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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the Amendment/Request for Reconsideration filed on February 06, 2026. Claims 2-3, 6-10, and 14-15 have been amended and are hereby entered. Claims 1-16 are currently pending and have been examined. This action is made FINAL.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 16 is provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/029,926 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented.
Although Applicant notes in the Remarks, filed February 06, 2026, that a terminal disclaimer has been submitted, no documentation appears to have been filed with regard to the terminal disclaimer. Regardless, as noted above, the filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ma et al. (CN 112452731 A), hereinafter Ma.
PNG
media_image1.png
657
801
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1. Ma Fig. 6, Sectional View (Examiner-Annotated)
Regarding claim 16, Ma discloses an automatic cat excrement removing device (title; page 21/24, second paragraph), comprising:
a ball compartment assembly (drum 2), configured to have at least three spaces (annotated fig. 1) comprising a working compartment (annotated fig. 1) used for holding cat litter and allowing a cat to excrete (page 21/24, third paragraph), a screening compartment (annotated fig. 1) for screening cat litter and cat excrement (page 22/24, third paragraph), and an excrement collection compartment (annotated fig. 1) for holding cat excrement (page 22/24, third paragraph), wherein a surface of the screening compartment facing a center of a circle of the ball compartment assembly is provided with a plurality of screening holes (sieving holes 411; fig. 4); and
a driving assembly (drum driving device 3), configured to drive the ball compartment assembly to automatically rotate (page 21/24, sixth paragraph), wherein
when the ball compartment assembly rotates to an initial position, the working compartment is located at a lowest position of the ball compartment assembly (fig. 8); when the ball compartment assembly rotates to a first position from the initial position, the screening compartment is located at the lowest position of the ball compartment assembly (intermediate position between those shown in fig. 8-9), so that the cat litter falls into the screening compartment through the plurality of screening holes (fig. 8-9), while the cat excrement stays in the working compartment because a size of the cat excrement is larger than a size of each of the plurality of screening holes (fig. 8-9); and
when the ball compartment assembly rotates from the first position to a second position, the excrement collection compartment is located at the lowest position of the ball compartment assembly (fig. 9-10), so that the cat excrement falls into the excrement collection compartment (fig. 9-10); when the ball compartment assembly reversely rotates from the second position to the first position, the cat excrement falls into the excrement collection compartment due to self-gravity of the cat excrement (fig. 11-12); when the ball compartment assembly continuously rotates back to the initial position from the first position, the cat litter falls into the working compartment through the screening holes of the screening compartment (fig. 13);
wherein a peripheral contour of the ball compartment assembly is a shape of a revolving body (fig. 8-13), the peripheral contour of the ball compartment assembly is formed by the working compartment, the screening compartment and the excrement collection compartment (annotated fig. 1), the working compartment and the screening compartment are connected through the screening holes (annotated fig. 1).
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6 and 8-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoeschen (US 5,509,379 A), hereinafter Hoeschen, in view of Baxter et al. (US 9,433,185 B2), hereinafter Baxter, and Wagner (DE 202011101182 U1), hereinafter Wagner.
PNG
media_image2.png
893
702
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2. Hoeschen Fig. 3, Initial Position (Examiner-Annotated)1
Regarding claim 1, Hoeschen discloses an automatic cat excrement removing device (kitty litter box 100; abstract), comprising:
a pedestal (base 102);
a compartment assembly (cylinder 104), wherein the compartment assembly is mounted on the pedestal (fig. 1-2), wherein the compartment assembly has an axis and is configured to rotate around the axis relative to the pedestal (col 3, lines 26-34, cylinder 104 may rotate within base 102), wherein a peripheral contour of the compartment assembly is a shape of a revolving body (fig. 1-2, cylinder 104 is a revolving cylinder), wherein the peripheral contour of the compartment assembly is formed by a working compartment (annotated fig. 2), a screening compartment (annotated fig. 2, includes separation assembly 314), and an excrement collection compartment (annotated fig. 2, includes collection assembly 316), wherein the excrement collection compartment is provided with an opening (opening of scoop 414) that is configured to allow cat excrement to fall into the excrement collection compartment (col 3, lines 35-41, opening of scoop 314 receives excrement into collection assembly 316).
Hoeschen does not appear to specifically disclose:
wherein the compartment assembly is a ball compartment assembly;
wherein the ball compartment assembly is detachably mounted on the pedestal; and
wherein an excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly is disposed at the opening of the excrement collection compartment, wherein the excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly is configured to selectively open or close the opening.
However, Baxter is in the field of automatic cat excrement removing devices (title; abstract) and teaches wherein the compartment assembly (chamber 20) is a ball compartment assembly (fig. 2-3; col 13, line 67-col 14, line 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the automatic cat excrement removing device with compartment assembly of Hoeschen to have made the compartment assembly a ball shape as taught by Baxter with a reasonable expectation of success to increase the aesthetic appeal of the device (col 13, line 67-col 14, line 1).
Additionally, Wagner is in the field of cat excrement removing devices (title; abstract) and teaches wherein an excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly (comprises flap 2, lever arm 4, counterweight 5, and pivot point 6) is disposed at the opening of the excrement collection compartment (opening of storage space 1, see fig. 5), wherein the excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly is configured to selectively open or close the opening (see fig. 1-12, note that opening of storage space 1 is selectively sealed opened and closed by flap 2; page 13, lines 6-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the automatic cat excrement removing device with excrement collection compartment of Hoeschen to include the excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly as taught by Wagner with a reasonable expectation of success to more easily access the excrement collection compartment, thus limiting exposure of excrement to outside air and reducing odors (page 13, lines 6-7).
Although Hoeschen as modified does not appear to specifically teach wherein the ball compartment assembly is detachably mounted on the pedestal, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the ball compartment assembly and pedestal detachable from one another with the motivation of facilitating easy cleaning of the device, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 2, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 1, and further discloses wherein the working compartment (shown in annotated fig. 2) is axially provided with an inlet (either circular throughhole 106 or 310), which is configured to allow a cat to enter and exit the working compartment (col 2, lines 49-52, cat may enter cylinder 104 via throughhole 106 or 310).
Regarding claim 3, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 1, and further discloses wherein the working compartment (shown in annotated fig. 2) is disposed opposite to the screening compartment (shown in annotated fig. 2); and the excrement collection compartment (shown in annotated fig. 2) is located on a side of the screening compartment (shown in annotated fig. 2), and is configured to cause the working compartment to be located near a highest position of the ball compartment assembly (cylinder 104) when the screening compartment or the excrement collection compartment is located at a lowest position of the ball compartment assembly (see fig. 5-6, note that when separation assembly 314 or collection assembly 316 is located at the lowest position, working compartment is located near the highest position).
Regarding claim 5, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 1, and further discloses wherein the excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly (from Wagner, comprises flap 2, lever arm 4, counterweight 5, and pivot point 6) and a mounting mating surface (from Wagner, stop 7) of the opening (from Wagner, opening of storage space 1; fig. 5) are configured to clamp an opening portion of a rubbish bag (from Wagner, collection bag 16 may be clamped via stop 7 and seal 8) and allow the rubbish bag to maintain in an opening status (see Wagner fig. 5 and 14).
Regarding claim 6, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 5, and further discloses wherein the excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly (from Wagner, comprises flap 2, lever arm 4, counterweight 5, and pivot point 6) comprises:
a base (from Wagner, walls of storage space 1; fig. 14), connected to the opening (from Wagner, opening of storage space 1; fig. 14); and
a cover plate (from Wagner, flap 2, lever arm 4, and counterweight 5), of which an end is hinged to the base (from Wagner, hinged via pivot point 6), and configured to be in an open state under an action of self-gravity of the cover plate when the excrement collection compartment is at a lowest position of the ball compartment assembly (see Wagner fig. 5, note that flap 2 is opened by the weight of counterweight 5), the cat excrement falling into the excrement collection compartment (see Wagner fig. 5, wherein excrement enters storage space 1), wherein when the excrement collection compartment is at a highest position of the ball compartment assembly, the cover plate returns to a closed state under the action of self-gravity (see Wagner fig. 10, note that flap 2 is closed by weight of counterweight 5), and the cat excrement is locked in the excrement collection compartment (see Wagner fig. 10, wherein excrement is stored in storage space 1; abstract and page 13, lines 6-7 of Wagner).
Hoeschen as modified does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the base is detachably connected to the opening. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the base and opening detachable from one another with the motivation of facilitating easy cleaning of the device, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ
177, 179.
Regarding claim 8, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 1, and further discloses further comprising:
a sensing apparatus (from Baxter, weight sensor 106), configured to start, when a cat is sensed to leave the working compartment (from Baxter, interior of chamber 20), a driving assembly to drive the ball compartment assembly to rotate from an initial position to a second position via a first position, until the cat excrement falls into the excrement collection compartment (from Baxter, col 26, lines 30-49, rotation device 130 automatically rotates chamber 20 when animal leaves chamber 20 to deposit waste in waste drawer 150).
Regarding claim 9, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 1, and further discloses further comprising:
a litter-cleaning module (from Baxter, control panel 102), configured to start, when a user starts the litter-cleaning module, a driving assembly (from Baxter, rotation device 130) to drive the ball compartment assembly to reversely rotate from an initial position to a first position via a second position (from Baxter, col 21, lines 1-4; col 24, lines 26-29, control panel 102 is capable of causing rotation device 130 to drive chamber 20 to rotate either clockwise or counter-clockwise), until cat litter completely falls into the excrement collection compartment (from Baxter, waste drawer 150; col 23, lines 36-42, cat litter is emptied from chamber 20 into waste drawer 150 during empty cycle).
Regarding claim 10, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 1, and further discloses further comprising:
a driving assembly (from Baxter, rotation device 130), wherein the driving assembly comprises:
a motor (from Baxter, “motor” col 26, lines 47-49), fixedly disposed on the pedestal (from Baxter, col 6, lines 16-27, motor is located within isolation mount 118 which may be integrally formed with support base 100); and
a gear assembly (from Baxter, “gear assembly” col 26, lines 47-49), of which one end is fixed disposed on an output end of the motor (gear fixed to motor shown in Baxter fig. 9), and an other end is connected to the ball compartment assembly (see Baxter fig. 7-9), and configured to drive the ball compartment assembly to rotate under the driving of the motor (from Baxter, col 26, lines 17-22, motor and gear assembly of rotation device 130 are capable of driving rotation of chamber 20).
Hoeschen as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein an other end of the gear assembly is selectively connected to the ball compartment assembly. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the gear assembly and ball compartment assembly detachable from one another, with the motivation of facilitating easy cleaning of the device, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 11, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 10, and further discloses wherein an end of the pedestal (base 102) that is away from the gear assembly is further provided with rolling wheels (first elongated roller 300, second elongated roller 302; col 2, lines 36-44, note that first and second rollers 300, 302 may extend the width of base 102, thus at least part of first and second rollers 300, 302 would be located at the end of base 102 away from the gear assembly, regardless of wherever the gear assembly may be located), which are configured to support the ball compartment assembly when the ball compartment assembly (cylinder 104) is mounted on the pedestal (col 2, lines 36-44; fig. 3); and when the ball compartment assembly rotates, the rolling wheels simultaneously rotate around their own axis (col 2, lines 36-44, first and second rollers 300, 302 rotate around first and second respective axes 304, 306 when cylinder 104 is rotated).
Regarding claim 12, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 2, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein a height of the inlet (either circular throughhole 106 or 310) of the working compartment (annotated fig. 2) does not exceed 10 cm.
However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have made
the height of the inlet of the working compartment less than 10 cm with the motivation of
making the inlet more accessible to animals, particularly smaller, older, or less mobile
animals, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in size of a
component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of
ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Furthermore, no
criticality has been described in the instant disclosure regarding the optimal height of
the inlet of the working compartment.
Regarding claim 13, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 8, and further discloses wherein the sensing apparatus (from Baxter, weight sensor 106) is a sensor (from Baxter, col 9, lines 19-22, weight sensor 106 is disclosed as a force sensor).
Hoeschen as modified does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the sensor is a microwave radar, or a pyroelectric infrared sensor, or a thermopile infrared sensor, or an infrared intrusion detector, or a light-sensing sensor.
However, Hoeschen as modified does teach a sensor (from Baxter, indicator 120) for detection of an animal within waste drawer 150, wherein indicator 120 may be an infrared intrusion detector (see Baxter, col 11, line 66 – col 12, line 40), as is well known in the art; thus, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the same mechanism may be used for sensor 106 for detecting presence of animals within chamber 20.
Regarding claim 14, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 9, and further discloses wherein the litter-cleaning module (from Baxter, control panel 102) is a button, or a touch key, or a module remotely controlled by means of Wi-Fi, smart phone apps, or a global wireless communication standard (from Baxter, col 24, lines 26-29, control panel 102 allows for selection of different settings/cycles and is shown as having buttons in Baxter fig. 1-2).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Hoeschen (US 5,509,379 A), hereinafter Hoeschen, in view of Baxter et al. (US 9,433,185 B2), hereinafter Baxter, and Wagner (DE 202011101182 U1), hereinafter Wagner, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pierson, Jr. (US 5,911,194 A), hereinafter Pierson, Jr.
PNG
media_image3.png
556
848
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 3. Pierson, Jr. Fig. 5A, Side View (Examiner-Annotated)
Regarding claim 4, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 1, and but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein an end of the excrement collection compartment is hinged to the working compartment, and is configured to turn outwards relative to the working compartment.
However, Pierson, Jr. is in the field of excrement removing devices (abstract) and teaches wherein an end (door 2) of the excrement collection compartment (annotated fig. 3) is hinged to the working compartment (annotated fig. 3, hinged via hinge 21), and is configured to turn outwards relative to the working compartment (see Pierson, Jr. fig. 2 and annotated fig. 3; col 3, lines 6-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the automatic cat excrement removing device with excrement collection compartment and working compartment of Hoeschen as modified to include the hinged end of the excrement collection compartment as taught by Pierson, Jr. with a reasonable expectation of success to allow for easy access to and disposal of waste from the excrement collection compartment.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Hoeschen (US 5,509,379 A), hereinafter Hoeschen, in view of Baxter et al. (US 9,433,185 B2), hereinafter Baxter, and Wagner (DE 202011101182 U1), hereinafter Wagner, as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Du et al. (CN 109220826 A), hereinafter Du.
Regarding claim 7, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 6, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly further comprises:
a first magnet, disposed on a free end of the cover plate, wherein a second magnet is disposed at a position of the base which corresponds to the first magnet, so that the cover plate and the base are in a locking state during rotation of the ball compartment assembly from an initial position to a second position; when the ball compartment assembly returns to the initial position, the cover plate rests on the base again under the action of self-gravity and the first magnet and the second magnet are re-connected to reinforce a locking force between the cover plate and the base.
However, Du is in the field of cat excrement removing devices (abstract) and teaches wherein the excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly (shown in fig. 3) further comprises:
a first magnet (first magnet 15), disposed on a free end of the cover plate (door plate 13; fig. 1 and 3), wherein a second magnet (second magnet 16) is disposed at a position of the base (upper housing 4) which corresponds to the first magnet (fig. 3), so that the cover plate and the base are in a locking state during rotation of the ball compartment assembly from an initial position to a second position (page 11, lines 8-11); when the ball compartment assembly returns to the initial position, the cover plate rests on the base again under the action of self-gravity and the first magnet and the second magnet are re-connected to reinforce a locking force between the cover plate and the base (page 11, lines 8-11).
The Examiner notes that Du teaches magnetic connection of a cover plate assembly, as is well understood in the art. When applied to the device of Hoeschen as modified by Baxter and Wagner, the magnetic connection of the cover plate assembly would be capable of placing the cover plate and the base in a locking state during the rotation of the ball compartment assembly from the initial position to the second position. Furthermore, the magnetic connection of the cover plate assembly would be capable of ensuring that when the ball compartment assembly returns to the initial position, the cover plate rests again under the action of self-gravity, and that the first magnet and the second magnet are re-connected to reinforce a locking force between the cover plate and the base.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the automatic cat excrement removing device with excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly of Hoeschen as modified to incorporate the first and second magnets as taught by Du with a reasonable expectation of success to create a more stable connection to close the opening of the cover plate assembly in order to better seal excrement and odors within the excrement collection compartment.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Hoeschen (US 5,509,379 A), hereinafter Hoeschen, in view of Baxter et al. (US 9,433,185 B2), hereinafter Baxter, and Wagner (DE 202011101182 U1), hereinafter Wagner, as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Nissim et al. (US 5,931,119 A), hereinafter Nissim.
Regarding claim 15, Hoeschen as modified discloses the automatic cat excrement removing device as claimed in claim 10, but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the gear assembly comprises: a driving gear, a first driven gear and a second driven gear; wherein the first driven gear comprises a large gear and a small gear that are coaxially and integrally disposed; one end of the driving gear is connected to an output end of the motor, and an other end of the driving gear meshes with the large gear of the first driven gear; the small gear of the first driven gear selectively meshes with the second driven gear; the second driven gear is fixedly disposed on the ball compartment assembly.
However, Nissim is in the field of cat excrement removing devices (abstract) and teaches wherein the gear assembly (see fig. 7a-7b) comprises: a driving gear (worm 114), a first driven gear (comprises worm gear 116, intermediate shaft 120, and section gear 124) and a second driven gear (crank drive gear 126); wherein the first driven gear comprises a large gear (worm gear 116) and a small gear (section gear 124) that are coaxially and integrally disposed (see fig. 7a-7b, note that worm gear 116 and section gear 124 are coaxially and integrally disposed via intermediate shaft 120); one end of the driving gear is connected to an output end of the motor (electric motor 110, see fig. 7a), and an other end of the driving gear meshes with the large gear of the first driven gear (see fig. 7a-7b); the small gear of the first driven gear selectively meshes with the second driven gear (see fig. 7a-7b); the second driven gear is fixedly disposed on the ball compartment assembly (see fig. 4-5a and 7a-7b; note that when used to modify the device of Hoeschen as modified by Baxter, crank drive gear 126 would be fixedly attached on the ball compartment assembly; col 7, lines 14-24).
The Examiner notes that the device of Hoeschen as modified by Baxter and Wagner and the device of Nissim are analogous, as both teach an automatic cat excrement removing device that rotatably screens cat litter to filter out cat excrement. Furthermore, both devices of the prior art utilize a gear assembly to facilitate rotation of the compartment assembly. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the automatic cat excrement removing device with motor and gear assembly of Hoeschen as modified by Baxter and Wagner to incorporate the teachings of a driving gear, a first driven gear, and a second driven gear of Nissim with a reasonable expectation of success to allow for automatic control of the rotation of the device as taught by Nissim. Furthermore, the Examiner notes that no criticality has been described in the instant disclosure regarding the number or arrangement of gears within the gear assembly (see Specification, para [0080]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 4-8 of 22), filed February 06, 2026, regarding the rejection of claim(s) 16 under §102 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that Ma does not anticipate claim 16 of the instant application. Applicant further asserts that “the excrement collection compartment of Ma should be the waste discharging box 7” and states that “reference 23…refers to a waste discharge mouth that…is not capable of collecting or holding excrement”.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, the Examiner respectfully notes that the term “excrement collection compartment” as claimed is sufficiently broad such that the portion of rotary drum 2 of Ma indicated as “excrement collection compartment” in annotated figure 1 of the above rejection reads upon the claimed “excrement collection compartment”. In other words, since under broadest reasonable interpretation, said portion indicated in annotated figure 1 is a “compartment” that is capable of at least temporarily collecting excrement, it can be interpreted as an “excrement collection compartment”. The Examiner notes that baffle 5 of Ma, which delineates said portion indicated as the “excrement collection compartment” in annotated fig. 1, is particularly capable of collecting excrement (see Ma fig. 11-12). The waste discharging box 7 cited by Applicant is not considered part of the “excrement collection compartment” in the present rejection. As such, the Examiner maintains that Ma anticipates claim 16 of the instant application as currently presented.
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 8-11 of 22), filed February 06, 2026, regarding the rejection of claim(s) 1 under §103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that “Hoeschen fails to teach or suggest ‘the peripheral contour of the ball compartment assembly is formed by a working compartment, a screening compartment, and an excrement collection compartment’”.
With regard to the above argument, the Examiner notes that a grayscale color-coded version of “Annotated Figure 2” provided in the Non-Final Rejection, filed on November 07, 2025, has been provided in the rejection above in order to further clarify the positions of the “working compartment”, “screening compartment”, and “excrement collection compartment” taught by Hoeschen. Each of the aforementioned compartments reads upon corresponding compartments recited in claim 1, as understood under the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim 1. Each of the aforementioned compartments also makes up a portion of the peripheral contour of the compartment assembly, such that the peripheral contour is formed by the working compartment, screening compartment, and excrement collection compartment.
Additionally, although Applicant points to specific desired outcomes that the instant invention achieves, the noted desired outcomes are not explicitly incorporated into the claims of the instant application, and thus do not need to be achieved by the prior art in order for the prior art to meet and/or make obvious the claims.
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 11-13 of 22), filed February 06, 2026, regarding the rejection of claim(s) 1 under §103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that “Hoeschen fails to teach or suggest the screening compartment”.
Although Applicant asserts that the “screening compartment” of Hoeschen structurally differs from that of the instant invention and particularly asserts that “the separation assembly 314 of Hoeschen does not constitute a closed space during rotation”, such a structural distinction is not actually claimed. All limitations of current claim 1 of the instant application with regard to the screening compartment are met by the prior art of Hoeschen, including those describing the structure of the screening compartment.
Additionally, although Applicant points to specific desired outcomes that the instant invention achieves, the noted desired outcomes are not explicitly incorporated into the claims of the instant application, and thus do not need to be achieved by the prior art in order for the prior art to meet and/or make obvious the claims.
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 13-16 of 22), filed February 06, 2026, regarding the rejection of claim(s) 1 under §103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that “Hoeschen fails to teach or suggest the ‘opening that is configured to allow cat excrement to fall into the excrement collection compartment’”.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, the Examiner notes that the scoop 414 of Hoeschen funnels cat excrement into flexible conduit 420 and subsequently into reservoir 422, all of which are considered part of the excrement collection compartment as indicated in annotated figure 2. In order for the scoop 414 to funnel excrement into the conduit 420, it must inherently have an opening that allows the excrement to be channeled from the central portion of cylinder 104 into the reservoir 422. As such, scoop 414 is considered as having some form of “opening” as required by the claim. The Examiner further notes that no further limitations are presented in claim 1 relating to a specific structure of the “opening”.
Although Applicant further argues that “there exists a condition where cat excrement flows back out of the reservoir and enters the working space…as the cylinder 104 rotates continuously”, the Examiner respectfully notes that, whether or not Applicants allegations about such a condition are true, the claim does not explicitly provide any specific limitations that preclude this “condition”.
Applicant further states that Hoeschen fails to disclose “wherein an excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly is disposed at the opening of the excrement collection compartment, wherein the excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly is configured to selectively open or close the opening”. However, this limitation is met via modification of Hoeschen with Wagner.
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 16-17 of 22), filed February 06 2026, regarding the rejection of claim(s) 1 under §103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that “Wagner fails to cure the deficiencies of Hoeschen”. Applicant further argues that the “excrement collection compartment cover plate assembly…disclosed by Wagner is opposite to the direction in which the excrement enters the alleged excrement collection compartment”.
In response to Applicant’s arguments, the Examiner respectfully notes that the specific directionality in which the cover plate assembly opens and closes is not claimed. In response to Applicant’s particular argument that the modification of Hoeschen with Wagner would result in a device incapable of allowing excrement to enter the excrement collection compartment, the Examiner further notes that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In this case, Wagner merely teaches a cover plate assembly that is capable of selectively opening and closing based on rotation of a compartment assembly. The exact directionality of the of opening and closing of the cover plate assembly is not critical, as it is not necessary that the exact cover plate assembly of Wagner be bodily incorporated into the cat excrement removing device of Hoeschen, but rather that one of ordinary skill in the art would combine the teachings of a cover plate assembly that is capable of selectively opening and closing based on rotation of the compartment assembly to the cat excrement removing device of Hoeschen. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make such a modification in order to further enclose the excrement collection compartment from the remainder of the device in order to prevent spread of unpleasant odors.
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 17-18 of 22), filed February 06, 2026, regarding the rejection of claim(s) 4 under §103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that “Pierson, Jr. is a nonanalogous art and cannot support a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103”.
In response to Applicant's argument that Pierson, Jr. is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Pierson, Jr. is in the same broad field of endeavor of litter boxes, and is even in the same more specific field of endeavor of rotating litter boxes. It is not necessary for the prior art to teach the exact structure and/or exact mechanism of operation for the prior art to be considered within the same field of the inventor’s endeavor. Still furthermore, the prior art of Pierson, Jr. is also reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, as it teaches an excrement removing device that allows for easy access of a user to excrement waste via the hingedly attached excrement collection compartment. Therefore, the Examiner maintains that Pierson, Jr. is considered analogous art.
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 18-20), filed February 06, 2026, regarding the rejection of claim(s) 4 under §103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that “Pierson, Jr. fails to teach ‘wherein an end of the excrement collection compartment is hinged to the working compartment, and is configured to turn outwards relative to the working compartment’”.
In response to Applicant’s argument, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In this case, Pierson, Jr. merely teaches an end of an excrement collection compartment hinged to a working compartment, wherein the excrement collection compartment is capable of turning outwards relative to the working compartment. The exact structure of the excrement collection compartment is not critical, as it is not necessary that the exact excrement collection compartment of Pierson, Jr. be bodily incorporated into the cat excrement removing device of Hoeschen as modified, but rather that one of ordinary skill in the art would combine the teachings of a hinged excrement collection compartment that is capable of turning outwards relative to the working compartment of Hoeschen. The Examiner further notes that one would be motivated to make such a modification in order to allow further access to the excrement collection compartment such that the compartment can be more easily cleaned.
Additionally, although Applicant points to specific desired outcomes that the instant invention achieves, the noted desired outcomes are not explicitly incorporated into the claims of the instant application, and thus do not need to be achieved by the prior art in order for the prior art to meet and/or make obvious the claims.
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, pages 20-21 of 22), filed February 06, 2026, regarding the rejection of claim(s) 9 under §103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts that “Baxter fails to teach ‘until the cat litter completely falls into the excrement collection compartment’”. Applicant additionally states that “Baxter does not include an excrement collection compartment disposed inside the chamber 20…that stores cat litter”.
In response to Applicant’s argument, the Examiner respectfully notes that Baxter does not need to teach an excrement collection compartment disclosed within the compartment assembly, as this feature is already taught by the primary reference, Hoeschen. With regard to claim 9, Baxter is merely being used to modify Hoeschen to teach “a litter-cleaning module, configured to start…a driving assembly to drive the ball compartment assembly to reversely rotate…until cat litter falls completely into the excrement collection compartment”. The Examiner thus maintains that Baxter teaches the aforementioned limitations of claim 9 (as outlined in the rejection above), and that claim 9 is taught by the prior art of Hoeschen in view of Baxter and Wagner.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ERICA M HUEBNER whose telephone number is (703)756-4560. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:00 PM ET.
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 (571) 272-6909. 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.
/E.M.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3647
/KIMBERLY S BERONA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3647
1 The Examiner notes that a grayscale color-coded version of “Annotated Figure 2”, presented in the Non-Final Rejection, filed November 07, 2025, has been presented above in order to provide additional clarity to the positions of the “working compartment”, “screening compartment”, and “excrement collection compartment” of Hoeschen.