Animal husbandry – Confining or housing – Animal display or open work enclosure
Reexamination Certificate
1997-10-28
2002-10-08
Poon, Peter M. (Department: 3643)
Animal husbandry
Confining or housing
Animal display or open work enclosure
C119S474000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06460486
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates generally to animal crates or kennels used for housing, training and maintaining dogs, cats and other pet animals. More particularly, the invention relates to a square-back animal crate that can be easily assembled and disassembled by the pet owner, that is strong enough to contain the animal without injury and that is aesthetically appealing.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Animal crates represent an effective and humane method of pet management. The crates can be employed to house, contain and train most commonly found pets including dogs, cats, birds and rodents.
While commercial operations, such as veterinarians, professional kenneling businesses and humane societies, have popularly used animal crates for some time, pet owners have also discovered the value and benefits of using a crate in their homes. Among other things, a crate provides a pet owner with an appropriate space when the animal needs to be confined and assists in house training the animal. As many animals have territorial instincts, the crate also provides a secure “den” for them.
In order to be effective, however, a crate must be properly configured and meet certain criteria. Unfortunately, many existing crates lack critical features or suffer from other disadvantages that affect the sale of the crates, impair the ability of the pet owner to fully enjoy the crates or use them to the maximum benefit, injure the pet in extreme cases, as well as potentially lead to misperceptions on the part of consumers as to the humanitarian aspects of crates generally.
One primary disadvantage of existing crates stems from their necessary size. Many crates are very expansive structures so that they can properly house a large animal, such as many breeds of dogs, while providing the animal with sufficient room to maneuver. These crates require a lot of space which can have detrimental effects on both the pet owner and the retail seller of crates.
For instance, while many pet owners may have long term need for a crate, there are frequently times when the crate may need to be moved. Some pet owners, for example, may wish to relocate the crate or move the crate between the outside and the inside of the house so as to give the animal a more varied environment. Additionally, the pet owner may wish to take the animal along on a vacation, drop the animal off with someone that will care for it while the owner is away, or otherwise travel with the animal. Under such circumstances, it would be convenient for the pet owner to be able to transport the crate as well so that it could be used at the new location. The size and bulk of many prior art crates, however, render them quite awkward for transportation.
At other times, the pet owner may wish to temporarily store away the crate. Once again, most existing crates, even those intended for small animals, take up a significant amount of space, making them difficult to store.
The size and bulk of prior art crates also has a detrimental effect on the retailers and sellers of such items. Retailers of crates need to store multiple crates to have on hand as inventory and to display the crates to customers in their stores. The size of the crates means that a significant and vital amount of storage and display space is taken up by each crate.
Some in the industry have attempted to overcome these disadvantages by producing collapsible crates that can be manipulated to a smaller, flatter size or square-back crates which can be disassembled into smaller individual pieces when the crate is not in use, thereby making storage and transportation easier. Many of these prior art crates, however, suffer from disadvantages.
In order to be useful to pet owners, the collapsible and square-back crates must be relatively easy to assemble and disassemble. Thus, the method of constructing and taking apart the crate should be straight forward and easily understood by the pet owner. Likewise, the time to actually assemble and disassemble the crate should be short. Ideally, there should also be a minimum of components making up the crate. Too many components, particularly small ones, leads to the possibility that some of them could be lost. Furthermore, an excess of components, each with its own distinct characteristics, increases the complexity of the crate and furthers the likelihood that the pet owner may become confused when attempting to reassemble the crate. Finally, a large number of components increases the risk that the animal may loosen some and become injured.
Many of the prior art collapsible and square-back crates reflect these disadvantages. U.S. Pat. No. 5,452,681 and U.S. Pat. No. 5,467,734, both issued to Ho, for example, each refer to animal crates that consist of numerous parts. Many of the parts are small attachment pieces that fit together in a unique way and that could be easily lost or broken, thereby rendering the crate useless.
Another disadvantage found in many collapsible and square-back crates is their lack of integrity when placed under stress. Any crate should be able to prevent the unintended release of the animal, especially when the animal is actively attempting to escape the confines of the crate. Collapsible and square-back crates, however, are particularly susceptible to failure when the confined animal attacks the crate. By their nature, these crates are intended to come apart and thus, contain a variety of potential weak points that could fail under pressure applied by the animal or external factors.
A crate must be able to maintain its structural integrity and not allow the escape of the animal under a variety of circumstances. These include situations where particularly aggressive breeds may attack the crate in an effort to escape undesired confinement, as well escape efforts of animals due to fear (for example, trying to seek cover during a storm) or positive excitement (for example, attempting to reach its owner who has just come home from work).
Areas of a crate that are typically most vulnerable to failure are the door, where an animal might destroy or manipulate the latch, the edges of the crate, where the side panels are joined and where the animal may be able to leverage itself through, and the mesh or gauge design of the panels, where the animal could collapse or distort the structure. Furthermore, not only must the crate be able to withstand the efforts of an animal to break out but it also must maintain its integrity even against partial failure. If the animal is able to bite off or work loose portions of the crate, those pieces could be swallowed by the animal causing it to choke or otherwise become injured.
Similarly, the animal may hurt itself on exposed portions of the crate. Likewise, if the animal is able to create a gap or otherwise separate the side panels, the gap may not be big enough to allow for escape but could easily lead to the choking of the animal if the gap allows only the animal's head through.
Many of the prior art crates are constructed in ways that may be particularly prone to causing injury to the animal if they partially fail. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,917,047 issued to Wazeter refers to a knock-down crate that contains a number of small sharp components that assist in holding the side and top panels of the crate together. If the animal were to obtain access to these components, they could easily cause the animal to choke.
Similarly, U.S. Pat. No. 4,256,056 issued to Sou depicts a portable crate that also contains a number of small components. Once again, an animal could swallow these parts, break a tooth or otherwise become injured if the parts become exposed.
The base found in many crates frequently represents another disadvantage. This is true of both collapsible and square-back crates as well as those crates designed as permanent constructions. The base of a crate will frequently become soiled with urine and feces from the animal. Even for those animals that are completely trained not to defecate in the crate, the base will naturally become sullied with such waste as dirt, fur and sl
Beavers Chester
Johnson William
Pederson Trygve M.
Powers E. Michael
Tedham Thomas A.
Fredrikson & Byron , P.A.
Kennel-Aire, Inc.
Nguyen Son T.
Poon Peter M.
LandOfFree
Aesthetically appealing square-back animal crate does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Aesthetically appealing square-back animal crate, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Aesthetically appealing square-back animal crate will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2957246