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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/17/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1, 8 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 8 “the viewing window” should be clarified to recite –the second viewing window--.
Claim 8, line 10 “the viewing window” should be clarified to recite –the second viewing window--.
Claim 17, line 5 “a viewing window” should be clarified to recite –a first viewing window--.
Claim 17, lines 8-9 “the view window” should be clarified to recite –the first viewing window--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-7, 17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sori (EP 3299315 A1) in view of Craemer (DE 202004010676 U1) and Dellevigne (GB 2384966 A).
For claim 1, Sori discloses a trash can bait station device comprising: a trash can body comprised of: a lid (as shown in the figures and discussed in the description at first two paragraphs under “prior art”); a first interior space (as shown in the figures and discussed in the description at first two paragraphs under “prior art”); and a handle (Fig. 4 as shown on the lid); a first opening (Figs. 6, 11 and as discussed in the abstract: 3); a trap station (Fig. 1: 10) comprised of: a trap station body (Figs. 12-15), a second interior space (Figs. 13, 15: interior of the body 10), and a second opening (Fig. 15: 6); a bait (Fig. 15: 12); and a trap (Fig. 13).
Sori fails to show a first interior spaced comprised of a first viewing window. However, Craemer teaches a trash can comprising a body (2) having an interior space comprised of a first viewing window (as discussed in the abstract: “The casing is transparent in its design, at least partially, and may be made of a transparent material”); a lid (3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the trash can bait station device of Sori to include the first viewing window as taught by Craemer for the advantage of determining whether the trash can body is fully emptied.
Sori fails to show the trap station body comprised of a second viewing window, the viewing window attached to the trap station body via a hinge. However, Dellevigne teaches a trap station comprising a trap station body (10) comprised of a second viewing window (Fig. 2: 160), the viewing window attached to the trap station body via a hinge (Fig. 3: 42). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the trash can bait station device of Sori to include the second viewing window as taught by Dellevigne for the advantage of providing visual access to the interior of the trap station body without opening the trap station.
For claim 2, Sori as modified discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 1, wherein the lid attaches to the trash can body via a hinge (Sori as shown in Figs. 2, 5, 10, 11).
For claim 3, Sori as modified discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 1, wherein the handle is positioned on the lid (Sori as shown in Fig. 4: handle on lid).
For claim 4, Sori as modified discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 1, wherein the first opening (Sori as discussed in the abstract: 3) receives the trap station (Sori 10).
For claim 5, Sori as modified discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 1, wherein the bait is comprised of an anticoagulant bait, a non-anticoagulant bait, a soft bait, a pellet bait, a block bait (Sori Fig. 15: 12), a liquid bait, a gummy bait, a grain bait, or a paste bait.
For claim 6, Sori as modified discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 1, wherein the trap is comprised of a snap trap, a glue trap, an electronic trap, a live-capture trap, a multiple-catch trap, a bucket trap, an electric-shock trap, or a tunnel trap (Sori Figs. 12-15).
For claim 7, Sori as modified discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 1, wherein the bait is positioned on the trap (Sori as shown in Fig. 15).
For claim 17, Sori discloses a method of using a trash can bait station device (as shown in Fig. 11), the method comprising the following steps: providing a trash can bait station device comprised of a trash can body (as shown in Fig. 11 and discussed in the description at first two paragraphs under “prior art”) comprised of a body opening (Fig. 11: 3) that receives at least one trap station (Fig. 11: 10), the trap station comprised of a trap station body comprised of a trap station opening (Figs. 12-15: 6), and an interior space (Figs. 13, 15: interior of the body 10); placing a bait (Fig. 15: 12) and a trap (Fig. 13) within the interior space; placing the trap station into the body opening (as discussed in the abstract).
Sori fails to show the step of checking a content of the trap station through a secondary viewing window within the trash can body. However, Craemer teaches a trash can comprising a trash can body (2) having a body opening (at the top end of the body 2, revealed when the lid 3 is lifted); and the method of checking a content of the trap station through a viewing window within the trash can body (as discussed in the translated description “The housing 2 consists of a transparent material and provides an insight into the inside of the waste collection container”, such that viewing through a bottom wall, defining the viewing window, allows insight to a trap station body). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the trash can bait station device of Sori to include the viewing window as taught by Craemer for the advantage of determining whether the trash can body is fully emptied.
Sori fails to show the trap station body comprised of a viewing window. However, Dellevigne teaches a trap station comprising a trap station body (10) comprised of a viewing window (Fig. 2: 160), and the method of checking a content of the trap station via viewing the interior space through the view window (as discussed on page 7, lines 24-26). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the trap station of Sori to include the viewing window as taught by Dellevigne for the advantage of providing visual access to the interior of the trap station body without opening the trap station.
For claim 19, Sori as modified discloses the method of using a trash can bait station device of claim 17 further comprised of a step of securing the trap station into the body opening via engaging a second locking mechanism (Sori as discussed “an appropriate locking system 8 (preferably with a key) adapted to secure the device 10 to the inside of the housing 3”).
For claim 20, Sori as modified discloses the method of using a trash can bait station device of claim 17, wherein the trash can body is comprised of a wheel (as shown in Figs. 5, 10, 11).
Claims 8-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sori (EP 3299315 A1) in view of Craemer (DE 202004010676 U1), Ziegler (DE 20102532 U1) and Dellevigne (GB 2384966 A).
For claim 8, Sori discloses a trash can bait station device comprising: a trash can body comprised of: a wheel (as shown in Figs. 5, 10, 11); a lid (as shown in the figures and discussed in the description at first two paragraphs under “prior art”); a first interior space (as shown in the figures and discussed in the description at first two paragraphs under “prior art”); and a handle (Fig. 4 as shown on the lid); a first opening (Figs. 6, 11 and as discussed in the abstract: 3); a trap station (Fig. 1: 10) comprised of: a trap station body (Figs. 12-15), a second interior space (Figs. 13, 15: interior of the body 10); and a second opening (Fig. 15: 6); a bait (Fig. 15: 12); and a trap (Fig. 13).
Sori fails to show a first interior spaced comprised of a first viewing window. However, Craemer teaches a trash can comprising a body (2) having an interior space comprised of a first viewing window (as discussed in the abstract: “The casing is transparent in its design, at least partially, and may be made of a transparent material”); a lid (3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the trash can bait station device of Sori to include the first viewing window as taught by Craemer for the advantage of determining whether the trash can body is fully emptied.
Sori fails to show a first locking mechanism. However, Ziegler teaches a trash can body (Fig. 1: 1), a lid (3), and a first locking mechanism (as discussed in the translated description: “a lock is provided with which the lid can be secured to the waste container”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the trash can bait station device of Sori to include a first locking mechanism as taught by Ziegler for the advantage of securing the contents of the first interior space from access to pests or inadvertently spilling out.
Sori fails to show the trap station body comprised of a second viewing window, the viewing window attached to the trap station body via a hinge; and a second locking mechanism. However, Dellevigne teaches a trap station comprising a trap station body (10) comprised of a second viewing window (Fig. 2: 160), the viewing window attached to the trap station body via a hinge (Fig. 3: 42); and a second locking mechanism (as discussed in the abstract and Fig. 2: 100). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the trash can bait station device of Sori to include the second viewing window and locking mechanism as taught by Dellevigne for the advantages of providing visual access to the interior of the trap station body without opening the trap station, and securing the bat station closed.
For claim 9, Sori as modified discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 8, wherein the handle is positioned on the trash can body (Sori as shown in Fig. 4: handle on lid).
For claim 10, Sori as modified discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 8, wherein the first opening (Sori as discussed in the abstract: 3) receives the trap station (Sori 10).
For claim 11, Sori as modified discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 8, wherein the trap station is secured within the first opening (Sori as discussed “an appropriate locking system 8 (preferably with a key) adapted to secure the device 10 to the inside of the housing 3”) via a third locking mechanism (Sori Fig. 9: 8).
For claim 12, Sori as modified discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 11, wherein the third locking mechanism is comprised of a key lock (Sori as discussed “an appropriate locking system 8 (preferably with a key) adapted to secure the device 10 to the inside of the housing 3”), a combination lock, or a childproof lock.
For claim 13, Sori as modified by Craemer, Ziegler and Dellevigne discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 8, wherein the second locking mechanism (Dellevigne 100) is comprised of a clip, a clamp, a magnet, or a childproof lock (Dellevigne “Also, these downwardly extending margins deny ready admission of the end of a tool, e. g. , such as might be used by an inquisitive child in order to pry apart the two-part cover (14) and the base (12) of the rodent bait station (10).”)
For claim 14, Sori as modified by discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 8, wherein the bait is positioned on the trap station body (Sori as shown in Fig. 15: 12).
For claim 15, Sori as modified by discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 8, wherein the trap is positioned on the trap station body (Sori as shown in Fig. 13).
For claim 16, Sori as modified by Craemer, Ziegler and Dellevigne discloses the trash can bait station device of claim 8, wherein the first locking mechanism (Ziegler 15) secures the lid to the trash can body (Ziegler as discussed in the translated description: “a lock is provided with which the lid can be secured to the waste container”).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sori (EP 3299315 A1) in view of Craemer (DE 202004010676 U1) and Dellevigne (GB 2384966 A), as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Ziegler (DE 20102532 U1).
For claim 18, Sori as modified by Craemer and Dellevigne disclose the method substantially as claimed, but fail to show a first locking mechanism. However, Ziegler teaches a trash can body (Fig. 1: 1), wherein the trash can body is comprised of a lid (3) and a first locking mechanism (as discussed in the translated description: “a lock is provided with which the lid can be secured to the waste container”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the trash can body of Sori to include a first locking mechanism as taught by Ziegler for the advantage of securing the contents of the trash can body from access to pests or inadvertently spilling out.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Gaibotti (US 2009/0229170) shows a bait station with a transparent viewing window; and Gyldenkilde et al. (WO 2020057709 A1) shows a bait station removably accommodated within a receiving part of a waste bin.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE A CLERKLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7611. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5PM.
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, Peter Poon can be reached at 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.
/DANIELLE A CLERKLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3643