DETAILED ACTION
The present application and its arguments have been reviewed and currently claims 1,4-5,7-32 and 34-37 are rejected and claims 2, 3, 6, and 33 are cancelled.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/20/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
It is first noted to applicant that the Examiner inadvertently wrote in the Non-Final Rejection on 10/17/2025 on pages 3 and 15 that Franck discloses each of the plurality of teeth and then later writes that Franck does not disclose a plurality of teeth defining a second axial end and later uses Bryson as a secondary reference to teach the plurality of teeth. Therefore, “each of a plurality of teeth” will be considered “the tooth” as it is inherent that “the tooth” was intended (ex., compare to page 9 of the OA where a single tooth is positively recited).
In response to applicants arguments on page 14 that Franck fails to disclose an increasing corresponding angle of attack of the tooth with respect to the pipe length, the examiner respectfully disagrees as Franck shows a completely uncompressed condition where the tooth is flush with the pipe (ex., see the left side in annotated figure below) and a compressed condition where the tooth is pressed radially inward of the pipe (see the left side which shows the bend or the right side in annotated figure below where an angle is produced).
PNG
media_image1.png
588
1676
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 26, 37, 27-29, 32, and 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franck (U.S. Patent No. 2,405,822) in view of Bryson (U.S. Patent No. 4,082,326).
It is noted to the applicant that the claims are ordered as shown above.
In regards to claim 26, Franck discloses:
A joint assembly (see fig. 2 hereinafter) comprising:
a piping element (14); and
a fastener configured to secure a pipe length to the piping element, the fastener comprising:
a nut (20);
a gasket (54) positioned at least partially between the nut and the piping element; and
a grip band (46) positioned at least partially between the nut and the gasket,
the grip band comprising a body (42) defining a first axial end (see annotated figure 2 below) and a tooth defining a second axial end (see annotated figure 2),
the tooth defining a tapered edge (ex., see 52 in figure 3) at the second axial end of the grip band and configured to rotate with respect to an axis of the grip band in transition from the uncompressed condition to a compressed condition to increase a corresponding angle of attack of the tooth with respect to the pipe length (ex., see figure 2),
the tooth being in contact with each of the pipe length and the gasket at the second axial end upon assembly and tightening of the piping element and the fastener about the pipe length (ex., see figure 2),
but does not disclose:
a plurality of teeth defining a second axial end.
In regards to the plurality of teeth, Bryson discloses a similar device (see fig. 1) comprising a gasket (22) being pressed by a grip ring (20) comprising a plurality of slits to define a plurality of teeth (4:4-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the second axial end of the grip ring of Franck with the provision of a plurality of V-shaped slits because Bryson discloses it is known to provide grip bands with a plurality of V-shaped slits to define a plurality of teeth (4:4-5) and it has been held that a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (see In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) in MPEP2144.04(VI)(B)). In this case, modifying the second end of Franck in view of Herold to be comprised of a plurality of teeth (ex., compared to a single continuous tooth) comprising V-shaped slits, which is a known configuration as disclosed by Bryson, would not produce any new and unexpected results.
PNG
media_image2.png
537
1130
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 37, Franck further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 26, wherein the grip band further defines an inner surface extending from the first axial end to the second axial end,
the inner surface defining a constant inner diameter in an uncompressed condition of the grip band (ex., see figure 3).
In regards to claim 27, Franck further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 37, wherein the grip band comprises a body defining the constant inner diameter,
the inner surface defining a cylindrical portion in each of an uncompressed condition and a compressed condition of the grip band.
In regards to claim 28, Franck further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 27, wherein the piping element defines a first conical portion (32) proximate to a first end of the piping element.
In regards to claim 29, Franck further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 28, wherein the piping element further defines a second conical portion (30) extending from the first conical portion (ex., the point 28) and distal from the first end of the piping element,
a slope angle of the second conical portion being less than a slope angle of the first conical portion (see annotated figure 3 above hereinafter),
each of the slope angle of the first conical portion and the slope angle of the second conical portion measured with respect to an axis of the piping element (see annotated figure 3),
In regards to claim 32, Franck further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 27, wherein the nut defines a shoulder in an inner surface, the shoulder sized to receive and position the grip band with respect to an axis of the nut.
In regards to claim 34, Franck in view of Bryson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 27, wherein adjacent teeth of each of the plurality of teeth define a notch therebetween (ex., the teeth of Bryson).
In regards to claim 35, Franck further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 27, wherein a minimum inner diameter of the piping element is less than an outer diameter of the pipe length (see annotated figure 2).
In regards to claim 36, Franck further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 27, wherein an axis of the pipe length is aligned with an axis of the piping element when the joint assembly is tightened (see annotated figure 2).
Claim(s) 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franck in view of Bryson as applied to claim 28 above and in further view of Larson (U.S. Patent No. 11,015,748).
In regards to claim 30, Franck in view of Bryson discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 27,
but does not disclose:
a washer positioned at least partially between the nut and the gasket.
In regards to the washer, Larson discloses a similar device (see fig. 1, right side) comprising a grip ring (56), a washer (66) and a gasket (34) pressed directly against the grip ring (see fig. 1),
wherein the washer may be flat or tapered and provides the benefit of further assisting the driving of the grip ring (8:34-44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the gasket of Franck in view of Bryson with the provision of a washer to provide the benefit of further assisting the driving of the grip ring, as taught by Larson (8:34-44).
In regards to claim 31, Franck in view of Bryson and Larson discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 30, wherein an inner surface of the washer defines a conical shape.
Claim(s) 1, 21, 7-13, 23, 14, 16, 17, 19, 20, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franck in view of Herold (U.S. Patent No. 2,529,552) and in further view of Bryson.
It is noted to the applicant that the claims are ordered as shown above.
In regards to claim 1, Franck discloses:
A joint assembly (see fig. 2 hereinafter) comprising:
a piping element (14) defining:
a first conical (32) portion proximate to a first end of the piping element; and
a second conical portion (30) extending from the first conical portion and distal from the first end of the piping element,
a slope angle of the second conical portion being less than a slope angle of the first conical portion (see annotated figure 2 below, where the slope angle is less),
each of the slope angle of the first conical portion and the slope angle of the second conical portion measured with respect to an axis of the piping element (see annotated figure 2); and
a fastener (see near 20) configured to secure a pipe length to the piping element,
the fastener comprising:
a nut (20);
a gasket (54) positioned at least partially between the nut and the piping element,
an outer surface of the gasket in contact with each of the first conical portion and the second conical portion (see fig. 2, where the outer surface is in contact with both conical surfaces); and
a grip band (42) positioned at least partially between the nut and the gasket,
the grip band comprising
a body defining a first axial end (see annotated figure 2) and a single tooth defining a second axial end (see annotated figure 2),
wherein the tooth is configured to rotate with respect to an axis of the grip band in transition from an uncompressed condition to a compressed condition to increase a corresponding angle of attack of each of the plurality of teeth with respect to the pipe length (ex., compare 52 in figure 3 to figure 2),
wherein the tooth is in contact with each of the pipe length and the gasket at the second axial end upon assembly and tightening of the piping element and the fastener about the pipe length,
but does not disclose:
the second conical portion abutting the first conical portion;
a plurality of teeth defining a second axial end.
In regards to the second conical portion, Herold discloses that similar couplings (see figs. 3 and 5) with a grip ring (“S”) can comprise:
a first and a second conical surface (39 and 41, fig. 5) abutting against a gasket (R’),
wherein the second conical portion is extending from and abutting the first conical portion and distal from the first end of the piping element (see fig. 5),
a slope angle of the second conical portion being less than a slope angle of the first conical portion (see fig. 5),
each of the slope angle of the first conical portion and the slope angle of the second conical portion measured with respect to an axis of the piping element (see fig. 5), and
an outer surface of the gasket (33, fig. 4) in contact with each of the first conical portion and the second conical portion (see fig. 5),
wherein the shallow conical surfaces (ex., 41 in fig. 5 and 24 in fig. 2) are used to urge gripping ring when no gasket is present (2:47-54; ex., see 3:64-66, where the second conical surface is shallow).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the shape of the step and second conical portion of Franck such that the second conical portion abuts the first conical portion and comprises an angle less than a slope angle of the first conical portion to provide the benefit of urging a grip ring when no gasket is present because Herold teaches it is known to provide first and second conical portions abutting one another (see fig. 5), Herold discloses shallow surfaces (ex., conical surface) are used to urge gripping ring when no gasket is present (2:47-54; ex., see 3:64-66, where the second conical surface is shallow), and it has been held that a change in shape has been found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant. See In re Dailey 357 F.2d 669, 672-73 (CCPA 1966) (referred to in MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B)). In this case, a person of ordinary skill could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success and the results would have been predictable because modifying the shape of the second conical surface to abut the first conical surface (ex., Herold shows this configuration is known and achievable) would produce no new or unexpected results (ex., the result of providing the benefit of being able to urge a grip ring).
In addition, applicant's specification does not explain the criticality of having a dual conical surface which lacks a cylindrical step therebetween. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art could have modified the conical surface of Larson to be a dual conical surface as claimed as desired for the intended use.
In regards to the plurality of teeth, Bryson discloses a similar device (see fig. 1) comprising a gasket (22) being pressed by a grip ring (20) comprising a plurality of slits to define a plurality of teeth (4:4-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the second axial end of the grip ring of Franck in view of Herold with the provision of a plurality of V-shaped slits because Bryson discloses it is known to provide grip bands with a plurality of V-shaped slits to define a plurality of teeth (4:4-5) and it has been held that a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (see In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) in MPEP2144.04(VI)(B)). In this case, modifying the second end of Franck in view of Herold to be comprised of a plurality of teeth (ex., compared to a single continuous tooth) comprising V-shaped slits, which is a known configuration as disclosed by Bryson, would not produce any new and unexpected results.
PNG
media_image2.png
537
1130
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 21, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 1, wherein the outer surface of the gasket comprises a first outer portion and a second outer portion (ex., the portions contacting the conical surfaces in annotated figure 2 above hereinafter),
the first outer portion of the gasket configured to contact the second conical portion of the piping element and the second outer portion of the gasket configured to contact the first conical portion of the piping element (ex., see annotated figure 2, where removing the step would inherently still meet the limitation).
In regards to claim 7, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 21, wherein the nut defines a shoulder in an inner surface, the shoulder sized to receive and position the grip band with respect to an axis of the nut.
In regards to claim 8, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 21, wherein each of the plurality of teeth defines a tapered edge at the second axial end of the grip band (ex., see 52 in fig. 3).
In regards to claim 9, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 8, wherein the tapered edge of each of the plurality of teeth defines a chamfer,
the chamfer facing radially outward when the grip band is in the uncompressed condition (ex., see 52 in fig. 3).
In regards to claim 10, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 21, wherein adjacent teeth of each of the plurality of teeth define a notch therebetween (ex., see the notches of Bryson).
In regards to claim 11, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 21, further comprising the pipe length (36, annotated figure 2),
the pipe length received within each of the fastener and the piping element (see annotated figure 2),
each of the fastener and the piping element configured to secure a position of the pipe length with respect to each of the fastener and the piping element.
In regards to claim 12, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 11, wherein a minimum inner diameter of the piping element is less than an outer diameter of the pipe length (see annotated figure 2).
In regards to claim 13, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 11, wherein an axis of the pipe length is aligned with an axis of the piping element when the joint assembly is tightened.
In regards to claim 23, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 21, wherein the gasket defines a rib on the outer surface, the rib extending in a radial direction from a surrounding portion of the outer surface (see annotated figure 2).
In regards to claim 14, Franck discloses:
A method of using a joint assembly (see annotated figure 2 above hereinafter), the method comprising:
engaging a fastener with a piping element, wherein:
the fastener comprises:
a nut (20);
a gasket (54) positioned at least partially between the nut and the piping element; and
a grip band (46) positioned at least partially between the nut and the gasket,
the grip band comprising a body (42) defining a first axial end (see annotated figure 2) and a tooth defining a second axial end (see annotated figure 2); and
the piping element defines:
a first conical portion (32) proximate to a first end of the piping element; and
a second conical portion (30) extending from and the first conical portion and distal from the first end of the piping element,
a slope angle of the second conical portion being less than a slope angle of the first conical portion (see annotated figure 2),
each of the slope angle of the first conical portion and the slope angle of the second conical portion measured with respect to an axis of the piping element;
inserting a pipe length (36) through the fastener and into the piping element; and
tightening the fastener against the piping element, which comprises:
reducing an inner diameter of the grip band (ex., see the second end of the grip band) while maintaining an outer diameter of the grip band (ex., there are multiple outer diameters not deformed); and
engaging the grip band with the pipe length to fix a position of the pipe length with respect to a position of each of the fastener and the piping element (see annotated figure 2),
engaging the grip band with the pipe length comprising:
contacting each of the pipe length and the gasket with the tooth at the second axial end (see annotated figure 2); and
increasing a corresponding angle of attack of the tooth with respect to the pipe length relative to an angle of attack of the tooth before tightening the fastener against the piping element (ex., compare figure 3 with figure 2),
but does not disclose:
a plurality of teeth defining a second axial end,
the second conical portion abutting the first conical portion.
In regards to the second conical portion, Herold discloses that similar couplings (see figs. 3 and 5) with a grip ring (“S”) can comprise:
a first and a second conical surface (39 and 41, fig. 5) abutting against a gasket (R’),
wherein the second conical portion is extending from and abutting the first conical portion and distal from the first end of the piping element (see fig. 5),
a slope angle of the second conical portion being less than a slope angle of the first conical portion (see fig. 5),
each of the slope angle of the first conical portion and the slope angle of the second conical portion measured with respect to an axis of the piping element (see fig. 5), and
an outer surface of the gasket (33, fig. 4) in contact with each of the first conical portion and the second conical portion (see fig. 5),
wherein the shallow conical surfaces (ex., 41 in fig. 5 and 24 in fig. 2) are used to urge gripping ring when no gasket is present (2:47-54; ex., see 3:64-66, where the second conical surface is shallow).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the shape of the step and second conical portion of Franck such that the second conical portion abuts the first conical portion and comprises an angle less than a slope angle of the first conical portion to provide the benefit of urging a grip ring when no gasket is present because Herold teaches it is known to provide first and second conical portions abutting one another (see fig. 5), Herold discloses shallow surfaces (ex., conical surface) are used to urge gripping ring when no gasket is present (2:47-54; ex., see 3:64-66, where the second conical surface is shallow), and it has been held that a change in shape has been found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant. See In re Dailey 357 F.2d 669, 672-73 (CCPA 1966) (referred to in MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B)). In this case, a person of ordinary skill could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success and the results would have been predictable because modifying the shape of the second conical surface to abut the first conical surface (ex., Herold shows this configuration is known and achievable) would produce no new or unexpected results (ex., the result of providing the benefit of being able to urge a grip ring).
In addition, applicant's specification does not explain the criticality of having a dual conical surface which lacks a cylindrical step therebetween. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art could have modified the conical surface of Larson to be a dual conical surface as claimed as desired for the intended use.
In regards to the plurality of teeth, Bryson discloses a similar device (see fig. 1) comprising a gasket (22) being pressed by a grip ring (20) comprising a plurality of slits to define a plurality of teeth (4:4-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the second axial end of the grip ring of Franck in view of Herold with the provision of a plurality of V-shaped slits because Bryson discloses it is known to provide grip bands with a plurality of V-shaped slits to define a plurality of teeth (4:4-5) and it has been held that a mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (see In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) in MPEP2144.04(VI)(B)). In this case, modifying the second end of Franck in view of Herold to be comprised of a plurality of teeth (ex., compared to a single continuous tooth) comprising V-shaped slits, which is a known configuration as disclosed by Bryson, would not produce any new and unexpected results.
In regards to claim 16, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The method of claim 14, wherein pairs of adjacent teeth of the plurality of teeth of the grip band define notches therebetween (ex., the V-shaped notches of Bryson),
the method further comprising closing the notches by movement of the adjacent teeth towards each other to block extrusion of the gasket through the notches (it is inherent that V-shaped slots that are pressed radially inward would cause the notches to close).
In regards to claim 17, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The method of claim 14, wherein engaging the grip band with the pipe length comprises engaging with the pipe length a sharp edge of a tapered edge (52, fig. 3 of Franck) of each of the plurality of teeth of the grip band (it is inherent that providing a plurality of teeth would further meet the limitation of the claim).
In regards to claim 19, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The method of claim 14, wherein tightening the fastener against the piping element comprises contacting at least one of the first conical portion and the second conical portion with the gasket (see annotated figure 2).
In regards to claim 20, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The method of claim 14, wherein tightening the fastener against the piping element comprises aligning an axis of the pipe length with an axis of the piping element (see annotated figure 2).
In regards to claim 25, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson further discloses:
The method of claim 14, wherein a tensile strength of the resulting joint assembly is greater than or equal to a tensile strength of the pipe length.
Claim(s) 4-5 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franck in view of Herold and Bryson as applied to claims 14 and 21 above and in further view of Larson (U.S. Patent No. 11,015,748).
In regards to claim 4, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 21,
but does not disclose:
a washer positioned at least partially between the nut and the gasket.
In regards to the washer, Larson discloses a similar device (see fig. 1, right side) comprising a grip ring (56), a washer (66) and a gasket (34) pressed directly against the grip ring (see fig. 1),
wherein the washer may be flat or tapered and provides the benefit of further assisting the driving of the grip ring (8:34-44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the gasket of Franck in view of Herold and Bryson with the provision of a washer to provide the benefit of further assisting the driving of the grip ring, as taught by Larson (8:34-44).
In regards to claim 5, Franck in view of Herold, Bryson, and Larson further discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 4, wherein an inner surface of the washer defines a conical shape.
In regards to claim 18, Franck in view of Herold and Bryson discloses:
The method of claim 14, rotating the plurality of teeth of the grip band with respect to an axis of the grip band in transition from an uncompressed condition to a compressed condition (ex., compare figure 3 with figure 2),
but does not disclose:
wherein the fastener further comprises a washer positioned at least partially between the nut and the gasket, and
wherein engaging the grip band with the pipe length comprises:
contacting the washer with the plurality of teeth of the grip band; and
rotating, with a force applied by the washer, the plurality of teeth of the grip band with respect to an axis of the grip band in transition from an uncompressed condition to a compressed condition.
In regards to the washer, Larson discloses a similar device (see fig. 1, right side) comprising a grip ring (56), a washer (66) and a gasket (34) pressed directly against the grip ring (see fig. 1),
wherein the washer may be flat or tapered and provides the benefit of further assisting the driving of the grip ring (8:34-44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the gasket of Franck in view of Herold and Bryson with the provision of a washer to provide the benefit of further assisting the driving of the grip ring, as taught by Larson (8:34-44).
Claim(s) 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franck in view of Herold, Bryson, and Larson as applied to claim 4 above and in further view of Behrens et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,351,998).
In regards to claim 22, Franck in view of Herold, Bryson, and Larson discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 4, but does not disclose the washer and the gasket are adhesively joined to each other.
In regards to the adhesive, Behrens discloses a similar device where a gasket is adhesively joined to a sealing element to provide the benefit of a reduction of parts (4:42-47).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to adhesively join the washer and gasket of Franck in view of Herold, Bryson, and Larson to each other to provide the benefit of a reduction of parts, as taught by Behrens (4:42-47).
Claim(s) 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franck in view of Herold, Bryson, and Larson as applied to claim 21 above and in further view of DeWitt et al. (EP-0528079).
In regards to claim 24, Franck in view of Herold, Bryson, and Larson discloses:
The joint assembly of claim 21,
but does not disclose:
wherein the grip band defines a groove in the outer surface,
the groove defined in an axial direction with respect to the axis of the grip band between a body and the teeth of the grip band.
In regards to the groove, Dewitt discloses a similar grip band (see fig. 6) comprising a groove (64) so that the assembler may be able to quickly determine which end of the ferrule should be first inserted over the tube end (7:42-51).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the grip band of Franck in view of Herold, Bryson, and Larson with the provision of a groove so that the assembler may be able to quickly determine which end of the ferrule should be first inserted over the tube end, as taught by Dewitt (7:42-51).
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Franck in view of Herold, Bryson, and Larson as applied to claim 14 above and in further view of Rescheneder (U.S. Patent No. 2,786,697).
In regards to claim 15, Franck in view of Herold, Bryson, and Larson discloses:
The method of claim 14, wherein tightening the fastener against the piping element comprises compressing the inner surface of the gasket of the fastener,
but does not disclose:
the gasket comprises ribs.
In regards to the ribs, Rescheneder discloses a similar device comprising a seal (5) comprising a plurality of ribs (4) that prevents foreign material from affecting the sealing performance (2:5-9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the flat inner surface of the gasket of Franck in view of Herold, Bryson, and Larson with the provision of ribs to prevent foreign material from affecting the sealing performance, as taught by Rescheneder (2:5-9).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Dewitt et al. (EP-528079) discloses a very similar device to the present invention.
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 ALEXANDER TYLER RUFRANO whose telephone number is (571)272-6223. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30AM to 4:30PM.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at (571) 270-3654. 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.T.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3679
/Matthew Troutman/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights