Animal husbandry – Animal controlling or handling – Hitching or tethering
Reexamination Certificate
2001-02-23
2003-03-25
Jordan, Charles T. (Department: 3644)
Animal husbandry
Animal controlling or handling
Hitching or tethering
C119S028500, C119S526000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06536376
ABSTRACT:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
This invention relates to the pet industry and, more particularly to pet restraint systems and methods.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The demand for safe, effective, and convenient devices and methods for restraining domestic animals has increased considerably over the years as society has continued to become more urbanized. With more and more families living in urban and suburban areas and facing constraints on available outdoor and indoor space, it has become more difficult to efficiently and effectively confine a dog or other pet within a predetermined area using conventional methods. Moreover, regardless of whether the particular environment in which the animal is found is urban or rural, letting the animal wander about unrestrained can pose obvious problems for the pet, its owner, and others in the community—problems only exacerbated as traffic and congestion increases in proportion to the urbanization of the animal's surroundings.
Conventional devices and methods as were employed in the past such as leashing the animal to a tree or stake in the ground are not easily adapted to a more urbanized environment. Nor are these devices and methods necessarily the safest or most efficient way to restrain a pet, and yet, fencing in the animal may not be an option for a pet owner having only limited or no yard space in which to confine the animal. Moreover, even for those in a rural environment or having at least a limited amount of yard space, fencing may not be aesthetically desirable or economical. Still, too, fencing in the animal is only a partial solution because of its permanence: if one desires to take the animal temporarily to a new location such as a beach or a park, the fence provides no assistance in confining the pet to a predetermined area in the temporary environment. And, while pet cages generally can be transported, they must have a very limited size if they are to be transported easily. Yet a limited-sized cage is very uncomfortable to a pet. Moreover, even limited-sized cages are unsightly, yet enlarging a cage to make it more comfortable for the pet inevitably makes the cage more difficult to transport and more unsightly. These same inherent disadvantages in using conventional devices and methods in an outdoor environment make such devices and methods particularly ill-suited or entirely ineffectual in an indoor setting such as a house or an apartment.
Some recent attempts have been made to improve on or adapt to more urban settings these conventional devices and methods. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,085,174 by Etkin, titled Pet Trainer is a device intended primarily for use in house training a dog confined to limited-space indoor environment, the device being essentially a wide-panel platform surrounded by a continuous peripheral lip over which newspapers can be placed and a centered protruding post to which the dog is tethered. Similarly, U.S. Pat. No. 4,147,129 by Ruplen, titled Animal Platform provides a platform and tether post, its major differences being that the platform provides a sleep station and the protruding tether post is closer to the platform surface.
These devices are limited, however, in a number of respects. Both rely not on the weight of the platform to restrain the dog, but rather to the fact that the length of the restraining cord tethering the dog to the centered post is sufficiently short to prevent the animal from straying entirely off the platform; confined to the platform, the pet's weight essentially anchors in place the platform on which the pet is tethered. Thus, there size of the platform dictates and limits the area to which the pet can be confined. If one wanted to increase the area within which the dog were free to roam, say, within a large kitchen, one could not do so because the dog would then be free to step off the platform, which in turn, would then be unconstrained by the dog's weight and could be turned over or pulled in any direction by the animal. Moreover, the rectangular dimensions of both platforms dictate the type of area within which each can be used efficiently. The invariable dimensions preclude use of the platforms in an area smaller than or having a peripheral boundary different from that of the platforms. Neither would be usable, for example, in a long narrow hallway.
Certain other devices, perhaps seeking to overcome these disadvantages, have taken a different tack by attempting to tether the animal to an anchor. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,456,214 by Quilling (“'214 patent”) titled Tether Balls and Leash for Tethering Pets describes a pair of plastic coated heavy metallic balls serving as an anchor to which a dog or cat is tethered. But this approach poses its own problems. One problem arises from the elimination of the petweighted platform: of necessity, the bi-spherical anchor (i.e., the pair of metallic tether balls) remains quite heavy as well as poses a significant physical obstacle. If one desires more weight, additional balls can be strung together, but this only increases the clumsiness of the arrangement and the size of the physical obstacle posed by a plurality of spherical anchors. Another problem stems from the fact that each anchor has a welded link (like that of a chain) that connects to a latch on a tethering leash, but the spherical nature and size of the weight prevents more than a few of the anchors from being joined to the same leash.
The '214 patent shares some similarity with U.S. Pat. No. 704,730 (“'730 Patent”) by Zeirleyn, titled Hitching Weight, which describes a heavy anchor having a circular base that is hurled from a horse and buggy, and U.S. Pat. No. 450,633 (“'663 Patent”) by Motter, also titled Hitching Weight, which provides a horse hitch in the form of an extendable chain wound around a drum encased in a metallic, barrel-like cylindrical casing. These devices, too, possess features that are disadvantages in the context of restraining a pet. Each, for example, has a centered protrusion on which pet or a human moving within a relatively confined area could stumble and perhaps even become impaled. The centered protrusion of the '730 patent is a gravity stop to engage the drumwound chain. In the '633 patent, it is an eye-hook extending from the top of a heavy anchor to which a hitching strap connects so that the weight can be slung from a carriage like an anchor thrown over the side of a ship. In the context of restraining a pet, both the vertical protrusions associated with both devices pose significant disadvantages. Not only could they impale the pet or a person moving within a confined area, they also are an obstacle to portability if one desires a device that is sufficiently compact and narrow so as to be easily moved and stored.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,870,974 (“'974 patent”) by Johnson, titled Animal Anchor borrows from these earlier devices and also poses some of the same disadvantages as well as ones of its own. The '974 patent provides a device having a central hub to which are connected a series of spokes that extend outwardly and upwardly from an outer circular base portion to the hub. Like the '730 and '633 patents the '974 patent explicitly relies on a rim portion having an annular or cylindrical outer perimeter. Also like the '730 and '633 patents, the '974 has a centered protrusion in the form of a bolt that extends upwardly from the hub and to which is connected a closed-end S-hook or other connector for a restraining cord or chain. The upward protrusion, moreover is enhanced by the elevation of the hub connected to the annular outer rim by the upwardly extending spokes.
In addition to the disadvantages posed by the upward protrusion, the '974 poses new ones as well to a pet or human moving around or over the device in that a pet may entangle its paw or a human a limb in the wide gaps between the spokes. This increases the potential for a pet or human to stumble over the device or otherwise become entangled between the spokes and possibly fall on the upward pr
Bracewell & Patterson LLP
Jordan Charles T.
Zerr John W.
LandOfFree
Kit and associated methods for confining a pet within a... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Kit and associated methods for confining a pet within a..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Kit and associated methods for confining a pet within a... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3053704