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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “61” has been used to designate both “clamp” and “bracket” (at least in Fig. 1a). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 9-12 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.
Claims 9-12 and 14 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: claims 9-12 recite a clamp, and for claim 14 a bracket. However, the disclosure requires the clamp is attached to the bracket in order to function as intended. The disclosure does not provide details for the use of the clamp alone, or for claim 14, the use of the bracket alone. Therefore, the structural relationship of the clamp is unclear without the use of the bracket.
Furthermore, claim 12 recites, “the arched member is resiliently biased to a closed position. However, the closed position appears to only occur when coupled with the I-shaped bracket. Therefore, for the purposes of examination, the examiner will interpret any curved member to also include a closed position.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson; Scott et al. (US 20230292696 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 5 Nelson discloses a removable veterinary environment control system (Fig. 12; 502) for a veterinary enclosure for an animal (Fig. 11) comprising a self-contained panel (502), wherein the self-contained panel houses:
at least one heating means [0072]; at least one heating control (702) for controlling the temperature within the veterinary enclosure [0072], the heating control arranged to control the heating means;
at least one lighting means (Fig. 12; 504); [0081];
at least one lighting control (702, 902); [0056] for controlling the light emitted within the veterinary enclosure an animal housing, the lighting control arranged to control the lighting means;
at least one ventilation means comprising a fan (Fig. 12; 704);
at least one ventilation control [0079] for controlling the ventilation within the veterinary enclosure, the ventilation control arranged to control the ventilation means; wherein the self-contained panel is removably attachable to a veterinary enclosure by at least one removable connector (connector shown in Fig. 12); [0073], to connect the system to a veterinary enclosure and the self-contained panel further comprises a power input (Fig. 12; 110) to receive power to the panel and electrical components contained therein.
Nelson appears to disclose at least one removable connector. However, should the applicant disagree then it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include at least one removable connector in order to ensure a firm attachment to the enclosure.
Regarding claim 6 Nelson, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Nelson further discloses at least one loudspeaker (Fig. 12; 608); [0070].
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson; Scott et al. (US 20230292696 A1) in view of Sunden; Kenneth Clark (US 20210220201 A1).
Regarding claim 2 Nelson, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Nelson does not disclose the heating means comprises a ceramic heater. Sunden teaches the heating means comprises a ceramic heater [0035].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the heating means of Nelson to be ceramic, as taught by Sunden, in order to heats an animal deeper into their body tissue [0035].
Nelson in view of Sunden does not explicitly disclose a plate. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as an obvious substitution of functional equivalent, to substitute a ceramic heater with a ceramic plate, since a simple substitution of one known element for another would obtain predictable results, for streamlining the profile.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson; Scott et al. (US 20230292696 A1) in view of Wang; Yu-Chin (US 20120081883 A1).
Regarding claim 3 Nelson, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Nelson discloses a plurality of lights (Fig. 12; 504), but does not disclose LED, and further comprising an adjustment mechanism for adjustment of the angle of emission of the lighting means.
Wang teaches LED [0025], and further comprising an adjustment mechanism (Fig. 3); [0025] for adjustment of the angle of emission of the lighting means.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the plurality of lights of Nelson to be LED, and further comprising an adjustment mechanism for adjustment of the angle of emission of the lighting means, as taught by Wang, in order to adjust the illumination angle of the lighting as well as providing a light source with improved longevity.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson; Scott et al. (US 20230292696 A1) in view of Berkman; Peter D. et al. (US 20140360805 A1).
Regarding claim 8 Nelson, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Nelson does not disclose a microphone. Berkman teaches a microphone [0037].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Nelson to include a microphone in order to allow two-way communication [0037].
Claim(s) 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson; Scott et al. (US 20230292696 A1), in view of Lys; Ihor et al. (US 11076536 B2)
Regarding claims 15 and 17 Nelson, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Nelson does not disclose at least one power outlet; at least one recess and/or at least one attachment member for attaching a veterinary accessory.
Lys teaches at least one power outlet (Fig. 7B; 1010); at least one recess and/or at least one attachment member for attaching a veterinary accessory (1012A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Nelson to include at least one power outlet; at least one recess and/or at least one attachment member for attaching a veterinary accessory, as taught by Lys, in order to allow the connection of auxiliary devices, as desired.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson; Scott et al. (US 20230292696 A1), in view of Cauchy; Matt et al. (US 20100319627 A1).
Regarding claim 16 Nelson, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Nelson does not disclose plastic. Cauchy teaches plastic [0041].
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 device of Nelson to include plastic, as taught by Cauchy, for improved sanitation, and since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim(s) 9-14 and 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson; Scott et al. (US 20230292696 A1), in view of Cauchy; Matt et al. (US 20100319627 A1).
Regarding claims 9-11 and 13 Nelson, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Nelson does not disclose a mounting bracket having at least one receiving channel in which is positioned a slidable clamp rotatable through 360 degrees. Senakiewich teaches a mounting bracket (Fig. 5; 10) having at least one receiving channel (16) in which is positioned a slidable clamp (42) rotatable through 360 degrees (Col. 2, lines 25-33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the removable connector of Nelson with the mounting bracket having at least one receiving channel in which is positioned a slidable clamp rotatable through 360 degrees, as taught by Senakiewich, in order to more efficiently support heavy objects (Col. 1 lines 5-12).
Regarding claim 12 Nelson, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Nelson does not disclose a clamp comprising at least one resilient curved member, wherein the curved member is resiliently biased to a closed position.
Senakiewich teaches a clamp comprising at least one resilient curved member (Fig. 7; 42), wherein the arched member is resiliently biased to a closed position (closed connection with bracket).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the removable connector of Nelson with a clamp comprising at least one resilient curved member, wherein the curved member is resiliently biased to a closed position, as taught by Senakiewich, in order to more efficiently support heavy objects (Col. 1 lines 5-12).
Nelson in view of Senakiewich does not disclose an arched member. It would have been a matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the curved member of Nelson in view of Senakiewich to be arched, in order to apply a more direct grip on the channel, and as an obvious change in shape. In reDailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claim 14 Nelson, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Nelson does not disclose wherein the or removable connector comprises an I-shaped mounting bracket having a first longitudinal channel, a transverse base channel and a transverse upper channel.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as an obvious substitution of functional equivalent, to substitute the removable connector, as taught by Nelson, with a removable connector comprises an I-shaped mounting bracket having a first longitudinal channel, a transverse base channel and a transverse upper channel, in order to allow for even weight distribution, and since a simple substitution of one known element for another would obtain predictable results.
Regarding claims 24-25 Nelson, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Nelson does not disclose at least one bracket having a channel therein;- at least one slidable clamp positioned with a channel of a bracket;- wherein the slidable clamp is slidable along a channel in the bracket; and- wherein the slidable clamp is rotatable, wherein: each slidable clamp comprises a first outward facing plate and a second back plate, wherein the back plate is positioned in a channel of the bracket;- the first and second plates are held together by a threaded screw about which the clamp can rotate; and- the or each slidable clamp comprises at least one arched member wherein the or each arched member is resiliently biased to a closed position.
Senakiewich teaches at least one bracket (Fig. 2; 10) having a channel (16) therein;- at least one slidable clamp (30) positioned with a channel of a bracket;- wherein the slidable clamp is slidable along a channel in the bracket (capable of being slid); and- wherein the slidable clamp is rotatable, wherein: each slidable clamp comprises a first outward facing plate and a second back plate (42), wherein the back plate is positioned in a channel of the bracket;- the first and second plates are held together by a threaded screw (40) about which the clamp can rotate (Col. 2, lines 58-65); and the or each slidable clamp comprises at least one arched member (38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the removable connector of Nelson with the removable connector of Senakiewich, in order to more efficiently support heavy objects (Col. 1 lines 5-12).
Nelson in view of Senakiewich does not disclose wherein the or each arched member is resiliently biased to a closed position. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the arched member of Nelson in view of Senakiewich to be resiliently biased to a closed position in order to allow for quick release, while still supporting heavy loads.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY LOWERY whose telephone number is (571)270-3228. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am-4 pm PST.
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, Timothy Collins can be reached at 571-272-6886. 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.
/BRITTANY A LOWERY/Examiner, Art Unit 3644
/TIMOTHY D COLLINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3644
