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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument regarding the claim amendment to claims 1-12 have been considered. Jansma is used to show the amended limitations.
In response to claims 13-14 and 17-20, these claims are allowed.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wells et al (US 2008/0217314) in view of Jansma (US 2018/0304395).
Wells discloses, regarding claim 1, A welding torch neck adapter (See Paragraph [0019], Gooseneck 14), comprising: an electrically conductive body configured to detachably attach to a handle assembly of a consumable electrode-fed welding torch (Figs 1-5 show a conductive body configured to be attached to a handle of a welding torch.) on a first portion of the conductive body and configured to detachably attach to a neck of the welding torch on a second portion of the conductive body to secure the neck to the handle assembly (Fig 1 shows a first and second portion and the handle 74 at or near element 12 being secured to the neck); and a guide tube positioned within the conductive body and configured to support a first consumable wire liner in alignment with a liner lock of a second consumable wire liner. (Guide tube at 28 has a liner 64 and 72 with a lock 70, See Paragraphs [0026] – [0030]) Regarding claim 12, Figs 1-5 show the first portion of the guide tube extends from the second portion of the conductive body to the first portion of the conductive body.
Wells fails to disclose, wherein the welding torch neck adapter comprises a stopping surface configured to limit an axial movement of the liner lock such that the liner lock does not enter the guide tube.
Jansma discloses a wire liner 349 inside a welding neck adapter 346, where a liner lock 600 (See Fig 4B and Fig 6), where the liner lock is prevented from moving downward via a stopping surface such as shoulder 808 (See Paragraph [0063], [0071]) or the inner neck portion 354. (See Paragraph [0062]). Either of these being equivalent to a stopping surface on an adjacent component.
It would have been obvious to adapt Wells in view of Jansma to provide the stopping surface for preventing movement of the liner lock and wire liner. This combination shows why it would have been obvious to provide a stopping surface on a particular component in order to prevent the liner lock from entering another particular component.
Regarding claim 12, Wells discloses, Figs 1-5 show the first portion of the guide tube extends from the second portion of the conductive body to the first portion of the conductive body.
Claim(s) 2-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wells et al (US 2008/0217314) in view of Jansma (US 2018/0304395), Haney et al (US 2021/0057839) and Matiash (US 2005/0224489).
The teachings of Wells have been discussed above. Wells fails to disclose, regarding claims 2 and 16, the guide tube comprises a first portion having a first inner diameter and a second portion having a second inner diameter larger than the first inner diameter, the first inner diameter configured to support the first consumable wire liner.
Haney discloses, a guide with a liner 146, where the guide has a first portion with a diameter smaller than the second diameter as shown in Fig 3C.
It would have been obvious to provide the guide tube comprises a first portion having a first inner diameter and a second portion having a second inner diameter larger than the first inner diameter, the first inner diameter configured to support the first consumable wire liner for preventing “bird’s nesting” and/or jamming of the wire as taught by Matiash. (See Paragraphs [0005]-[0009])
Regarding claims 3 and 17, Haney shows the first and second portions positioned in the non-respective portions of the guide tube. Regarding claims 4 and 18, Fig 3 of Wells shows a second diameter outer diameter of the guide tube being larger than the first outer diameter of the first portion of the guide tube. The first diameter being at 70 and the second diameter being at 68. Regarding claims 5 and 19, Wells discloses gas passages 42 and 50. (See Paragraphs [0022], [0023]) Regardless, it would have been obvious to provide gas passages for providing gas through the torch for creating an inert atmosphere to prevent oxidation during welding. Regarding claims 6 and 20, Fig 4 shows the handle 74 being secured to the second portion via threading. (See Paragraph [0022])
Regarding claim 7, it would have been obvious to thread and taper the interior of the handle and conductive body as this is an obvious variant for attaching cylindrical parts.
Claim(s) 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wells et al (US 2008/0217314) in view of Jansma (US 2018/0304395), Oberndorfer et al (US 2015/0306695) and Ohkubo et al (US 2010/0206852).
The teachings of Wells have been discussed above. Wells fails to disclose the first and second portions having a chamfer.
Oberndorer discloses two portions of a welding torch having a neck and handle with the connection between two pieces having a chamfer or bevel. (See Abstract) It would have been obvious to adapt Wells in view of Oberndorfer to provide the first portion of the conductive body comprises a chamfer, an end of the second portion of the guide tube configured to align with the chamfer when positioned within the conductive body as a chamfer or bevel provides an optimal connection between the parts, as well as providing optimum current transfer. (See Paragraph [0008]) As the liner lock in Wells is located in at the end of the portion, it would be captured in a bevel or chamfer if modified.
Wells fails to disclose the first portion of the conductive body has a taper on an exterior of the conductive body to make electrical contact with a conductor in the handle assembly when attached to the handle assembly, the second portion of the conductive body has a taper on an interior of the conductive body to make electrical contact with a conductor in the neck when attached to the neck.
Ohkubo and Oberndorer are used to show why one having ordinary skill in the art would taper or chamfer parts to be connected in a welding torch. Ohkubo discloses tapering the contact surfaces of the cylindrical parts in the welding torch. The tapered surfaces allow for a greater surface area of connection which result in better conduction of current. (See Paragraphs [0017] – [0020]) A bevel or chamfer as disclosed in Oberndorfer is also a tapered surface, although not in the way was intended by applicant. Regardless, it would have been obvious to adapt Wells in view of Ohkubo and Oberndorer to provide the first portion of the conductive body has a taper on an exterior of the conductive body to make electrical contact with a conductor in the handle assembly when attached to the handle assembly, the second portion of the conductive body has a taper on an interior of the conductive body to make electrical contact with a conductor in the neck when attached to the neck as a tapered mating surface provides an optimal connection between the parts, as well as providing optimum current transfer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13, 14, 17-20 are allowed.
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 BRIAN W JENNISON whose telephone number is (571)270-5930. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-5.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at 571-270-5569. 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.
/BRIAN W JENNISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761 5/6/2026
Prosecution Insights