DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claim(s) 2-4, 10, 15, 16 and 21 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(b)as being anticipated by Wilson (US 520510).
Regarding claim 2, Wilson discloses a wildlife exclusion system, comprising: an exclusion arrangement including a series of elevated static elongated conductive rods (metal plates D and D’, pg. 2, ll. 24-29) suspended over an open such that there is an air gap below the elevated static elongated conductive rods (alternating plates D, D’ are suspended such that there is a gap created between D, D’ and E, pg. 2, ll. 30-33, fig. 4), the elongated conductive rods configured to deliver an electric shock to wild animals when particular elevated static elongated conductive rods from the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods within the exclusion arrangement are bridged thereby to close an open circuit in order to discourage the wild animals from entering a restricted area (pg.1, ll. 89-93).
Regarding claim 3, Wilson discloses wherein a first portion of the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods is of opposite polarity of a second portion of the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods, such that the wild animals may bridge a connection between the first portion of the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods and the second portion of the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods (pg. 2, ll. 25-29).
Regarding claim 4, Wilson discloses wherein a plurality of elevated static elongated conductive rods of the first portion of the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods alternates with a plurality of elevated static elongated conductive rods of the second portion of the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods (plates D and D’ alternate, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, Wilson discloses wherein the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods of the exclusion arrangement are supported by insulating material (pg. 2, ll. 44-49).
Regarding claim 15, Wilson discloses a wildlife exclusion system, comprising: an exclusion arrangement including one or more elevated static elongated conductive rods (metal plates D and D’, pg. 2, ll. 24-29) suspended over an open space such that there is an air gap below the elevated static elongated conductive rods (alternating plates D, D’ are suspended such that there is a gap created between D, D’ and E, pg. 2, ll. 30-33, fig. 4), the elongated conductive rods configured to deliver an electric shock to a wild animal when contacted by the wild animal to close an open circuit in order to discourage the wild animal from entering a restricted area (pg.1, ll. 89-93).
Regarding claim 16, Wilson discloses wherein the exclusion arrangement includes two or more elevated static elongated conductive rods (plates D and D;, fig. 1), and wherein a first elevated static elongated conductive rod of the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods is of opposite polarity of a second portion of the elevated static elongated conductive rods (pg. 2, ll. 24-29), such that the wild animals may bridge a connection between the first portion of the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods and the second portion of the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods (pg. 3, ll. 16-23).
Regarding claim 21, Wilson discloses wherein the series of elevated static elongated conductive rods of the exclusion arrangement are supported by insulating material (pg. 2, ll. 44-49).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-28 are allowed.
Claims 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 11, filed 9/15/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 2-6, 10, 12-17, and 21 under 102 and 103 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Wilson (US 520510) as disclosed in the above office action.
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 EBONY E EVANS whose telephone number is (571)270-1157. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 5712726909. 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.
/EBONY E EVANS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647