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 .
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 bushings recited in claims 22 and 23 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 § 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.
Claims 1,7,8,14,15,20,22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Daughira 3685542 (newly cited).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (bushings)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Covering adjacent to second connecting component)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First substantially circular passage)][AltContent: textbox (Second substantially circular passage)]
PNG
media_image1.png
407
500
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claims 1,8,15, Daughira discloses a mechanical collar and system (see fig. 2) comprising:
a first connecting component 20 having a first connecting component inner diameter; and
a second connecting component 16 oriented perpendicular to the first connecting component 20;
wherein the first connecting component 20 and the second connecting component 16 are adjoined to one another as features of the mechanical collar;
and wherein the second connecting component 16 comprises a first substantially circular passage and a second substantially circular passage (see above annotated figure);
wherein the second substantially circular passage has an outer diameter less than the inner diameter of the first substantially circular passage such that the second substantially circular passage is at least partially located within the first substantially circular passage; and wherein the first substantially circular passage is defined by a first substantially circular continuous perimeter and the second substantially circular passage is defined by a second substantially circular continuous perimeter. See above annotated figure. With further regard to claims 8 and 15, note protective apparatus (sensing elements 30/32) which is operatively attached to first connecting component 20 and mechanical arm component 28 operatively attached to the second connecting component 16.
With regard to claims 7,14,20, note coverings that hide cables entering the collar. See above annotated figure.
With regard to claim 22, note bushings that allow protective apparatus 30,32 to rotate. See annotated figure above.
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.
Claims 2,3,9,16,21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daughira 3685542 in view of Morizur et al 20140179844.
With regard to claims 2,3,9,16,21, Daughira does not explicitly disclose that the collar comprises polycarbonate, polyphenylsulfone or polyethylene.
Morizur et al disclose compositions that can be used for a variety of applications, including plumbing equipment. See paragraph 270. Morizur et al also disclose that the composition may comprise polycarbonate, polyphenylsulfone or polyethylene. See paragraphs 209 and 253.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to form the collar of Daughira to comprise polycarbonate, polyphenylsulfone or polyethylene, in view of the teaching of Morizur et al that such materials are suitable for use in a variety of applications, including plumbing equipment.
Claims 4,5,11,12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daughira 3685542.
With regard to these claims, Daughira does not disclose the first connecting component having a diameter of between approximately one inch and approximately five inches, nor the first substantially circular passage having an inner diameter of between approximately one inch and approximately six inches.
However, Daughira does disclose in col. 2, lines 52-55 that diameters of the collar may be varied based on the needs of a particular application. Further, it appears that one skilled in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in selecting diameters that fall within the claimed ranges, as it only involves adjusting the diameter sizes to provide the stated desired property of flow. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to form the first connecting component to have a diameter of between approximately one inch and approximately five inches, and the first substantially circular passage to have an inner diameter of between approximately one inch and approximately six inches, with the collar of Daughira as a matter of routine optimization, since it has been held that "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA1955).
Claims 6,13,19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daughira 3685542 in view of McElroy 3995888.
With regard to claims 6,13,19, Daughira does not disclose the second connecting component to comprise a C-clamp located adjacent to the first substantially circular passage and the second substantially circular passage.
McElroy discloses a C-clamp 18 (fig. 1) which is used to connect two sections of different diameter passageways together.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to include a C-clamp adjacent to the first substantially circular passage and the second substantially circular passage, if one wished to connect the first and second passages of Daughira together without utilizing threaded connections.
Claims 23 is is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daughira 3685542 in view of Ganaway 4761839.
Daughira does not disclose the bushings (see annotated figure above) to be formed of nylon.
Ganaway discloses the use of a bushing 90, which may be formed of a homopolymer (nylon). See col. 3, lines 5-10.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to utilize nylon bushings as the bushings in the collar of Daughira, if one wished to provide bushings that can easily be replaced.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9,11-16,19-23 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.
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 NICHOLAS D LUCCHESI whose telephone number is (571)272-4977. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 800-430.
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, Eric Rosen can be reached at 571-270-7855. 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.
/NICHOLAS D LUCCHESI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772