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 § 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.
It is noted that the rejection of claim 15 has not changed.
Claim(s) 11-15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rudolph (4,174,068) in view of Strong et al. (2010/0213217) and Rigolio (D567,899).
Regarding claim 15, Rudolph above shows A pneumatic spray gun for dispensing texture material, the pneumatic spray gun comprising: a pressure canister (16) including an interior volume structured and arranged to receive a cartridge (13) containing the texture material; a spray nozzle (37) adjacent a front end of the pressure canister structured and arranged to receive the texture material when the texture material is dispensed from the cartridge; and an air nozzle (33) structured and arranged to direct pressurized air toward the texture material as the texture material passes through the spray nozzle,
But fails to disclose wherein the spray nozzle comprises a contoured central nozzle opening comprising at least one concave retaining recess and at least one convex retaining rib structured and arranged to engage a contoured tip of the cartridge to thereby inhibit relative rotational movement between the contoured cartridge tip and the contoured central nozzle opening.
However, Strong et al. shows A cartridge (12, 14) for containing and dispensing texture materials from a texture material spray gun, the cartridge comprising a contoured central opening (fig 1, 34) that comprises at least one retaining recess (flat sections of 42) and at least one radially projecting rib (ribs of between the flat sections) structured and arraigned to engage a contoured tip (26) of the cartridge to thereby inhibit relative rotational movement between the contoured cartridge tip and the contoured central nozzle opening.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to add the ribs and recesses of the cartridge of Strong et al. as modified above, to the cartridge and nozzle of Rudolf, and make the central nozzle opening of Rudolf contoured so that the ribs and recesses of the cartridge interact with them, in order to prevent rotation of the cartridge within the nozzle as taught by Strong et al. ([0011]).
The above combination still fails to disclose that the radially projecting rib has a concave outer surface at least one radially indented recess is concave.
However, Rigolio teaches a nozzle tip that includes at least one radially projecting rib (fig 1) having a concave outer surface and at least one radially indented concave recess (fig 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to use the recesses and ribs of Rigolio instead of the recess and ribs of Strong et al. in order to increase the number of recesses and ribs, thereby further preventing rotation between the cartridge and the spray gun by increasing the surface area of the connection.
Regarding claim 11, Rudolph above shows a pneumatic spray gun nozzle assembly (10) the assembly comprising: a spray nozzle (17, 31) including a central nozzle opening; an air nozzle (33) structured and arranged to direct pressurized air toward the texture material as the texture material passes through the spray nozzle (fig 1); and a cartridge (13) including a hollow cartridge body (fig 1) and a cartridge tip (14) extending forwardly along a longitudinal axis from the cartridge body, insertable in the central nozzle opening (fig 1),
But fails to disclose that the nozzle tip comprising a rear flange retained within the cartridge body and that the central nozzle opening is contoured along with the contoured cartridge tip, wherein the central nozzle opening comprises at least one retaining recess receiving at least one radially projecting rib of the contoured cartridge tip and at least one retaining rib received within at least one radially indented recess of the cartridge tip, whereby relative rotational movement of the contoured cartridge tip within the contoured central nozzle opening is inhibited by the at least one radially projecting rib of the contoured cartridge tip received in the at least one concave retaining recess of the contoured central nozzle opening, or by the at least one convex retaining rib of the contoured central nozzle opening received within the at least one radially indented recess of the contoured cartridge tip.
Strong et al. teaches a two piece cartridge body (14) with the nozzle tip (24) comprising a rear flange (the wider portion of 12) retained within the cartridge body (14).
Strong et al. also shows a cartridge that has an anti-rotation system between the tip (24) and a hollow cartridge (14) surrounding the tip. The anti-rotation system including at least one radially projecting rib (ribs 26) and at least one radially indented recess (flat sections 40 between ribs 26) structured and arranged to inhibit rotation of the cartridge tip around the longitudinal axis when the cartridge is mounted in the texture material spray gun (the flat portions and ribs of 24 prevent rotation of 24 because they mate with corresponding surfaces 34 and 42 of 14).
In Strong et al. the central nozzle opening is contoured along with the contoured cartridge tip figure 1 in order to prevent rotation [0011], wherein the central nozzle opening comprises at least one retaining recess (42) receiving at least one radially projecting rib of the contoured cartridge tip and at least one retaining rib (34) received within at least one radially indented recess of the cartridge tip, whereby relative rotational movement of the contoured cartridge tip within the contoured central nozzle opening is inhibited by the at least one radially projecting rib of the contoured cartridge tip received in the at least one concave retaining recess of the contoured central nozzle opening, or by the at least one convex retaining rib of the contoured central nozzle opening received within the at least one radially indented recess of the contoured cartridge tip [0011].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to use an anti-rotation system similar to that of Strong et al. in the system of Rudolph between the central nozzle opening and the cartridge tip in order to prevent rotation as taught by Strong et al.[0011].
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to use the two piece cartridge body system of Strong et al, in the gun of Rudolph in order to have the nozzle easily replaceable without the need to replace the entire cartridge body.
The above combination still fails to disclose wherein the contoured central nozzle opening comprises at least one concave retaining recess and at least one convex retaining rib received within at least one radially indented recess of the cartridge tip.
However, Rigolio teaches a nozzle tip that includes at least one radially projecting rib (fig 1) having a concave outer surface and at least one radially indented concave recess (fig 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to use the recesses and ribs of Rigolio instead of the recess and ribs of Strong et al. in order to increase the number of recesses and ribs, thereby further preventing rotation between the cartridge and the spray gun by increasing the surface area of the connection.
Regarding claim 12, wherein the contoured central nozzle opening comprises at least two of the concave retaining recesses and the contoured nozzle tip comprises at least two of the radially projecting ribs (Rigolio)
Regarding claim 13, wherein the contoured central nozzle opening comprises at least two of the convex retaining ribs and the contoured nozzle tip comprises at least two of the radially indented recesses (Rigolio).
Regarding claim 14, wherein the contoured central nozzle opening comprises four of the concave retaining recesses and four of the convex retaining ribs, and the contoured nozzle tip comprises four of the radially projecting ribs and four of the radially indented recesses (Rigolio).
Regarding claim 17, wherein the rear flange of the cartridge tip comprises a front surface contacting a front end of the cartridge body to thereby retain the rear flange within the cartridge body (Strong, fig 1).
Claim(s) 1-10 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones et al. (2,646,906) in view of Strong et al. (2010/0213217) and Rigolio (D567,899)
Regarding claim 1, Jones et al. shows A cartridge (10) for containing and dispensing texture materials from a texture material spray gun, the cartridge comprising: a generally cylindrical hollow cartridge body (fig 1) comprising a front end (the end with the tip), an open rear end (the end without the tip) structured and arranged to receive a movable plunger (25), and a cylindrical inner surface extending between the front end and the rear end structured and arranged to slidingly engage the movable plunger (fig 1); and a cartridge tip (12) extending forwardly along a longitudinal axis from the cartridge body comprising a rear flange (19) retained within the cartridge body (fig 1,3)
But fails to disclose at least one radially projecting rib having a convex outer surface and at least one radially indented concave recess structured and arranged to inhibit rotation of the cartridge tip around the longitudinal axis when the cartridge is mounted in the texture material spray gun.
Strong et al. shows a cartridge that has an anti-rotation system between the tip (24) and a hollow cartridge (14) surrounding the tip. The anti-rotation system including at least one radially projecting rib (ribs 26) and at least one radially indented recess (flat sections 40 between ribs 26) structured and arranged to inhibit rotation of the cartridge tip around the longitudinal axis when the cartridge is mounted in the texture material spray gun (the flat portions and ribs of 24 prevent rotation of 24 because they mate with corresponding surfaces 34 and 42 of 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to use an anti-rotation system similar to that of Strong et al. in the system of Jones et al. in order to prevent rotation as taught by Strong et al.[0011].
The above combination still fails to disclose that the radially projecting rib has a concave outer surface at least one radially indented recess is concave.
However, Rigolio teaches a nozzle tip that includes at least one radially projecting rib (fig 1) having a concave outer surface and at least one radially indented concave recess (fig 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively field to use the recesses and ribs of Rigolio instead of the recess and ribs of Strong et al. in order to increase the number of recesses and ribs, thereby further preventing rotation between the cartridge and the spray gun by increasing the surface area of the connection.
Regarding claim 2, the cartridge tip (12, Jones) comprises a generally cylindrical body and a front portion extending forwardly from the body (fig 1).
Regarding claim 3, the at least one radially projecting rib and at least one radially indented concave recess are located in the front portion (fig 1, Rigolio).
Regarding claim 4, comprising at least one of the radially projecting ribs and at least one of the radially indented concave recesses circumferentially spaced from the at least one radially projecting ribs around a circumference of the cartridge tip (fig 1 Rigolio).
Regarding claim 5, comprising at least two of the radially projecting ribs and at least two of the radially indented concave recesses circumferentially spaced from the at least two radially projecting ribs around a circumference of the cartridge tip (fig 1 Rigolio).
Regarding claim 6, comprising at least four of the radially projecting ribs and at least four of the radially indented concave recesses circumferentially spaced from the at least four radially projecting ribs around a circumference of the cartridge tip (fig 1 Rigolio).
Regarding claim 7, wherein each of the radially projecting ribs tapers radially inward toward a front dispensing tip (Rigolio) .
Regarding claim 8, each of the radially projecting ribs comprises side channel walls extending along a length of the front portion and extending radially inward toward adjacent ones of the radially indented concave recesses (fig 1, 2 Rigolio).
Regarding claim 9, wherein each of the radially indented recesses comprises a rear wall (the rear wall is being considered the surface of the flange 19 of Jones since the ribs of Rigolio go all the way to the flange).
Regarding claim 10, wherein each of the rear walls of the radially indented concave recesses transitions into side channel walls of adjacent ones of the radially projecting ribs that extend along a length of the front portion (Rigolio).
Regarding claim 16, wherein the rear flange of the cartridge tip comprises a front surface contacting the front end of the cartridge body to thereby retain the rear flange within the cartridge body (Jones, fig 3).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 15 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 15, the examiner notes that Strong is being used to teach a contoured opening (34) and a contoured projection or nozzle (26) that are rotationally locked together. The 103 rejection clearly states that The modification done to Rudolph is to add the ribs and recesses of the cartridge of Strong et al. as modified above, to the cartridge and nozzle of Rudolf, and make the central nozzle opening of Rudolf contoured so that the ribs and recesses of the cartridge interact with them, in order to prevent rotation of the cartridge within the nozzle as taught by Strong et al. ([0011]).
The above rejection is being maintained.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 11 and their dependent claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new rejections above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JASON J BOECKMANN whose telephone number is (571)272-2708. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm.
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, Arthur Hall can be reached on (571) 270-1814. 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.
/JASON J BOECKMANN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 2/12/2026