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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3-8, & 14-18 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 4 as it is currently recited depends from cancelled claim 2.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 8, & 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being unpatentable over Laville et al, French Patent Publication No. FR 3066360 B1; herein Ville.
Re claim 1, Ville discloses an insect oviposition collector, comprising
a rigid plate (1; the decking plate, fig. 1-6 & 11A-B) having, on at least one surface, raised patterns (fig. 1-6 & 11A-B, between the wells; 2 via the shape of the bottom; 23 and substantially vertical walls; 24) configured to promote egg deposition by insects (fig. 4, the wells; 2 are for the insects to dispose eggs; 22 therein),
the plate having, at an upper and lower edge, a profile (fig. 1-6 & 11A-B, the profile that is received within the reclosable opening; 72, see page 8; para 7) complementary to a guide (72; the reclosable openings, fig. 9 & 11A-B) fixed in an oviposition zone (7; the greenhouse, fig. 8-10 & 11B),
wherein the profile is configured to slide in the guide so that the collector can be inserted into and withdrawn from the oviposition zone by translation (fig. 11A-B and page 8; para 9, the opening allows the spawning plate to be inserted and removed).
Re claim 3, Ville discloses the invention of claim 1, Ville further discloses wherein the rigid plate comprises a stamped metal sheet or a plastic material (page 3; para 12, wherein the rigid plate is either a stamped metal [a known means of creating wells] or plastic) having ribs (fig. 1-6 & 11A-B, between the wells; 2 via the shape of the bottom; 23 and substantially vertical walls; 24) on both a front surface and a rear surface of the rigid plate (fig. 11A-B).
Re claim 4, as best understood, Ville discloses the invention of claim 1, Ville further discloses wherein the profile is formed integrally with the plate as a single piece (fig. 3-4 & 11A-B).
Re claim 6, Ville discloses the invention of claim 1, Ville further discloses lateral connection elements (72; the resealable openings, fig. 9 & 11A-B) for reversible assembly of two adjacent collectors (fig. 9, within the plurality of resealable openings the tray units may be reversibly assembled therein).
Re claim 8, Ville discloses the invention of claim 1, Ville further discloses wherein a visible surface of the plate is black in color (page 5; para 10, the plate is black).
Re claim 14, Ville discloses the invention of claim 1, Ville further discloses an insertion hatch (71; the laying chamber, fig. 9) comprising two bent plates (722; the cleaning elements of the reclosable openings, fig. 11A-B) each having a slot (72; the reclosable openings, fig. 9 & 11A-B), suitable for inserting and removing the collector (page 8; para 10, wherein the cleaning member is a seal, brush, or broom that will each deform during extraction to clean the egg-laying plate), and a door (721; the flap/shutter, fig. 1A-B) for closing the slot (page 8; para 8, via the bi as of the torsion springs therein).
Re claim 15, Ville discloses the invention of claim 14, Ville further discloses wherein the insertion hatch further comprises elastic lips (722; the cleaning elements of the reclosable openings, fig. 11A-B) forming a barrier to prevent insect escape while allowing the collector to pass through by elastic deformation of the lips (page 8; para 9-10, wherein the cleaning member is a seal, brush, or broom that will each deform during extraction to clean the egg-laying plate and prevent the release of the flying insects).
Re claim 16, Ville discloses a system comprising the insect oviposition collector of as claimed in claim 1, Ville further discloses an oviposition zone (7; the greenhouse, fig. 8-10 & 11B) having an opening (fig. 9, within the wall of the greenhouse; 7) equipped with an insertion hatch (71; the laying chamber, fig. 9) comprising two bent plates (722; the cleaning elements of the reclosable openings, fig. 11A-B) each having a slot (72; the reclosable openings, fig. 9 & 11A-B) suitable for inserting and removing the collector (page 8; para 10, wherein the cleaning member is a seal, brush, or broom that will each deform during extraction to clean the egg-laying plate), and a door (721; the flap/shutter, fig. 1A-B) for closing the slot (page 8; para 8, via the bi as of the torsion springs therein).
Re claim 17, Ville discloses the invention of claim 1, Ville further discloses an oviposition zone having an opening provided with deformable lips (721 & 722; the flap/shutter & cleaning member, fig. 11A-B) movable between a closed configuration (fig. 11 A and page 8; para 8, wherein the shutter is maintained in the closed position) and a configuration for inserting and removing the collector (fig. 11B).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ville as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Shapiro Ilan et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0139075 A1; herein Shap.
Re claim 5, Ville discloses the invention of claim 1, Ville fails to disclose wherein the profile of the plate comprises a rod penetrating the collector and extended by a head whose cross section is complementary to a profile of the guide. However, Shap discloses wherein the profile of the plate (fig. 1-2, the perimeter of the sliding type drawers; 26/46) comprises a rod (fig. 1-2, the rod-shaped protrusion on the drawer; 26/46) penetrating the collector and extended by a head whose cross section is complementary to a profile of the guide (para 12-13 and fig. 1-2, via the sliding rail mechanism).
The only distinction between the prior art and the claimed invention is that the prior art fails to disclose wherein the profile of the plate comprises a rod penetrating the collector and extended by a head whose cross section is complementary to a profile of the guide however, Shap discloses such structure. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the prior art elements of the sliding drawer-type rails as taught by Shap to the tray and reclosable openings of the laying chamber of the prior art to yield the predictable result of stabilizing the stray within the opening. See MPEP 2143 I. (A).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ville as applied to claim 6 above, in view of Massaro, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0191677 A1; herein Mass.
Re claim 7, Ville discloses the invention of claim 6, Ville fails to disclose wherein the lateral connection elements comprise at least one magnet. However, Mass discloses lateral connection elements comprising at least one magnet (para 48, wherein the dividers are inserted and mounted with a magnet).
The only distinction between the prior art and the claimed invention is that the prior art fails to disclose wherein the lateral connection elements comprise at least one magnet however, Mass discloses such a mounting feature. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the prior art elements of the mounting magnet as taught by Mass to the reclosable opening and plate of the prior art to yield the predictable result of securing the plate within the laying chamber. See MPEP 2143 I. (A).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ville as applied to claim 6 above, in view of Jeong, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0201986 A1; herein Je and Harden et al., U.S. Patent No. 6,212,864 B1, herein Hard.
Re claim 18, Ville discloses the invention of claim 1, Ville further discloses cleaning equipment comprising a fiber brush (page 8; para 10, wherein the brush is used for cleaning the tray).
Ville fails to disclose the cleaning equipment comprising at least one pair of counter-rotating drive rollers configured to engage and advance the collector between a pair of fiber brushing rollers rotating at a speed different from a speed of the drive rollers. However, Je discloses cleaning equipment comprising a pair of fiber brushing rollers (510; the brushing rollers, fig. 2-3).
The only distinction between the prior art and the claimed invention is that the prior art fails to disclose the cleaning equipment comprising at least one pair of counter-rotating drive rollers configured to engage and advance the collector between a pair of fiber brushing rollers rotating at a speed different from a speed of the drive rollers however, Je discloses such brushing rollers. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the known technique of the brushing rollers taught by Je to improve the similar device disclosed by the prior art in the same way by allowing both sides of the plate to be cleaned). See MPEP 2143 I. (C).
The combination of Ville and Je fails to disclose the cleaning equipment comprising at least one pair of counter-rotating drive rollers configured to engage and advance the collector between the pair of fiber brushing rollers rotating at a speed different from a speed of the drive rollers. However, Hard discloses at least one pair of counter-rotating (col 4; 38-42, the belts are driven to be counter rotating thus the sets of drums are rotating counter to one another to convey the plants contained on the belts) drive rollers (130 & 154/155; the cylindrical drums and the rear drive drums, fig. 2) configured to engage and advance a collector (125a; the half-cylinder projections, fig. 2) between a pair of fiber brushing rollers (134 & 135; the overlapping brushes, fig. 1-3) rotating at a speed different from a speed of the drive rollers (fig. 3, the rotational speed of the brush is slower since its diameter is larger).
The only distinction between the prior art and the claimed invention is that the prior art fails to disclose the cleaning equipment comprising at least one pair of counter-rotating drive rollers configured to engage and advance the collector between the pair of fiber brushing rollers rotating at a speed different from a speed of the drive rollers however, Hard discloses a similar technique for moving a collector/object. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the prior art elements of the counter rotating belts and rollers as taught by Hard to the cleaning apparatus of the prior art to yield the predictable result of automated removal of the collector. See MPEP 2143 I. (A).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE P MACCRATE whose telephone number is (571)272-5215. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 9am-5pm 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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua J Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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.
/NICOLE PAIGE MACCRATE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA J MICHENER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642