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 .
While there is an attorney docket number listed in the Application Data Sheet, there is no power of attorney on file.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the drawings do not disclose any reference numbers. 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
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 1-19 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.
For claims 1, 4-5, 8, 10, 12-13, 16, 18-19, the limitation “having” is not positively recited as the limitation “having” is a step while the claims are apparatus claims.
For claim 1, the limitation “a second end” in line 4 is unclear because is it referring to a different second end than what was stated in line 2? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same second end and it is recommended that “the” be inserted before “second end” in claim 1.
For claim 8, the limitation “extending” in line 2 is not positively recited as the limitation “extending” is a step while claim 8 is an apparatus claim.
For claim 13, the limitation “extending” in line 5 is not positively recited as the limitation “extending” is a step while claim 13 is an apparatus claim.
Also, for claim 13, the limitation “a first end of the elongated portion” in line 8 is unclear because is it referring to a different first end of the elongated portion than what was stated in lines 1-2? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same first end of the elongated portion and it is recommended that “the” be inserted before “first end of the elongated portion” in claim 13.
Also, claim 13 recites the limitation "the elongated member" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For claim 16, the limitation “a first visible side” and “a second visible side” in lines 1-2 are unclear because is it referring to a different first visible side and second visible side than what was stated in claim 13, lines 4-5? For examination purposes, the limitation will be treated as the same first visible side and second visible side and it is recommended that “the” be inserted before “first visible side” and “second visible side” in claim 16.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the elongated member" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-3, 6-7, 9, 11, 14-15, and 17 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 1-8, 11, 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Kaplan (US 20110297106 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kaplan discloses a leash (title and abstract), comprising: an elongated member (1) having a first end (first end adjacent to 5) and a second end (second end adjacent to 3; fig. 1 depicts the elongated member 1 having a first end and a second end), wherein the first end adapted for receipt of a fastener or securement mechanism (7); and a handle (3) disposed at a second end of the elongated member (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 1 wherein the elongated member and the handle are constructed from a same material or same materials ([0011], [0013] and fig. 1 as the leash and handle are formed as a singular piece) and are monolithically formed as a one-piece member ([0011], [0013] and fig. 1 as the leash and handle are formed as a singular piece).
Regarding claim 3, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 2 wherein the same material is EVA ([0013]).
Regarding claim 4, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 1 wherein the elongated member having a plurality of holes (9) extending along a portion of a length of the elongated member (figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 5, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 1 wherein the elongated member having at least one opening (loop of 5 in fig. 2) at or near the first end adapted for attaching the fastener or securement mechanism to the elongated member at the first end (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 6, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 4 further comprising at least one decorative, functional or informational item (13) adapted for securement to the elongated member at one of the plurality of holes (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 6 wherein the at least one decorative, functional or informational item containing information about an animal that the fastener or securement mechanism is connected to ([0016] as the decorative element 13 can comprise of any feature desired by the user, as such, the decorative element can incorporate information about the animal, such as an identification tag).
Regarding claim 8, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 6 wherein the elongated member having a first visible side and a second visible side and each hole of the plurality of holes extending through from the first visible side to the second visible side (figs. 2-3 and [0014]); wherein the at least one decorative, functional or informational item is a two-sided decorative item (fig. 4B and [0015]) adapted for securement to the elongated member through at least one hole of the plurality of holes such that a first decorative element (13) of the two-sided decorative item is positioned and associated with the first visible side of the elongated member and a second decorative element (13’) of the two-sided decorative item is positioned and associated with the second visible side of the elongated member (fig. 4B and [0015]).
Regarding claim 11, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 1 wherein the first end of the elongated member also adapted for receipt of extension member (23; fig. 6 depicts the elongated member adapted for receipt of extension member 23).
Regarding claim 13, Kaplan discloses a leash (title and abstract)comprising: a one-piece body ([0011], [0013] and fig. 1 as the leash and handle are formed as a singular piece) comprising an elongated portion (1) having at least one opening (loop of 5 in fig. 2) at or near a first end (first end adjacent to 5) of the elongated portion and a handle portion (3) monolithically formed with the elongated portion at a second end (second end adjacent to 3) of the elongated portion ([0011], [0013] and fig. 1 as the leash and handle are formed as a singular piece), the elongated portion having a first visible side and a second visible side (figs. 1-3) and defining a plurality of holes (9) extending therethrough from the first visible side to the second visible side (figs. 2-3); wherein the first end of the elongated portion is adapted for receipt of a fastener, securement mechanism (7, fig. 1) or extension member attached at the at least opening (loop of 5 in fig. 2) at or near a first end of the elongated portion (fig. 2); wherein the plurality of holes extends along a majority of a length of the elongated member (figs. 2-3 and [0014]) as defined by a location of a first of the plurality of holes to a location of a last of the plurality of holes (figs. 2-3 and [0014] as the plurality of holes extend along the length of the elongated member and so will have a location of a first of the plurality of holes to a location of a last of the plurality of holes).
Regarding claim 14, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 13 wherein the one-piece body constructed from an EVA material ([0013]).
Regarding claim 15, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 13 further comprising at least one decorative, functional or informational item (13) adapted for securement to the elongated portion at one of the plurality of holes (fig. 3); wherein the information item containing information about an animal that the fastener or securement mechanism is connected to ([0016] as the decorative element 13 can comprise of any feature desired by the user, as such, the decorative element can incorporate information about the animal, such as an identification tag).
Regarding claim 16, Kaplan discloses the leash of claim 13 wherein the elongated portion having a first visible side and a second visible side and each hole of the plurality of holes extending through from the first visible side to the second visible side (figs. 2-3 and [0014]); wherein the at least one decorative, functional or informational item is a two-sided decorative item (fig. 4B and [0015]) adapted for securement to the elongated portion through at least one hole of the plurality of holes such that a first decorative element (13) of the two-sided decorative item is positioned and associated with the first visible side of the elongated portion and a second decorative element (13’) of the two-sided decorative item is positioned and associated with the second visible side of the elongated portion (fig. 4B and [0015]).
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.
Claim(s) 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaplan as applied to claims 6 and 13 above, and further in view of Osher (US 20180125037 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Kaplan teaches the leash of claim 6, but is silent wherein the elongated member is constructed from a transparent or translucent material and wherein the at least one decorative, functional or informational items is a light item adapted to disperse visible light within the elongated member while the light item is turned on and secured to the elongated member.
Osher teaches wherein the elongated member (1524) is constructed from a transparent or translucent material (claim 1 and [0043]) and wherein the at least one decorative, functional or informational items (1510, 1520) is a light item adapted to disperse visible light within the elongated member while the light item is turned on and secured to the elongated member ([0042-0043] and figs. 3B-3D).
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 elongated member of Kaplan to be constructed from a transparent or translucent material and wherein the at least one decorative, functional or informational items is a light item adapted to disperse visible light within the elongated member while the light item is turned on and secured to the elongated member as taught by Osher in order to improve visibility during dusk or nighttime hours ([0002] of Osher).
Regarding claim 17, Kaplan teaches the leash of claim 13, but is silent wherein the elongated portion is constructed from a transparent or translucent material and wherein the at least one decorative, functional or informational items is a light item adapted to disperse visible light within the elongated portion while the light item is turned on and secured to the elongated portion.
Osher teaches wherein the elongated portion (1524) is constructed from a transparent or translucent material (claim 1 and [0043]) and wherein the at least one decorative, functional or informational items (1510, 1520) is a light item adapted to disperse visible light within the elongated portion while the light item is turned on and secured to the elongated portion ([0042-0043] and figs. 3B-3D).
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 elongated portion of Kaplan to be constructed from a transparent or translucent material and wherein the at least one decorative, functional or informational items is a light item adapted to disperse visible light within the elongated portion while the light item is turned on and secured to the elongated portion as taught by Osher in order to improve visibility during dusk or nighttime hours ([0002] of Osher).
Claims 10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaplan as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Hurwitz (US 20100083912 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Kaplan teaches the leash of claim 1, but is silent wherein the elongated member having an outer layer of reflective material or glow-in-the-dark material.
Hurwitz teaches wherein the elongated member (10) having an outer layer of reflective material or glow-in-the-dark material ([0068]).
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 elongated member of Kaplan to have an outer layer of reflective material or glow-in-the-dark material as taught by Hurwitz in order to improve the safety of the pet and the user (abstract of Hurwitz).
Regarding claim 18, Kaplan teaches the leash of claim 13, but is silent wherein the elongated portion having an outer layer of reflective material or glow-in-the-dark material.
Hurwitz teaches wherein the elongated portion (10) having an outer layer of reflective material or glow-in-the-dark material ([0068]).
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 elongated portion of Kaplan to have an outer layer of reflective material or glow-in-the-dark material as taught by Hurwitz in order to improve the safety of the pet and the user (abstract of Hurwitz).
Claims 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaplan as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Deliou (US 20200275635 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Kaplan teaches the leash of claim 1, but is silent wherein the elongated member or the handle having a pocket adapted for receipt of a NFC chip.
Deliou teaches wherein the elongated member (60) or the handle having a pocket adapted for receipt of a NFC chip (55A and [0218] as the NFC chip can be enclosed or embedded in the elongated member 60, and so the elongated member comprises of a pocket adapted for receipt of the NFC chip).
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 elongated member or the handle of Kaplan to have a pocket adapted for receipt of a NFC chip as taught by Deliou in order to help track the pet and alert the owner when their pet is lost (abstract of Deliou).
Regarding claim 19, Kaplan teaches the leash of claim 13, but is silent wherein the elongated member or the handle having a pocket adapted for receipt of a NFC chip; wherein the pocket is monolithically formed with the elongated portion or handle portion.
Deliou teaches wherein the elongated member (60) or the handle having a pocket adapted for receipt of a NFC chip (55A and [0218] as the NFC chip can be enclosed or embedded in the elongated member 60, and so the elongated member comprises of a pocket adapted for receipt of the NFC chip); wherein the pocket is monolithically formed with the elongated portion or handle portion ([0218] as the NFC chip is enclosed or embedded in the pocket of the elongated portion, and so the pocket is monolithically formed with the elongated portion).
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 elongated member or the handle of Kaplan to have a pocket adapted for receipt of a NFC chip; wherein the pocket is monolithically formed with the elongated portion or handle portion as taught by Deliou in order to help track the pet and alert the owner when their pet is lost (abstract of Deliou).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Broshat (US 11690357 B2) teaches an elongated member with a plurality of holes.
Sheldon (US 20160135431 A1) teaches an NFC chip.
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