DETAILED ACTION
Amendments filed on 8/6/2025 have been entered.
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 § 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.
Claims 8, 9, 17, 18 are 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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 8, 9, 17, 18 recite “the locking device is a hollow cylindrical spring-metal ring”. There is no description given in the specification of the published application disclosing the locking device is a spring. There is no drawing neither example given in the specification illustrates and/or describes that the structure of the claimed limitation the locking device is a spring.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8, 9, 17, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 8, 9, 17, 18 recites “the locking device is a hollow cylindrical spring-metal ring”. It is unclear how structure such as locking device as disclosed in paragraph [47] of the application locking device 5 with notches which is configured to be pressed inwards in order to achieve the tight locking function can be a spring. The function/feature of a spring is configured to expand/contract making the structure to be flexible due to a force being exert on the spring or being released from the spring, which is opposite of the function of the locking device as disclosed in the specification. The bolded phrase makes the claimed limitations indefinite, because the structure and the function of the locking device contradict the claimed limitation spring metal ring. More clarification is required.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1, 2, 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (6,148,631), in view of Lee (US 2015/0369528 A1).
Claim 1: Watanabe discloses a noise reduction device (i.e., preamble), comprising:
an outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9), wherein the outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9) comprises a first end (i.e., inherent; annotated FIG.9) connected to a capillary tube (i.e., FIG.9 shows view of a capillary tube) and a second end (i.e., inherent; annotated FIG.9) connected to an evaporator (i.e., column 7 line 51: evaporator system for operating by pressure/temperature),
wherein a plurality of porous wire meshes (i.e., annotated FIG.9; honeycomb pipes 2 used as porous mesh; column 8 line 6-7) arranged at an interval is disposed in the outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9), and side edges (i.e., inherent) of the plurality of porous wire meshes (i.e., 2) abut against an inner wall surface (i.e., inherent) of the outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9); and
wherein a plurality of inner connecting tubes (i.e., annotated FIG.9 shows plurality of inner connecting tubes) are sleeved in the outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9), two adjacent inner connecting tubes (i.e., annotated FIG.9) abut against two opposite end surfaces (i.e., annotated FIG.9) of one of the porous wire meshes (i.e., 2), respectively;
[AltContent: textbox (outer connecting tube)][AltContent: connector]
PNG
media_image1.png
660
507
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 1, except for pore diameters of the plurality of porous wire meshes are sequentially reduced from the first end to the second end.
However, Lee teaches pore diameters of the porous wire mesh (i.e., mesh 242) is sequentially reduced from the first end to the second end (i.e., as shown in FIG.2 dimeter of mesh sequentially reduced from one end toward another end; see paragraph [49]: mesh 242 that extends from portion 241 towards discharge portion 215, and FIG.2 shows the diameter of the mesh 242 sequentially reduced from the first end at 241 to the second end at 215) for the purpose of filtering foreign substance preventing it from being blocked (paragraph [50]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include pore diameters of the porous wire mesh is sequentially reduced from the first end to the second end as taught by Lee in order to filter foreign substance to prevent it from being blocked (Change in size MPEP 21.44.04 IV).
PNG
media_image2.png
348
456
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 2: Watanabe as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the porous wire meshes (i.e., 2) comprise a first porous wire mesh (i.e., 2) adjacent to the first end, a second porous wire mesh (i.e., 2) disposed in a middle (i.e., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to place a second porous wire mesh in a middle of the outer connecting tube in order to enhance noise reducing measure, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art - Location of Parts: MPEP 2144.04 VI-C) of the outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9) and a third porous wire mesh (i.e., 2) adjacent to the second end; and pore diameters of the first porous wire mesh, the second porous wire mesh and the third porous wire mesh are sequentially reduced (i.e., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include pore diameters of the first porous wire mesh, the second porous wire mesh and the third porous wire mesh are sequentially reduced in order to filter foreign substance to prevent it from being blocked - Change in size MPEP 21.44.04 IV).
Claim 10: Watanabe as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1 a refrigeration device (i.e., preamble), comprising the noise reduction device (i.e., preamble; FIG.9), the capillary tube (i.e., FIG.9 capillary tube) and the evaporator (i.e., column 7 line 51).
Claim 11: Watanabe discloses a noise reduction device (i.e., FIG.9), comprising:
an outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9), wherein: the outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9) comprises a first end (i.e., inherent; annotated FIG.9) connected to a capillary tube (i.e., FIG.9 shows view of a capillary tube) and a second end (i.e., inherent; annotated FIG.9) connected to an evaporator (i.e., column 7 line 51: evaporator system for operating by pressure/temperature), wherein a plurality of porous wire meshes (i.e., annotated FIG.9; honeycomb pipes 2 used as porous mesh; column 8 line 6-7) arranged at an interval is disposed in the outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9), and side edges (i.e., inherent) of the plurality of porous wire meshes (i.e., 2) abut against an inner wall surface (i.e., inherent) of the outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9); and wherein the porous wire meshes (i.e., 2) comprise a first porous wire mesh (i.e., 2) adjacent to the first end, a second porous wire mesh (i.e., 2) disposed in a middle (i.e., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to place a second porous wire mesh in a middle of the outer connecting tube in order to enhance noise reducing measure, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art - Location of Parts: MPEP 2144.04 VI-C) of the outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9) and a third porous wire mesh (i.e., 2) adjacent to the second end; and pore diameters of the first porous wire mesh, the second porous wire mesh and the third porous wire mesh are sequentially reduced (i.e., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include pore diameters of the first porous wire mesh, the second porous wire mesh and the third porous wire mesh are sequentially reduced in order to filter foreign substance to prevent it from being blocked - Change in size MPEP 21.44.04 IV).
PNG
media_image3.png
644
555
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 11, except for pore diameters of the plurality of porous wire meshes are gradually reduced from the first end to the second end;
However, Lee teaches pore diameters of the porous wire mesh (i.e., mesh 242) is gradually reduced from the first end to the second end (i.e., as shown in FIG.2 dimeter of mesh gradually reduced from one end toward another end) for the purpose of filtering foreign substance preventing it from being blocked (paragraph [50]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include pore diameters of the porous wire mesh is gradually reduced from the first end to the second end as taught by Lee in order to filter foreign substance to prevent it from being blocked (Change in size MPEP 21.44.04 IV).
Claim 12: Watanabe as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the outer connecting tube (i.e., annotated FIG.9) further sleeves a plurality of inner connecting tubes (i.e., annotated FIG.9 shows plurality of inner connecting tubes), and two adjacent inner connecting tubes (i.e., annotated FIG.9) abut against two opposite end surfaces (i.e., annotated FIG.9) of one of the plurality of porous wire meshes (i.e., 2), respectively.
Claims 4, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (6,148,631), in view of Lee (US 2015/0369528 A1), in view of Campbell (US 2010/0254758 A1).
Claim 4: Watanabe as modified fails to disclose wherein the outer connecting tube and the inner connecting tube are flexible tubes, and an outer diameter of the inner connecting tube is equal to an inner diameter of the outer connecting tube.
However, Campbell teaches the outer connecting tube and the inner connecting tube are flexible tubes (i.e., paragraph [50]: tubes made out of plastic or rubber) for the purpose of utilizing multiple fittings to meet customer specifications and need for reliability and to be cost effective (paragraph [50]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include the outer connecting tube and the inner connecting tube are flexible tubes as taught by Campbell in order to utilize multiple fittings to meet customer specifications and need for reliability and to be cost effective.
Claim 13: Watanabe as modified fails to disclose wherein the outer connecting tube and the inner connecting tube are flexible tubes, and an outer diameter of the inner connecting tube is equal to an inner diameter of the outer connecting tube.
However, Campbell teaches the outer connecting tube and the inner connecting tube are flexible tubes (i.e., paragraph [50]: tubes made out of plastic or rubber) for the purpose of utilizing multiple fittings to meet customer specifications and need for reliability and to be cost effective (paragraph [50]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include the outer connecting tube and the inner connecting tube are flexible tubes as taught by Campbell in order to utilize multiple fittings to meet customer specifications and need for reliability and to be cost effective.
Claims 5, 6, 14, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (6,148,631), in view of Lee (US 2015/0369528 A1), in view of Oh (KR 101879248 B1).
Claim 5: Watanabe as modified fails to disclose wherein each of the first end and the second end further sleeves a connector, and the connector comprises a tubular fixing portion disposed inside the inner connecting tube and a flared connecting portion protruding from the inner connecting tube.
However, Oh teaches each of the first end (i.e., inherent) and the second end (i.e., inherent) further sleeves a connector (i.e., 130 sleeve used as connector), and the connector (i.e., 130) comprises a tubular fixing portion (i.e., tube portion 131 used as tubular fixing portion) disposed inside the inner connecting tube (i.e., 151) and a flared connecting portion (i.e., extension portion 132 used as flared connecting portion) protruding from the inner connecting tube (i.e., 151) for the purpose of reducing manufacturing cost and securing the airtightness (paragraph [15]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include each of the first end and the second end further sleeves a connector, and the connector comprises a tubular fixing portion disposed inside the inner connecting tube and a flared connecting portion protruding from the inner connecting tube as taught by Oh in order to prevent leakage and to secure the airtightness.
PNG
media_image4.png
405
513
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 6: Watanabe as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 5, wherein the outer connecting tube (Oh i.e., 152) is further sleeved with a locking device (Oh i.e., ring 143 used as locking device; ring 143 to surround the surface in order to maintain airtightness more strongly) at an outer circumference corresponding to the tubular fixing portion (Oh i.e., 131).
Claim 14: Watanabe as modified fails to disclose wherein each of the first end and the second end further sleeves a connector, and the connector comprises a tubular fixing portion disposed inside the inner connecting tube and a flared connecting portion protruding from the inner connecting tube.
However, Oh teaches each of the first end (i.e., inherent) and the second end (i.e., inherent) further sleeves a connector (i.e., 130 sleeve used as connector), and the connector (i.e., 130) comprises a tubular fixing portion (i.e., tube portion 131 used as tubular fixing portion) disposed inside the inner connecting tube (i.e., 151) and a flared connecting portion (i.e., extension portion 132 used as flared connecting portion) protruding from the inner connecting tube (i.e., 151) for the purpose of reducing manufacturing cost and securing the airtightness (paragraph [15]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include each of the first end and the second end further sleeves a connector, and the connector comprises a tubular fixing portion disposed inside the inner connecting tube and a flared connecting portion protruding from the inner connecting tube as taught by Oh in order to prevent leakage and to secure the airtightness.
Claim 15: Watanabe as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 14, wherein the outer connecting tube (Oh i.e., 152) is further sleeved with a locking device (Oh i.e., ring 143 used as locking device; ring 143 to surround the surface in order to maintain airtightness more strongly) at an outer circumference corresponding to the fixing portion (Oh i.e., 131).
PNG
media_image5.png
401
350
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claims 7, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (6,148,631), in view of Lee (US 2015/0369528 A1), in view of Oh (KR 101879248 B1), and in view of Goto (CN 113167416 A).
Claim 7: Watanabe as modified fails to disclose wherein each of the first end and the second end is further sleeved with a hollow bolt, and each of the capillary tube and the evaporator is provided with a nut sleeve matched with the hollow bolt, the hollow bolt abutting against the locking device to press the locking device inwards.
However, Goto teaches each of the first end (i.e., inherent) and the second end (i.e., inherent) is further sleeved with a hollow bolt (i.e., flared bolt 10), and each of a tube (i.e., tube 120) is provided with a nut sleeve (i.e., flared nut 30) matched with the hollow bolt (i.e., 10), the hollow bolt (i.e., 10) abutting against the locking device (i.e., locking surface 37) to press the locking device inwards (i.e., intended use/functional language) for the purpose of preventing the connection of the piping from loosening (paragraph [52]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include each of the first end and the second end is further sleeved with a hollow bolt, and each of the tube is provided with a nut sleeve matched with the hollow bolt, the hollow bolt abutting against the locking device to press the locking device inwards as taught by Goto in order to prevent the connection of the piping from loosening.
PNG
media_image6.png
309
553
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 16: Watanabe as modified fails to disclose wherein each of the first end and the second end is further sleeved with a hollow bolt, and each of the capillary tube and the evaporator is provided with a nut sleeve matched with the hollow bolt, the hollow bolt abutting against the locking device to press the locking device inwards.
However, Goto teaches each of the first end (i.e., inherent) and the second end (i.e., inherent) is further sleeved with a hollow bolt (i.e., flared bolt 10), and each of a tube (i.e., tube 120) is provided with a nut sleeve (i.e., flared nut 30) matched with the hollow bolt (i.e., 10), the hollow bolt (i.e., 10) abutting against the locking device (i.e., locking surface 37) to press the locking device inwards (i.e., intended use/functional language) for the purpose of preventing the connection of the piping from loosening (paragraph [52]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include each of the first end and the second end is further sleeved with a hollow bolt, and each of the tube is provided with a nut sleeve matched with the hollow bolt, the hollow bolt abutting against the locking device to press the locking device inwards as taught by Goto in order to prevent the connection of the piping from loosening.
PNG
media_image6.png
309
553
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claims 8, 9, 17, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (6,148,631), in view of Lee (US 2015/0369528 A1), in view of Oh (KR 101879248 B1), in view of Goto (CN 113167416 A), and further in view of Lin (CN 112082033 A).
Claim 8: Watanabe as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein an inner wall surface (i.e., inherent) of the hollow bolt is cylinder-shaped (Goto i.e., 10 see FIG.5); the locking device (Oh i.e., 143) is a hollow cylindrical ring having (Oh i.e., as shown in FIG.8 143 is hollow cylinder ring) a first bottom surface (i.e., inherent) and a second bottom surface (i.e., inherent) opposite to each other, wherein the first bottom surface (i.e., inherent) is close to the hollow bolt (Goto i.e., 10).
Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 8, but fails to disclose a spring.
However, Lin teaches a spring (40; elastic structure 40 one end is connected to clap and other end connected to inner wall of shell see FIG.2) for the purpose of providing restoring force to make clap movable so as to adjust the volume of the internal cavity.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include a spring as taught by Lin in order to provide restoring force to make clap movable so as to adjust the volume of the internal cavity.
Further, Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 8, except for metal ring. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Watanabe to include metal ring in order to enhance securing the airtightness, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice (Preferred Material).
Further, Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 8, except for a diameter smaller than an inner diameter of the hollow bolt, and a diameter of the second bottom surface is larger than the inner diameter of the hollow bolt. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include a diameter smaller than an inner diameter of the hollow bolt, and a diameter of the second bottom surface is larger than the inner diameter of the hollow bolt in order to prevent the connection of the piping from loosening, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claim 9: Watanabe as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein the locking device (Oh i.e., 143) is a hollow cylindrical ring (Oh i.e., as shown in FIG.8 143 is hollow cylinder ring) provided with a plurality of notches (Oh i.e., screw part 121 used as notches) at an end facing the hollow bolt (Goto i.e., 10); an inner wall surface of the hollow bolt (Goto i.e., 10), and a side surface (i.e., inherent) of the hollow bolt (Goto i.e., 10) faces the locking device (Oh i.e., 143);
Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 9, but fails to disclose a spring.
However, Lin teaches a spring (40; elastic structure 40 one end is connected to clap and other end connected to inner wall of shell see FIG.2) for the purpose of providing restoring force to make clap movable so as to adjust the volume of the internal cavity.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include a spring as taught by Lin in order to provide restoring force to make clap movable so as to adjust the volume of the internal cavity.
Further, Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 9, except for a frustum cone-shaped. The configuration/shape of the claimed locking device is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration/shape of the claimed locking device is significant in order to enhance securing the airtightness - Change of Shape: MPEP 2144.04).
Further, Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 9, except for metal ring. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Watanabe to include metal ring in order to enhance securing the airtightness, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice (Preferred Material).
Further, Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 9, except for an inner diameter of an end of the hollow bolt close to the locking device is larger than an outer diameter of the locking device, and a diameter of an opposite end of the hollow bolt is smaller than the outer diameter of the locking device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include an inner diameter of an end of the hollow bolt close to the locking device is larger than an outer diameter of the locking device, and a diameter of an opposite end of the hollow bolt is smaller than the outer diameter of the locking device in order to prevent the connection of the piping from loosening, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claim 17: Watanabe as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 16, wherein an inner wall surface (i.e., inherent) of the hollow bolt is cylinder-shaped (Goto i.e., 10 see FIG.5); the locking device (Oh i.e., 143) is a hollow cylindrical ring having (Oh i.e., as shown in FIG.8 143 is hollow cylinder ring) a first bottom surface (i.e., inherent) and a second bottom surface (i.e., inherent) opposite to each other, wherein the first bottom surface (i.e., inherent) is close to the hollow bolt (Goto i.e., 10).
Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 17, but fails to disclose a spring.
However, Lin teaches a spring (40; elastic structure 40 one end is connected to clap and other end connected to inner wall of shell see FIG.2) for the purpose of providing restoring force to make clap movable so as to adjust the volume of the internal cavity.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include a spring as taught by Lin in order to provide restoring force to make clap movable so as to adjust the volume of the internal cavity.
Further, Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 17, except for metal ring. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Watanabe to include metal ring in order to enhance securing the airtightness, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice (Preferred Material).
Further, Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 17, except for a diameter smaller than an inner diameter of the hollow bolt, and a diameter of the second bottom surface is larger than the inner diameter of the hollow bolt. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include a diameter smaller than an inner diameter of the hollow bolt, and a diameter of the second bottom surface is larger than the inner diameter of the hollow bolt in order to prevent the connection of the piping from loosening, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Claim 18: Watanabe as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 16, wherein the locking device (Oh i.e., 143) is a hollow cylindrical ring (Oh i.e., as shown in FIG.8 143 is hollow cylinder ring) provided with a plurality of notches (Oh i.e., screw part 121 used as notches) at an end facing the hollow bolt (Goto i.e., 10); an inner wall surface of the hollow bolt (Goto i.e., 10), and a side surface (i.e., inherent) of the hollow bolt (Goto i.e., 10) faces the locking device (Oh i.e., 143);
Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 18, but fails to disclose a spring.
However, Lin teaches a spring (40; elastic structure 40 one end is connected to clap and other end connected to inner wall of shell see FIG.2) for the purpose of providing restoring force to make clap movable so as to adjust the volume of the internal cavity.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include a spring as taught by Lin in order to provide restoring force to make clap movable so as to adjust the volume of the internal cavity.
Further, Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 18, except for metal ring. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Watanabe to include metal ring in order to enhance securing the airtightness, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice (Preferred Material).
Further, Watanabe discloses the claimed limitations in claim 18, except for an inner diameter of an end of the hollow bolt close to the locking device is larger than an outer diameter of the locking device, and a diameter of an opposite end of the hollow bolt is smaller than the outer diameter of the locking device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to further modify the apparatus of Watanabe to include an inner diameter of an end of the hollow bolt close to the locking device is larger than an outer diameter of the locking device, and a diameter of an opposite end of the hollow bolt is smaller than the outer diameter of the locking device in order to prevent the connection of the piping from loosening, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art - Optimum value: MPEP 2144.05 II-B).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to all the claims under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments to new amendment is addressed in this office action. Therefore, a new ground(s) of rejections have been made in response to the amendments.
Applicant’s argument on page 13 last paragraph: “the proposed combination lacks a rational motivation. Lee fails to provide an enabling disclosure for the claimed structure. Lee does not disclose a plurality of meshes whose pore diameters are sequentially reduced”.
Examiner response: examiner respectfully disagrees, because as indicated in the office action, Watanabe discloses a plurality of porous wire meshes in column 8 lines 1-9: honeycomb pipes 2 are used as homogenizing means refrigerant, but porous metal or porous ceramic may be also used, therefore Watanabe was modified to only include what lacks pore diameters of the porous wire meshes are sequentially reduced from the first end to the second end as taught by Lee in order to filter foreign substance to prevent it from being blocked. Lee teaches mesh 242 in paragraph [49]: mesh 242 that extends from portion 241 towards discharge portion 215, and FIG.2 shows the diameter of the mesh 242 sequentially reduced from the first end (at 241) to the second end (at 215).
Applicant’s argument on page 15 first paragraph: “Goto does not teach the central limitation of claims 7 and 16 which requires the hollow bolt abutting against the locking device to press the locking device inwards. The proposed combination with Goto is improper”.
Examiner response: examiner respectfully disagrees, because Goto teaches hollow bolt (bolt 10) abutting against the locking device (locking portion 37 used as locking, locking portion 37 is configured to be engaged with claw portion 56) to press the locking device inwards (functional language). This is apparatus claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition is met, requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur. As indicated in the office action, Watanabe was modified to only include the hollow bolt abutting against the locking device to press the locking device inwards as taught by Goto in order to prevent the connection of the pipe from loosening.
Examiner response to applicant’s argument on page 15 third paragraph regarding claims 9 and 18: examiner respectfully disagrees, because specific structural features and specific mechanical action are not claimed.
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 KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI whose telephone number is (313)446-6612. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am to 5:00 pm EST.
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, Len Tran can be reached at (571) 272-1184. 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.
/KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/LEN TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763