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 .
Status of Claims
As per the submission to the Office filed on 02/05/2026, the following represents the changes from the previous claims: Claims 1 and 10 were amended, and claim 6 was canceled. Claims 1-5 and 7-11 are presented for examination.
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 1-5, 7-11 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the wet pet food" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the plunger" in lines 5-6 and throughout. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the plunger" in line 4 and “the food bowl” in line 2 and throughout. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the plunger" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 5, and 7-11 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 1-3, 5, 7 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by over Vachula (US 20200253162 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Vachula discloses an apparatus comprising: an electrically-actuated container opener (190); and a processing system (160) connected to the electrically-operated container opener ([0088] and [0090]), the processing system configured to initiate a pet feeding event ([0092], [0104] and [0110] as the user can set the feeding schedule) by: electrically actuating the electrically-actuated container opener to puncture the sealed container ([0090-0091]) presenting the wet pet food (Vachula is capable of holding a sealed container containing wet pet food) into a food holder (180); and maintaining a time history to determine one or more future pet feeding events ([0092] and [0110] as the user can set the feeding schedule and so maintains a time history).
Regarding claim 2, Vachula discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: a rotating carousel (193) configured to receive and store one or more sealed containers of wet pet food ([0107] as the food pod holder 180 is attached to the carousel and so the carousel teaches the limitation to receive and store the one or more sealed containers of wet pet food); and an electrical motor (181’) configured to rotate the carousel around an axis of rotation ([0107]), wherein the processing system is connected to the electrical motor ([0115-0116]), wherein, prior to actuating the plunger, the processing system rotates the carousel via the electrical motor, and wherein the processing system stops the electrical motor when a selected sealed container is in a proximity of the plunger ([0088-0090] and [0107] as the control system sends signals to determine the next position of a can), and wherein the plunger is actuated after the electrical motor is stopped ([0088-0090] and [0107]).
Regarding claim 3, Vachula discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a load cell (184) physically coupled to the food bowl ([0075] and [0078]), wherein the load cell is configured to measure a weight of the wet pet food dispensed into the food bowl ([0075] and [0078]), and wherein the processing system is configured to deactivate the plunger when the weight of the wet pet food dispensed into the food bowl is greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold weight ([0075], [0078], [0088], [0090-0093] and [0111] as the control system sends signals to determine the next position of a can based on weight and so Vachula teaches the processing system to deactivate the plunger when the weight of the wet pet food dispensed into the food bowl is greater than or equal to a predetermined threshold weight).
Regarding claim 5, Vachula discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: a computing system ([0109-0110] describes a phone sending inputs to the processing system 160); and a wireless communication link between the processing system and the computing system ([0109-0110] as the phone is a mobile phone and so there is a wireless communication link between the processing system and the computing system), wherein a user enters one or more user commands associated with one or more pet feeding events ([0092], [0103-0104] and [0109-0110]) and a quantity of the wet pet food to be dispensed into the computing system ([0078], [0093] and [0113-0114] as the user can adjust the weight sensing device from the computing system and the weight sensing device will send that signal to the processing system 160 to control the quantity of wet pet food), wherein the processing system is configured to receive the user commands from the computing system via the wireless communication link ([0109-0110]), and wherein the processing system schedules the pet feeding events ([0109-0110]) and stores the quantity of the wet pet food to be dispensed as a predetermined threshold weight ([0078], [0093] and [0113-0114]).
Regarding claim 7, Vachula discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processing system initiates the pet feeding event upon receiving a user command ([0092], [0103-0104] and [0109-0110]).
Regarding claim 9, Vachula discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a user interface ([0109-0110]), wherein a user enters one or more user commands associated with one or more pet feeding events ([0092], [0103-0104] and [0109-0110]) and a quantity of the wet pet food to be dispensed via the user interface ([0078], [0093] and [0113-0114] as the user can adjust the weight sensing device from the user interface and the weight sensing device will send that signal to the processing system 160 to control the quantity of wet pet food), wherein the processing system is configured to receive the user commands via the user interface ([0109-0110]), and wherein the processing system schedules the pet feeding events ([0109-0110]) and stores the quantity of the wet pet food to be dispensed as a predetermined threshold weight ([0078], [0093] and [0113-0114]).
Regarding claim 10, Vachula discloses the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the user interface includes any combination of one or more push buttons, an LCD touchscreen, one or more switches, one or more rotary knobs, or one or more light emitting diodes ([0110] as mobile phones are known to use one or more light emitting diodes).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vachula as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Scheidler (US 4315483 A as cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 4, Vachula teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the electrically-actuated plunger is actuated by a cam (195).
However, Vachula silent wherein the electrically-actuated plunger is actuated by any of a lead screw linear actuator, a pneumatic actuator, a hydraulic actuator, or a rigid chain-based actuator.
Scheidler teaches wherein the electrically-actuated plunger is actuated by any of a lead screw linear actuator (Col. 3, lines 12-31), a pneumatic actuator, a hydraulic actuator, or a rigid chain-based actuator.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the cam of Vachula to include a lead screw linear actuator, a pneumatic actuator, a hydraulic actuator, or a rigid chain-based actuator as taught by Scheidler in order to securely drive the electrically-actuated device in a downward motion when opening the food (Col. 3, lines 12-22 of Scheidler).
Regarding claim 11, Vachula teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but does not explicitly state wherein the food holder is a food bowl.
Scheidler teaches wherein the food holder is a food bowl (40).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the food holder of Vachula to be a food bowl as taught by Scheidler in order to securely hold the food (fig. 4 of Scheidler).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vachula as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Abramson (US 8100084 B1 as cited in IDS).
Regarding claim 8, Vachula teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but is silent about further comprising a refrigeration unit configured to maintain the wet pet food at a temperature that is lower than an ambient temperature.
Abramson teaches a refrigeration unit (Col. 4, lines 49-55) configured to maintain the wet pet food at a temperature that is lower than an ambient temperature (Abramson is capable of teaching to maintain the wet pet food at a temperature that is lower than an ambient temperature as it provides refrigeration (Col. 4, lines 49-55)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include comprising a refrigeration unit configured to maintain the wet pet food at a temperature that is lower than an ambient temperature as taught by Abramson into the apparatus of Vachula in order to prevent the wet pet food from spoiling (Col. 4, lines 49-55 of Abramson).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5 and 7-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
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
/DAVID J PARSLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Prosecution Insights