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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 8 (claim 8 is directed to at least non-elected Sub-species X-XIII which includes rotary actuator supports 1384, 1584, 1684, and 1784 as claimed in claim 8) and 10-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected Group and Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 12/22/2025.
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I and Sub-species I, 2, and a in the reply filed on 12/22/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “The language of the two groups of claims tracks closely, and none of the three alleged factors suggesting a serious search/examination burden apply. There are no searchable fields for hand-held rodent trap-setting devices and methods of setting rodent traps.”. This is not found persuasive because the claims of each of Groups I and II are not commensurate in scope and are distinct from each other and therefore the search for one Group is not required in the search for the other Group. If applicant is traversing on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the Examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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, 2, 6, 7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Ballard 6,199,314.
In regard to claim 1, Ballard discloses a hand-held rodent trap-setting device including: a base (14A) for supporting a platform (12A) of a rodent trap; a handle (16B) coupled to the base (at 18) and extending generally in (16C in Fig. 3 at 18B generally extends in the plane of 14A or the position of 16B when it extends in a horizontal orientation and is parallel to 14 in Fig. 4) or above a major plane of the base (position 4 of 16A-B in Fig. 4 or position 2 of 16B in Fig. 5), for allowing a user to hold the trap-setting device; a clamping arm (horizontal portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 that engages 12F within a notch of 24) coupled to the base (horizontal portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 is coupled to base 14A by the tab extending to the left from 14D in Figs. 4-5) and configured to contact a top surface of the rodent trap platform (12A) to clamp down the rodent trap platform onto the base (see Fig. 5); and an actuator (reverse J-shaped portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5) coupled to the base (14A; reverse J-shaped portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 is pivotally connected to 14 at closed end 14D) and to the clamping arm (horizontal portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 that engages 12F within a notch of 24), operable by the user, and configured to engage and/or release the clamping arm onto/from the rodent trap platform.
In regard to claim 2, Ballard discloses a safety catch (free end of 24 with notch) mounted on or along the clamping arm (horizontal portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 that engages 12F within a notch of 24) such that the safety catch and clamping arm move jointly in response to the user operating the actuator (see Figs. 4-5), the safety catch positioned to catch a kill bar (12F) of the rodent trap (12) when the rodent trap is mounted on the base (14A) and the kill bar is an armed position (see Fig. 5), thereby preventing the kill bar from snapping on a user’s hand while the user sets the rodent trap.
In regard to claim 6, Ballard discloses a linking arm assembly (see the 90 degree bend of 24 in Figs. 4-5 which joins the actuator and clamping arm and extends rearward from the front/right end of the horizontal portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 and the front/right end of the J-shaped portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5; the linking arm assembly of claim 6 can be interpreted to be the same structure as the rearward arm of claim 5 because applicant has failed to distinguish between the two structures) coupling the actuator (reverse J-shaped portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5) to the clamping arm (horizontal portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 that engages 12F within a notch of 24) and configured to convert a vertical motion of the actuator into a vertical motion of the clamping arm (the rotation of 24 has a vertical component of motion as shown by the change in position of the parts of 24 in Figs. 4-5, wherein the vertical component of motion of the reverse J-shaped portion results in a corresponding vertical component of motion of the horizontal portion of 24).
In regard to claim 7, Ballard discloses a comprising a linking arm assembly (see the 90 degree bend of 24 in Figs. 4-5 which joins the actuator and clamping arm and extends rearward from the front/right end of the horizontal portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 and the front/right end of the J-shaped portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5; the linking arm assembly of claim 6 can be interpreted to be the same structure as the rearward arm of claim 5 because applicant has failed to distinguish between the two structures) coupling the actuator (reverse J-shaped portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5) to the clamping arm (horizontal portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 that engages 12F within a notch of 24) and configured to convert a horizontal motion of the actuator into a vertical motion of the clamping arm (the rotation of 24 has horizontal and vertical components of motion as shown by the change in position of the parts of 24 in Figs. 4-5, wherein horizontal component of motion of the reverse J-shaped portion results in a corresponding vertical component of motion of the horizontal portion of 24).
In regard to claim 9, Ballard discloses wherein the handle (16B) extends generally in the major plane of the base (14A; the position of 16B when it extends in a horizontal orientation and is parallel to 14 in Fig. 4; applicant has failed to more particularly claim the structure of the handle which overcomes the Examiner’s broad, yet reasonable interpretation of Ballard).
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.
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ballard 6,199,314.
In regard to claims 3-4, Ballard does not disclose wherein the handle has a length of at least five inches or at least ten inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the handle such that it has a length of at least five inches or ten inches since applicant has not disclosed that by doing so is critical to the design or produces any unexpected results and it appears that the device of Ballard would perform equally as well by doing so, and because a person of ordinary skill in the art would readily design the handle such that it has a length of at least five inches or ten inches in order to be able to accommodate certain lengths of rodent traps to be used on the base (14A of Ballard) of the device such that the handle can surely move throughout its range of motion so as to be able to clear the base as shown in Figures 4-5 of Ballard and not to come into contact with the base or rodent trap platform (12A of Ballard).
In regard to claim 5, Ballard discloses a rearward arm (see the 90 degree bend of 24 in Figs. 4-5 which joins the actuator and clamping arm and extends rearward from the front/right end of the horizontal portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 and the front/right end of the J-shaped portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5) coupling the actuator (reverse J-shaped portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5) to the clamping arm (horizontal portion of 24 in Figs. 4-5 that engages 12F within a notch of 24), but does not disclose the rearward arm having a length of at least two inches. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the rearward arm such that it has a length of at least two inches since applicant has not disclosed that by doing so is critical to the design or produces any unexpected results and it appears that the device of Ballard would perform equally as well by doing so, and because a person of ordinary skill in the art would readily design the rearward arm such that it has a length of at least two inches in order to be able to accommodate certain thicknesses of rodent trap platforms to be used on the base (14A of Ballard) of the device such that the actuator can be used to surely move the clamping arm throughout its range of motion shown in Figures 4-5 of Ballard so that the clamping arm is able to both properly engage with the rodent trap platform (12A of Ballard) and swing clear of the rodent trap platform as shown in Figures 4-5 of Ballard for a given thickness of the rodent trap platform.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARREN W ARK whose telephone number is (571)272-6885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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.
/DARREN W ARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
DWA