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 06/16/2026, the following represents the changes from the previous claims: Claims 1-4,6-7,10-14 and 17-20 were amended, and Claims 5, 8-9 and 15-16 were canceled. Claims 1-4,6-7,10-14 and 17-20 are presented for examination.
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 1, 3-4, 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stewart (US 20220015332 A1) in view of Groff (US 20140096722 A1), SHIN (KR 20220004370 A) and RAMIREZ (US 20110290199 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Stewart teaches a pet recovery cone harness device comprising: a harness (220) having an opening (fig. 8 depicts the harness having an opening); and a deformable cone (210 as the cone is flexible, and so is a deformable cone) that attaches to the harness ([0035] and fig. 8) via a first fastener (224 and fig. 9), the deformable cone comprised of a fastener (252A and 252B).
However, Stewart is silent wherein the deformable cone comprised of a secondary fastener; wherein the first fastener is a magnetic fastener; and further wherein the harness is comprised of a drawstring adjustment fastener configured to adjust a diameter of the harness.
Groff teaches wherein the deformable cone (fig. 2) comprised of a secondary fastener (208 and 209 and [0016]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a secondary fastener as taught by Groff into the apparatus of Stewart in order to easily adjust the cone ([0016] of Groff).
SHIN teaches wherein the first fastener (14 and 15 fig. 7) is a magnetic fastener (see machine translation “a first magnet portion ( 14) and a second magnet unit 15 coupled by magnetism.”).
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 first fastener of Stewart to include wherein the first fastener is a magnetic fastener as taught by SHIN in order to easily allow for the structure to be fastened and separated (see machine translation “a structure that can be fastened and separated.” of SHIN).
RAMIREZ teaches wherein the harness (10) is comprised of a drawstring adjustment fastener (160 and 161 [0016]) configured to adjust a diameter of the harness (“Drawstrings 160 and 161 attached to each flap may be latched and adjusted to maintain a tight fit of the harness to the animal.” [0016] as the drawstring adjusts the harness and so will adjust a diameter of the harness).
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 harness of Stewart to include a drawstring adjustment fastener configured to adjust a diameter of the harness as taught by RAMIREZ in order to adjust the harness to maintain a tight fit on the animal based on the size of the animal ([0016] of RAMIREZ).
Regarding claim 3, Stewart as modified by Groff, SHIN and RAMIREZ teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 1, and Stewart further teaches wherein the deformable cone is comprised of a cone fastener (252A and 252B).
Regarding claim 4, Stewart as modified by Groff, SHIN and RAMIREZ teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 3, and Stewart further teaches wherein the cone fastener is comprised of a hook and loop fastener ([0044]).
Regarding claim 6, Stewart as modified by Groff, SHIN and RAMIREZ teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 1, and Groff further teaches wherein the secondary fastener is comprised of a zipper ([0016]).
Regarding claim 7, Stewart as modified by Groff, SHIN and RAMIREZ teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 1, and Stewart further teaches wherein the cone is comprised of a viewing window (claim 14 states that the collar is clear, and so comprises of a viewing window).
Claim(s) 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stewart as modified by Groff, SHIN and RAMIREZ as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kath (US 20190373860 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Stewart as modified by Groff, SHIN and RAMIREZ teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 1, but is silent wherein the harness is comprised of a D loop.
Kath teaches wherein the harness (500) is comprised of a D loop (400, figs. 1-4 and [0015]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a D loop as taught by Kath onto the harness of Stewart as modified by Groff, SHIN and RAMIREZ where the D loop allows the user to have further control of their pet.
Regarding claim 10, Stewart as modified by Groff, SHIN, RAMIREZ and Kath teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 8, and Stewart further teaches wherein the cone is comprised of a rounded edge (figs. 11-12 depict the edge of the cone to be a rounded edge).
Claims 11-13, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stewart (as above) in view of Kath (as above), Groff (as above) and Jurgens (US 20170280681 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Stewart teaches a pet recovery cone harness device comprising: a harness (220) having an opening (fig. 8 depicts the harness having an opening); a harness fastener (236); a cone (210) comprised of a cone fastener (252A and 252B), wherein the cone attaches to the harness via an attachment fastener (224 and fig. 9); wherein a height of the cone is adjustable via folding down a portion of the cone (the 210 cone is flexible, and so the height can be adjusted via folding down a portion of the cone).
However, Stewart is silent wherein the harness comprises of a padding and wherein the cone is comprised of a secondary fastener that allows a portion of the cone to be secured to itself; and securable in place via a cone height adjusting fastener; and further wherein the padding is a memory foam padding.
Kath teaches a wherein the harness (500) comprises of a padding ([0012] and [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include padding as taught by Kath into the harness of Stewart in order to provide the animal with a soft comfort ([0019] of Kath).
Groff teaches wherein the cone (fig. 2) is comprised of a secondary fastener (208 and 209 and [0016]) that allows a portion of the cone to be secured to itself ([0016]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed to modify the cone of Stewart to include a secondary fastener that allows a portion of the cone to be secured to itself as taught by Groff in order to easily adjust the cone ([0016] of Groff).
Jurgens teaches a securable in place via a cone height adjusting fastener (1008).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed to modify the cone of Stewart to include securable in place via a cone height adjusting fastener as taught by Jurgens in order to securely adjust the height of the cone ([0087] of Jurgens).
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 padding of Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens to be a memory foam padding in order to provide extra support and comfort to the animal as it is well known in the art, 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.
Regarding claim 12, Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 11, but is silent wherein the harness fastener is comprised of a hook and loop fastener.
Kath teaches wherein the harness fastener is comprised of a hook and loop fastener ([0014]).
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 harness fastener of Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens to include a hook and loop fastener as taught by Kath in order to securely attach the harness to the animal ([0014] of Kath).
Regarding claim 13, Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 11, and Stewart further teaches wherein the cone fastener is comprised of a hook and loop fastener ([0044]).
Regarding claim 17, Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 11, Stewart further teaches wherein the cone is comprised of a viewing window (claim 14 states that the collar is clear, and so comprises of a viewing window).
Regarding claim 18, Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 11, and Stewart further teaches wherein the cone is comprised of a rounded edge (figs. 11-12 depict the edge of the cone to be a rounded edge).
Regarding claim 19, Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 11, and Groff further teaches wherein the secondary fastener is comprised of a magnet, a snap button, a hook and loop fastener (fig. 2 and [0015]), or an adhesive fastener.
Regarding claim 20, Stewart teaches a pet recovery cone harness device comprising: a harness (220) having an opening (fig. 8 depicts the harness having an opening); a harness fastener (236); a cone (210) comprised of a cone fastener (252A and 252B), wherein the cone attaches to the harness via an attachment fastener (224 and fig. 9); and further wherein a height of the cone is adjustable via rolling down a portion of the cone (the 210 cone is flexible, and so the height can be adjusted via folding down a portion of the cone).
However, Stewart is silent wherein the harness comprises of a moisture wicking inner ventilation lining, and a padding; and wherein the cone is comprised of a secondary fastener that allows a portion of the cone to be secured to itself; and securable in place via a cone height adjusting magnetic fastener.
Kath teaches wherein the harness (500) comprises of a moisture wicking inner ventilation lining ([0012] and [0019] as the harness comprises of a combination of materials that can be used such as the breathable material, synthetic and mesh, and so comprises of a moisture wicking inner ventilation lining), and a padding ([0012] and [0019] as a combination of materials can be used such as mesh and padding).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a moisture wicking inner ventilation lining and padding as taught by Kath into the harness of Stewart in order to enhance the comfort of the animal while wearing the harness ([0019] of Kath).
Groff teaches wherein the cone (fig. 2) is comprised of a secondary fastener (208 and 209 and [0016]) that allows a portion of the cone to be secured to itself ([0016]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed to modify the cone of Stewart to include a secondary fastener that allows a portion of the cone to be secured to itself as taught by Groff in order to easily adjust the cone ([0016] of Groff).
Jurgens teaches securable in place via a cone height adjusting fastener (1008).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed to modify the cone of Stewart to include securable in place via a cone height adjusting fastener as taught by Jurgens in order to securely adjust the height of the cone ([0087] of Jurgens).
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 adjusting fastener of Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens to be a magnetic fastener in order to allow the user to easily secure the rolled cone in place, since a simple substitution of one known equivalent element for another would obtain predictable results. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1739, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395, 1396 (2007).
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Stewart (US 20220015332 A1 embodiment of fig. 3, hereon referred to as Stewart’2).
Regarding claim 14, Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens teaches the pet recovery cone harness device of claim 11, but is silent wherein the attachment fastener is comprised of a zipper fastener.
Stewart’2 teaches wherein the attachment fastener (124) is comprised of a zipper fastener ([0024]).
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 attachment fastener of Stewart as modified by Kath, Groff and Jurgens to include a zipper fastener as taught by Stewart’2 in order to provide a more convenient and secured attachment as it is well known in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 11 and 20 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
