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 .
Claims 1-7, 9-18 are currently pending, with claims 1-6 and 15-18 having been previously withdrawn. Claims 7 and 9-14 have been considered on their merits, as discussed below.
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.
Claims 7 and 9-14 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 7 recites “a second driving assembly, configured to be driving connected with the transmission assembly.” It is unclear what is meant by “driving connected.” One of ordinary skill in the art could not reasonably ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter. Thus, claim 7 and dependent claims 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b),
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 7 and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 113317211 to Zhao (“Zhao”) in view of CN 112715380 to Chen (“Chen”)1.
Regarding claim 7, Zhao teaches an automatic cat litter tray, comprising: a container (31) provided with an opening configured to allow a pet to enter and leave the container (FIG. 2); a first driving assembly (32), configured to drive the container to rotate from an initial angle to a first preset angle; a separator (315) provided inside the container and rotatable together with the container, wherein the separator is provided with a transmission assembly.
Zhao does not explicitly teach the separator comprises a grille plate and two guiding strips provided at two sides of the grille plate, and a distance between the two guiding strips gradually decreases from a front end to a rear end of the grille plate; and a second driving assembly, configured to be driving connected with the transmission assembly to drive the separator to rotate to a second preset angle after the container is rotated to the first preset angle.
Chen teaches an automatic cat litter tray, comprising a separator (6) that has a grille plate and two guiding strips (15) provided at two sides of the grille plate, and a distance between the two guiding strips gradually decreases from a front end to a rear end of the grille plate (FIG. 5); and a second driving assembly (9), configured to be driving connected with the transmission assembly to drive the separator to rotate to a second preset angle after the container is rotated to the first preset angle (pg. 4 of attached English translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the litter tray of Zhao so that it includes the grille plate, as taught by Chen, in order to prevent spillage. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the litter tray of Zhao so that it includes the second driving assembly, as taught by Chen, in order to improve its movement and rotatability.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Zhao and Chen teaches each and every element of claim 7, as discussed above, and it teaches wherein the separator is rotatably connected to and inside the container through at least one rotating shaft, and the at least one rotating shaft extends out of a side wall of the container, and an end of the at least one rotating shaft is provided with the transmission assembly (Zhao at FIGS. 1-4; Chen at FIGS. 1-5).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Zhao and Chen teaches each and every element of claim 9, as discussed above, and it teaches wherein the transmission assembly comprises a first gear provided at an end of the rotating shaft, and when the container is rotated to the first preset angle, the first gear is drivingly connected with the second driving assembly (Zhao at FIGS. 1-4; Chen at FIGS. 1-5).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Zhao and Chen teaches each and every element of claim 10, as discussed above, and it teaches wherein the automatic cat litter tray further comprises a base, the base is provided thereon with several brackets configured for supporting the container, a side edge of the container is fixedly connected with a second gear, the second gear is drivingly connected with the first driving assembly, the second driving assembly is provided on one side of the brackets, and comprises a separator driving motor and a third gear drivingly connected with the separator driving motor, the third gear and the first gear are provided in parallel, and when the container is rotated to the first preset angle, the first gear is just meshed with the third gear (Zhao at FIGS. 1-4; Chen at FIGS. 1-5).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Zhao and Chen teaches each and every element of claim 9, as discussed above, and it teaches wherein a side edge of the container is provided with a second gear, the second gear is drivingly connected with the first driving assembly, the second driving assembly is provided on the second gear and is configured to rotate with the second gear, and when the container is rotated to the first preset angle, the second driving assembly drives, through the transmission assembly, the rotating shaft to drive the separator to rotate (Zhao at FIGS. 1-4; Chen at FIGS. 1-5)..
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Zhao and Chen teaches each and every element of claim 12, as discussed above, and it teaches wherein the transmission assembly comprises a first gear provided at an end of the rotating shaft, the second driving assembly further comprises a separator driving motor and a third gear drivingly connected with the separator driving motor, and the third gear is meshed with the first gear (Zhao at FIGS. 1-4; Chen at FIGS. 1-5).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Zhao and Chen teaches each and every element of claim 13, as discussed above, and it teaches wherein the automatic cat litter tray further comprises a base, the base is provided thereon with several brackets for supporting the container, the second gear comprises an external gear and an internal gear provided in a stacked manner, an accommodating cavity configured for accommodating the separator driving motor is provided between the external gear and the internal gear, and the first gear and the second gear are both provided between the second gear and the container (Zhao at FIGS. 1-4; Chen at FIGS. 1-5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 7 and 9-14 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.
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 MARISA CONLON whose telephone number is (571)272-4387. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00.
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.
/MARISA V CONLON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
1 Copies of the foreign references, along with their English translations, are attached.