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 .
Status of the Application
This action is responsive to the amendment dated 9/21/2026. Claims 1-15 and 21 remain pending. Claim 1 has been amended. The applicant’s amendment has necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection below. This action is Final.
Response to Remarks
Applicant's amendment to recite an elongate flow structure having a proximal end and a distal end along with the other amendments has overcome the rejection of record. However, a new ground(s) of rejection is applied to the claims below. As such, applicant's arguments with respect to the 102 rejection over Coombs have not been found persuasive. A new interpretation of Coombs as stated below in the 102 rejection teaches each and every limitation including an elongate flow structure having a proximal end and a distal end along with the other amendments.
Applicant's amendments to the claims have necessitated further search and/or consideration and/or revision of the rejection, and accordingly, this action must be made Final.
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) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Coombs et al. (US 6,110,383, hereafter “Coombs”).
Regarding claim 1, Coombs discloses a water intake device (Fig. 1) for use in a fuel storage tank, said water intake device comprising: an elongate flow structure (13) having a proximal end (the end of 13 below the valves 46, 48, 50 which is connected to 54 with reference to Fig. 1) and a distal end (the end of 13 above the valves 46, 48, 50 with reference to Fig. 1), the elongate flow structure including a plurality of flow tubes (34, 36, 38) having respective first ends (39, 40, 41) of different lengths and a second end (the ends of 34, 36, 38 which meet at 51) at the proximal end of the elongate flow structure (Fig. 1), said flow tubes being coupled together between the proximal end of the elongate flow structure and the first ends so as to form an integrated structure for insertion in the fuel storage tank (as shown in Fig. 1, see how the flow tubes are coupled together at the base end at 51); a header manifold (51) at the proximal end of the elongate flow structure in fluid communication with the second ends of said flow tubes, the header manifold having a single connection port (52); and said header manifold being configured to allow flow between said flow tubes and said connection port (Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 2, Coombs further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 1, wherein said elongate flow structure assumes a generally L-shaped configuration when deployed in the fuel storage tank, the generally L-shaped configuration having a first leg portion (the portion at 51) and a second leg portion (the portion at 34, 36, 38), the second leg portion being oriented at an angle with respect to the first leg portion. (Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 3, Coombs further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 2, further comprising a sled structure at a distal end of the elongate flow structure. (Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 4, Coombs further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 1, further comprising a sheath (32) containing said plurality of flexible flow tubes.
Regarding claim 5, Coombs further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 4, wherein said sheath defines openings at the respective first ends of the flow tubes. (as shown in Fig. 1, see how 32 includes openings to allow fluid communication between the inside and outside of 32)
Regarding claim 6, Coombs further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 5, further comprising an elongate substrate (the portion of 12 within 32) in said sheath.
Regarding claim 7, Coombs further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 6, wherein said elongate substrate comprises a band having a flat portion. (Fig. 1)
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) 8 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coombs.
Regarding claim 8, Coombs further discloses a water intake device as set forth in claim 7, but fails to disclose wherein said band comprises stainless steel.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the generally flat band of Coombs to comprise stainless steel since selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to provide a material that is known to be robust, durable, inexpensive and easy to manufacture.
Regarding claim 21, Coombs further discloses a water intake device as set forth in claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein at least one of the flow tubes has a different inner diameter from at least one other of the flow tubes.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the diameter of at least one of the flow tubes to have a different inner diameter from at least one other of the flow tubes since it has been 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” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Coombs would not operate differently with the claimed diameter.
Claim(s) 9-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coombs in view of Burris et al. (US 2007/0000558, hereafter “Burris”).
Regarding claim 9, Coombs discloses a water intake device (Fig. 1) for use in a fuel storage tank, said water intake device comprising: an elongate flow structure (13) including at least one flow tube (34, 36, 38) having a distal first end (39, 40, 41) and a proximal second end (the ends of 34, 36, 38 which meet at 51); a header manifold (51) in fluid communication with the second end of said flow tube, the header manifold having at least one connection port (52); said header manifold being configured to allow flow between said flow tube and said connection port (Fig. 1); and an elongate substrate (the portion of 12 around each of 34, 36, 38) adjacent to said flow tube, wherein said elongate flow structure is capable of a generally L-shaped configuration when deployed in the fuel storage tank, the generally L-shaped configuration having a first leg portion (the portion at 51) and a second leg portion (the portion at 34, 36, 38), the second leg portion being oriented at an angle with respect to the first leg portion (Fig. 1), but fails to disclose wherein said elongate flow structure is coiled but capable of assuming a generally L-shaped configuration when deployed in the fuel storage tank.
Burris teaches a system comprising an elongate flow structure (103, 106) that is capable of being coiled and capable of assuming a generally L-shaped configuration when deployed in the fuel storage tank. (para. [0040], [0042]; see how the tubes can be made of rubber which is flexible such that the tubes can take a different shape.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the material of the elongate flow structure of Coombs to be made of rubber as taught by Burris in order to provide a non-corrosive, cost effective, and durable material. (para. [0040], [0042])
Regarding claim 10, Coombs in view of Burris further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 9, wherein said substrate provides a semi-rigid characteristic that allows the elongate flow structure to be guided. (Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 11, Coombs in view of Burris further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 9, wherein said elongate substrate comprises a band having a flat portion. (Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 13, Coombs in view of Burris further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 9, further comprising a sled structure at a distal end of the elongate flow structure. (Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 14, Coombs in view of Burris further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 9, further comprising a sheath (32) containing said flow tube and said elongate substrate.
Regarding claim 15, Coombs in view of Burris further disclose a water intake device as set forth in claim 10, wherein said elongate flow structure deploys from a non L-shaped configuration to the generally L-shaped configuration. (as modified, the tubes are flexible, so the elongate flow structure is at least capable of taking a different shape before being in an operation position which take a generally L-shaped configuration as shown in Fig. 1)
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 PAUL J GRAY whose telephone number is (571)270-0544. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571 272-4881. 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.
/PAUL J GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights