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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the Request for Continued Examination filed on August 31, 2026. Claims 1, 4, 7-9, and 11-12 have been amended and are hereby entered. Claim 15 has been added. Claims 1-15 are currently pending and have been examined.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 August 31, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 6-7, Applicant is suggested to amend the phrase “removable from the rack at least one of the axial end surfaces” to, for example, --removable from the rack at at least one of the axial end surfaces-- to improve readability of the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8, 10, and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Urbanski et al. (US 2019/0166812 A1), hereinafter Urbanski.
Regarding claim 1, Urbanski discloses a device for rearing insects (title; abstract), comprising a rack (middle modules 5a-5f of technological line 1) with at least one elongate rack bottom (system of metal transverse brackets 12) which extends in the rack between opposite axial end surfaces thereof (fig. 1-2, brackets 12 provided along the entirety of middle modules 5a-5f of technological line 1) and is provided with a set of upward directed wings (profiled lateral sidewalls 6a, 6b) on either side (fig. 1; para [0051]), wherein the rack bottom is covered with a continuous lining of plastic (conveyor belt 11; fig. 1; para [0019], belt 11 is made of plastic) which also extends laterally over an upward directed part of each of the wings (para [0048], [0050], and [0060], sidewalls 6a, 6b are “supporting the edges of the belt of the conveyor 11”, and the edge of belt 11 is disclosed as being “pressed down” against curved sidewalls 6a, 6b under the working load), wherein the lining is movable over the rack bottom in an axial direction (fig. 2; para [0056]) and is removable from the rack at least one of the axial end surfaces (end sidewalls 9 and 10; fig. 2, nothing disclosed by Urbanski precludes removal of conveyor belt 11 from an end sidewall 9 and 10 for cleaning, maintenance, and/or replacement purposes, as is well understood in the art of conveyor belt systems).
Regarding claim 2, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the rack (middle modules 5a-5f of technological line 1) comprises a number of similar rack bottoms (systems of metal transverse brackets 12) at successive levels (levels 2) one above the other (fig. 1-3).
Regarding claim 3, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 2, and further discloses wherein the rack bottoms (systems of metal transverse brackets 12) comprise a number of substantially parallel bars (transverse brackets 12) which extend in said axial direction (fig. 2, transverse brackets are lined up such that they collectively extend in an axial direction) and maintain a mutual intermediate space (space 7; fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the plastic (conveyor belt 11) is selected from the group consisting of polypropylene, polyethylene, ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) (para [0019], belt 11 may be made of plastic, such as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or polypropylene (PP)).
PNG
media_image1.png
247
322
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1. Urbanski Fig. 3, Partial View (Examiner-Annotated)
Regarding claim 6, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the wings (profiled lateral sidewalls 6a, 6b) each comprise a continuous plate body (fig. 1 and 3), which plate body comprises an upright wall (see annotated fig. 1, denoted by dotted lines) and a lying bottom (see annotated fig. 1, denoted by solid line), wherein the bottom of each of the wings is connected fixedly to the rack bottom (system of metal transverse brackets 12; fig. 3; para [0058]).
Regarding claim 7, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein at least the rack bottom (system of metal transverse brackets 12) comprises a metal selected from the group consisting of aluminium and steel (para [0018], brackets 12 may be made of stainless steel or galvanized steel).
Regarding claim 8, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein an infeed device (either of rear module 3 having tension system 8 or front module 4 having driving shaft 15, depending on movement direction of belt 11) is coupled operatively to an inlet of the rack (inlet of middle modules 5a-5f of technological line 1; fig. 2; para [0056] and [0060]), which infeed device is intended and configured to carry the lining axially into the rack over the rack bottom (para [0056]; fig. 2).
Regarding claim 10, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein an outfeed device (either of rear module 3 having tension system 8 or front module 4 having driving shaft 15, depending on movement direction of belt 11) is coupled operatively to an outlet of the rack (outlet of middle modules 5a-5f of technological line 1; fig. 2; para [0056] and [0060]), which outfeed device is intended and configured to carry the lining axially out of the rack (para [0056]; fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, Urbanski discloses a method for rearing insect larvae in a rearing device (title; abstract), wherein at least one device according to claim 1 is utilized as the rearing device (see rejection for claim 1), and wherein the lining (conveyor belt 11) is propelled over the rack bottom (system of metal transverse brackets 12) in a flat state across a whole length of the rack bottom (para [0056]; fig. 2, belt 11 as a whole is not positioned at an incline and remains level as it moves between rear module 3 and front module 4).
Regarding claim 13, Urbanski discloses the method of claim 12, and further discloses wherein the insect larvae are fly larvae (para [0028], Hermetia illucens is the scientific name of the black soldier fly).
Regarding claim 14, Urbanski discloses the method of claim 13, and further discloses wherein the fly larvae are black soldier fly larvae (para [0028], Hermetia illucens is the scientific name of the black soldier fly).
Regarding claim 15, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 7, and further discloses wherein the rack bottom (system of metal transverse brackets 12) comprises stainless steel (para [0018], brackets 12 may be made of stainless steel).
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urbanski et al. (US 2019/0166812 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 1, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the lining comprises a polyolefin film.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the lining out of polyolefin, with the motivation of utilizing accessible materials well understood in the art, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim(s) 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urbanski et al. (US 2019/0166812 A1), hereinafter Urbanski, in view of Kim et al. (KR 20190110257 A), hereinafter Kim.
Regarding claim 9, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 8, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the infeed device is configured to dispense at least one of a food source and insect larvae onto an exposed surface of the lining.
However, Kim is in the field of insect rearing (title) and teaches wherein the infeed device (left side of breeding unit 100, comprising organic waste supply unit 300 and larval supply unit 400) is configured to dispense at least one of a food source and insect larvae onto an exposed surface of the lining (conveyor belt 120; fig. 4; page 13/16, last paragraph and page 14/16, first paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the insect rearing device with lining and infeed device of Urbanski to have made the infeed device capable of dispensing a food source and larvae onto the lining as taught by Kim with a reasonable expectation of success to place feed and insect larvae onto the rearing device near the beginning of a rearing process production line.
Regarding claim 11, Urbanski discloses the device according to claim 10, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the outfeed device is configured to remove the larvae of the insects from the lining.
However, Kim is in the field of insect rearing (title) and teaches wherein the outfeed device (right side of breeding unit 100, comprising collecting unit 200) is configured to remove the larvae of the insects from the lining (conveyor belt 120; fig. 2; page 13/16, eighth paragraph).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the insect rearing device with lining and outfeed device of Urbanski to have made the outfeed device capable of removing insect larvae from the lining as taught by Kim with a reasonable expectation of success to collect insect larvae and leftover feed once rearing is complete for later processing (page 13/16, eighth paragraph).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 3 of 5), filed August 10, 2026, regarding the rejection of at least claim(s) 1 under §102 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that “Urbanski’s conveyor belt is a separate endless belt that remains with the device, while the lateral sidewalls are separate structural components” and that “Urbanski does not disclose a lining that itself extends laterally upward over the sidewalls/wings”.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, it does not appear clear how Applicant’s argument that “Urbanski’s conveyor belt is a separate endless belt that remains with the device, while the lateral sidewalls are separate structural components” relates to the instant claims. In response to Applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention (i.e., a conveyor belt and lateral sidewalls not as separate components), it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Additionally, the Examiner respectfully maintains that Urbanski does disclose “a lining that itself extends laterally upward over the sidewalls/wings”. Urbanski specifically discloses a lining (conveyor belt 11) that overlaps and is supported from beneath by upwardly curved wings (profiled laterals sidewalls 6a, 6b; shown in fig. 3; see paragraphs [0048], [0050], and [0060], sidewalls 6a, 6b are “supporting the edges of the belt of the conveyor 11”, and the edge of belt 11 is disclosed as being “pressed down” against curved sidewalls 6a, 6b under the working load). Urbanski further shows wherein the wings (profiled lateral sidewalls 6a, 6b) form a continuous upward curve shape (see fig. 3). Since Urbanski describes wherein the edges of the lining are pressed down against the continuously curved wings (paragraph [0060]), it is understood that the lining thus also extends laterally at least partially over an upward directed part of said wings.
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 3 of 5), filed August 10, 2026, regarding the rejection of at least claim(s) 1 under §102 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that it would “be against the teaching of Urbanski to allow the conveyor belt to extend over the lateral sidewalls” due to the thermal conduction phenomena described by Urbanski.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, the Examiner notes that Urbanski only specifies wherein “the inner edge” of the profiled lateral sidewalls (6a, 6b) are “supporting the upper surface of the belt of the conveyor 11” (see paragraph [0058]). Therefore, it is understood that a portion of the metal wings (sidewalls 6a, 6b) remains exposed such that the disclosed thermal conductance is still possible.
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 3 of 5), filed August 10, 2026, regarding the rejection of at least claim(s) 1 under §102 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that Urbanski does not disclose “that the conveyor belt is removable from the rack at an axial end surface”.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, Urbanski does not provide any teachings that preclude the lining (conveyor belt 11) from being removed from the rack (middle modules 5a-5f of technological line 1) at an axial end surface, as is well understood in the art of conveyance systems for the purposes of belt cleaning, maintenance, and/or replacement.
For at least these reasons, rejection of at least claim(s) 1 in view of the prior art of Urbanski is maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERICA M HUEBNER whose telephone number is (703)756-4560. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM ET.
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 (571) 272-6909. 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.
/E.M.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3647
/KIMBERLY S BERONA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3647
