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 .
Notice to Applicant
Claims 1-27 have been examined in this application. This communication is the first action on the merits of these claims.
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because the drawings appear to be grayscale versions of colored photos or renders, and are not of sufficient quality to see the details of the individual labeled components. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “each dust-adhering liquid-absorbent granule in the form of an extruded pellet” in lines 3-4 appear to be missing a word and should be amended to, for example, “each dust-adhering liquid-absorbent granule is in the form of an extruded pellet”. 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 1-27 are rejected under 35 103 as being obvious over US Patent Number 2014/0069344 by Lipscomb in view of US Patent Application Number 2011/0253055 by Tang.
Regarding claim 1, Lipscomb discloses a litter containing dust-containing or dust-forming granules composed of a dust-containing or dust-forming material (the abstract discloses extruded pellets coated with smectite, preferably bentonite, and bentonite is well-known to form dust when agitated), each liquid-absorbent granule in the form of an extruded pellet comprised of a starch-containing material and water-soluble binder formed of or from starch during pellet extrusion in an amount sufficient to form a clump of the liquid-absorbent pellets and the dust-containing or dust-forming granules when wetted with water (paragraph 4 discloses “litter grains comprised of extruded starch-containing pellets…which includes a water soluble carbohydrate polymer binder formed during extrusion that functions as a clumping agent to clump adjacent pellets together when wetted with liquid”).
Lipscomb does not disclose a dust-suppressing component, the dust-suppressing litter component comprised of dust-adhering liquid-absorbent granules. However, this limitation is taught by Tang. Tang discloses an animal litter compositions having filler particles 108, and paragraph 34 discloses “The addition of one or more charged polymers as filler particles in the clumping litter reduces or even eliminates air-born dust particles, as electrostatic interactions between the polymers and the dust particles trap the dust, thus reducing the amount of free dust in the air when the litter is dispensed from the bag or used by an animal”. Tang further discloses that the filler particles provide other functionality including absorbing moisture. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Lipscomb using the teachings from Tang in order to make the pellets 70 and sorbent material 38 of Lipscomb to allow them to be manufactured separately.
Regarding claim 2 (dependent on claim 1), Lipscomb as modified by Tang discloses each extruded dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellet is substantially completely composed of the starch-containing organic material and contains no dust-containing or dust-forming material when extruded. Paragraph 11 discloses a variety of materials for the admixture that are organic and contain no dust-containing or dust-forming material.
Regarding claims 3 (dependent on claim 1), 4 (dependent on claim 1), 16 (dependent on claim 15), 17 (dependent on claim 15), 18 (dependent on claim 15), Lipscomb as modified by Tang discloses each extruded dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellet consists of the starch-containing organic material, wherein the extruded dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellets are extruded substantially completely of at least one cereal grain. Paragraph 80 discloses “Another preferred starch-containing admixture is formed of a mixture of one or more of high carbohydrate, high starch cereal grains that make up between 80% and 99% (≈100%) by weight of the total admixture”.
Regarding claims 5 (dependent on claim 1), 7 (dependent on claim 6), 19 (dependent on claim 15), Lipscomb discloses the extruded dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellets each contain at least 7.5% of the water-soluble binder by pellet weight. Paragraph 21 discloses “each one of the plurality of litter pellets produced has at least 1% of carbohydrate polymer clumping agent by uncoated pellet weight and preferably between 1% and 10% carbohydrate polymer clumping agent”.
Regarding claims 6 (dependent on claim 1), 20 (dependent on claim 19)¸ Lipscomb discloses the extruded dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellets are extruded from an admixture comprised of the starch-containing material (paragraph 80 discloses “Another preferred starch-containing admixture is formed of a mixture of one or more of high carbohydrate, high starch cereal grains that make up between 80% and 99% (≈100%) by weight of the total admixture”) at an extrusion temperature of at least 100º C forming the water soluble binder from starch during pellet extrusion in the amount sufficient to form a clump of the dust-adhering liquid-absorbent granules and the dust-containing or dust-forming granules when wetted with water (paragraph 9 discloses a variety of extruder temperatures of at least 100º C).
Lipscomb does not disclose an extrusion pressure of at least 1500 PSI. However, first, this is a product by process limitation that does not further limit the structure of the claim. Furthermore, paragraph 9 discloses a variety of extruder pressures, including at least 900 PSI, which includes the claimed range of at least 1500 PSI. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a higher pressure range as needed to produce the desired material properties in the extruded pellets, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claims 8 (dependent on claim 1), 21 (dependent on claim 15), Lipscomb and Tang do not explicitly disclose the extruded dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellets have a dust carrying or dust pickup capacity of at least 0.07 grams of dust particles per gram thereof, the dust particles each having a size no greater than 100 microns. However, paragraph 34 of Tang discloses “The addition of one or more charged polymers as filler particles in the clumping litter reduces or even eliminates air-born dust particles, as electrostatic interactions between the polymers and the dust particles trap the dust, thus reducing the amount of free dust in the air when the litter is dispensed from the bag or used by an animal”. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to optimize the pickup capacity of the de-dusting agent as needed in order to adequately reduce the dustiness of the litter composition as needed.
Regarding claims 9 (dependent on claim 1), 22 (dependent on claim 15), Lipscomb and Tang do not explicitly disclose the litter is comprised of a weight percentage of the extruded dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellets, and wherein each weight percent of the extruded dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellets in litter reduces the number or amount of the dust particles in the litter which can become airborne during use of the litter by at least 0.5%. However, paragraph 34 of Tang discloses “The addition of one or more charged polymers as filler particles in the clumping litter reduces or even eliminates air-born dust particles, as electrostatic interactions between the polymers and the dust particles trap the dust, thus reducing the amount of free dust in the air when the litter is dispensed from the bag or used by an animal”. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to optimize the reduction of dust particles using the de-dusting as needed in order to adequately reduce the dustiness of the litter composition as needed.
Regarding claims 10 (dependent on claim 1), 23 (dependent on claim 15), Lipscomb as modified by Tang further teaches the extruded dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellets are used in the litter in their as-extruded form. Tang suggests using separate absorbent particles 102 and filler particles 108, and separating the extruded pellets and absorbent coating of Lipscomb would allow the pellets 70 to be used in their as-extruded form.
Regarding claims 11 (dependent on claim 11), 12 (dependent on claim 11), 13 (dependent on claim 12), 24 (dependent on claim 15), 27 (dependent on claim 26), Lipscomb as modified by Tang further discloses each one of the dust-containing for dust-forming granules are comprised of sodium bentonite. Paragraph 45 of Tang discloses absorbent particles 102 comprising clumping material particles including sodium bentonite powder.
Regarding claims 14 (dependent on claim 1), 25 (dependent on claim 15), Lipscomb discloses the pellets absorb at least one and one-half times their own weight in oil. Paragraph 190 discloses “These uncoated pellets have an ASTM oil absorbancy of at least 1.25 grams per gram and between 1.25 grams per gram and 1.80 grams per gram (preferably about 1.60 grams per gram)”.
Lipscomb does not explicitly disclose the dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellets absorb at least three times their own weight in water. However, having suggested a water absorbent pellet, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to optimize the amount of oil that the core absorbs, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 15, Lipscomb discloses a litter containing dust-containing or dust-forming granules composed of a dust-containing or dust-forming material containing a plurality of smaller dust particles formed of the dust-containing material or dust-forming material which can become airborne (the abstract discloses extruded pellets coated with smectite, preferably bentonite, and bentonite is well-known to form dust when agitated), each liquid-absorbent pellets is extruded pellet is extruded substantially completely from a starch-containing material (paragraph 80 discloses “Another preferred starch-containing admixture is formed of a mixture of one or more of high carbohydrate, high starch cereal grains that make up between 80% and 99% (≈100%) by weight of the total admixture”), contains a water-soluble binder formed of or from starch during pellet extrusion in an amount sufficient to form a clump of the liquid-absorbent pellets and the dust-containing or dust-forming granules when wetted with water or a liquid comprised of water (paragraph 4 discloses “litter grains comprised of extruded starch-containing pellets…which includes a water soluble carbohydrate polymer binder formed during extrusion that functions as a clumping agent to clump adjacent pellets together when wetted with liquid”), and does not have any dust containing or dust forming material when extruded (paragraph 11 discloses a variety of materials for the extruded pellets 70 that contain no dust-containing or dust-forming material).
Lipscomb does not disclose a dust-suppressing component, the dust-suppressing litter component comprised of dust-adhering liquid-absorbent pellets. However, this limitation is taught by Tang. Tang discloses an animal litter compositions having filler particles 108, and paragraph 34 discloses “The addition of one or more charged polymers as filler particles in the clumping litter reduces or even eliminates air-born dust particles, as electrostatic interactions between the polymers and the dust particles trap the dust, thus reducing the amount of free dust in the air when the litter is dispensed from the bag or used by an animal”. Tang further discloses that the filler particles provide other functionality including absorbing moisture. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Lipscomb using the teachings from Tang in order to make the pellets 70 and sorbent material 38 of Lipscomb to allow them to be manufactured separately.
Regarding claim 26, Lipscomb discloses a litter containing dust-containing or dust-forming granules composed of a dust-containing or dust-forming material containing a plurality of smaller dust particles formed of the dust-containing material or dust-forming material which can become airborne (the abstract discloses extruded pellets coated with smectite, preferably bentonite, and bentonite is well-known to form dust when agitated), each liquid-absorbent pellets is extruded pellet consisting essentially of a starch-containing material extruded from a starch-containing organic admixture (paragraph 80 discloses “Another preferred starch-containing admixture is formed of a mixture of one or more of high carbohydrate, high starch cereal grains that make up between 80% and 99% (≈100%) by weight of the total admixture”) at an extrusion temperature of at least 100º C (paragraph 9 discloses a variety of extruder temperatures of at least 100º C) forming at least 7.5% of the water-soluble binder by pellet weight (paragraph 21 discloses “each one of the plurality of litter pellets produced has at least 1% of carbohydrate polymer clumping agent by uncoated pellet weight and preferably between 1% and 10% carbohydrate polymer clumping agent”) of or from starch during extrusion (paragraph 4 discloses “litter grains comprised of extruded starch-containing pellets…which includes a water soluble carbohydrate polymer binder formed during extrusion that functions as a clumping agent to clump adjacent pellets together when wetted with liquid”).
Lipscomb does not disclose a dust-suppressing component, the dust-suppressing litter component comprised of dust-adhering liquid-absorbent granules. However, this limitation is taught by Tang. Tang discloses an animal litter compositions having filler particles 108, and paragraph 34 discloses “The addition of one or more charged polymers as filler particles in the clumping litter reduces or even eliminates air-born dust particles, as electrostatic interactions between the polymers and the dust particles trap the dust, thus reducing the amount of free dust in the air when the litter is dispensed from the bag or used by an animal”. Tang further discloses that the filler particles provide other functionality including absorbing moisture. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Lipscomb using the teachings from Tang in order to make the pellets 70 and sorbent material 38 of Lipscomb to allow them to be manufactured separately.
Lipscomb does not disclose an extrusion pressure of at least 1500 PSI. However, first, this is a product by process limitation that does not further limit the structure of the claim. Furthermore, paragraph 9 discloses a variety of extruder pressures, including at least 900 PSI, which includes the claimed range of at least 1500 PSI. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a higher pressure range as needed to produce the desired material properties in the extruded pellets, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL H WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6554. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6:30.
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, Josh Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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.
MICHAEL H. WANG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3642
/MICHAEL H WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642