Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/248,012

DISPENSING DEVICE FOR ANIMAL FOOD

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 24, 2025
Examiner
EVANS, EBONY E
Art Unit
3647
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Houndsy LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
64%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 64% of resolved cases
64%
Career Allow Rate
612 granted / 957 resolved
+11.9% vs TC avg
Strong +30% interview lift
Without
With
+29.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
976
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.2%
-37.8% vs TC avg
§103
42.1%
+2.1% vs TC avg
§102
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
§112
28.6%
-11.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 957 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . 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 11, 17 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. Claim 11 recites the limitation "the sliding member" in lines 1 and 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 17 and 18 recites the limitation "the flexible flap" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the 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 1,2, 6, 7, 12-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) (a)(2) as being anticipated by KR 200496191. Regarding claim 1, KR 200496191 discloses a dispensing device comprising: a container (storage container 200, fig. 3) defining an interior storage chamber and a container opening providing access to the interior storage chamber (fig. 3); a bowl (B) supported by a moveable bowl support (distribution member 300), wherein the moveable bowl support is configured to move the bowl between a filling position aligned with the container opening (fig. 1 and 5) and a serving position in front of the container housing (fig. 2 and 5); and an actuator including a first end (top end of lever member 400) and a second end (bottom end of lever member 400), wherein the second end operates to move the moveable bowl support (bottom end of lever member 400 moves the bowl support via protrusion 312, fig. 3 and 5); wherein, when the first end of the actuator is in a first position, the moveable bowl support positions the bowl in the filling position (top end of lever member 400 is in a first position shown in fig. 1 and 5); wherein, when the first end of the actuator is in a second position, the moveable bowl support positions the bowl in the serving position (top end of lever member 400 is in a second position shown in fig. 2 and 5). Regarding claim 2, KR 200496191 discloses comprising a locking mechanism preventing free movement of the first end out of the first position or the second position (locking jaw 311A, para. 0035). Regarding claim 6, KR 200496191 discloses further comprising a housing defining an inner volume (housing 100), wherein the housing includes a housing opening providing a passage to the inner volume (discharge hole 121), wherein the container opening is aligned with the passage (fig. 6a). Regarding claim 7, KR 200496191 discloses further comprising one or more tracks located below the container (sliding part 311, fig. 4), and wherein the one or more tracks includes first and second tracks located on opposing sides of the opening on the upper side of a housing bottom surface (sliding parts 311 are located on opposite sides of discharge hole 121, fig. 6b). Regarding claim 12, KR 200496191 discloses wherein a rear bottom inner surface of the interior storage chamber slopes towards the container opening (storage container 200 bottom slopes towards the container opening, fig. 3). Regarding claim 13, KR 200496191 discloses wherein a front surface of the container includes a window through which a portion of the interior storage chamber can be seen (through-hole 110A, para. 0025, fig. 1). Regarding claim 14, KR 200496191 discloses wherein the housing includes a sealable lid providing access to the interior storage chamber (cover 101, para. 0020, fig. 1). Regarding claim 15, KR 200496191 discloses wherein the bowl (B) is removable from the bowl support (fig. 2). Regarding claim 16, KR 200496191 discloses a dispensing device comprising: a housing (housing 100); a storage chamber located within the housing (storage container 200), the storage chamber including an opening (discharge hole 210, fig. 3); a bowl (B) supported by a moveable bowl support (distribution member 300, fig. 2); and an actuator (lever member 400) operable to move the moveable bowl support between a filling position (fig. 1 and 5) and a serving position (fig. 2 and 5); and wherein initiating movement of the actuator between the filling position and the serving position requires a first force to be applied along a first vector followed by a second force applied along a second vector (para. 0046). Regarding claim 19, see claim 15 above. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 200496191 in view of Terenzi (US 5794560). Regarding claim 8, KR 200496191 discloses the invention substantially as claimed but fails to teach a wall surrounding a portion of the container opening below a bottom surface of the container. However, Terenzi teaches a wall surrounding a portion of the container opening below a bottom surface of the container (bottom portion of 36 extending below base support 32, fig. 7A). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify KR 200496191 system with an opening as taught by Terenzi to guide feed into a bowl positioned below the feeder to prevent feed from falling outside of the bowl. Regarding claim 9, KR 200496191 as modified by Terenzi discloses the invention substantially as claimed and Terenzi further teaches wherein a first portion of the wall is located within the passage and a second portion of the wall is located below the bottom surface of the housing (reducer 36 is positioned within hopper 26 feed outlet, fig. 6 and 7A). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-5, 10 and 20 are 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. Claim 10 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EBONY E EVANS whose telephone number is (571)270-1157. The examiner can normally be reached 9am -5pm EST. 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 5712726909. 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. /EBONY E EVANS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 24, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Apr 02, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599067
CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT PRODUCTION FACILITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593818
Unloading Auger
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588656
ANIMAL FEEDER SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588655
CAT TOWER FEEDING TRAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582093
PORTABLE UNIT FOR DOSING OF A DISINFECTANT HOOF BATH REMEDY FOR LIVESTOCK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
64%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+29.5%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 957 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month