is constructed and arranged to be positioned on a floor of a building (fig. 3) and the actuator target senses weight of a domesticated animal on the actuator target to actuate the food dispenser ([0041] as the actuator target has a pressure sensor, and any part of the dog can be used to activate the pressure sensor).
Regarding claim 7, Yin discloses the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, comprising a plurality of actuator targets (310, 330 and 340) spaced apart from each other (fig. 3) and a processor (130), wherein the processor enables one of the plurality of actuator targets to cause the food dispenser to dispense food upon actuation of the one of the plurality of actuator targets ([0037] and [0047]).
Regarding claim 9, Yin discloses the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, comprising a plurality of actuator targets (310, 330 and 340) spaced apart from each other (fig. 3) and a processor (130), wherein the processor selectively enables one of the plurality of actuator targets on an alternating or rotating basis ([0046], [0050], [0094] and fig. 5 as the user can select which actuator target will be active, and so the processor will selectively enables one of the plurality of actuator targets on an alternating or rotating basis) (Please note that the instant specification in [0017] states that only one of the targets will actuate the food, and that the targets will alternate. Therefore, the Examiner will interpret the alternating of the targets as the rotating basis1) to cause the food dispenser to dispense food upon actuation of the one of the plurality of actuator targets.
Regarding claim 11, Yin discloses the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, the food dispenser comprising an adjustable timer (515, 520, 525 [0055]) that controls an amount of time that food that is dispensed by the food dispenser ([0034], [0058], [0076]-[0077]).
Regarding claim 13, Yin discloses the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, the animal food dispenser comprising a food receptacle (receptacle of 102 and 320) in physical communication with the reservoir of the food dispenser and a sensor (see 112b above), selected from the group of light sensor, weight sensor ([0041] as the pressure sensor will sense weight), infrared beam, and any combination thereof, wherein when the food dispenser is actuated to release animal food from the reservoir the animal food is received into the food receptacle, the sensor detects the presence of the animal food in the food receptacle, and the sensor disables the food dispenser until the animal food is removed from the food receptacle ([0030]).
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 2-3, 6, 8, 10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin (US 20230363352 A1 as cited in IDS) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yin (US 20230363352 A1 as cited in IDS, embodiment of fig. 14 hereon referred to as Yin’14).
Regarding claim 2, Yin teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in claim 1, comprising the food dispenser (320).
However, Yin is silent about a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other.
Yin’14 teaches a plurality of food dispensers (1420 and 1430) spaced apart from each other (fig. 14).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yin to include a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other as taught by Yin’14 in order to encourage the animal to exercise and run between each food dispensers ([0116] of Yin’14).
Regarding claim 3, Yin teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, comprising a plurality of actuator targets (310, 330 and 340) spaced apart from each other (fig. 3).
However, Yin is silent about a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other.
Yin’14 teaches a plurality of food dispensers (1420 and 1430) spaced apart from each other (fig. 14).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yin to include a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other as taught by Yin’14 in order to encourage the animal to exercise and run between each food dispensers ([0116] of Yin’14).
Regarding claim 6, Yin teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, comprising the food dispenser and a processor (112), wherein the processor enables the food dispenser to dispense food upon actuation of the actuator target ([0035]).
However, Yin is silent about a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other.
Yin’14 teaches a plurality of food dispensers (1420 and 1430) spaced apart from each other (fig. 14).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yin to include a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other as taught by Yin’14 in order to encourage the animal to exercise and run between each food dispensers ([0116] of Yin’14).
Regarding claim 8, Yin teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, comprising the food dispenser and a processor (112).
However, Yin is silent about a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other, wherein the processor selectively enables one of the plurality of food dispensers to dispense food upon actuation of the actuator target on a rotating basis.
Yin’14 teaches a plurality of food dispensers (1420 and 1430) spaced apart from each other (fig. 14), wherein the processor ([0116] and fig. 14 as 1420 and 1400 will comprise a processor in order to receive the signal from the actuator target and dispense the feed) selectively enables one of the plurality of food dispensers to dispense food upon actuation of the actuator target on a rotating basis ([0116] “target 1410 directs dispensers 1420 and 1430 to alternate generating a reward signal after the animal 1402 has successfully interacted with target 1410 so that the animal 1402 is running back and forth between target 1410 and the two dispensers in an alternating manner”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yin to include a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other, wherein the processor selectively enables one of the plurality of food dispensers to dispense food upon actuation of the actuator target on a rotating basis as taught by Yin’14 in order to encourage the animal to exercise and run between each food dispensers ([0116] of Yin’14).
Regarding claim 10, Yin teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, comprising the food dispenser and a processor (112), and wherein the processor enables the food dispenser to emit an audible sound upon actuation of the actuator target ([0035] as the reward signal is an audible sound when the food dispenser receives the dispense signal from the actuator target).
However, Yin is silent about a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other, wherein the processor enables one of the plurality of food dispensers to dispense food upon actuation of the actuator target and disables a remainder of the plurality of food dispensers.
Yin’14 teaches a plurality of food dispensers (1420 and 1430) spaced apart from each other (fig. 14), wherein the processor ([0116] and fig. 14 as 1420 and 1400 will comprise a processor in order to receive the signal from the actuator target and dispense the feed) enables one of the plurality of food dispensers to dispense food upon actuation of the actuator target ([0116]) and disables a remainder of the plurality of food dispensers ([0116] as when one of the food dispensers is dispensing food upon actuation of the actuator target, the other food dispensers will be disabled as they are not dispensing food and the actuator target is activating only one of the food dispensers)(Please note that the specification does not state the limitation “disable”, and that [0010] of applicant’s specification states that a signal will be sent to one of the feeders. Therefore, the Examiner will interpret the “disable” limitation as described in the specification).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yin to include a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other, wherein the processor enables one of the plurality of food dispensers to dispense food upon actuation of the actuator target and disables a remainder of the plurality of food dispensers as taught by Yin’14 in order to encourage the animal to exercise and run between each food dispenser at different locations (fig. 14 and [0116] of Yin’14).
Regarding claim 15, Yin as modified by Yin’14 teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 8, and Yin further teaches comprising a user controlled input device (450) selected from the group consisting of a remote control, a computer, a cellular phone (fig. 4), a tablet, or any combination thereof, wherein a user may use the user controlled input device to control the processor (fig. 4 and [0052]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin (as above) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kubala (US 20060000418 A1) and Morosin (US 20050252457 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Yin teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, but does not teach wherein the food dispenser comprising a plurality of selectable apertures on a rotatable dial that may be rotated to select one of the plurality of selectable apertures, with each aperture of the selectable apertures having a different area to allow an amount of food to be dispensed by the food dispenser that is defined by the area of a selected aperture, and a motor, wherein when the motor is activated the rotatable dial rotates changing the selected aperture.
Kubala teaches the food dispenser (2’) comprising a plurality of selectable apertures (34’), with each aperture of the selectable apertures having a different area ([0022]) to allow an amount of food to be dispensed by the food dispenser that is defined by the area of a selected aperture ([0022]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yin to include a plurality of selectable apertures, with each aperture of the selectable apertures having a different area to allow an amount of food to be dispensed by the food dispenser that is defined by the area of a selected aperture as taught by Kubala in order to determine the rate of when the food is dispensed ([0022] of Kubala).
Morosin teaches the plurality of selectable apertures (210) on a rotatable dial (460) that may be rotated to select one of the plurality of selectable apertures ([0023] and [0026]), and a motor (450), wherein when the motor is activated the rotatable dial rotates changing the selected aperture ([0023], [0026] and [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plurality of selectable apertures of Yin as modified by Kubala to be on a rotatable dial that may be rotated to select one of the plurality of selectable apertures, and a motor, wherein when the motor is activated the rotatable dial rotates changing the selected aperture as taught by Morosin in order to automatically rotate the plurality of selectable apertures and provide convenience to the user without the need of the user to manually rotate the plurality of selectable apertures ([0002] of Morosin).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin (as above) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Anderton (US 11013214 B2 as cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 14, Yin teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, but is silent the animal food dispenser comprising a door, biased in a closed position and capable of moving to an open position, and a solenoid which upon activation moves the door from the closed position to the open position, wherein the door prevents animal food from leaving the reservoir in the closed position, allows animal food to leave the reservoir in the open position, and the amount of animal food released from the reservoir can be controlled by a duration of time which the solenoid is activated moving the door to the open position.
Anderton teaches the animal food dispenser comprising a door (214), biased in a closed position and capable of moving to an open position (figs. 1-2), and which upon activation moves the door from the closed position to the open position, wherein the door prevents animal food from leaving the reservoir in the closed position (Col. 4, lines 9-19), allows animal food to leave the reservoir in the open position (Col. 4, lines 9-19), and the amount of animal food released from the reservoir can be controlled by a duration of time which is activated moving the door to the open position (Col. 4, lines 9-19 as the duration of time is based on the amount of time the authorized pet remains).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify animal food dispenser of Yin to include a door, biased in a closed position and capable of moving to an open position, which upon activation moves the door from the closed position to the open position, wherein the door prevents animal food from leaving the reservoir in the closed position, allows animal food to leave the reservoir in the open position, and the amount of animal food released from the reservoir can be controlled by a duration of time which is activated moving the door to the open position as taught by Anderton in order restrict access of food to unauthorized animals (Col. 4, lines 9-19 of Anderton).
The combination of Yin as modified by Anderton does not explicitly state a solenoid. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify animal food dispenser of Yin as modified by Anderton to include a solenoid as the solenoid is functionally equivalent to the automatic door of Anderton.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin (as above) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Anderson (US 20220240486 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Yin teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 1, but is silent the food dispenser comprising an ultrasonic sensor for detecting the domesticated animal's proximity to the food dispenser, wherein when the domesticated animal's presence reaches a pre set proximity, the food dispenser is reset to a beginning process.
Anderson teaches the food dispenser comprising an ultrasonic sensor ([0187]) for detecting the domesticated animal's proximity to the food dispenser ([0187]), wherein when the domesticated animal's presence reaches a pre set proximity, the food dispenser is reset to a beginning process ([0187]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify animal food dispenser of Yin to include an ultrasonic sensor for detecting the domesticated animal's proximity to the food dispenser, wherein when the domesticated animal's presence reaches a pre set proximity, the food dispenser is reset to a beginning process as taught by Anderson in order to easily determine the proximity of the user ([0187] of Anderson).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin as modified by Yin’14 as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Anderton (US 11013214 B2 as cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 17, Yin as modified by Yin’14 teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 6, and Yin further teaches each food dispenser in the plurality of food dispensers (see above) but is silent wherein the food dispenser further comprising a warning light, and a sensor selected from the group consisting of a photocell sensor, a laser diode, or any combination thereof, wherein when the sensor detects the reservoir is depleted of animal food the sensor signals to the processor to disable the animal food dispensing system and the processor disables the food dispenser and activates the warning light on the food dispenser.
Anderton teaches wherein the food dispenser further comprising a warning light (Col. 10, lines 59-67), and a sensor (abstract describes a dispenser sensor), wherein when the sensor detects the reservoir is depleted of animal food the sensor signals to the processor to disable the animal food dispensing system and the processor disables the food dispenser and activates the warning light on the food dispenser (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify animal food dispenser of Yin as modified by Yin’14 to include a warning light, and a sensor, wherein when the sensor detects the reservoir is depleted of animal food the sensor signals to the processor to disable the animal food dispensing system and the processor disables the food dispenser and activates the warning light on the food dispenser as taught by Anderton in order to alert the user (Col. 10, lines 59-67 of Anderton).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the sensor of Anderton to be selected from the group consisting of a photocell sensor, a laser diode, or any combination thereof, since applicant has not disclosed that the sensor being a photocell sensor, a laser diode, or any combination thereof solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with any other sensor.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin (US 20230363352 A1 as cited in IDS) in view of Kubala (US 20060000418 A1) and Morosin (US 20050252457 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Yin teaches an animal food dispensing system (300) for exercising domesticated animals comprising: an actuator target (104, 310, 330 and 340) constructed and arranged to be actuated by a domesticated animal (302 and [0049]), the actuator target comprising a wireless transmitter (132; [0036], [0038], [0047] and figs. 1 and 3 as the wireless module 132 sends wireless transmissions that include a dispense signal to the dispenser) and a sensor (140), in communication with the wireless transmitter, selected from the group of weight sensor, pressure sensor ([0041]), temperature sensor, presence sensor ([0041]), infrared beam, ultrasonic sensor, or any combination thereof; an animal food dispenser (102 and 320) spaced apart from the actuator target (fig. 3), the animal food dispenser comprising a wireless receiver (114 and [0047]) constructed and arranged to receive a signal from the wireless transmitter (fig. 3 and [0035] and [0047]); wherein the actuator target, via the wireless transmitter, transmits the signal to the animal food dispenser upon activation by the sensor (fig. 1 and [0030] and [0041-0042]) and the signal transmitted from the wireless transmitter of the actuator target to the animal food dispenser actuates the food dispenser to release animal food from a reservoir (120) of the food dispenser ([0036], [0038] and [0047]).
However, Yin is silent about a plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures, with each aperture of the selectable apertures having a different area to allow an amount of food to be dispensed by the food dispenser that is defined by the area of a selected aperture, and a motor to control the plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures.
Kubala teaches the food dispenser (2’) comprising a plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures (34’), with each aperture of the selectable apertures having a different area ([0022]) to allow an amount of food to be dispensed by the food dispenser that is defined by the area of a selected aperture ([0022]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yin to include a plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures, with each aperture of the selectable apertures having a different area to allow an amount of food to be dispensed by the food dispenser that is defined by the area of a selected aperture as taught by Kubala in order to determine the rate of when the food is dispensed ([0022] of Kubala).
Morosin teaches a motor (450) to control the plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures ([0023], [0026] and [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plurality of selectable apertures of Yin as modified by Kubala to include a motor to control the plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures as taught by Morosin in order to automatically rotate the plurality of selectable apertures and provide convenience to the user without the need of the user to manually rotate the plurality of selectable apertures ([0002] of Morosin).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin in view of Yin’14, Kubala and Morosin.
Regarding claim 19, Yin teaches an animal food dispensing system (300) for exercising domesticated animals comprising: a processor (130); an actuator target (310, 330 and 340) constructed and arranged to be actuated by a domesticated animal (302 and [0049]), the actuator target comprising a wireless transmitter (132; [0036], [0038], [0047] and figs. 1 and 3 as the wireless module 132 sends wireless transmissions that include a dispense signal to the dispenser) and a sensor (140), in communication with the wireless transmitter, selected from the group of weight sensor, pressure sensor ([0041]), temperature sensor, presence sensor ([0041]), infrared beam, ultrasonic sensor, or any combination thereof; an animal food dispenser (102 and 320) spaced apart from the actuator target (fig. 3), the animal food dispenser comprising a wireless receiver (114 and [0047]) constructed and arranged to receive a processor signal from the processor ([0035][0046-0047], [0050], [0094] and figs. 3 and 5); wherein upon activation by the sensor, the actuator target, via the wireless transmitter, transmits an actuator signal to the processor which in turn transmits the processor signal to the plurality of animal food dispensers activating one of the plurality of animal food dispensers to release animal food from a reservoir (120) of the food dispenser and disables a remainder of the food dispenser (fig. 1, [0030], [0036], [0038], [0041-0042] and [0047]).
However, Yin does not teach a plurality of animal food dispensers spaced apart from each other; a plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures, with each aperture of the selectable apertures having a different area to allow an amount of food to be dispensed by the food dispenser that is defined by the area of a selected aperture, and a motor to control the plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures.
Yin’14 teaches a plurality of animal food dispensers (1420 and 1430) spaced apart from each other (fig. 14).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yin to include a plurality of animal food dispensers spaced apart from each other as taught by Yin’14 in order to encourage the animal to exercise and run between each food dispensers ([0116] of Yin’14).
Kubala teaches the food dispenser (2’) comprising a plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures (34’), with each aperture of the selectable apertures having a different area ([0022]) to allow an amount of food to be dispensed by the food dispenser that is defined by the area of a selected aperture ([0022]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yin to include a plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures, with each aperture of the selectable apertures having a different area to allow an amount of food to be dispensed by the food dispenser that is defined by the area of a selected aperture as taught by Kubala in order to determine the rate of when the food is dispensed ([0022] of Kubala).
Morosin teaches a motor (450) to control the plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures ([0023], [0026] and [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plurality of selectable apertures of Yin as modified by Yin’14 and Kubala to include a motor to control the plurality of rotatably, selectable apertures as taught by Morosin in order to automatically rotate the plurality of selectable apertures and provide convenience to the user without the need of the user to manually rotate the plurality of selectable apertures ([0002] of Morosin).
Regarding claim 20, Yin as modified by Yin’14, Kubala and Morosin teaches the animal food dispensing system for exercising domesticated animals as described in Claim 19, and Yin further teaches wherein the processor randomly selects which one of the plurality of animal food dispensers is activated to release animal food from a reservoir of the food dispenser ([0046], [0050], [0094] and fig. 5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues “Because Yin teaches a training system dependent upon significant human input and exact performance by the animal, Yin does not anticipate the use of proximity sensors to activate the system. Respectfully, as claims 1, as amended, is believed to define over the cited Yin reference, Applicant requests that the rejection of claim 1 in view of Yin be withdrawn.”.
The examiner respectively disagrees. Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
Applicant further argues “As Examiner notes, Yin teaches an animal food dispensing system, but is silent about a plurality of food dispensers spaced apart from each other. Yin’14, a single figure not drawn to scale, shows two food dispensers an unknown distance apart from one another. In Yin’s specification, the reference to Figure 14 fails to teach a distance between the two food units. Yin generally teaches towards using a system as a means of training with active human involvement. Yin teaches that the human oversees the system and operates with a remote to train the pet. This teaches away from having the dispensers far apart and out of site of the human operator. Instead a practitioner in the art would read Yin to expect that the two systems would be in sight of one another to allow the user to oversee each and the animal.”.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
All other claims with arguments are similarly unpersuasive as they relate to claim 1 and the art used for those claims were used for other features that are not claimed in claim 1.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAHAR ALMATRAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2470. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Peter Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/SAHAR ALMATRAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3643
/DAVID J PARSLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
1 Examiner note: if this limitation is not what is intended by Applicant, then the specification does not appear to enable the claim limitation. A 112a enablement rejection will be analyzed in light of Applicant’s response/amendments.
