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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I as represented by Figs. 1A – 2E in the reply filed on 9/9/25 is acknowledged; see also interview summary dated 8/29/25.
Claims 6 – 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/9/25.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 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 1 recites the limitation “to allow a pet to easily access the pet seat at the user’s desire.” The term is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “pet-friendly materials.” The term is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: securing mechanism in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 5/17/24 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed (emphasis added above). It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered except as indicated on the form. The non-patent literature is struck through and has not been considered as no copy was provided; see above.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Chappell (US PG Pub. No. US 20200298897 A1).
Re Claim 1
Chappell discloses:
A standalone pet seating apparatus (see all figs, title, abstract) comprising:
a frame having a front, a back, and two sides (see fig. 3; front 36, back 34, and two sides 38 and 40);
a pet seat attached to the frame (69);
an elevation piece (20) attached to the front of the frame (fig. 1) and designed to be positioned in an engaged position and a disengaged position by a user to allow a pet to easily access the pet seat at the user’s desire (see figs. 1-4; see [0043] as well for example), and the elevation piece including a walking surface for the pet to traverse (see fig. 1; see [0028] and/or [0034] for example);
a securing mechanism to secure the elevation piece in at least one of the engaged position and disengaged position (110 and 112); and
the standalone pet seating apparatus being constructed for the elevation piece to be stored under the pet seat when in the disengaged position (see figs. 1-4; see [0043] as well for example).
Re Claim 3
Chappell discloses:
further comprising a seat support structure (59 and 58) aligned with the sides of the frame (figs. 1-2) and a backpiece (42) aligned with the back of the frame (figs. 1-2).
Re Claim 4
Chappell discloses:
wherein the pet seat, seat support structure, and backpiece are made of pet-friendly materials (the entire apparatus is designed for pets / animals and therefore is made of pet-friendly materials; see also [0029] and [0039]).
Re Claim 5
Chappell discloses:
wherein the elevation piece is made to swivel about at least one axis (it is made to swivel, see fig 6; additionally or alternatively, swiveling about one axis is rotating / pivoting in relation to the one axis, which the elevation piece does – see figs. 1-4 and 6-7; see [0010] and [0034] and [0043]).
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chappell (US PG Pub. No. US 20200298897 A1) in view of Lane et al. (US Patent No. US 12158006 B1 and hereinafter “Lane”) or Sloan et al. (US Patent No. US 5213060 A and hereinafter “Sloan”).
Re Claim 2
Chappell discloses all claim limitations, see above, except:
further comprising at least one stability piece attached to the end of a bottom of the elevation piece.
Lane teaches a ramp which uses at least one stability piece attached to the end of a bottom of the elevation piece (see resilient feet 50 which are non-skid) and Sloan teaches the same at the end of a ramp (see feet 36), with both references teaching the above for the purpose of increasing friction, improving stability, and/or improving safety. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify Chappell to include at least one stability piece attached to the end of a bottom of the elevation piece as taught by either Lane or Sloan for the purpose articulated above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional pet beds / seats and ramp structures are provided. Some of the ramp structures are linked with the pet beds / seats, whereas others are included as separately attachable structures.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E SOSNOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-7944. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 3:30 PM and 9 PM through 11:59 PM Monday through Friday, generally.
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, Justin Mikowski can be reached at (571)272-8525. 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.
/DAVID E. SOSNOWSKI/
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3673
/David E Sosnowski/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3673