DETAILED ACTION
The present application and its arguments have been reviewed and currently claims 1-8, 10, 12-14, and 21 are rejected and claims 9, 11, and 15-20 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/5/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicants arguments on pages 9-10 in regards that Wakelin fails to disclose a convexly curved wall area over the entire length of the at least one curved wall area, the examiner respectfully disagrees as “over the entire length of the at least one curved wall area” only requires an entire portion of a convex portion which can be shown in the magnified box as shown in annotated figure 10 below where it starts at one point of the convex curve to an end point and its directly in between two ring-shaped points.
PNG
media_image1.png
701
862
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In response to applicants arguments on pages 10-11 regarding the examiner relying on the receiver socket 21 to disclose “at least one curved wall”, the examiner respectfully disagrees as the examiner is not relying on the receiver socket to disclose the curved wall.
In response to applicants arguments on page 12 that Wakelin does not disclose constant wall thickness, the examiner respectfully disagrees as both the present invention and prior art are press-formed (ex., using dyes to produce a shape in a pipe) and structurally they would both comprise similar wall thicknesses (ex., how would the prior art not be a constant wall thickness but the present invention would be when both are formed via press forming?). In addition, see page 3, lines 41-44 of Wakelin, where the device can also be created via casting which would produce a perfect wall thickness.
In response to applicants arguments on page 16 of 19 that both curved ends meet in the present invention, the examiner respectfully disagrees as the supports points 105 would cause the constantly curved outer line of the inner pipe to end before reaching the constantly curved inner line of the outer pipe to meet (ex., see the 112a rejection below for clarification).
Applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to claim(s) 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 “constantly curved outer line and the constantly curved inner line meet in their respective end points” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In this case, the limitation “wherein the constantly curved outer line and the constantly curved inner line meet in their respective end points” was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention because each of the support points comprises separate sections (ex., appears linear) and the curved lines would not meet at the respective end points as shown in annotated figure 1B below (ex., the crescent moon shape of the present application would not be the same moon as depicted by applicant on page 14 of 19 in the remarks of 6/5/2025).
PNG
media_image2.png
664
1170
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wakelin (GB-1512961).
Claim 1, Wakelin discloses:
A fluid connection arrangement (see figs. 5, 6a, 6b hereinafter) for establishing a fluid connection, comprising:
a receiving part (21) comprising a receiving wall that has a receiving wall inner side (25) that delimits an interior of the receiving part (see fig. 5); and
a tubular connecting part (22) that is received at least partially in the interior of the receiving part and comprises a tube wall having:
a plurality of ridge-shaped support points (24) that extends along a longitudinal direction of the tubular connecting part and the receiving wall inner side,
at least one curved wall area (see annotated figs. 6b below) that extends between two adjacent ridge-shaped support points of the plurality of ridge-shaped support points (see annotated fig. 6b below),
wherein the tubular connecting part is provided by press forming (see note below) a tubular precursor with a concentric cross-section to obtain the tube wall of the tubular connecting part with a rotationally symmetrical cross-section (ex., see fig. 10) comprising the plurality of ridge-shaped support points and the at least one curved wall area,
wherein the press forming comprises a circumferential action of a plurality of jaws of a forming tool on the tubular precursor,
wherein the press forming of the tubular precursor ensures a uniform forming and a constant wall thickness in the tubular precursor,
wherein the tube wall comprising the plurality of ridge-shaped support points and the at least one curved wall area has a constant wall thickness which is identical to the tubular precursor (see fig. 10), and
wherein the at least one curved wall area is shaped as a convexly curved wall area (see annotated fig. 6b) and is curved outwardly with respect to a tube interior of the tubular connecting part (see fig. 10),
wherein between the at least one curved wall area of the tubular connecting part and the receiving wall inner side,
at least one gap (see near 23) is arranged, and
wherein a solder (23) is received in the at least one gap to provide a materially bonded and fluid-tight connection between the receiving wall inner side and the at least one curved wall area (see lines 31-33 in the translated document provided herein),
wherein the receiving wall that delimits the interior of the receiving part has a wall end side (see near 26 in fig. 5, where the wall goes radially inward) that closes the interior transversely to an insertion direction of the tubular connecting part, and
a cavity configured to receive the solder is formed between the wall end side and an end face of the inserted tubular connecting part (see figs. 5 and 6b, where solder is formed in a gap between the inner and outer pipe near 24).
It is notated that “press-forming” is a product-by-process limitation. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). It is the patentability of the product that is to be determined and not recited process steps irrespective of whether or not only process steps are set forth.
PNG
media_image3.png
484
887
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 2, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, wherein, when inserting the tubular connecting part into the receiving part, the plurality of ridge-shaped support points are at least partially inwardly deformable to receive the tubular connecting part in the receiving part (see lines 24-27, where the walls of the coupling are deformable).
Claim 3, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, wherein the plurality of ridge-shaped support points received in the receiving part are configured to apply a force to the receiving wall inner side (see fig. 5, where there is nothing structural preventing this functional limitation).
Claim 4, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, wherein the plurality of ridge-shaped support points are arranged rotationally symmetrically with respect to a central axis of the tubular connecting part (see annotated fig. 6b above hereinafter).
Claim 5, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, wherein a plurality of curved wall areas are arranged rotationally symmetrically with respect to a central axis of the tubular connecting part (see annotated fig. 6b).
Claim 6, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, wherein:
the plurality of ridge-shaped support points lie on a first circumferential circle of the tubular connecting part with respect to a central axis of the tubular connecting part (see fig. 6b),
respective central areas of a plurality of curved wall areas lie on a second circumferential circle of the tubular connecting part with respect to the central axis of the tubular connecting part (see fig. 6b), and
the first circumferential circle has a first circular diameter that is greater than a second circular diameter of the second circumferential circle (see fig. 6b, where the support points comprise a greater diameter than the curved areas).
Claim 7, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, wherein a length of the plurality of ridge-shaped support points along the longitudinal direction of the tubular connecting part is less than a length of the at least one gap along the longitudinal direction of the tubular connecting part (see fig. 5, where “y” is greater than “x”).
Claim 8, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, wherein:
the tubular connecting part has an insertion section (see fig. 5, where “x” is the length of the insertion section) that is completely received in the interior of the receiving part,
the insertion section being connected to an outer section (considered as the remainder of the pipe length near 22) of the tubular connecting part that extends from the insertion section,
the plurality of ridge-shaped support points and the at least one curved wall area of the tube wall are arranged in the insertion section (see fig. 5), and
a tube wall of the outer section has a concentric cross section (see fig. 6a, where the tube wall is concentric).
Claim 10, as best understood, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, wherein each ridge-shaped support point of the plurality of ridge-shaped support points comprises a “rounded top” (see annotated fig. 6b) that bears against the receiving wall inner side.
Claim 12, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, wherein the at least one gap has a crescent shape (see fig. 6b, where the gap has a crescent shape).
Claim 14, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, wherein a wall thickness of the tube wall is between .5 mm and 1.2 mm (see lines 178-179, where the tube thickness is up to 0.6 mm).
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.
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakelin as applied to claim 1 above.
In regards to claim 13, Wakelin discloses:
The fluid connection arrangement of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein a radial depth of the at least one gap transverse to the longitudinal direction of the tubular connecting part is between .02 mm and .2 mm.
However, while Wakelin does not disclose “a radial depth of the at least one gap transverse to the longitudinal direction of the tubular connecting part is between .02 mm and .2 mm”, the “radial depth of the gap” may be determined through the use of routine experimentation during the engineering design process to optimize the functionality of the device, suited to the intended use and desired parameters.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the radial depth of the gap of Wakelin to be between “.02 mm and .2 mm”, as the “depth” may be optimized to the desired operational parameters through the use of routine experimentation. A person of ordinary skill in the art undertaking such experimentation would have had a reasonable expectation of success and the results would have been predictable because Wakelin discloses the structure related to the gap (see lines 97-100 where “inserting the tube 22 into 97 the socket 21 to define therebetween a capillary gap 23”; ex., see lines 82-86, where the inner and outer diameters of the tubes are known parameters). See MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
It is noted that In Gardner v TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984), the Federal Circuit held that, where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device.
Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakelin in view of Mainberger (DE-102005000991).
In regards to claim 21, as best understood, Wakelin discloses:
A fluid connection arrangement for establishing a fluid connection, comprising:
a receiving part (21) comprising a receiving wall that has a receiving wall inner side (25) that delimits an interior of the receiving part (see fig. 5); and
a tubular connecting part (22) that is received at least partially in the interior of the receiving part and comprises a tube wall having:
a plurality of ridge-shaped support points (24) that extends along a longitudinal direction of the tubular connecting part and the receiving wall inner side,
at least one curved wall area (see annotated figs. 6b below) that extends between two adjacent ridge-shaped support points of the plurality of ridge-shaped support points (see annotated fig. 6b below),
wherein the at least one curved wall area is shaped as a convexly curved wall area (see annotated fig. 6b),
wherein the tubular connecting part is provided by press forming (see note below) a tubular precursor with a concentric cross-section to obtain the tube wall of the tubular connecting part with a rotationally symmetrical cross-section (see fig. 10 where the symmetry is symmetrical) comprising the plurality of ridge-shaped support points and the at least one curved wall area,
wherein the press forming comprises a circumferential action of a plurality of jaws of a forming tool on the tubular precursor,
wherein the press forming of the tubular precursor ensures a uniform forming and a constant wall thickness in the tubular precursor (see fig. 10, where the tubing is uniform and constant wall thickness),
wherein the tube wall comprising the plurality of ridge-shaped support points and the at least one curved wall area has a constant wall thickness which is identical to the tubular precursor (see fig. 10, where the tubing is uniform and constant wall thickness),
wherein between the at least one curved wall area of the tubular connecting part and the receiving wall inner side,
at least one gap (see near 23) is arranged
wherein the at least one gap has a crescent shape (see fig. 6b),
wherein a solder (23) is received in the at least one gap to provide a materially bonded and fluid-tight connection between the receiving wall inner side and the at least one curved wall area (see lines 31-33 in the translated document provided herein),
wherein the receiving wall that delimits the interior of the receiving part has a wall end side (see near 26 in fig. 5, where the wall goes radially inward) that closes the interior transversely to an insertion direction of the tubular connecting part, and
a cavity configured to receive the solder is formed between the wall end side and an end face of the inserted tubular connecting part (see figs. 5 and 6b, where solder is formed in a gap between the inner and outer pipe near 24),
wherein the crescent shape is characterized by a constantly curved outer line with a first curve radius and by a constantly curved inner line with a second curve radius (see figure 6b which shows the gap between the outer and inner pipe), which is smaller than the first curve radius,
wherein it is obvious that the embodiment shown in figures 5, 6a, 6b comprises four flutes on the inner tube as opposed to the embodiment of figures 1, 2a, 2b where the flutes are on the outer tube (see page 2, lines 99-104) and that the inner tube can also comprise three flutes instead of four (see page 2, lines 104-105),
wherein the embodiment of figures 3, 4a, 4b are similar to the embodiment of figures 1, 2a, and 2b but comprises only three flutes (14, figure 4b) to define three constantly curved gaps (13, fig. 4b) which is considered an optimum number (see page 2, lines 70-80),
but does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the constantly curved outer line and the constantly curved inner line meet in their respective end points (ex., see figure 4b where if the outer pipe profile was in the inner pipe would meet the limitation of the claim).
In regards to shape of the inner pipe, Mainberger discloses two embodiments of a welded pipe connection such that either three radially inward protrusions are on an outer pipe (see fig. 4) or three radially outward protrusions are on an inner pipe (see fig. 5; see lines 55-57 in the translated document provided herein) such that they are complementary to each other (ex., compare figures 4 and 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to simply substitute the four-lobed shape of the pipe end of the inner pipe of Wakelin with the tri-lobed shape of the outer pipe of Wakelin (ex., as shown in figure 4b) such that a constantly curved outer line of an inner pipe and a constantly curved inner line of an outer pipe meet in their respective end points because Wakelin only require a simple substitution of four lobed profile as shown in figure 6b with the three lobed profile of Wakelin as shown in figure 4b to meet the limitation of the claim, Wakelin discloses obvious variants of placements of the lobes between the inner and outer pipes such that they are complementary (see page 2, lines 99-104), Wakelin discloses that the four flute pipe (figures 3, 4a, 4b) are similar to the three flute pipe (figures 1, 2a, and 2b) such that the three flute pipe (14, figure 4b) defines three constantly curved gaps (13, fig. 4b) which is considered an optimum number (see page 2, lines 70-80), Wakelin discloses that the inner tube can also comprise three flutes instead of four (see page 2, lines 104-105), and Mainberger discloses that it is known for gas welded pipes to have the lobes on either the outer pipe or the inner pipe such that they are complementary to each other (see lines 55-57 in the translated document provided herein). Thus, simply substituting the cross-sectional shape of the four lobed pipe with the cross-sectional shape of the three lobed in another embodiment would not have produced any new or unexpected result.
In addition, Wakelin discloses there a finite number of identified solutions of using either a three fluted pipe (see fig. 4b) or a four fluted pipe (fig. 6b). A person of ordinary skill could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success because modifying the cross-sectional shape of the four fluted pipe to be the shape of the known three fluted pipe to define three constantly curved gaps which is considered an optimum number (see page 2, lines 70-80) is within their technical grasp and would produce no new results as a change of shape has been held to be a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Dailey 357 F.2d 669, 672-73 (CCPA 1966) (referred to in MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B)).
Conclusion
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
/ZACHARY T DRAGICEVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679