Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/258,289

Pest Deterrent Roller Guard for Animal Feed Dispenser

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jul 02, 2025
Examiner
VALENTI, ANDREA M
Art Unit
3643
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Double Down Deer Feed LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
42%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 42% of resolved cases
42%
Career Allow Rate
312 granted / 736 resolved
-9.6% vs TC avg
Strong +58% interview lift
Without
With
+58.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
779
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
52.9%
+12.9% vs TC avg
§102
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
§112
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 736 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Objections Claims 1, 2, 4, 8 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 5, “feed to exit” should be --feed to an exit-- Claim 2, line 2, “long” should be –along-- Claim 4, line 3-4, “the bracket further comprises a second arm” should be --the bracket further comprises a first and a second arm-- Claim 8, line 1, “pin a plurality” should be --pin is a plurality-- Appropriate correction is required. 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) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 3,962,997 to Ruth in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,867,104 to Vandiver. Regarding Claim 1, Ruth teaches an animal feed dispenser comprising: a feed tank (Ruth Fig. 1 #12); a feed dispenser (Ruth Fig. 1 #32) operatively connected to the feed tank; a feed chute (Ruth Fig. 1 #34) for distributing feed dispensed by the feed dispenser from the feed tank, wherein said feed chute has an egress cavity for dispensed feed to exit having at least an edge about the egress cavity (Ruth exit edge of Fig. 1 #34. Ruth is silent on teaching a roller guard comprising a bracket mounted to said feed chute egress cavity. However, Vandiver teaches the general knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art that it is known to provide a feeder outlet with a roller guard comprising a bracket mounted to a feed chute (Vandiver Fig. 1 roller #42, bracket #34a, feeder outlet area between floor #12 and wall #28). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Ruth with the teachings of Vandiver before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to keep squirrels away as taught by Vandiver. The modification is merely the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results. Regarding Claim 2, Ruth as modified teaches the roller guard further comprises a cylindrical body (Vandiver Col.3 line 14) having one or more pins extend away from and long a longitudinal axis of the cylindrical body, wherein said one or more pins matingly engages with a receiving cavity formed on at least one arm of said bracket (Vandiver Fig. pins #40 and #38 received cavity in left and right #34a). Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 3,962,997 to Ruth in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,867,104 to Vandiver as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 11,028,614 to Robinson et al. Regarding Claim 3, Ruth as modified is silent on the roller guard further comprises one or more ball bearing fittings affixed to an internal surface of said cylindrical body and wherein said one or more pins extends through said ball bearings providing an axis of rotation about the one or more pins. However, Robinson teaches the general knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art that it is known to provide a roller guard comprising one or more ball bearing fittings affixed to an internal surface of said cylindrical body and wherein said one or more pins extends through said ball bearings providing an axis of rotation about the one or more pins (Robinson axle pins #54, roller #80; Col. 8 lines 29-36 and lines 51-61 “bearing” between #54 and #85). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the teachings of Ruth with the teachings of Robinson before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to improve movement of the roller so the animal can’t get solid footing as taught by Robinson. The modification is merely the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results. Regarding Claim 4, Ruth as modified teaches the roller guard further comprises a cylindrical body (Ruth Col. 3 line 14) having a hollow, internal cavity formed through and along the longitudinal axis of the cylindrical body (Robinson Fig. 3B #85), and wherein the bracket further comprises a second arm (Ruth Fig. a #34a both sides of roller #42), wherein the first and second arms further comprise opposing pins projecting (Robinson Fig. 2D #54 and Fig. 1 #80) inwards for receiving at least a portion of the internal cavity formed through and along the longitudinal axis of the cylindrical body. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the teachings of Ruth with the teachings of Robinson before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success for ease of installation and adjusting the size of the roller, the roller can be cut to any desired size if the pins are inserted into the roller instead of extending from the roller as taught by Robinson. The modification is merely the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results. Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2007/0028844 to Bodenstab et al in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,867,104 to Vandiver. Regarding Claim 12, Bodenstab teaches an animal feed dispenser comprising: a feed tank (Bodenstab Fig. 2 #24); a feed dispenser (Bodenstab Fig. 2 #26a-26d) operatively connected to the feed tank; a feed trough (Bodenstab Fig. 1 #16a) for distributing and holding feed from the feed dispenser for use by intended animals, wherein said feed trough comprises an edge. Bodenstab is silent on a bracket affixed to the edge of said feed trough; wherein the bracket comprises one or more arms having a cavity formed therethrough for receiving a pin; a cylindrical roller having a pin extend from a distal end of said cylindrical roller mounted via the pin to said bracket arm, wherein the cylindrical roller provides a rotational movement about an axis formed by said pin. However, Vandiver teaches the general knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art that it is known to provide a bracket (Vandiver Fig. 1 #34 and #34a) affixed to the edge of said feed trough (Vandiver Fig. 1 area between #28 and #12); wherein the bracket comprises one or more arms having a cavity formed therethrough for receiving a pin (Vandiver Fig. 1 arms #34s receive in cavity pins #40 and #38); a cylindrical roller (Vandiver Fig. 1 #42 and Col. 3 line 14) having a pin extend from a distal end of said cylindrical roller mounted via the pin to said bracket arm, wherein the cylindrical roller provides a rotational movement about an axis formed by said pin. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Bodenstab with the teachings of Vandiver before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to keep squirrels away as taught by Vandiver. The modification is merely the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results. 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. Claim(s) 5, 6, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 4,867,104 to Vandiver. Regarding Claim 5, Vandiver teaches a roller guard (Vandiver Fig. 1 #42) for deterring animals from intruding into an animal feed dispenser (Vandiver Fig. 1 #10) comprising: a bracket comprising an arm (Vandiver Fig. 1 #34 and #34a), wherein the arm has a cavity, formed through said arm (Vandiver Fig. 1 cavity receives pins #40 and #38), for receiving a pin; a cylindrical roller (Vandiver Col. 3 line 14) mounted to said arm via insertion of the pin through said cavity, wherein the cylindrical roller comprises a smooth surface (Vandiver Fig. 1 rollers #42 have a smooth surface and Col. 3 line 14 teaches it can by cylindrical) and rotation movement about an axis formed by said pin. Regarding Claim 6, Vandiver teaches a second arm (Vandiver Fig. 1 #34a at both ends of #42 creates two arms), wherein the second arm has a cavity, formed through said arm, for receiving the pin, wherein said cylindrical roller is mounted between the first and second arms (Vandiver Fig. 1 pins #38 and #40 are received in cavity of #34a respectively and #42 mounted between each #34a). Regarding Claim 8, Vandiver teaches the pin a plurality of pins, wherein each pin extends from a distal end of the cylindrical roller (Vandiver Fig. 1 pins #38 and #40). 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) 7, 9, 10, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 4,867,104 to Vandiver in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,497,585 to Engler. Regarding Claims 7, 9, 10, 11, Vandiver is silent on the pin is a single rod extending through a length of the cylindrical roller and wherein the bracket further comprises one or more mounting holes for affixing the bracket to an animal feed dispenser. However, Engler teaches the general knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art that it is known alternate equivalent to provide a single rod extending through a length of the cylindrical roller (Engler Fig. 1 #4) and wherein the bracket comprises one or more mounting holes (Engler Fig. 3 #12) for affixing the bracket to an animal feed dispenser (italics indicates functional language the structure of Engler is capable of performing). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Vandiver with the teachings of Engler before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to adjust the height and rigidity of the guard as taught by Engler. The modification is merely the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or the simple substitution of one known axle configuration with another to obtain predictable results. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following prior art of record is a teaching of the general knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art of animal deterrents: U.S. Patent No. 9,924,707; U.S. Patent No. 10,542,728; U.S. Patent No. 9,121,208; U.S. Patent No. 5,293,721; U.S. Patent No. 5,755,179; U.S. Patent No. 6,367,419; U.S. Patent No. 6,571,517; U.S. Patent No. 18,275; U.S. Patent No. 2,533,538; U.S. Patent No. 2,541,241; U.S. Patent No. 3,381,666; French Patent FR 2507058. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREA M VALENTI whose telephone number is (571)272-6895. The examiner can normally be reached Available Monday and Tuesday only, eastern time. 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. /ANDREA M VALENTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643 27 January 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 02, 2025
Application Filed
Jan 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593760
TREE GUARD ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588657
Stock Tank Guard
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12550834
AUTONOMOUS WALL MOUNTED GARDEN
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12550833
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CREATING AND SUSTAINING A COOL MICROCLIMATE IN AN ARTIFICIAL VALLEY, AND USE OF STRUCTURE FOR VALORIZATION AND REMEDIATION OF BAUXITE RESIDUE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12507646
AQUAPONICS SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
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
42%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+58.0%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 736 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