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 .
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
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 1, 6-11, and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klokkersund (US 20210144980 A1), hereafter referred to as “Klokkersund,” in view of Dauphinee (US 20180303077 A1), hereafter referred to as “Dauphinee”, and Morton (US 4538376 A), hereafter referred to as “Morton”.
Regarding claim 1, Klokkersund teaches a lobster trap (figs. 1-4) comprising:
a top (fig. 1), a bottom (fig. 1), and sides (fig. 1) coupled together to form a rectangular enclosure (fig. 1);
the sides comprising:
an entrance side (fig. 1, side of the left-most element 6), the entrance side comprising an entrance (6, 7) that extends and narrows inwardly into the rectangular enclosure to permit entry of lobster into the rectangular enclosure (fig. 1 showing that elements 7 extend and narrow inwardly);
an escape side (fig. 2, side where element 8 locates), the escape side comprising an escape vent (8) to allow lobster smaller than a minimum size to escape the rectangular enclosure (paragraph [0021]);
a harvest side (fig. 1, side where element 2 locates), the harvest side comprising a flexible mesh (paragraph [0015], e.g., teaching mesh webbing or netting).
However, Klokkersund does not explicitly teach the top comprising: a door to enable access inside the rectangular enclosure, that the harvest side includes a drawstring, wherein the drawstring is releasable to expand an opening defined by the flexible mesh and is retractable to tighten the drawstring and constrict the opening.
Dauphinee teaches a trap (figs. 1-24) including a top (fig. 1) comprising a door (54) to enable access inside a rectangular enclosure (fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lobster trap of Klokkersund, such that the top includes a door to enable access inside the rectangular enclosure, as taught by Dauphinee, in order to provide access into the interior chamber, allowing the user to, e.g., bait the trap, remove lobsters from the trap, and make repairs (paragraph [0065] of Dauphinee).
Morton teaches a lobster trap (figs. 1-8) including a harvest side (side where 16 extends from, fig. 2; see also fig. 8) with a drawstring (17), wherein the drawstring is releasable to expand an opening defined by flexible mesh (col. 3, lines 63-68) and is retractable to tighten the drawstring and constrict the opening (col. 3, lines 63-68).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Klokkersund in view of Dauphinee to replace the harvest door with a drawstring, as taught by Morton, such that the drawstring is releasable to expand an opening defined by the flexible mesh and is retractable to tighten the drawstring and constrict the opening, as further taught by Morton, in order to allow the opening of the harvest side to be adjustable in size (col. 3, lines 63-68 of Morton).
Regarding claim 6, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the lobster trap of claim 1, and Morton further teaches wherein the drawstring (17) is attachable to the lobster trap to retain tension in the drawstring (fig. 5 and col. 3, lines 63-68) and detachable from the lobster trap to release tension from the drawstring (fig. 8 and col. 3, lines 63-68).
Regarding claim 7, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the lobster trap of claim 1, and Klokkersund further teaches that the sides further comprise:
a suspension side (fig. 1, side on the left by element 4), opposite the harvest side (fig. 1, side by element 2), the lobster trap further comprising:
a suspension structure (see fig. 1 showing a hauling rope, not numbered, on the left side by element 4 and paragraph [0025]), coupled to the lobster trap, to enable the lobster trap to be suspended at the suspension side (fig. 1 and paragraph [0025]).
Regarding claim 8, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the lobster trap of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein the entrance side and the escape side are the same side comprising both the entrance and the escape vent.
Dauphinee further teaches the trap (figs. 1-24) including an entrance side (fig. 3) and an escape side (fig. 3) on the same side comprising both an entrance (30; fig. 3) and an escape vent (44; fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton, such that the entrance side and the escape side are the same side comprising both the entrance and the escape vent, as further taught by Dauphinee, in order to accommodate the needs, requirements, and preferences of the user and the shape and size of the trap (paragraph [0061] of Dauphinee).
Regarding claim 9, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the lobster trap of claim 1, and Klokkersund further teaches a rectangular frame structure (fig. 1), wherein the top, the bottom, and the sides are coupled to the rectangular frame structure to form the rectangular enclosure (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 10, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the lobster trap of claim 1, and Morton further teaches a weight (12, 13; fig. 1) coupled to the bottom to bias the lobster trap toward sinking bottom first (col. 3, lines 53-58).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton to include a weight coupled to the bottom to bias the lobster trap toward sinking bottom first, as further taught by Morton, in order to ensure that the trap stays position and settles onto the sea floor in its intended orientation (col. 3, lines 53-58).
Regarding claim 11, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the lobster trap of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach an internal entrance side to divide the rectangular enclosure into two chambers.
Dauphinee further teaches teaches the trap (figs. 1-24) with an internal entrance (fig. 2, side where 40 locates) side to divide the rectangular enclosure into two chambers (fig. 2 showing chambers to the left and right of 40).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton, such that an internal entrance side to divide the rectangular enclosure into two chambers, as further taught by Dauphinee, in order to improve the stability of the trap (paragraph [0055] of Dauphinee).
Regarding claim 12, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the lobster trap of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach an anchor element, coupled to the entrance, to maintain inward extension of the entrance into the rectangular enclosure.
Morton further teaches an anchor element (20, 21; fig. 1), coupled to a side (fig. 1), to maintain inward extension of the side into the rectangular enclosure (col. 4, lines 1-11).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton to include an anchor element, coupled to the entrance, to maintain inward extension of the entrance into the rectangular enclosure, as further taught by Morton, in order to ensure that door of the entrance of the trap stays position (col. 4, lines 1-11 of Morton).
Regarding claim 13, Klokkersund teaches a method for harvesting lobster (abstract teaching harvesting large crustacean; figs. 1-4), the method comprising:
hoisting a lobster trap from water (paragraph [0025]), the lobster trap comprising a top (fig. 1), a bottom (fig. 1), and sides coupled together to form a rectangular enclosure (fig. 1), the sides comprising:
an entrance side (fig. 1, side of the left-most element 6), the entrance side comprising an entrance (6, 7) that extends and narrows inwardly into the rectangular enclosure to permit entry of lobster into the rectangular enclosure (fig. 1 showing that elements 7 extend and narrow inwardly);
an escape side (fig. 2, side where element 8 locates), the escape side comprising an escape vent (8) to allow lobster smaller than a minimum size to escape the rectangular enclosure (paragraph [0021]);
a harvest side (fig. 1, side where element 2 locates), the harvest side comprising a flexible mesh (paragraph [0015], e.g., teaching mesh webbing or netting);
suspending the lobster trap with the harvest side oriented downward (see fig. 1 showing a hauling rope, not numbered, on the left side by element 4 and paragraph [0025]).
Klokkersund does not expliclty teach the top comprising a door to enable access inside the rectangular closure. Additionally, Klokkersund further teaches releasing a harvest door (2) to allow lobster inside the lobster trap to fall out of the lobster trap through the opening (paragraph [0025]), but does not explicitly teach that the harvest side includes a drawstring, wherein the drawstring is releasable to expand an opening defined by the flexible mesh and is retractable to tighten the drawstring and constrict the opening;
releasing the drawstring to expand the opening and allow lobster inside the lobster trap to fall out of the lobster trap through the opening;
retracting the drawstring to constrict the opening.
Dauphinee teaches a method (abstract; figs. 1-24) including a top (fig. 1) comprising a door (54) to enable access inside a rectangular closure (fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Klokkersund, such that the top includes a door to enable access inside the rectangular enclosure, as taught by Dauphinee, in order to provide access into the interior chamber, allowing the user to, e.g., bait the trap, remove lobsters from the trap, and make repairs (paragraph [0065] of Dauphinee).
Morton teaches a method (abstract; figs. 1-8) including a harvest side (fig. 2, side where element 16 locates) with a drawstring (17), wherein the drawstring is releasable to expand an opening defined by the flexible mesh (col. 3, lines 63-68) and is retractable to tighten the drawstring and constrict the opening (col. 3, lines 63-68);
releasing the drawstring to expand the opening and allow lobster inside the lobster trap to fall out of the lobster trap through the opening (fig. 8);
retracting the drawstring to constrict the opening (col. 3, lines 63-68; see also fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Klokkersund in view of Dauphinee to replace the harvest door with a drawstring, as taught by Morton, such that the drawstring is releasable to expand an opening defined by the flexible mesh and is retractable to tighten the drawstring and constrict the opening; releasing the drawstring to expand the opening and allow lobster inside the lobster trap to fall out of the lobster trap through the opening; and retracting the drawstring to constrict the opening, as further taught by Morton, in order to allow the opening of the harvest side to be adjustable in size (col. 3, lines 63-68 of Morton).
Regarding claim 14, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the method of claim 13, and Morton further teaches that the drawstring (17) is attachable to and detachable from the lobster trap (figs. 5 and 8; col. 3, lines 63-68),
the releasing comprises: detaching the drawstring from the lobster trap to release tension to the drawstring and expand the opening (fig. 8 and col. 3, lines 63-68).
Regarding claim 15, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the method of claim 13, and Morton further teaches wherein the drawstring (17) is attachable to and detachable from the lobster trap (figs. 5 and 8; col. 3, lines 63-68),
the retracting comprises: attaching the drawstring to the lobster trap to apply tension to the drawstring and constrict the opening (fig. 5 and col. 3, lines 63-68).
Regarding claim 16, Klokkersund teaches a method of manufacturing a lobster trap (abstract, figs. 1-4), the method comprising:
providing a top (fig. 1), a bottom (fig. 1), and sides (fig. 1);
the sides comprising:
an entrance side (fig. 1, side of the left-most element 6), the entrance side comprising an entrance (6, 7) that extends and narrows (fig. 1 showing that elements 7 extend and narrow inwardly);
an escape side (fig. 2, side where element 8 locates), the escape side comprising an escape vent (8) to allow lobster smaller than a minimum size to pass through the escape vent (paragraph [0021]);
a harvest side (fig. 1, side where element 2 locates), the harvest side comprising a flexible mesh (paragraph [0015], e.g., teaching mesh webbing or netting);
the method further comprising:
coupling the top, the bottom, and the sides to form a rectangular enclosure (fig. 1).
However, Klokkersund does not explicitly teach that the top comprises a door to enable access inside the rectangular enclosure, the harvest side includes a drawstring, wherein the drawstring is releasable to expand an opening defined by the flexible mesh and is retractable to tighten the drawstring and constrict the opening.
Dauphinee teaches a method (abstract; figs. 1-24) including a top (fig. 1) comprising a door (54) to enable access inside a rectangular closure (fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Klokkersund, such that the top includes a door to enable access inside the rectangular enclosure, as taught by Dauphinee, in order to provide access into the interior chamber, allowing the user to, e.g., bait the trap, remove lobsters from the trap, and make repairs (paragraph [0065] of Dauphinee).
Morton teaches a method (abstract; figs. 1-8) including a harvest side (fig. 2, side where element 16 locates) with a drawstring (17), wherein the drawstring is releasable to expand an opening defined by the flexible mesh (col. 3, lines 63-68) and is retractable to tighten the drawstring and constrict the opening (col. 3, lines 63-68).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Klokkersund in view of Dauphinee to replace the harvest door with a drawstring, as taught by Morton, such that the drawstring is releasable to expand an opening defined by the flexible mesh and is retractable to tighten the drawstring and constrict the opening, as further taught by Morton, in order to allow the opening of the harvest side to be adjustable in size (col. 3, lines 63-68 of Morton).
Claims 2 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klokkersund in view of Dauphinee and Morton as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Torngren (US 3826032 A), hereafter referred to as “Torngren”.
Regarding claim 2, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the lobster trap of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach that the harvest side further comprises:
a partial frame coupled to the top, bottom, and adjacent sides that are adjacent the harvest side, the partial frame forming part of the harvest side around a perimeter of the harvest side and a complete frame around edges of the opening, the flexible mesh being coupled to the partial frame.
Torngren teaches a trap (figs. 1-21c) including a side with partial frame (fig. 8) connecting a flexible netting material (28) to a rigid frame (figs. 2 and 8), where the partial frame is coupled to a top (figs. 2 and 8), bottom (figs. 2 and 8), and adjacent sides (figs. 2 and 8), the partial frame forming part of a side around a perimeter of the side and a complete frame around edges of the opening (fig. 8), the flexible mesh being coupled to the partial frame (fig. 8).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Klokkersund in view of Dauphinee and Morton to include a partial frame coupled to the top, bottom, and adjacent sides that are adjacent the harvest side, the partial frame forming part of the harvest side around a perimeter of the harvest side and a complete frame around edges of the opening, the flexible mesh being coupled to the partial frame, as taught by Torngren, in order to provide additional rigidity to the trap on the harvest side, and to improve the means in which the flexible mesh material is coupled to the rigid frame.
Regarding claim 17, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the method of claim 16, but does not explicitly teach providing the harvest side further comprises:
providing a partial frame coupled to the top, the bottom, and adjacent sides that are adjacent the harvest side, the partial frame forming part of the harvest side around a perimeter of the harvest side and a complete frame around edges of the opening, the flexible mesh being coupled to the partial frame.
Torngren teaches a method (abstract; figs. 1-21c) including providing a side with partial frame (fig. 8) connecting a flexible netting material (28) to a rigid frame (figs. 2 and 8), where the partial frame is coupled to a top (figs. 2 and 8), bottom (figs. 2 and 8), and adjacent sides (figs. 2 and 8), the partial frame forming part of a side around a perimeter of the side and a complete frame around edges of the opening (fig. 8), the flexible mesh being coupled to the partial frame (fig. 8).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Klokkersund in view of Dauphinee and Morton to include providing a partial frame coupled to the top, bottom, and adjacent sides that are adjacent the harvest side, the partial frame forming part of the harvest side around a perimeter of the harvest side and a complete frame around edges of the opening, the flexible mesh being coupled to the partial frame, as taught by Torngren, in order to provide additional rigidity to the trap on the harvest side, and to improve the means in which the flexible mesh material is coupled to the rigid frame.
Claims 3 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klokkersund in view of Dauphinee and Morton as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Anderson et al. (US 20160165863 A1), hereafter referred to as “Anderson.”
Regarding claim 3, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton teaches the lobster trap of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach:
tapered walls at the harvest side, the tapered walls extending, at a taper angle from the top, the bottom, and adjacent sides that are adjacent the harvest side, towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening.
Anderson teaches a trap (figs. 1-7E) including tapered walls (200; fig. 6) at a harvest side (112; fig. 1), the tapered walls extending, at a taper angle from the top, the bottom, and adjacent sides that are adjacent the harvest side (fig. 6), towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening (fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton to include tapered walls at the harvest side, the tapered walls extending, at a taper angle from the top, the bottom, and adjacent sides that are adjacent the harvest side, towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening, as taught by Anderson, in order to stabilize the trap.
Regarding claim 18, Klokkersund as modified by King teaches the method of claim 16, but does not explicitly teach:
providing tapered walls;
coupling the tapered walls at the harvest side, the tapered walls extending, at a taper angle from the top, the bottom, and adjacent sides that are adjacent the harvest side towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening.
Anderson teaches a method (abstract; figs. 1-7E) including tapered walls (200; fig. 6) at a harvest side (112; fig. 1), the tapered walls extending, at a taper angle from the top, the bottom, and adjacent sides that are adjacent the harvest side (fig. 6), towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening (fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton to include tapered walls at the harvest side, the tapered walls extending, at a taper angle from the top, the bottom, and adjacent sides that are adjacent the harvest side, towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening, as taught by Anderson, in order to stabilize the trap.
Claims 4-5 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klokkersund in view of Dauphinee, Morton, and Torngren as applied to claims 2 and 17 above, and further in view of Anderson.
Regarding claim 4, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee, Morton, and Torngren teaches the lobster trap of claim 2, but does not explicitly teach:
tapered walls at the harvest side extending towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening.
Anderson teaches a trap (figs. 1-7E) including tapered walls (200; fig. 6) at a harvest side (112; fig. 1) extending towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the enclosure through the opening (fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Klokkersund as modified by King to include tapered walls at the harvest side extending towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening, as taught by Anderson, in order to stabilize the trap.
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings of Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee, Morton, Torngren, and Anderson teaches the lobster trap of claim 4, and further teaches wherein the tapered walls (200 as relied on Anderson) are coupled to the partial frame (fig. 2 of Klokkersund).
Regarding claim 19, Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee, Morton, and Torngren teaches the method of claim 17, but does not explicitly teach:
providing tapered walls;
coupling the tapered walls at the harvest side, the tapered walls extending towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening.
Anderson teaches a method (abstract; figs. 1-7E) including providing tapered walls (200; fig. 6), coupling the tapered walls at a harvest side (112; fig. 1), the tapered walls extending towards flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening (fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee, Morton, and Torngren to include providing tapered walls, and coupling the tapered walls at the harvest side, the tapered walls extending towards the flexible mesh to aid in unloading of lobster from the rectangular enclosure through the opening, as taught by Anderson, in order to stabilize the trap.
Regarding claim 20, the combined teachings of Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee, Morton, Torngren, and Anderson teach the method of claim 19, and further teaches coupling the tapered walls (200 as relied on Anderson) to the partial frame (fig. 2 of Klokkersund).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/26/2025 have been fully considered but they 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. As shown above, independent claims 1, 13, and 16 are taught by Klokkersund as modified by Dauphinee and Morton.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
The cited prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure. The references have many of the elements in the applicant’s disclosure and claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jessica Byun whose telephone number is (571) 272-3212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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. Agendas may be sent to HaeRie.Byun@uspto.gov.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter Poon can be reached on (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.
/H.J.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 3643
/MARISA V CONLON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643