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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3 and 5-33 of U.S. Patent No. 12,213,473. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they commonly claim:
For claim 1 of the present application vs. claim 1 of the patent: an animal kill trap comprising an enclosure that comprises; an upper lid vs. an upper lid that is hinged at a front end of the animal kill trap; a trap mechanism vs. a trap mechanism configured to be opened and non-triggerable until the upper lid is in a closed position thereby allowing baiting and inspection of the animal kill trap without risk of injury to a user by accidental triggering of the animal kill trap, wherein utilization of the upper lid of the animal kill trap acts as a lever to reduce a force required to set or empty the animal kill trap; wherein said trap mechanism comprises a kill bar, two lid reset arms, and two linkage members, such that each lid reset arm of said two lid reset arms comprises one of said two linkage members located on either side of the kill bar and attached to the upper lid vs. wherein the trap mechanism comprises a kill bar, and two lid reset arms and two sliding and slotted linkage members, such that each lid reset arm of said two lid reset arms comprises one of said two sliding and slotted linkage members located on either side of the kill bar and attached to the upper lid; wherein the kill bar is mechanically linked to the upper lid by way of said two linkage members located on either side of the kill bar.
Claims 2-3 of the present application and claims 2-3 of the patent claim the same subject matter.
Claims 4-13 of the present application and claims 5-14 of the patent claim the same subject matter.
Claims 14-17 of the present application and claims 15-24 of the patent claim the same subject matter.
For claim 18 of the present application vs. claims 25, 27, and 29 of the patent: wherein the trap mechanism further comprises kill bar rivets on the kill bar which are coupled to said two linkage members, and wherein the two lid reset arms are configured such that when the upper lid is fully opened in an over centered position from said upper lid of the animal kill trap, the two lid reset arms lock the kill bar in a retracted set position so as to render the animal kill trap completely safe and unable to be activated when the upper lid is in an open position from said upper lid of the animal kill trap such that said utilization of the upper lid of the animal kill trap acts as said lever to reduce said force required to set or empty the animal kill trap; or an upwardly sprung treadle, and wherein the animal kill trap is configured to attract an animal into the animal kill trap by way of a bait placed in a removable bait well beyond the upwardly sprung treadle at a rear end of the animal kill trap; or wherein the kill bar does not force down hard on the upwardly sprung treadle, thus configured to ensure that striking or impact pressure is biased towards an animal’s head on animals that progress further through the animal kill trap vs. wherein the trap mechanism further comprises kill bar rivets on the kill bar which are coupled to said two sliding and slotted linkage members, and wherein the two lid reset arms are configured such that when the upper lid is fully opened in an over centered position from said upper lid hinged at said front end of the animal kill trap, the two lid reset arms lock the kill bar in a retracted set position so as to render the animal kill trap completely safe and unable to be activated when the upper lid is in an open position from said upper lid hinged at said front end of the animal kill trap such that said utilization of the upper lid of the animal kill trap acts as said lever to reduce said force required to set or empty the animal kill trap; wherein the trap mechanism further comprises an upwardly sprung treadle, and wherein the animal kill trap is configured to attract an animal into the animal kill trap by way of a bait placed in a removable bait well beyond the upwardly sprung treadle at the rear a rear end of the animal kill trap; wherein the trap mechanism further comprises an upwardly sprung treadle, and wherein the kill bar does not force down hard on the upwardly sprung treadle, thus configured to ensure that striking or impact pressure is biased towards an animal's head on animals that progress further through the animal kill trap.
Claim 19 of the present application and claims 28 and 30 of the patent claim the same subject matter.
Claim 20 of the present application and claims 26, 31, 33 of the patent claim the same subject matter.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 12, paragraph 0036, line 1, the phrase “an upper lid hinged at the rear of the trap” is unclear since it appears that the lid 7 is actually hinged at a location adjacent the front wall of the trap since the tunnel component 9 through which the rodent enters the trap is located thereat; and
Page 18, paragraph 0071, line 4, the term “treadle spring 3” should be replaced with --treadle spring 2--.
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 6, 8, 15, 16, and 18 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.
In regard to claim 6, the terms “said lever” and “said force required to set or empty the animal kill trap” lack positive antecedent basis.
In regard to claim 8, the phrase “a bar is no longer present to hold the capture flag in a downwards position” renders the claim vague and indefinite since it is unclear if the term “a bar” represents the same or different structure than the initially recited “a kill bar” recited in claim 1. In paragraph 0077 of the specification, it states “A capture flag is also erected…once the trap has been sprung (Figure 4) and the kill bar is no longer present (down position) to hold the flag in a down position and is best seen in Figure 5.”
In regard to claims 15-16, these claims improperly depend from “claim 16” and should be changed to properly depend from another previous claim.
In regard to claim 16, line 14, the term “a trigger mechanism” renders the claim vague and indefinite since the term “a second stage trigger mechanism” was previously recited in claim 15 and therefore it is unclear whether the term recited in claim 16 represents the same or different “trigger mechanism” from that recited in claim 15.
In regard to claim 18, lines 3-4 and lines 6-7, the phrases “when the upper lid is fully opened in an over centered position from said upper lid of the animal kill trap” and “when the upper lid is in an open position from said upper lid of the animal kill trap” renders the claim vague and indefinite since the upper lid cannot be opened in an over centered position or be in an open position with respect to itself.
In regard to claim 18, lines 7-8, the terms “said utilization”, “said lever”, and “said force required to set or empty the animal kill trap” lack positive antecedent basis.
Claims 2-5 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: the structural relationship comprising a pivotal connection between the upper lid and the trap or the enclosure since it is necessary to have some sort of connection between the upper lid and the trap or enclosure (as by definition of an over-center mechanism wherein it has been established previously in claim 1 that there is a connection between the kill bar and the upper lid via the two lid reset arms with two linkage members and therefore the opposing connection of the upper lid to some other structure must be recited in order to allow the upper lid to be over centered) in order to cause the upper lid to either be over-centered or assume an over centering/over centered position.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Yang 2022/0151219.
In regard to claim 1, Yang discloses an animal kill trap comprising an enclosure (enclosure defined by 7) that comprises an upper lid (7), and a trap mechanism (2-3); and, wherein said trap mechanism comprises a kill bar (3), two lid reset arms (side portions of 7 with 62), and two linkage members (62,621), such that each lid reset arm of said two lid reset arms comprises one of said two linkage members located on either side of the kill bar (3; 62,621 are located laterally outward from 3) and attached to the upper lid (7; 62,621 extend from inner lateral surfaces of 7 as shown in Figs. 2, 4), wherein the kill bar (3) is mechanically linked to the upper lid (7; 62,621 of 7 is received within 611 of 61 which is a part of base 2 and 3 has inwardly extending posts in Fig. 2 which are received within the elongated semi-cylindrical recess located in the middle of 2 that is aligned with and located laterally inward of 61 in Fig. 2; therefore the kill bar 3 is mechanically linked to the lid 7 by way of the interconnections of the posts of the kill bar 3 and the second positioning portion 62 of the upper lid 7 to the receiving portions of the base 2 as shown in Fig. 2) by way of said two linkage members (62,621) located on either side of the kill bar (see Figs. 1-3).
In regard to claim 2, Yang discloses wherein the upper lid (7) is over-centered to ensure that the kill bar (3) is locked in a deactivated position (3 is in the triggered position in Fig. 5 and therefore deactivated) when the upper lid is in an open position (see position of 7 in Fig. 5).
In regard to claim 3, Yang discloses wherein the kill bar (3) comprises a weight (teeth extending from 3 as shown in Figs. 2, 7) mechanically affixed to provide impact momentum.
In regard to claim 4, Yang discloses wherein the animal kill trap further comprises a safety mechanism, wherein the animal kill trap cannot be activated when the upper lid is open (see Fig. 5) in an over centering position (see Fig. 6 wherein 7 is positioned over the center of base 2) to a safe position (see Fig. 5).
In regard to claim 5, Yang discloses wherein a force reduces as the upper lid (7) is cocked further back from an initial sprung position (see Fig. 6) to the safe position (see Fig. 5; the force required to move lid 7 from the position from Fig. 6 to the position in Fig. 5 is reduced because gravity begins to act upon 7 to cause it to fall to the position in Fig. 5).
In regard to claim 6, Yang discloses wherein the upper lid (7) comprises an integrated lever system comprising said lever that sets and releases the animal kill trap in order for said upper lid (7) to reduce said force required to set or empty the animal kill trap (by opening the lid 7, it allows the user free access to set the clamping member 3 and allows the user to more easily empty the trap by merely turning over the base 2 and allowing the dead rodent to fall without manipulation by the user).
In regard to claim 7, Yang discloses wherein the animal kill trap further comprises a visible indicator (32) to confirm that the animal kill trap has been activated.
In regard to claim 8, Yang discloses wherein the visible indicator is a capture flag (32) that is erected by way of a counter-balanced force of gravity once a bar is no longer present to hold the capture flag in a downwards position (upward movement of 32 is a result of downward gravitational movement of 31 in a downward direction).
In regard to claim 9, Yang discloses wherein said trap mechanism further comprises an upwardly sprung treadle (41; left end of 41 is upwardly sprung to assume the position in Fig. 7) to activate the animal kill trap which is configured to be activated by an animal by weight.
In regard to claim 10, Yang discloses wherein activation pressure of the upwardly sprung treadle (41) is adjustable to compress a spring (see spring in Fig. 2) which holds a weight of the upwardly sprung treadle (in the set position, the spring acts to maintain 41 in the set position due to the interconnection/interaction of the parts between 41 and the spring).
In regard to claim 11, Yang discloses wherein the upwardly sprung treadle (41) is adjustable via an adjustable set-off weight adjuster (see the square shaped plate just below 41 in Fig. 2 and whose upper surface limits the downward motion of the left end of 41 in Fig. 7) for variable target animals.
In regard to claim 12, Yang discloses wherein the kill bar (3) is a spring-loaded bar (via spring shown in Fig. 2), wherein upon activation of the upwardly sprung treadle, the spring-loaded bar is configured to swing in from above and behind a targeted animal’s head thereby dispensing a fatal blow to the targeted animal (see position of 3 in Figs. 7 and 6).
In regard to claim 13, Yang discloses wherein the spring-loaded bar (3) is retained in a set position by way of a wire form (edge of 32 received in notch shown in Fig. 7) and locking member (locking member defining notch receiving the edge of 32 in Fig. 7).
In regard to claim 14, Yang discloses wherein the locking member is a tumbler (locking member defining notch receiving the edge of 32 in Fig. 7), wherein said trap mechanism further comprises a sear (elongated hook shaped structure that engages an upper surface of 41 in Fig. 7), wherein the spring-loaded bar (3) is retained in the set position by way of the wire form (edge of 32 received in notch shown in Fig. 7) and the tumbler (locking member defining notch receiving the edge of 32 in Fig. 7), which in turn rests on the sear (elongated hook shaped structure that engages an upper surface of 41 in Fig. 7) engaged with the upwardly sprung treadle (41), such that the wire form applies force to a back of the tumbler (locking member defining notch receiving the edge of 32 in Fig. 7 from the right side) in a direction of a slot in a center rib structure (see elongated slot within the square shaped member directly below 41 in Fig. 2 through which the hook shaped structure extends in Fig. 7).
In regard to claim 15, Yang discloses wherein the tumbler (locking member defining notch receiving the edge of 32 in Fig. 7) acts as a first stage of a trigger and translates linear force to a downwards rotational force, directly in line with a center of a pivot point of the sear that is falling or a second stage trigger mechanism thereby translating minimal stored energy in the spring-loaded bar (3) to an end of the sear (elongated hook shaped structure that engages an upper surface of 41 in Fig. 7), wherein it engages with the upwardly sprung treadle (41) thus ensuring consistent triggering force due to lack of frictional effects at an interface between the upwardly sprung treadle (41) and the sear (elongated hook shaped structure that engages an upper surface of 41 in Fig. 7).
In regard to claim 16, Yang discloses wherein a ramp is utilized on top of the sear, wherein the tumbler contacts and engages with the sear (these limitations are not disclosed by Yang because each of the limitations separated by the term “or” cause them to be alternatively recited); or the sear (elongated hook shaped structure that engages an upper surface of 41 in Fig. 7) is a lever engaged on a shelf (upper surface of 41 in Fig. 7) on the upwardly sprung treadle (41) having a pivot point directly below a location at which a load is being retained by way of the tumbler (pivot point of the elongated hook shaped structure defined by the laterally extending posts shown in Fig. 2 is shown to be below the notch receiving the edge of 32 in Fig. 7); or the wire form, when in a fully open position, over-rotates the tumbler rearward, this in turn acts on the sear, causing the sear to lift sufficiently high that the upwardly sprung treadle then springs upwards and allows the trap mechanism to reset; or when the upper lid is motioned forward into a closed position, the tumbler acts against the sear to move it forward in turn causing the sear to engage with the upwardly sprung treadle, and thus correspondingly locks the tumbler into position; or when the upper lid is rotated into the closed position, the wire form, kill bar and tumbler lock into their respective positions and act upon the sear, thereby causing the sear to fall and engage with the upwardly sprung treadle; or a triggering point is raised substantially that upon closure of the upper lid, a trigger mechanism resets such that the sear is in engagement with the upwardly sprung treadle in a locked configuration and wherein, the triggering point is a leading edge of the upwardly sprung treadle.
In regard to claim 17, Yang discloses wherein the trap mechanism is configured such that substantially mechanical force retention and triggering elements are contained on a floor (2) of the animal kill trap and underneath where an animal enters the animal kill trap (holes 71-73; see Figs. 1, 2, 7).
In regard to claim 18, Yang discloses wherein the trap mechanism further comprises kill bar rivets on the kill bar which are coupled to said two linkage members, and wherein the two lid reset arms are configured such that when the upper lid is fully opened in an over centered position from said upper lid of the animal kill trap, the two lid reset arms lock the kill bar in a retracted set position so as to render the animal kill trap completely safe and unable to be activated when the upper lid is in an open position from said upper lid of the animal kill trap such that said utilization of the upper lid of the animal kill trap acts as said lever to reduce said force required to set or empty the animal kill trap (these limitations are not disclosed by Yang because each of the limitations separated by the term “or” cause them to be alternatively recited); or an upwardly sprung treadle (41), and wherein the animal kill trap is configured to attract an animal into the animal kill trap by way of a bait (bait shown being placed in Fig. 5 and the bait is shown to be retained within the trap in Fig. 6) placed in a removable bait well (vertically extending cylindrical well extending upwardly from 2 in Fig. 2) beyond the upwardly sprung treadle (41; the bait well extends below/beyond 41) at a rear end of the animal kill trap (left end of 2); or wherein the kill bar (3) does not force down hard on the upwardly sprung treadle (41), thus configured to ensure that striking or impact pressure is biased towards an animal’s head on animals that progress further through the animal kill trap (outer edge of 3 in Figs. 5-6 shown abutting outer edge of 2 and not 41).
In regard to claim 19, Yang discloses wherein the enclosure further comprises vents (71-73) in horizonal directions (71-73 extend horizontally through the vertical walls of 7) that are configured to carry scent through air to attract animals to the animal kill trap; or wherein said enclosure further comprises a chassis (2), and the chassis is configured to be removably affixed to a ground surface (an anchoring means such as a chain or rope may be extended over base 2).
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) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang 2022/0151219 in view of Shah et al. 2023/0042831.
In regard to claim 20, Yang does not disclose wherein a code identification system that identifies the animal kill trap and that is used in recording trap captures in a centralized database. Shah et al. disclose an intelligent rodent device (100,200), wherein during the installation process the handler scans QR code on the device and sets the priority network and once the handler activates the device it is connected and configured into the management system (see para. 0049). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Yang such that it further comprises a code identification system that identifies the animal kill trap and that is used in recording trap captures in a centralized database in view of Shah et al. in order to provide a means by which the user may positively identify the trap when reviewing or recording trap information.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang 2022/0151219 in view of Stapelford et al. 2020/0267515.
In regard to claim 20, Yang does not disclose wherein radio communication technology that communicates back to a centrally monitored database and that is configured to advise when an animal has been trapped. Stapleford et al. disclose systems, methods and devices for remote trap monitoring wherein the communication networks may be any network or combination of networks that enables transmission of an alert from sensor monitoring and transmission device (5) to the trap monitoring notification service (7) and further that enables the service (7) to transmit a notification message to the smart devices of the notification recipients associated with the SMT (5) and that the communications network may comprise one or more, or a combination of, wireless and/or wired networks, such as but not limited to Wide Area Networks (WANs), Local Area Networks (LANs), Wireless LANs (WLANs), Low Power Wide Area Networks (LPWANs), 3G, 4G and 5G cellular networks, Wi-Fi networks, satellite networks, wireless mesh networks (see para. 0046) and that the cellular modem (203) can transmit over existing LTE/Extended GPRS networks (see para. 0067); and wherein the trap monitoring notification service (7) stores registration information in a database (8) and that the subscriber database (305) stores information and includes a plurality of fields including status (362) of each respective SMT (105; see paras. 0105, 0107-108). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the trap of Yang such that it further comprises radio communication technology that communicates back to a centrally monitored database and that is configured to advise when an animal has been trapped in view of Stapleford et al. in order to provide a means of communicating the status of the trap over known communication networks to the user who may be located a great distance from the location of the trap so that the user may be apprised of the status of the trap at all times.
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