DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 3-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
For claim 3, the limitation “d.” should state “a.”.
For claim 4, the limitation “e.” should state “a.”.
For claim 5, the limitation “f.” should state “a.”.
For claim 5, the status identification “Withdrawn” was confirmed in an interview to be a typographical error.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 & 5 each recites the limitation “the secondary segment” in line 11 of claim 1 and line 2 of claim 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For claim 2, the limitation “a single secondary segment” in line 2 is inconsistent to the limitation “a plurality of secondary segments” in claim 1, line 4. The examiner recommends amending claim 1 to include the limitation –at least one—to the limitation “secondary segment” of claim 1, line 11 for clarity.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the attachment location" in lines 2 and 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Also, the limitation “secondary segment” in line 4 is unclear because is it referring to a different secondary segment than what was stated in claim 1, line 6? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as one of the plurality of secondary segments and it is recommended that “one of the plurality of” be inserted before “secondary segments” in claim 4.
Claim 7 contains the trademark/trade name “Velcro”. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a hook and loop material and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claims 3, 6 and 8 are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Glenn (US 10869462 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Glenn discloses a pet toy (title, disclosure), comprising:
a first segment (100) having a volume (interior of 100 in figs. 1 and 2), the first segment having a plurality of first coupling features (fastening means of 202, 205a, 205b, 208a and 208b and Col. 4, lines 5-8, 14-19 and 34-37) disposed on the exterior of the first segment (Col. 4, lines 5-8, 14-19 and 34-37 and Col. 8, lines 35-48 as the coupling features will be placed on the openings 202, 205a, 205b, 208a and 208b of the body 100, and so the coupling features will be disposed on the exterior of the first segment);
a plurality of secondary segments (101, 102a, 102b, 103a and 103b) each having a volume (interior of 101, 102a, 102b, 103a and 103b), the secondary segments each having a plurality of secondary coupling features (209a-209e) disposed on the exterior of the secondary segment (fig. 2), the secondary coupling features configured to couple with the first coupling features (Col. 4, lines 5-8, 14-19 and 34-37);
a connecting element (200, 204a, 204b, 207a and 207b), the connecting element having a first end (Col. 7, lines 48-51) and a second end (end connecting to 209a-209e in fig. 2), the first end having a first end coupling feature (Col. 7, lines 48-51 as the coupling feature is where the first end connects to the first segment of body 100) and being coupled to the first segment (Col. 7, lines 48-51 as the coupling feature is where the first end connects to the first segment of body 100), the second end having a second end coupling feature (fig. 2 depicts the second end coupling feature to be where the second end couples to 209a-209e) and being coupled to the secondary segment (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 2, Glenn discloses the pet toy of claim 1, wherein: There is a single secondary segment (101).
Regarding claim 3, Glenn discloses the pet toy of claim 2, wherein: The first end of the connecting element is fixedly attached to the first segment (Col. 7, lines 48-51), and the second end of the connecting element is fixedly attached to the secondary segment (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Glenn discloses the pet toy of claim 2, wherein: The attachment location of the first end to the first segment and the attachment location of the second end to the secondary segment is such that when the first segment is coupled to the secondary segment the first segment and secondary segment envelopes the connecting element (figs. 1-2 and Col. 7, lines 48-51 as the connecting element envelopes when the first and secondary segment are reattached).
Regarding claim 5, Glenn discloses the pet toy of claim 1, wherein: The first segment exterior and the secondary segment exterior are textile materials (Col. 3, lines 30-31, and 65-66 and Col. 4, lines 14, and 32-33).
Regarding claim 7, Glenn discloses the pet toy of claim 1, wherein: The first coupling feature is an article of Velcro attached to the first segment, and the secondary coupling feature is an article of Velcro which is attached to the secondary segment (Col. 4, lines 46-47).
Regarding claim 8, Glenn discloses the pet toy of claim 1, wherein: There are two first coupling features (fastening means of 202, 205a, 205b, 208a and 208b and Col. 4, lines 5-8, 14-19 and 34-37) and two secondary coupling features (209a-209e).
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glenn as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shamitoff (US 6887120 B2).
Regarding claim 6, Glenn teaches the pet toy of claim 1, but is silent about wherein: The first coupling feature and the secondary coupling feature form a sleeve-and- insert relationship, the first coupling feature forming an insert to be inserted into the secondary coupling feature, the secondary coupling feature forming a sleeve to receive the first coupling feature.
Shamitoff teaches the first coupling feature (126 and Col. 4, ln 17-22) and the secondary coupling feature (128 and Col. 4, ln 17-22) form a sleeve-and- insert relationship (fig. 3 and Col. 4, ln 17-25), the first coupling feature forming an insert (130) to be inserted into the secondary coupling feature (figs. 1-3 and Col. 4, ln 17-25), the secondary coupling feature forming a sleeve (134) to receive the first coupling feature (figs. 1-3 and Col. 4, ln 17-25).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a sleeve-and- insert relationship as taught by Shamitoff to the first coupling feature and the secondary coupling feature of Glenn in order to provide further engagement with the pet when the appendages are detached and makes an audible snapping noise (Col. 4, lines 26-34 and 46 of Shamitoff).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sutton (US 11129486 B2) teaches a connecting element.
Millward (US 20200085016 A1) teaches a connecting element.
LaPointe (US 20250108311 A1) teaches a connecting element.
De Leon (US 8998670 B1) teaches a sleeve-and-insert relationship.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAHAR ALMATRAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2470. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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.
/SAHAR ALMATRAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3643
/MORGAN T JORDAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643