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 § 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)(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 48 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Black et al. (WO 2012030717 A2).
For claim 48, Black et al. shows an insect trap (as discussed in [0028]) comprising: a housing (Figs. 1-2: defined by walls 20, and tray that is adjacent the attractant receiving means 50); a reservoir at least partially defined by the first housing (space between 20 and inner surface of tray adjacent attractant receiving means 50); a protrusion (47) disposed within the reservoir and extending inward from an interior surface of the first housing (as shown in Fig. 2 and as discussed in [0053]), the protrusion configured to pierce a package disposed within the reservoir (as discussed in [0053]); an actuator (40) connected to the protrusion such that when the actuator is moved, the protrusion moves with the actuator within the reservoir (as discussed in [0053]); a substrate (Fig. 2: 34, 36) defining a plurality of channels (Fig. 2-3: 35); a trap chamber at least partially formed by the housing and the substrate (where the trap chamber is formed by closure of the opening of the cover 20 at the actuator 40 to bottom wall 36); an inlet (Fig. 2: at the top of the housing 20 at the actuator 40) into the trap chamber.
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, 6, 8, 9, 17-24 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parker et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0088310) in view of Duston et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0252074).
For claim 1, Parker et al. discloses an insect trap (Figs. 1-2 and as discussed in the abstract) comprising: a first housing (Figs. 1-2: 3); a reservoir (Fig. 2: 35) at least partially defined by the first housing (as discussed in [0040]); a second housing (Figs. 1-2: 2) moveably engaging the first housing (as discussed in [0036]); a trap chamber partially formed by the first and second housings (as shown in Fig. 10: interior space formed by the first housing 3 and the second housing 2); an inlet (Figs. 1-2: 34) into the trap chamber; and wherein the second housing (2) is movable between a first position where the inlet is open and a second position where the inlet is closed (as discussed in last sentence of [0035]).
Parker et al. fails to show a protrusion and an actuator. Duston et al. teaches an insect trap (as discussed in the abstract) comprising: a first housing (Fig. 2: formed between top wall 31 and bottom wall 29); a reservoir (Figs. 2-7: 47) at least partially defined by the first housing; a protrusion (Figs. 1-10: 25) disposed within the reservoir (47) and extending inward from an interior surface (at the tubular collar portion 34) of the first housing (as shown in Figs. 2-8), the protrusion configured to pierce a package disposed within the reservoir (as discussed in [0052]); an actuator (Figs. 2-8: 21) connected to the protrusion such that when the actuator is moved, the protrusion moves with the actuator within the reservoir (as discussed in [0054]). 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 insect trap of Parker et al. to include the protrusion and actuator as taught by Duston et al. for the advantage of providing a sealing portion of the liquid bait and means for activating the bait when ready for use.
For claim 6, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 1, wherein the trap chamber (Parker et al. Fig. 10: interior space formed by the first housing 3 and the second housing 2) comprises a floor (Parker et al. Figs. 2 and 5: 37), and wherein the first housing (Parker et al 3) comprises a bottom wall (Parker et al. Fig. 5: 351) and wherein the bottom wall forms the floor (Parker et al. Fig. 5: where the bottom wall 351 is the lowermost floor surface).
For claim 8, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 1, wherein the trap chamber (Parker et al. Fig. 10: interior space formed by the first housing 3 and the second housing 2) comprises a floor (Parker et al. Fig. 5: 351), wherein the first housing (Parker et al. Fig. 5: 3) comprises a bottom wall (Parker et al. Fig. 5: 36); and wherein at least a portion of the bottom wall (Parker et al. Fig. 5 at the top of bottom wall 31) adjacent to the floor is at an elevation above an elevation of the floor (Parker et al. Fig. 5 the mid to upper portion of the bottom wall 36 being above the floor 351), forming a pit to trap insects therein.
For claim 9, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 8, where the bottom wall (Parker et al. Fig. 5: 36) rises in elevation from the inlet (Parker et al. Fig. 5: 34) to a point (Parker et al. Fig. 5: 380) in the trap chamber adjacent the floor (Parker et al. Fig. 5: 351).
For claim 17, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 1, wherein the trap chamber (Parker et al. Fig. 10: interior space formed by the first housing 3 and the second housing 2) comprises a floor (Parker et al. Figs. 2-5 and 10: 36), and wherein the first housing (Parker et al. 3) comprises: a first portion (Parker et al. Figs. 2, 3 and 5: internal central area of first housing 3), the reservoir (Parker et al. Figs. 2 and 5: 35) being disposed within the first portion of the first housing; a second portion (Parker et al. Fig. 5: 32) spaced-apart from the first portion of the first housing; and a space defined between the first and second portions of the first housing (Parker et al. as shown in Fig. 5 at 36); wherein the second housing (Parker et al. Fig. 10: 2) is positioned over the space and movingly engaged with the first and second portions of the first housing to form the trap chamber and permit the second housing to move between the first and second positions (Parker et al. as discussed in last sentence of [0035]).
For claim 18, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 17, wherein a first tab (Parker et al. Fig. 11b: 381) extends from the first portion of the first housing into the space and a second tab (Parker et al. Figs. 2, 5, 10, 12 and 14: 33) extends into the space from the second portion of the first housing, and wherein the second housing includes a first detent (Parker et al. Fig. 11b: 27) configured to receive the first tab and a second detent (Parker et al. Fig. 12: 23) configured to receive the second tab.
For claim 19, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 18, wherein when the first and second tabs are engaged with the first and second detents (Parker et al. as shown in Figs. 11b and 12), the second housing (Parker et al. 2) is held in the first position (Parker et al. as shown in Fig. 14).
For claim 20, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 19, wherein when the second housing (Parker et al. 2) is moved from the first position (Parker et al. Fig. 14) to the second position (Parker et al. as shown in Figs. 10 and 13), the second housing is moved below the first and second tabs such that the first (Parker et al. Fig. 11b: 381) and second (Parker et al. Figs. 2, 5, 10, 12 and 14: 33) tabs act as a stop to hold the second housing in the second position (Parker et al. as shown in Fig. 10).
For claim 21, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 17, wherein a longitudinal chamber member (Parker et al. Fig. 5: outer wall 32) connects the first portion (Parker et al. Fig. 5: at wall 38) of the first housing to the second portion (Parker et al. Fig. 5: at threads 33) of the first housing.
For claim 22, Parker et al. and Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 21, wherein a plurality of interior channel walls (Parker et al. Figs. 2, 3 and 5: 37) extend perpendicularly from the longitudinal chamber member (Parker et al. Fig. 5: outer wall 32), forming a plurality of channels between each set of adjacent interior channel walls, each channel connected to the inlet (Figs. 1, 2, 4, 5, 10 and 14: 34) when the second housing is in the first position (Parker et al. as shown in Fig. 14).
For claim 23, Parker et al. and Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 17, wherein the second housing (Parker et al. 2) slideably engages the first and second housing portions (Parker et al. as discussed in [0037] and [0053]), enabling the second housing to slide between the first (Parker et al. as shown in Fig. 14) and second (Parker et al. as shown in Fig. 10) positions.
For claim 24, Parker et al. and Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 1, wherein the first housing (Parker et al. Figs. 4, 5, 10 and 14: 3) comprises a plurality of interior channel walls (Parker et al. Figs. 2, 3 and 5: 37) disposed within the trap chamber forming a plurality of sub-chambers, each sub-chamber connected to the inlet (Parker et al. Figs. 1, 2, 4, 5, 10 and 14: 34) when the second housing (Parker et al. Fig. 14: 2) is in the first position (Parker et al. as shown in Fig. 14).
For claim 31, Parker et al. and Duston et al. discloses the insect trap of claim 1, wherein the first housing comprises a bottom wall disposed at the inlet that is configured to provide grip for insects crawling into the trap chamber via the inlet (Parker et al. as discussed in [0029]).
Claims 3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parker et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0088310) in view of Duston et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0252074), as applied to claims 1 and 6 above, and further in view of Lang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2007/0044372).
For claim 3, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including wherein the trap chamber (Parker et al. Fig. 10: interior space formed by the first housing 3 and the second housing 2) comprises a floor (Parker et al. Figs. 2-5 and 10: 36) but fails to show further comprising an adhesive coated on a surface of the floor. Lang et al. teaches an insect trap (as shown in Figs. 10-11) comprising: a floor (Fig. 10: 102) and further comprising an adhesive (as discussed in [0072] and Fig. 10: 110) coated on a surface of the floor. 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 insect trap of Parker et al. to include the adhesive on a surface of the floor as taught by Lang et al. for the advantage of retaining the insects within the trap.
For claim 7, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including wherein the trap chamber (Parker et al. Fig. 10: interior space formed by the first housing 3 and the second housing 2) comprises a floor (Parker et al. Figs. 2-5 and 10: 37) but fails to show further comprising an adhesive at least partially coating a surface of the floor. Lang et al. teaches an insect trap (as shown in Figs. 10-11) comprising: a floor (Fig. 10: 102) and further comprising an adhesive at least partially coating a surface of the floor (as discussed in [0072] and Fig. 10: 110). 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 insect trap of Parker et al. to include the adhesive coating a surface of the floor as taught by Lang et al. for the advantage of retaining the insects within the trap.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parker et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0088310) in view of Duston et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0252074), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Majerowski et al. (WO 0101772 A1).
For claim 12, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed, but fails to show further comprising an attractant configured to attract insects and to be disposed within the reservoir, wherein the attractant comprises an attractant composition configured to attract insects, a first package enclosing the attractant composition, and a second package enclosing the first package therein and configured to be impermeable to gas. Majerowski et al. teaches an attractant (Fig. 6: 42) configured to attract insects and to be disposed within the reservoir (as discussed on Page 10, lines 12-13), wherein the attractant comprises an attractant composition configured to attract insects (as discussed on Page 5, lines 6-15), a first package (Fig. 6: 660) enclosing the attractant composition, and a second package (Fig. 6: 670) enclosing the first package therein and configured to be impermeable to gas. 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 insect trap of Parker et al. and Duston et al. to include the first package and the second package as taught by Majerowski et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because liquid bait will remain contained and sealed within the reservoir until the bait is released by the user and the insect trap is intended to be deployed.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parker et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0088310) in view of Duston et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0252074), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Black et al. (WO 2012030717 A2).
For claim 34, Parker et al. as modified by Duston et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed, but fails to show wherein the trap chamber comprises a retention mechanism selected from the group consisting of histamine, a chemical toxin, diatomaceous earth, amorphous silica, and biological control agents. Black et al. teaches an insect trap (as discussed in [0028]) comprising: a retention mechanism selected from the group consisting of histamine, a chemical toxin, diatomaceous earth, amorphous silica, and biological control agents (as discussed in [0044] and [0045)). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of Parker et al. and Duston et al. to include the retention mechanism as taught by Black et al. with a reasonable expectation of success because this would assist in successfully capturing the insects that enter the trap.
Claim 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black et al. Black et al. (WO 2012030717 A2) in view of Black et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0072711, herein Black et al. ‘711).
For claim 44, Black et al. shows an insect trap (as discussed in [0028]) comprising: a housing (Figs. 1-2: defined by walls 20, and tray that is adjacent the attractant receiving means 50); a reservoir at least partially defined by the housing (space between 20 and inner surface of tray adjacent attractant receiving means 50); a protrusion (47) disposed within the reservoir and extending inward from an interior surface of the housing (as shown in Fig. 2 and as discussed in [0053]); an actuator (40) disposed upon the housing and configured to move the protrusion within the reservoir (as discussed in [0053]); a trap chamber at least partially formed by the housings (where the trap chamber is formed by closure of the opening of the cover 20 at the actuator 40 to the bottom wall 36) and constructed to capture insects.
Black et al. fails to specifically show an outer package and an inner package enclosed within the outer package. However, Black et al. ‘711 teaches an insect trap comprising: an outer package (Fig. 2: 110) disposed within the reservoir and impermeable to gas, and an inner package (Fig. 2: 140) enclosed within the outer package, the inner package being permeable to gas (as discussed in [0057]); and an attractant composition (Fig. 2: 160) disposed with the inner package (as discussed in [0057]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of Black et al. to include the outer package and the inner package as taught by Black et al. ‘711 for the advantage of controllably retaining and dispersing the attractant within the reservoir.
Black et al. fails to specifically show wherein the inner package is configured to release the attractant composition at a release rate from about 15 ug per day to about 400 ug per day. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of Black et al. and Black et al. ‘711 to include the inner package is configured to release the attractant composition at a release rate from about 15 ug per day to about 400 ug per day for the advantage of controllably dispersing the attractant at a desired rate according the type of pests or the amount of pests to be monitored, since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
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