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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 17 states “The pet training floor pad of claim 1, further comprising an impermeable bottom layer which is impermeable to waste fluid of a pet.” However, claim 1, from which claim 17 depends, already states “wherein the pet training floor pad has an impermeable bottom layer which is impermeable to waste fluid of a pet.”
Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
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 1-13 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (KR 101720203) in view of Calimano et al. (CA 2845463) and Maguire (US 2010/0050951)
Regarding Claim 1, Park discloses a pet training floor pad (Figure 5b) comprising: a central region (area under kit 40; Figure 5b and 7); a perimeter region which surrounds the central region and forms a periphery of the pet training floor pad (outer edge of water proof pad 31 and body 10; Figure 7);
an absorbent material (absorbent pad 32);
a plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region (water proof channels and edges 31; Figures 2b, 5b and 7);
wherein the pet training floor pad has a bottom layer (body 10; Figure 2b); and
wherein the bottom layer is planar when the pet training floor pad is disposed on the floor (Figures 2b and 5b).
Park fails to disclose wherein the central region has a greater weight of the absorbent material per unit area than the perimeter region; and wherein the impermeable bottom layer is impermeable to waste fluid of a pet.
However, Calimano teaches an absorbent pad wherein the central region (main region 11 with absorbent layer 17) has a greater weight of the absorbent material per unit area than the perimeter region (edge region 14; Figure 7 shows the edge region does not contain the absorbent material).
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 absorbent region of Park, to have a greater weight of absorbent material as taught by Calimano, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure the liquid is distributed to and absorbed in the center of the pad to help prevent leaking outside of the potty.
Additionally, Maguire teaches a similar sloped pet potty, wherein the impermeable bottom layer (base 12) is impermeable to waste fluid of a pet (“Preferably the base is made from a plastic material and is an integral unit.” Paragraph [0017]).
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 bottom layer of Park, to be impermeable as taught by Maguire, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure the excrement does not leak outside of the pet potty.
Regarding Claim 2, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet floor training pad, further comprising a peripheral edge (outer edge of 31); and wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region slope downward from the peripheral edge to the central region (water proof channels and edges 31; Figures 2b, 5b and 7)
Regarding Claim 3, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad, wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region extend through the central region (Figure 5b).
Regarding Claim 4, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad, further comprising a central point within the central region (center of pad in Figures 2b and 5b); and wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region slope downward to the central point (Figure 5b).
Regarding Claim 5, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad, wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region converge towards the central region (Figures 2b and 5b).
Regarding Claim 6, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 5. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad, wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region and converge towards the central region converge in the perimeter region (Figures 2b and 5b).
Regarding Claim 7, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 5. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad of claim 5, wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region and converge towards the central region converge in the central region (Figured 2b and 5b).
Regarding Claim 8, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad of claim 1, further comprising a central point within the central region (center of pad in Figures 2b and 5b); wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region slope downward to the central point (Figure 5b); and wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region converge to the central point (Figure 5b).
Regarding Claim 9, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad of claim 1, further comprising a top surface (top of pad 30); and wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region are formed in the top surface (Figures 2b and 5b).
Regarding Claim 10, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad of claim 1, further comprising a central point within the central region (center of pad in Figures 2b and 5b); and wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region slope downward continuously from the peripheral edge to the central point (Figures 2b and 5b).
Regarding Claim 11, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1.
Park fails to explicitly disclose the pet training pad, wherein the plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region slope down at an angle in a range of 5° to 40°.
However, 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 sloping channels of Park, to slope down at an angle of 5-40 degrees, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure proper direction of liquid to absorbent areas, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 12, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad, wherein the pet training pad has a top surface area (top of pad 30).
Park fails to disclose wherein the central region defines up to 40.0 % of the top surface area of the pet training pad.
However, 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 central region of Park, to be up to 40% of the top surface area of the pad, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for a greater area for the urine to collect in, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding Claim 13, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad, wherein the pet training floor pad has a top surface area (top of pad 30).
Park fails to disclose wherein the central region defines 10.0 % to 40.0% of the top surface area of the pet training floor pad.
However, 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 central region of Park, to be 10-40% of the top surface area of the pad, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for a greater area for the urine to collect in, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding Claim 17, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad, further comprising a bottom layer (body 10; Figure 2b).
Park fails to explicitly disclose an impermeable bottom layer which is impermeable to waste fluid of a pet.
However, Maguire teaches a similar sloped pet potty, wherein the impermeable bottom layer (base 12) is impermeable to waste fluid of a pet (“Preferably the base is made from a plastic material and is an integral unit.” Paragraph [0017]).
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 bottom layer of Park, to be impermeable as taught by Maguire, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure the excrement does not leak outside of the pet potty.
Regarding Claim 18, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad, wherein the perimeter region surrounds the central region completely as to form a continuous loop around the central region (outer ring 31; Figure 2b).
Regarding Claim 19, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad, wherein the pet training pad has a peripheral edge which surrounds the perimeter region completely (outside edge of outer ring 31; Figure 2b).
Regarding Claim 20, Park discloses a method of using a pet training floor pad, comprising: obtaining the pet training floor pad (Figure 5b), the pet training floor pad comprising:
a central region (area under kit 40; Figure 5b and 7);
a perimeter region which surrounds the central region and forms a periphery of the pet training floor pad (outer edge of water proof pad 31 and body 10; Figure 7);
an absorbent material (absorbent pad 32);
a plurality of sloping channels which slope downward from the perimeter region to the central region (water proof channels and edges 31; Figures 2b, 5b and 7); and
placing the pet training floor pad on a floor (Figure 5b);
disposing a fluid on a top surface of the pet training floor pad such that the fluid flows in at least one of the plurality of sloping channels towards the central region (arrow in Figure 5c);
wherein the pet training floor pad has a bottom layer (body 10; Figure 2b); and
wherein the bottom layer is planar when the pet training floor pad is disposed on the floor (Figures 2b and 5b).
Park fails to disclose wherein the central region has a greater weight of the absorbent material per unit area than the perimeter region; and wherein the impermeable bottom layer (base 12) is impermeable to waste fluid of a pet.
However, Calimano teaches an absorbent pad wherein the central region (main region 11 with absorbent layer 17) has a greater weight of the absorbent material per unit area than the perimeter region (edge region 14; Figure 7 shows the edge region does not contain the absorbent material).
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 absorbent region of Park, to have a greater weight of absorbent material as taught by Calimano, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure the liquid is distributed to and absorbed in the center of the pad to help prevent leaking outside of the pad.
Additionally, Maguire teaches a similar sloped pet potty, wherein the impermeable bottom layer (base 12) is impermeable to waste fluid of a pet (“Preferably the base is made from a plastic material and is an integral unit.” Paragraph [0017]).
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 bottom layer of Park, to be impermeable as taught by Maguire, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure the excrement does not leak outside of the pet potty.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Calimano and Maguire as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schulin (US 2018/0077895).
Regarding Claim 14, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1.
Park fails to explicitly disclose wherein the absorbent material comprises a super absorbent polymer.
However, Schulin discloses a similar pet training floor pad, wherein the absorbent material comprises a super absorbent polymer (“The pad 110 comprises super absorbent polymer (SAP) material suitable to absorb urine.” Paragraph [0025]).
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 absorbent material of Park, to be a superabsorbent polymer as taught by Schulin, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to increase the volume of liquid being absorbed in order to prevent any leaking outside of the pet pad.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Calimano and Maguire as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kang (KR 2012/0070997)
Regarding Claim 15, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1.
Park fails to disclose the pet training floor pad, wherein the pet training pad has a concave contour towards the central region.
However, Kang teaches a pet potty, wherein the pet potty has a concave contour towards the central region (concave region 24; Figures 1-2).
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 sloped surfaces of Park, to have a concave contour as taught by Kang, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help further prevent the urine from spilling outside of the potty, while also easily directing the urine to the center of the potty.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Calimano and Maguire as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bruun et al. (US 2007/0219523)
Regarding Claim 16, Park as modified teaches the pet pad of claim 1. Park further discloses the pet training floor pad, further comprising a top surface (top of pad 30); wherein the plurality of sloping channels comprise adjacent channels (water proof channels; Figures 2b, 5b and 7).
Park fails to disclose wherein the top surface has a convex contour between the adjacent channels such that a fluid disposed on the convex contour will flow towards at least one of the adjacent channels.
However, Bruun teaches a pet training floor pad, wherein the top surface has a convex contour between the adjacent channels such that a fluid disposed on the convex contour will flow towards at least one of the adjacent channels (channels 7 with concave top surfaces 5; Figures 2 and 3).
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 top surface ad channels of Park, to have the convex contour as taught by Bruun, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to further help direct the flow of urine to the absorptive areas of the pad.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 2/9/26 with respect to claim 1 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.
Previously used references Park (KR 101720203) and Calimano et al. (CA 2845463), in combination with newly added references Maguire (US 2010/0050951), Kang (KR 2012/0070997), and Bruun et al. (US 2007/0219523) (cited by applicant in IDS dated 12/10/24) teach the amended claims, as discussed in the currently presented rejection above.
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 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