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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the at least one strap" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 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.
Claims 1-2, 5-7, 9, 20, 22, 29, 31, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bryson (US 2014/0216355) (cited by applicant in IDS dated 12/16/25).
Regarding Claim 1, Bryson discloses a pet containment device (Abstract) comprising:
a base member (floor panel 16); and
a back member (back panel 14);
wherein the base member and the back member are coupled for pivoting movement relative to each other between a stowed position and a use position (Figures 6A-6E);
wherein the base member is connectable to an anchor point in a vehicle (belt 92 with fastener 94 connected to system anchor 96; Figure 10a); and
wherein the base member and the back member define at least portions of an interior space for receiving a pet/animal when in the use position (Figures 4-5, 9, and 10a; Paragraph [0036]).
Regarding Claim 2, Bryson discloses the pet containment device according to claim 1, wherein the base member includes a pivot subassembly (hinge point 22), and the back member is coupled to the pivot subassembly (“The back panel 14 can be attached to the floor panel 16 at one or more hinge points 22.” Paragraph [0022]).
Regarding Claim 5, Bryson discloses the pet containment device, further comprising a collapsible barrier attached to the base member (spine 34 with side panels 32,33; Figures 2 and 6A-6E), the collapsible barrier extending between the base member and the back member when in a deployed position and at least partially defining the interior space (Figures 2 and 6A-6E).
Regarding Claim 6, Bryson discloses the pet containment device according to claim 5, wherein the collapsible barrier is fixed to the back member (“The frame 7 also has at least one spine 34 that is attached to the back panel 14” Paragraph [0022]).
Regarding Claim 7, Bryson discloses the pet containment device according to claim 5, wherein the collapsible barrier is independently moveable relative to the back member (“The spine 34 can be completely detachable, or made to detach at one end and pivot at the other, or as described above the spine 34 can be irreversible integrated into a front panel and made to fold about one or more hinge points (FIGS. 6a and 6b).” Paragraph [0037]).
Regarding Claim 9, Bryson discloses the pet containment device according to claim 5, wherein the collapsible barrier includes a net (“Any of the panels can optionally have one or more windows or vents made from a perforated and/or transparent material (such as perforated plastics), or a meshed, webbed, or netted fabric.” Paragraph [0025]; Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 20, Bryson discloses the pet containment device according to claim 1, wherein the base member and the back member include cooperating features for securing the back member in at least one of the stowed position or the use position (the spine 34 attachment points and detachment points; Paragraph [0037]; Figures 6a-6e).
Regarding Claim 22, Bryson discloses the pet containment device according to claim, 1, further comprising at least one latch member for securing the pet containment device to an anchor of a vehicle (belt 92 with fastener 94 connected to system anchor 96; Figure 10a).
Regarding Claim 29, Bryson discloses the pet containment device according to claim 1, further wherein the back member is configured to cooperate with a seatbelt of an associated vehicle (“The animal carrier 90 can also be attached to an automotive seat (e.g., bench seat) by passage of one or more installation belts (or standard automotive seat belts) through one or more belt paths, such as a belt path 18 built through the back panel 14” Paragraph [0051]).
Regarding Claim 31, Bryson discloses the pet containment device according to claim 1, further comprising at least one wheel for supporting the base member (wheels 28; Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 37, Bryson discloses the pet containment device according to claim 1, further comprising at least two latch members for securing the pet containment device to an anchor of a vehicle (“ FIG. 10a shows an animal carrier attached to an automotive seat 91 using an quick connect or installation belt 92 passed through a belt path 18 built into and through the back panel 14, wherein the installation belt 92 has a fastener 94 (at both ends) which is reversibly attachable to the LATCH system anchor 96.” Paragraph [0060], the fasteners at both ends are the at least two latch members).
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.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bryson (US 2014/0216355) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Powell (US 2008/0303321).
Regarding Claim 3, Bryson discloses the pet containment device of claim 1. Bryson further discloses wherein the device includes at least one latch member for coupling with an anchor point in a vehicle (belt 92 with fastener 94 connected to system anchor 96; Figure 10a).
Bryson fails to disclose wherein the pivot subassembly includes at least one latch member for coupling with an anchor point in a vehicle.
However, Powell teaches a vehicle safety seat, wherein the pivot subassembly (base of anti-rebound member 38; Figures 2-4) includes at least one latch member for coupling with an anchor point in a vehicle (“Welded to the terminal ends 32 of the cross tube are inner casings 33 of ISOFIX latches 34.” Paragraph [0034]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the latch member of Bryson, to be on the pivot assembly as taught by Powell, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to ensure the device remains in place during use, and creates a secure connection that is not easily moved out of place.
Regarding Claim 4, Bryson as modified teaches the pet containment device of claim 3. Bryson further discloses the pet containment device, wherein the latch member is movable relative to the base member (“the installation belt 92 has a fastener 94 (at both ends) which is reversibly attachable to the LATCH system anchor 96.” Paragraph [0060]; “the installation belt 92 can be stored on or with the animal carrier when not in use.” Paragraph [0061]).
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bryson (US 2014/0216355) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Meeker et al. (US 5427432).
Regarding Claim 12, Bryson discloses the pet containment device of claim 2. Bryson further discloses the pet containment device, further comprising a collapsible barrier (spine 34 with side panels 32,33; Figures 2 and 6A-6E) including a pivot arm attached to the base member (spine 34; Figures 6A-6E), the collapsible barrier extending between the base member and the back member when in a deployed position and at least partially defining the interior space (Figures 2 and 6A-6E).
Bryson fails to disclose wherein the pivot subassembly includes a lock mechanism for securing the pivot arm in at least one of a stowed or deployed position.
However, Meeker teaches a vehicle safety seat, wherein the pivot subassembly (Figure 2) includes a lock mechanism (slots 42 and pins 38) for securing the pivot arm (shield 10) in at least one of a stowed or deployed position (“the pivotable shield 10, pivotable between a raised position for allowing the entrance or exit of a child from the seat and a lowered position for securing the child in place.” Col. 4 lines 19-22).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the pivot arm of Bryson, with the locking mechanism of Meeker, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure the device does not collapse or move during use or transportation.
Regarding Claim 13, Bryson as modified teaches the pet containment device of claim 12.
Bryson fails to disclose the pet containment device, wherein the lock mechanism includes a lock body on the pivot subassembly, the lock body having at least one slot for receiving a pin of the pivot arm, whereby movement of the pivot arm is constrained by the movement of the pin in the at least one slot of the lock body.
However, Meeker teaches the pet containment device, wherein the lock mechanism includes a lock body on the pivot subassembly (Figure 2), the lock body having at least one slot (slots 42) for receiving a pin of the pivot arm (pins 38), whereby movement of the pivot arm is constrained by the movement of the pin in the at least one slot of the lock body (Figure 2; Col. 4 lines 55-65).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the pivot arm of Bryson, with the locking slot and pin of Meeker, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure the device does not collapse or move during use or transportation.
Regarding Claim 14, Bryson as modified teaches the pet containment device of claim 13.
Bryson fails to disclose the pet containment device, wherein the at least one slot includes an arcuate portion and at least one detent portion for locking the pivot arm in a deployed or stowed position.
However, Meeker teaches the pet containment device, wherein the at least one slot includes an arcuate portion (slot 42; Figure 2) and at least one detent portion (recesses 44) for locking the pivot arm in a deployed or stowed position (Figure 2; Col. 4 lines 55-65).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the pivot arm of Bryson, with the detent locking portion of Meeker, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to help ensure the device does not collapse or move during use or transportation.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bryson (US 2014/0216355) as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Jacquemot et al. (US 5971479) (cited by applicant in IDS dated 12/16/25).
Regarding Claim 23, Bryson discloses the pet containment device of claim 22.
Bryson fails to disclose the pet containment device, wherein the base member includes handle, the handle operative to actuate the at least one latch member.
However, Jacquemot teaches a vehicle safety seat, wherein the base member (support frame 4) includes handle (level 36), the handle operative to actuate the at least one latch member (“Disassembly is also easily achieved. It suffices to pivot the operating lever 36 in the direction of the arrow L (FIG. 2) to release the pawl 30 from the toothed sector 24. Simultaneously, a tractive force is exerted on the cable 34, causing the latch 17 to pivot in the direction of its release from the keeper 40” Col. 27-32).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the latch member of Bryson, with the handle to actuate the latch as taught by Jacquemot, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for accessible removal and placement of the device within the vehicle.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bryson in view of Jacquemot as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of Lam (US 2008/0156275).
Regarding Claim 26, Bryson as modified teaches the pet containment device of claim 23.
Bryson fails to disclose the pet containment device, wherein the at least one strap includes a pair of backpack straps.
However, Lam teaches a pet containment device (Abstract), wherein the at least one strap includes a pair of backpack straps (straps 51; Figure 2; Paragraph [0026]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the containment device of Bryson, with the backpack straps of Lam, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow for easier transportation of the device when not in the vehicle.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bryson (US 2014/0216355) as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Chandler (US 2016/0057968).
Regarding Claim 30, Bryson discloses the pet containment device of claim 29.
Bryson fails to disclose the pet containment device, further comprising a clamping member for clamping the seatbelt of the associated vehicle.
However, Chandler teaches a pet containment device, further comprising a clamping member for clamping the seatbelt of the associated vehicle (“Upper seat belt 26 passes through C-clamp 93,” Paragraph [0028]; Figure 3).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the containment device of Bryson, with the seatbelt clamps of Chandler, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to increase the security of the device within the vehicle, to help prevent excessive movement of the device during transportation.
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bryson (US 2014/0216355) as applied to claim 31 above, and further in view of O'Shaughnessy (US 20180014502).
Regarding Claim 32, Bryson discloses the pet containment device of claim 31.
Bryson fails to disclose the pet containment device, wherein the at least one wheel includes a selectively attachable wheel received in a socket of the base member.
However, O’Shaughnessy teaches a pet containment device (Figure 1A), wherein the at least one wheel includes a selectively attachable wheel received in a socket of the base member (“Preferably, the wheels 150a, 150b are removably coupled to the bottom panel 106, to allow removal when not needed.” Paragraph [0057]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wheels of Bryson, to be removably attached as taught by O’Shaughnessy, with reasonable expectation of success, in order to allow the containment device to allow for easier storage of the device while not in use.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhen et al. (US 2023/0263128), Yang (US 2023/0082910), Chen (US 2019/0313597), Pietra (US 2013/0125827), and Reid (US 5133294) are considered relevant prior art as they pertain to similar pet vehicle containment devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALANNA PETERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-6126. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Joshua Huson can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
/A.K.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
