DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the two electrical connection wires must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Examiner notes that only one appears to be shown in Fig. 8. No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 17 – “and a power module electrically connected to said water pump, wherein an electric switch assembly which is operatively coupled to said water pump and is disposed on said water guiding element for allowing a single hand of the user to carry out a rinse operation by said washing cup and a control operation by said electric switch assembly” does not grammatically make sense. Examiner recommends amending as follows: “[[and]] a power module electrically connected to said water pump, and an electric switch assembly which is operatively coupled to said water pump and is disposed on said water guiding element for allowing a single hand of the user to carry out a rinse operation by said washing cup and a control operation by said electric switch assembly”
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
Claims 1-4 and 7-21 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-12 and 14-19 of copending Application No. 19/358,385 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the same structure is claimed in both applications.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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)(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 1-4, 11, 13, 14, 17, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by La Penna et al. (US 20230320322 A1), hereinafter La Penna.
Regarding Claim 1
La Penna teaches a pet paw washing arrangement (paw cleaner (F), Fig. 13), comprising: a washing cup having a washing chamber (main housing (F1) with interior cavity (F2’)), a water outlet communicated to said washing chamber for spraying water into said washing chamber (spray nozzles (F3)), an access opening communicated to said washing chamber for allowing the pet paw to enter said washing chamber (star-shaped aperture (F4’)); and a water storage container (device (10), Fig. 21) which comprises a container body (main unit (A)) having a water chamber communicated to said water outlet (liquid delivery system (D)) to supply water to said washing chamber for cleaning the pet paw (Para. [0074], Para. [0087]) and a wastewater chamber communicated to said washing chamber (direction of “AF” at bottom of washing chamber, Para. [0112] “when the shampooing task occurs, the waste water with entrained shampoo, particulates, and loose hairs will flow from the hose “G” into the reservoir “B””, Fig. 23).
Regarding Claim 2
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 1, further comprising a water feeding pipeline which has a water feeding channel communicated between said water chamber and said water outlet (attachment connector (G7)) and a wastewater channel communicated between said washing chamber and said wastewater chamber (direction of “AF”, Fig. 23, Para. [0074], Para. [0087], and Para. [0099]).
Regarding Claim 3
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 3, wherein said washing cup comprises a bottom wall (bottom wall of cup (F7)) and a surrounding wall connected to said bottom wall to define said washing chamber (wall of main housing (F1) and spray head (F2)), wherein said water outlet is formed in said surrounding wall of said washing cup (spray nozzles (F2’), Fig. 14).
Regarding Claim 4
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 3, wherein said washing cup has a wastewater inlet formed in said bottom wall thereof for communicating with said wastewater channel (area of bottom wall that interfaces with flow “AF” of hose (G7), Fig. 23).
Regarding Claim 11
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 3, further comprising a water guiding element connected between said washing cup and said water feeding pipeline for supplying water from said water feeding pipeline to said washing cup (assembly including shampoo hose (F14), hose collar (F16), and fluid channel (F15), Fig. 23).
Regarding Claim 13
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 11, wherein said water guiding element comprises a water guiding component having a water guiding channel communicated to said water outlet (fluid channel (F15)), wherein said water guiding component is vertically extended from said surrounding wall of said washing cup (Examiner notes that fluid channel (F15) extends vertically relative to the side wall, Fig. 23).
Regarding Claim 14
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 13, wherein said water guiding element further comprises a connection component connected between said water guiding component and said water feeding pipeline (area near connector pin (F12)), wherein said connection component has a water communication channel communicated said the water guiding channel (connector pin (F12) allows the hose (G7) and the fluid channels (F14, F15) to be in communication with one another, Fig. 23).
Regarding Claim 17
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 11, said water storage container comprises a water pump for pumping water from said container body to said washing cup (pump (A12)), and a power module electrically connected to said water pump (power cord (PC) with power connector (A7)), wherein an electric switch assembly which is operatively coupled to said water pump and is disposed on said water guiding element for allowing a single hand of the user to carry out a rinse operation by said washing cup and a control operation by said electric switch assembly (squirt button (F13), Para. [0110], Fig. 23).
Regarding Claim 21
La Penna teaches a pet paw washing arrangement (paw cleaner (F), Fig. 13), comprising: a washing cup having a washing chamber (main housing (F1) with interior cavity (F2’)), a water outlet communicated to said washing chamber for spraying water into said washing chamber (spray nozzles (F3)), an access opening communicated to said washing chamber for allowing the pet paw to enter said washing chamber (star-shaped aperture (F4’)); and a water storage container (device (10), Fig. 21) which comprises a container body (main unit (A)) having a water chamber communicated to said water outlet (liquid delivery system (D)) to supply water to said washing chamber for cleaning the pet paw (Para. [0074], Para. [0087]); and a wastewater channel communicated to said wastewater chamber communicated to said washing chamber (direction of “AF” at bottom of washing chamber, Para. [0112] “when the shampooing task occurs, the waste water with entrained shampoo, particulates, and loose hairs will flow from the hose “G” into the reservoir “B””, Fig. 23).
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 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over La Penna et al. (US 20230320322 A1), hereinafter La Penna, in view of Reeh et al. (US 20180339757 A1), hereinafter Reeh.
Regarding Claim 5
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 1, but does not teach:
wherein said container body comprises a flexible partition layer which is disposed between said water chamber and said wastewater chamber.
Reeh teaches:
wherein said container body comprises a flexible partition layer which is disposed between said water chamber and said wastewater chamber (Para. [0067] “Collapsible bladders for reactant and waste storage allow generated waste to fill the void left by consumed reactants”).
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 pet paw washing arrangement of La Penna with the teaching of Reeh with a reasonable expectation of success and with the motivation of maximizing space within the water storage tank, thereby making the device smaller and more portable.
Regarding Claim 6
La Penna, in view of Reeh, teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 5, wherein said wastewater chamber is formed within said flexible partition layer (Reeh: Examiner notes that Reeh teaches both the reactant and waste water storage having flexible bladders, and the waste water storage flexible bladder can be defined as the flexible partition layer as claimed).
Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over La Penna et al. (US 20230320322 A1), hereinafter La Penna, in view of Fukuda et al. (Machine Translation of JP 4725983 B1), hereinafter Fukuda.
Regarding Claim 7
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 3, wherein a water discharge outlet is formed in said bottom wall (direction of “AF”, Para. [0112] “when the shampooing task occurs, the waste water with entrained shampoo, particulates, and loose hairs will flow from the hose “G” into the reservoir “B””, Fig. 23), but is silent on:
wherein said surrounding wall is made of a flexible material.
Fukuda teaches:
wherein said surrounding wall is made of a flexible material (silicon sheet (6), Page 2 Para. 6 “The sheet 6 for flocking the brush 5, the scattering prevention packing, and the water leakage prevention packing 12 may be any elastic material such as rubber”).
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 pet paw washing arrangement of La Penna to have the surrounding wall made of a flexible material as taught by Fukuda with a reasonable expectation of success and with the motivation of providing, for example, extra flexibility, durability, and impact resistance of the surrounding wall. Furthermore, the selection of a known material based upon its suitability for the intended use is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding Claim 8
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 3, but does not teach:
wherein said washing cup comprises a plurality of brush elements protruded from said surrounding wall and extended into said washing chamber.
Fukuda teaches:
wherein said washing cup comprises a plurality of brush elements protruded from said surrounding wall and extended into said washing chamber (brushes (5), Fig. 1 & 4).
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 pet paw washing arrangement of La Penna to include a plurality of brush elements as taught by Fukuda with a reasonable expectation of success and with the motivation of providing an additional means to agitate the water and soap within the chamber, thereby assisting in washing a pet’s paw.
Regarding Claim 9
La Penna, in view of Fukuda, teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 8, wherein said plurality of brush element are arranged around said water outlet (Examiner notes that when the brushes of Fukuda are applied to the pet paw washing device of La Penna, the plurality of brush element would be arranged around said water outlet as claimed).
Regarding Claim 10
La Penna, in view of Fukuda, teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 3, wherein said washing cup comprises a plurality of brush elements protruded from the surrounding wall and extended into said washing chamber (Fukuda: brushes (5), Fig. 1 & 4), wherein said plurality of brush element are arranged around said water outlet (Examiner notes that when the brushes of Fukuda are applied to the pet paw washing device of La Penna, the plurality of brush element would be arranged around said water outlet as claimed), but is silent on:
wherein each of said plurality of brush elements is made of silicon material.
Fukudo teaches that the brushes can be a soft resin and animal hair, but does not give examples of soft resins therein. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the brush elements of silicon material, 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 obviousness. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331. Examiner notes that silicon brushes have the known benefit of being gentle on, while still effectively cleaning, a pet’s paw.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over La Penna et al. (US 20230320322 A1), hereinafter La Penna.
Regarding Claim 12
La Penna teaches the pet paw washing arrangement according to claim 11, but is silent on:
wherein said water guiding element is made of a material more rigid than said water feeding pipeline.
However, Examiner notes that the water feeding pipeline of La Penna (G7) is an attachment hose, which is known to be flexible to allow a user to move the cleaning head relative to the liquid delivery system, while the water guiding element is not known or shown to be flexible in this way. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, given the disclosure of La Penna, that the water guiding element is made of a material more rigid than said water feeding pipeline as claimed. Examiner further notes that Applicant has not provided any particular criticality to this feature.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15, 16, and 18-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the double patenting rejection(s) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner notes that claim 15 contains allowable subject matter as written. However, as a matter of clarity, it is recommended to amend the claim to recite that the water guiding element establishes a handle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure:
US 20240324554 A1 – “Dog Paw Washing And Rinsing Device”
US 20240315200 A1 – “Paw Cleaner”
US 20230404032 A1 – “Pet Foot Washer”
US 20230240263 A1 – “Paw Cleaning Apparatus”
US 20210051921 A1 – “Portable Pet Grooming System”
US 20180255747 A1 – “Cleaning Apparatus For An Article”
US 20140326193 A1 – “System For Cleaning Pet Animal Such As Rabbit Limb, Feet, Hooves, Has Bottom Brush Element That Is Provided In Receiving Region And Bottom Brush Element Is Provided With Bristles That Are Directed Towards Access Opening”
US 20090308951 A1 – “Washing Device For Humans And Animals”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Katherine June Walter whose telephone number is (571) 272-6150. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
/K.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3647
/KIMBERLY S BERONA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Prosecution Insights