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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/10/26 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 6 “an animal eating from the feeder, and animal urinating” should read “an animal eating from the feeder, an animal urinating…”
In line 11 “wherein animal interaction at one animal interactive device will activate one or more of the other animal interactive devices” should read “wherein animal interaction at one animal interactive device is configured to activate one or more of the other animal interactive devices” to emphasize the functional nature of the limitation, given that this is an apparatus claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1, 3, 6-8, 10, 12, 14, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US 10080343) in view of Wernimont et al. (US 2020/0205381) (cited by Examiner in 892 dated 5/5/25) and Kim et al. (KR 102039934).
Regarding Claim 1, Chu discloses an animal welfare ecosystem comprising:
a plurality of animal interactive devices including a water dispenser (water device 500), a feeder (pet feeder 300), and an exercise device (training device 600), wherein each animal interactive device of the plurality of animal interactive devices is capable of measuring an animal’s interaction with said animal interactive device, wherein the animal's interaction includes an animal drinking from the water dispenser (“Water bin 510 may have a measurement system capable of determining how much water is loaded into, or remaining in the bin 510.” Col. 8 lines 35-37; “pet interaction device 508 may be a camera capable of filming (image and/or video) the pet drinking.” Col. 8 lines 29-30), an animal eating from the feeder (“Dry food bin 310, and wet food bin 312, may each, or collectively, have a measurement system capable of determining how much food is loaded into, or remaining in the bin.” Col. 6 lines 47-50), an animal exercising with the exercising device (“pet interaction device 608 may be a camera capable of filming (image and/or video) the pet training (e.g. playing).” Col. 9 lines 23-25; training history 618),
a computational hub in a communicative connection with each animal interactive device of the plurality of animal interactive devices (owner device 104; Figure 10); wherein animal interaction at one animal interactive device will activate one or more of the other animal interactive devices to perform an activity (“the pet devices may automatically control one another based on the pet's interaction with a given device” Abstract; “Each device may be connected, wirelessly or wired, such that each device may communicate with each other device” Col. 12 lines 59-60; “Dashed lines within FIG. 10 represent interconnection between devices 106 (and device 104 and server 102) via relay through home network 156. It should be appreciated that any device 106 can connect to any other component within system 100, 1000, via home network 156 or other commination interfaces.” Col. 13 lines 3-8; “at least two of the pet devices being in communication with each other such that interaction by the pet with one of the pet devices automatically triggers a change of the configuration settings of the other pet device.” Claim 2); and
wherein the measurement of animal interaction at any of the plurality of animal interactive devices is sendable to the computational hub (“food bin status 320 may be transmitted to owner device 104” Col. 7 lines 14-15; “treat bin status 416 may be transmitted to owner device 104” Col. 8 lines 11-12; “water bin status 516 may be transmitted to owner device 104” Col. 9 lines 7-8; Col. 10 lines 4-5; Col. 10 lines 48-49; Col. 12 lines 17-19), and wherein upon receipt of said measurement, the computational hub is configured to analyze the measurement (processor 138; Figure 1).
Chu fails to disclose a litterbox, and a stimulating toy, the animal interaction being an animal urinating and/or defecating in the litterbox, and an animal playing with the stimulating toy; and if the measurement reaches a pre-defined upper threshold of activity, the computational hub is configured to communicate with a different animal interactive device than the one from which the measurement was received to have said different animal interactive device perform an activity.
However, Wernimont teaches an animal welfare ecosystem comprising: a water device (500b), a feeder (feeding bowl 500a), a litterbox (litter box 400), wherein the animal interactive device is capable of measuring an animal’s interaction with said animal interactive device, wherein the animal's interaction includes an animal urinating and/or defecating in the litterbox (“the measure device 420 may be used to measure the weight of an animal in the litter box, materials excreted from the animal (e.g., feces or urine excreted from the animal), etc., including a combination thereof.” Paragraph [0051]); wherein the measurement of animal interaction at any of the plurality of animal interactive devices is sendable to the computational hub (Paragraph [0049]; Figure 6A-6B).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the welfare system of Chu, with the litterbox and measurement device of Wernimont, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help increase the amount of information provided to the system, to help ensure the pet maintains a healthy lifestyle.
Additionally, Kim teaches an animal welfare system comprising a feeder (snack outlet 520) and a stimulating toy (toy body 100), wherein the animal interactive device is capable of measuring an animal’s interaction with said animal interactive device, wherein the animal's interaction includes an animal playing with the stimulating toy (“the control & communication module 300 calculates the exercise amount of the dog based on the distance data measured using the algorithm, and transmits information on the exercise amount to the smartphone of the week or based on the exercise amount” Page 4 Paragraph 4 of translation); wherein animal interaction at one animal interactive device will activate one or more of the other animal interactive devices to perform an activity (Page 4 Paragraph 4 of translation), and if the measurement reaches a pre-defined upper threshold of activity, the computational hub is configured to communicate with a different animal interactive device than the one from which the measurement was received to have said different animal interactive device perform an activity (“The snack food supply control module 510 may be operated to provide a predetermined food and snack. That is, the control & communication module 300 may not provide a snack when the exercise amount does not exceed a certain standard, and the more the exercise amount, the more the snack partition plate 530 is rotated to the outside through the snack outlet 520. The amount emitted can be controlled.” Page 4 Paragraph 4 of translation).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the welfare system of Chu, with the toy of Kim, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help increase exercise as well as help prevent boredom, and to have provided the measurements and activation of Chu, to have an upper threshold of activity as taught by Kim, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help encourage a healthy lifestyle for the pet by encouraging exercise.
Regarding Claim 3, Chu as modified teaches the animal welfare ecosystem of claim 1. Chu further discloses wherein the computational hub is a stand-alone device selected from a computing device or a microcontroller (“Owner device 104 may be any device, such as a smartphone, computer, TV, tablet, laptop, smartwatch, etc.” Col. 3 lines 55-60).
Regarding Claim 6, Chu as modified teaches the animal welfare ecosystem of claim 1. Chu further discloses wherein the communicative connection may be enabled through physical wire(s), Ethernet cables, and/or one or more means of wireless connection (communication paths 112, 114, and 116 “A wireless communication protocol may include any one or more of Bluetooth, Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE), Zigbee, Wi-Fi,” Col. 2 lines 22-30).
Regarding Claim 7, Chu as modified teaches the animal welfare ecosystem of claim 1. Chu further discloses wherein the computational hub is in communicative connection with a dashboard or mobile application (pet owner application 146; Figure 1), and wherein the computational hub is capable of sending the measurements of animal interaction with each animal interactive device of the plurality of animal interactive devices to the dashboard or mobile application (Figures 1 and 10; “The pet device 106 then interacts with the pet 110 and transmits information regarding said interaction to either pet activity server 102 or owner device 104.” Col. 2 lines 46-49).
Regarding Claim 8, Chu as modified teaches the animal welfare ecosystem of claim 7. Chu further discloses wherein the dashboard or mobile application can send activity instructions to the computational hub to be relayed to one or more animal interactive devices of the plurality of animal interaction devices (“The pet owner 108 may then alter the preliminary information to set a desired pet facial recognition/monitoring/food intake estimation/feeding/activity schedule which is then used to configure the one or more pet device 106.” Col. 2 lines 40-46).
Regarding Claim 10, Chu as modified teaches the animal welfare ecosystem of claim 1. Chu further discloses the water dispenser includes a water receptacle (water device 500; Figures 10 and 5) and a plate securely placed in a position in front of the water receptacle (“scale 710 may be located in front of a food, treat, or water bin of devices 300, 400, 500 respectively such that the pet 110 stands on scale 710 when using devices 300, 400, and/or 500.” Col. 10 lines 26-29).
Regarding Claim 12, Chu discloses a method of monitoring health and behavior of one or more animals, the method comprising:
measuring an animal interaction with one or more animal interactive devices of a plurality of animal interactive devices within a defined area to form an animal interaction measurement (“Water bin 510 may have a measurement system capable of determining how much water is loaded into, or remaining in the bin 510.” Col. 8 lines 35-37; “pet interaction device 508 may be a camera capable of filming (image and/or video) the pet drinking.” Col. 8 lines 29-30), an animal eating from the feeder (“Dry food bin 310, and wet food bin 312, may each, or collectively, have a measurement system capable of determining how much food is loaded into, or remaining in the bin.” Col. 6 lines 47-50), an animal exercising with the exercising device (“pet interaction device 608 may be a camera capable of filming (image and/or video) the pet training (e.g. playing).” Col. 9 lines 23-25; training history 618), wherein the one or more animal interactive devices includes a water dispenser (water device 500), a feeder (pet feeder 300), and an exercise device (training device 600), wherein the animal's interaction includes an animal drinking from the water dispenser (“Water bin 510 may have a measurement system capable of determining how much water is loaded into, or remaining in the bin 510.” Col. 8 lines 35-37; “pet interaction device 508 may be a camera capable of filming (image and/or video) the pet drinking.” Col. 8 lines 29-30), an animal eating from the feeder (“Dry food bin 310, and wet food bin 312, may each, or collectively, have a measurement system capable of determining how much food is loaded into, or remaining in the bin.” Col. 6 lines 47-50), an animal exercising with the exercising device (“pet interaction device 608 may be a camera capable of filming (image and/or video) the pet training (e.g. playing).” Col. 9 lines 23-25; training history 618),
communicating the animal interaction measurement from the one or more animal interactive devices to a computational hub via a communicative connection (“food bin status 320 may be transmitted to owner device 104” Col. 7 lines 14-15; “treat bin status 416 may be transmitted to owner device 104” Col. 8 lines 11-12; “water bin status 516 may be transmitted to owner device 104” Col. 9 lines 7-8; Col. 10 lines 4-5; Col. 10 lines 48-49; Col. 12 lines 17-19); and
analyzing the measurement by the computational hub (processor 138; Figures 1 and 10; Col. 3 lines 61-65), and activating a different animal interactive device than the one or more from which the measurement was received to perform an activity (“the pet devices may automatically control one another based on the pet's interaction with a given device” Abstract; “Each device may be connected, wirelessly or wired, such that each device may communicate with each other device” Col. 12 lines 59-60; “Dashed lines within FIG. 10 represent interconnection between devices 106 (and device 104 and server 102) via relay through home network 156. It should be appreciated that any device 106 can connect to any other component within system 100, 1000, via home network 156 or other commination interfaces.” Col. 13 lines 3-8; “at least two of the pet devices being in communication with each other such that interaction by the pet with one of the pet devices automatically triggers a change of the configuration settings of the other pet device.” Claim 2).
Chu fails to disclose a litterbox, and a stimulating toy, wherein the animal interaction includes an animal urinating and/or defecating in the litterbox, and an animal playing with the stimulating toy; and if the measurement reaches a pre- defined upper threshold of activity, activating a different animal interactive device than the one or more from which the measurement was received to perform an activity.
However, Wernimont teaches a similar method of monitoring health and behavior of one or more animals; measuring an animal interaction with one or more animal interactive devices comprising a water device (500b), a feeder (feeding bowl 500a), a litterbox (litter box 400), wherein the animal interactive device is capable of measuring an animal’s interaction with said animal interactive device, wherein the animal's interaction includes an animal urinating and/or defecating in the litterbox (“the measure device 420 may be used to measure the weight of an animal in the litter box, materials excreted from the animal (e.g., feces or urine excreted from the animal), etc., including a combination thereof.” Paragraph [0051]); wherein the measurement of animal interaction at any of the plurality of animal interactive devices is sendable to the computational hub (Paragraph [0049]; Figure 6A-6B).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the welfare system of Chu, with the litterbox and measurement device of Wernimont, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help increase the amount of information provided to the system, to help ensure the pet maintains a healthy lifestyle.
Additionally, Kim teaches a similar method of monitoring health and behavior of one or more animals; measuring an animal interaction with one or more animal interactive devices comprising a food dispenser (snack outlet 520) and a stimulating toy (toy body 100); wherein the animal interaction includes an animal playing with the stimulating toy (“the control & communication module 300 calculates the exercise amount of the dog based on the distance data measured using the algorithm, and transmits information on the exercise amount to the smartphone of the week or based on the exercise amount” Page 4 Paragraph 4 of translation); and if the measurement reaches a pre- defined upper threshold of activity, activating a different animal interactive device than the one or more from which the measurement was received to perform an activity (“The snack food supply control module 510 may be operated to provide a predetermined food and snack. That is, the control & communication module 300 may not provide a snack when the exercise amount does not exceed a certain standard, and the more the exercise amount, the more the snack partition plate 530 is rotated to the outside through the snack outlet 520. The amount emitted can be controlled.” Page 4 Paragraph 4 of translation).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the welfare system of Chu, with the toy of Kim, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help increase exercise as well as help prevent boredom, and to have provided the measurements and activation of Chu, to have an upper threshold of activity as taught by Kim, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help encourage a healthy lifestyle for the pet by encouraging exercise.
Regarding Claim 14, Chu as modified teaches the method of claim 12. Chu further discloses wherein the computational hub is a stand-alone device selected from a computing device or a microcontroller (“Owner device 104 may be any device, such as a smartphone, computer, TV, tablet, laptop, smartwatch, etc.” Col. 3 lines 55-60).
Regarding Claim 17, Chu as modified teaches the method of claim 12. Chu further discloses wherein the communicative connection may be enabled through physical wire(s), Ethernet cables, and/or one or more means of wireless connection (communication paths 112, 114, and 116 “A wireless communication protocol may include any one or more of Bluetooth, Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE), Zigbee, Wi-Fi,” Col. 2 lines 22-30).
Regarding Claim 18, Chu as modified teaches the method of claim 12. Chu further discloses wherein the computational hub is in communicative connection with a dashboard or mobile application (pet owner application 146; Figure 1), and wherein the computational hub is capable of sending the measurements of animal interaction with each animal interactive device of the plurality of animal interactive devices to the dashboard or mobile application (Figures 1 and 10; “The pet device 106 then interacts with the pet 110 and transmits information regarding said interaction to either pet activity server 102 or owner device 104.” Col. 2 lines 46-49).
Regarding Claim 19, Chu as modified teaches the method of claim 18. Chu further discloses wherein the dashboard or mobile application can send activity instructions to the computational hub to be relayed to one or more animal interactive devices of the plurality of animal interaction devices (“The pet owner 108 may then alter the preliminary information to set a desired pet facial recognition/monitoring/food intake estimation/feeding/activity schedule which is then used to configure the one or more pet device 106.” Col. 2 lines 40-46).
Claims 4-5 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu in view of Wernimont and Kim as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Asahara (US 2020/0149950).
Regarding Claim 4, Chu as modified teaches the animal welfare ecosystem of claim 1.
Chu further discloses the animal welfare ecosystem wherein the computational hub is hardware selected from a computing device or a microcontroller (“Owner device 104 may be any device, such as a smartphone, computer, TV, tablet, laptop, smartwatch, etc.” Col. 3 lines 55-60)
Chu fails to disclose the animal welfare ecosystem, wherein the computational hub is hardware selected from a computing device or a microcontroller located within one or more of the plurality of animal interactive devices.
However, Asahara teaches a similar animal welfare system, wherein the computational hub is hardware selected from a computing device or a microcontroller located within one or more of the plurality of animal interactive devices (“The control blocks of the control devices 20A and 20C (particularly, the CPU 24 in the control unit 21) may be implemented by logic circuits (hardware) fabricated, for example, in the form of an integrated circuit (IC chip) and may be implemented by software run by a CPU (central processing unit).” Paragraph [0120]; Control 20a shown attached to scale 2 and litterbox 12 in Figure 2).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computational hub of Chu, to be located within one of the animal interactive devices as taught by Asahara, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help decrease the number of parts needed for the user to keep track of, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C); In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Regarding Claim 5, Chu as modified teaches the animal welfare ecosystem of claim 1.
Chu fails to disclose, the animal welfare ecosystem, wherein the computational hub is software located within one or more of the plurality of animal interactive devices.
However, Asahara teaches an animal welfare system, wherein the computational hub is software located within one or more of the plurality of animal interactive devices (“The control blocks of the control devices 20A and 20C (particularly, the CPU 24 in the control unit 21) may be implemented by logic circuits (hardware) fabricated, for example, in the form of an integrated circuit (IC chip) and may be implemented by software run by a CPU (central processing unit).” Paragraph [0120]; Control 20a shown attached to scale 2 and litterbox 12 in Figure 2).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computational hub of Chu, to be software located within one of the animal interactive devices as taught by Asahara, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help decrease the number of parts needed for the user to keep track of, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C); In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Regarding Claim 15, Chu as modified teaches the method of claim 12. Chu further discloses wherein the computational hub is hardware selected from a computing device or a microcontroller (“Owner device 104 may be any device, such as a smartphone, computer, TV, tablet, laptop, smartwatch, etc.” Col. 3 lines 55-60).
Chu fails to disclose wherein the computational hub is hardware selected from a computing device or a microcontroller located within one or more of the plurality of animal interactive devices.
However, Asahara teaches a method, wherein the computational hub is hardware selected from a computing device or a microcontroller located within one or more of the plurality of animal interactive devices (“The control blocks of the control devices 20A and 20C (particularly, the CPU 24 in the control unit 21) may be implemented by logic circuits (hardware) fabricated, for example, in the form of an integrated circuit (IC chip) and may be implemented by software run by a CPU (central processing unit).” Paragraph [0120]; Control 20a shown attached to scale 2 and litterbox 12 in Figure 2).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computational hub of Chu, to be located within one of the animal interactive devices as taught by Asahara, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help decrease the number of parts needed for the user to keep track of, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C); In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Regarding Claim 16, Chu as modified teaches the method of claim 12.
Chu fails to disclose the method, wherein the computational hub is software located within one or more of the plurality of animal interactive devices.
However, Asahara teaches the method, wherein the computational hub is software located within one or more of the plurality of animal interactive devices (“The control blocks of the control devices 20A and 20C (particularly, the CPU 24 in the control unit 21) may be implemented by logic circuits (hardware) fabricated, for example, in the form of an integrated circuit (IC chip) and may be implemented by software run by a CPU (central processing unit).” Paragraph [0120]; Control 20a shown attached to scale 2 and litterbox 12 in Figure 2).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the computational hub of Chu, to be software located within one of the animal interactive devices as taught by Asahara, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help decrease the number of parts needed for the user to keep track of, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C); In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu in view of Wernimont and Kim as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Simon et al. (GB 2600711).
Regarding Claim 11, Chu as modified teaches the animal welfare ecosystem of claim 10.
Chu fails to disclose the animal welfare ecosystem, wherein the water dispenser further includes a lick-circuit board which detects licks an animal takes from the water receptacle.
However, Simon teaches an animal water dispenser, wherein the water dispenser further includes a lick-circuit board which detects licks an animal takes from the water receptacle while sitting on the plate (capacitive drinking sensor 104; “embodiments may detect the immediate proximity, e.g. direct water touch by a tongue, paw or nose, of an animal via the detection of miniscule changes in capacitance” Page 17 Paragraph 2).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the water dispenser of Chu, with the lick-circuit as taught by Simon, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to easily determine the exact timing of when and how long the pet is interacting with the device.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu in view of Wernimont and Kim as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Deutsch (US 2014/0251234).
Regarding Claim 13, Chu as modified teaches the method of claim 12.
Chu fails to disclose the method, wherein if more than one animal is placed within the defined area, each animal interactive device of the plurality of animal interactive devices will include an RFID reader, and each or the one or more animals will wear an RFID tag, such that each animal interactive device of the plurality of animal interactive devices will be able to identify which animal’s interaction they are measuring.
However, Deutsch teaches a method, wherein if more than one animal is placed within the defined area, each animal interactive device of the plurality of animal interactive devices will include an RFID reader (detection electrode 108; Figures 1, 10, 12, 13, and 16), and each or the one or more animals will wear an RFID tag (transmitting collar device 124), such that each animal interactive device of the plurality of animal interactive devices will be able to identify which animal’s interaction they are measuring (“With continued reference to FIG. 1, the animal 102 may be alternatively detected based on the animal 102 wearing a transmitting collar device 124 or other transmitting device. Accordingly, the transmitting collar device 124 may comprise an RFID tag, as an example. The transmitting collar device 124 may be detected and monitored if the animal 102 wearing the transmitting collar device 124 comes within close proximity to or in contact with an electrode associated with the monitored object.” Paragraph [0039]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the interactive devices of Chu, with the RFID tag readers and RFID tags of Deutsch, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure the correct pet is getting the proper feeding and exercising schedules to keep them healthy.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu in view of Wernimont ‘381 and Kim as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Carson et al. (WO 2023/107918) and Wernimont et al. (US 2022/0087229).
Regarding Claim 21, Chu as modified teaches the animal welfare ecosystem of claim 1.
Chu fails to disclose the ecosystem, wherein the pre-defined threshold of activity of animal interaction at any of the plurality of animal interactive devices is configured to be changed by the computational hub based on past behavior, current behavior, and characteristics on an animal.
However, Carson teaches a pet training system, wherein the pre-defined threshold of activity of animal interaction at any of the plurality of animal interactive devices (“The method may further include determining, by the one or more processors, an expected distribution based on the subset of the plurality of historical pet eating data records, the expected distribution including a baseline, an upper threshold, and a lower threshold, wherein the upper threshold and the lower threshold correspond to the baseline” Paragraph [0054]) is configured to be changed by the computational hub (processers Paragraph [0054]) based on past behavior and current behaviors on an animal (“The baseline may be updated each time period (e.g., each day) based on the most current average of historical meal event values.” Paragraph [0054]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the measurements of Chu, to have a threshold be able to be updated based on past and current behaviors as taught by Carson, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help provide flexibility, and ensure the pet receives the proper care, based on the current health status of the pet.
Additionally, Wernimont ’229 teaches a pet training system wherein the pre-defined threshold of activity of animal interaction at any of the plurality of animal interactive devices is configured to be changed by the computational hub based on characteristics on an animal (Paragraph [0093]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the threshold of Chu, to be able to be updated based animal characteristics as taught by Wernimont ‘229, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help provide flexibility, and ensure the pet receives the proper care, during every stage of their life.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Newly added reference Kim et al. (KR 102039934) in combination with previously used references, teaches the claims as amended, as discussed in the currently presented rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALANNA PETERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6126. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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 Huson can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
/A.K.P./ Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights