Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/654,929

VIBRATION FEED SYSTEM

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
May 03, 2024
Examiner
BYUN, HAE RIE JESSICA
Art Unit
3643
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
All Seasons Feeders, Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
34%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 34% of cases
34%
Career Allow Rate
35 granted / 103 resolved
-18.0% vs TC avg
Strong +66% interview lift
Without
With
+66.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
137
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
47.9%
+7.9% vs TC avg
§102
23.7%
-16.3% vs TC avg
§112
26.3%
-13.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 103 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Claims 1-2, 5-7, 9-11, and 14 are currently pending. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. Claims 1-2, 5-7, 9-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor had possession of the claimed invention. Independent claim 1 recites a plate ramp with a shape that corresponds to a shape of the feeding device and a feed trough, wherein the plate ramp is configured to vibrate and cause thicker feed to travel down the plate ramp and onto a feed ramp of the feeding device and a vibrator cone with a vibrator cone mounting plate to which the vibrator cone is mounted, wherein the vibrator cone mounting plate is mounted on a bottom portion of the vibrator housing mounting plate (and as similarly recited in independent claim 10). Applicant’s Remarks at page 9 state that the amendments regarding the plate ramp element is supported in at least paragraph [0045] and Figures 5A, 5B, 7A, and 7B, which show the plate ramp at element 520. However, paragraph [0049] of the instant specification states “Similar to FIGURE 5B, FIGURE 8A depicts a plate ramp that is shaped as a square pyramid, corresponding to the shape of a feed ramp. FIGURE 8B depicts a view of a vibration feed system with a vibrator cone extending from a vibrator housing mounting plate. FIGURE 8C depicts another view of the vibration feed system [AltContent: textbox (Figures 5A and 8C of the instant specification.)]with vibrator cone 1 extending from vibrator PNG media_image1.png 300 532 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 362 457 media_image2.png Greyscale housing mounting plate 5.” Paragraph [0049] appears to state that Figure 5A and Figure 8C are different embodiments, and the plate ramp 520 appears to be the functionally same component as vibration cone 1. In view of claims 1 and 10, it is unclear how the system can have a plate ramp and a vibration cone? The disclosure does not discuss an embodiment with both of these components together. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) 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. Claims 1-2, 5-7, 9-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites a plate ramp with a shape that corresponds to a shape of the feeding device and a feed trough, wherein the plate ramp is configured to vibrate and cause thicker feed to travel down the plate ramp and onto a feed ramp of the feeding device and a vibrator cone with a vibrator cone mounting plate to which the vibrator cone is mounted, wherein the vibrator cone mounting plate is mounted on a bottom portion of the vibrator housing mounting plate (and as similarly recited in independent claim 10). It is unclear what this limitation is requiring in view of applicant’s disclosure. Paragraph [0045] and Figures 5A, 5B, 7A, and 7B, which show the plate ramp at element 520. However, paragraph [0049] of the instant specification states “Similar to FIGURE 5B, FIGURE 8A depicts a plate ramp that is shaped as a square pyramid, corresponding to the shape of a feed ramp. FIGURE 8B depicts a view of a vibration feed system with a vibrator cone extending from a vibrator housing mounting plate. FIGURE 8C depicts another view of the vibration feed system with vibrator cone 1 extending from vibrator housing mounting plate 5.” Paragraph [0049] appears to state that Figure 5A and Figure 8C are different embodiments, and plate ramp 520 appears to be the functionally same component as vibration cone 1. Claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons. In view of the rejections above under 35 USC § 112, the claims referred to in any and all rejections below are rejected as best understood. Claims 2, 5-7, 9, 11, and 14, depending on one or more of the rejected claims above, are rejected the same. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1, 2, 5, 6-7, 9-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song (KR 20210136756 A), hereafter referred to as “Song”, in view of Walker et al. (US 4722300 A), hereafter referred to as “Walker”. Regarding claim 1, Song teaches a vibration feed system for a feeding device for dispensing feed for animal consumption (figs. 1-8), the vibration feed system comprising: a vibrator housing (200); a vibrator housing mounting plate (220) on a top portion of the vibrator housing (fig. 6a-6b), the vibrator housing mounting plate having a plate ramp (220; figs. 6a-6b) with a shape that corresponds to a shape of the feeding device and a feed trough (figs. 6a-6b), wherein the plate ramp is configured to vibrate and cause thicker feed to travel down the plate ramp and onto a feed ramp of the feeding device (machine translation, paragraph [0035], teaching that the vibrating mechanism in combination with element 400 would allow a thicker feed to move down); a vibrator cone (400); and a vibrator cone mounting plate (300) to which the vibrator cone is mounted (figs. 6a-6b), wherein the vibrator cone mounting plate is mounted on a top portion of the vibrator housing mounting plate (figs. 1, 3, and 6). Song further appears to teach a motor within the vibrator housing (machine translation, paragraphs [0077]-[0078]), wherein the vibration housing mounting plate is configured to vibrate from motion of the motor to move feed through the feeding device and disperse the feed (machine translation, paragraphs [0077]-[0078]), but does not explicitly teach the above limitation. Walker teaches a vibration feed system (figs. 1-8) including a motor (32) within a vibrator housing (27; fig. 2). 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 vibration feed system of Song to include a motor within the vibrator housing, as taught by Walker, in order to provide automated feeding (machine translation of Song at paragraph [0077] and Walker at col. 7, line 51-col. 8, line 15). The combined teachings would result in wherein the vibration housing mounting plate is configured to vibrate from motion of the motor to move feed through the feeding device and disperse the feed. Regarding claim 2, Song in view of Walker teaches the vibration feed system of claim 1, and Song further teaches that the vibration feed system is removable from a hopper (100) for storing the feed (fig. 6, e.g., showing that 100 is removable from the vibration system via 211). Regarding claim 5, Song in view of Walker teaches the vibration feed system of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach that the vibration feed system is operable with a timer, one or more solar panels, and/or a battery. Walker further teaches that the vibration feed system is operable with a timer (73) and/or a battery (51). 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 vibration feed system of Song in view of Walker, such that the vibration feed system is operable with a timer and/or a battery, as further taught by Walker, in order to automate the feeding system and power the system without the need for a plug. Regarding claim 6, Song in view of Walker teaches the vibration feed system of claim 5, and Walker further teaches that the timer (73) is connected to the motor (32) and configured to send signals to the motor to start and stop (col. 7, line 12-col. 8, line 15). Regarding claim 7, Song in view of Walker teaches the vibration feed system of claim 5, and Walker further teaches that the timer (73) stores one or more predetermined feeding times and activates the motor (32) at the one or more predetermined feeding times (col. 7, line 12-col. 8, line 15). Regarding claim 9, Song in view of Walker teaches the vibration feed system of claim 1, and Song further teaches that the vibrator housing (110) further comprising: a vibrator housing door (spaces formed on 200; fig. 6). Regarding claim 10, Song teaches a vibration feed system for a feeding device for dispensing feed for animal consumption (figs. 1-8), the vibration feed system comprising: a vibrator housing (200); a vibrator housing mounting plate (110, 230) on a top portion of the vibrator housing (fig. 6a-6b showing 110 above 200), the vibrator housing mounting plate having a plate ramp (230; fig. 7), wherein the plate ramp is configured to vibrate and cause thicker feed to travel down the plate ramp and onto a feed ramp of the feeding device (machine translation, paragraph [0035], teaching that the vibrating mechanism would allow a thicker feed to move down); a vibrator cone (400); a vibrator cone mounting plate (300) to which the vibrator cone is mounted (figs. 6a-6b), wherein the vibrator cone mounting plate is mounted on a bottom portion of the vibrator housing mounting plate (300 mounted on a region below 110; fig. 7); and wherein the vibration feed system is configured to use vibration to move feed through the feeding device and disperse the feed (see attached machine translation, paragraph [0001]). Song further appears to teach a motor within the vibrator housing (machine translation, paragraphs [0077]-[0078]), but does not explicitly teach the above limitation. In addition, Song teaches that element 230 has a cone-like shape (fig. 7), but does not explicitly teach a square-pyramid shape. It is well settled, however, that merely changing the size or shape of a prior art device is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular size or shape was significant (MPEP 2144, citing In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976).) In this case, applicant has not shown patentable significance of the plate ramp having a square-pyramid shape (see, e.g., the instant specification at paragraph [0046]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the system of Song in view of Walker, such that the plate ramp is a square-pyramid shape, in order to accommodate the size and shape of the feeder. Walker teaches a vibration feed system (figs. 1-8) including a motor (32) within a vibrator housing (27; fig. 2). 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 vibration feed system of Song to include a motor within the vibrator housing, as taught by Walker, in order to provide automated feeding (machine translation of Song at paragraph [0077] and Walker at col. 7, line 51-col. 8, line 15). Regarding claim 11, Song in view of Walker teaches the vibration feed system of claim 10, and Song further teaches wherein the vibration feed system is removable from a hopper (100) for storing the feed (fig. 7, e.g., showing that 100 is removable from the vibration system via 211). Regarding claim 14, Song in view of Walker teaches the vibration feed system of claim 10, and Song further teaches that the vibrator housing (110) further comprising: a vibrator housing door (spaces formed on 200; fig. 7). Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 10/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As shown in the above rejections, Song in view of Walker teaches each and every element of independent claims 1 and 10, as best understood (please see 112(a) and 112(b) rejections above). Song teaches both the plate ramp and vibrator cone elements as shown above. 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 cited prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure. The references have many of the elements in the applicant’s disclosure and claims. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jessica Byun whose telephone number is (571) 272-3212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST. 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. Agendas may be sent to HaeRie.Byun@uspto.gov. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter Poon can be reached on (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. /H.J.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3643 /MARISA V CONLON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 03, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Oct 20, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 05, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Apr 10, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 10, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588649
CAT LITTER AND THE PREPARATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12538881
MAPLE TREE TAPPING TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12521220
RECOVERY CUSHION FOR ANIMALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12520814
Apparatus for assisting the forward movement of Livestock
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12507637
PLANT CONTAINER FOR GREENING WALLS AND A GREENING WALL
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
34%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+66.1%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 103 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month