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 02/18/2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant firstly argues that the modification of LaRochelle in view of Saccoccio to add an adapter allowing for mating with both internal and external connections renders LaRochelle unsuitable because LaRochelle is only disclosed as requiring female hoses. This argument cannot be correct as the modification would allow for connection to both male and female connections.
Applicant next argues that there is no motivation to modify LaRochelle in this way for substantially the same reason – LaRochelle is only concerned with a female connection to the hose. However, as stated in paragraph 14 of LaRochelle the idea of making a design that is robust to both male and female connections is already known in the art of LaRochelle – even if not applied in the specific connection claimed this is certainly evidence that one of ordinary skill in the art would have found such a modification predictable and useful.
Lastly Applicant argues that LaRochelle and Saccoccio are not in the same field of endeavor and that the added limitation “body of water” overcomes the prior rejection. However, since both LaRochelle and Saccoccio are liquid pumps the examiner does not find this argument persuasive in view of MPEP §2111 and §2114 (claim terms given their broadest reasonable interpretation and product claims examined by what they are not their function/use, respectively).
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 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2019/0136744 to LaRochelle in view US 2015/0167673 to Saccoccio.
Regarding claim 1
LaRochelle teaches:
LaRochelle teaches:
A kit (Fig. 1), comprising: a centrifugal pump assembly having a casing (Fig. 1), a plurality of outlet ports (112, 114) in continuous fluid communication with an interior of said casing without interruption (¶ [0012]) and oriented in different directions along the same plane, an axially-extending aperture (circular port) arranged to receive a rotatable shaft (to provide pumping; it is noted that while the photograph is somewhat grainy the structure shown in Fig. 1 at the center would be immediately recognizable to those in the art as the shaft adaption and the aperture for it therewith) power and positioned substantially perpendicular to the plane defined by the outlet ports (Fig. 1; axis is into and out of page); and at least one adapter (140) having a first open end configured and dimensioned to be removably connectable to one of said outlet ports (at 210) of said centrifugal pump assembly (see Fig. 2), a second open end (220) configured and dimensioned to be removably connectable to a water circulation system (at 120), for a body of water (this is intended use without any associated structure, see MPEP §2114, product claims are examined for what they are and not for desired functions/use-cases) and a hollow body connecting the first open end and the second open end (the center unthreaded nut portion).
LaRochelle fails to specifically teach wherein the outlet port has both internal and external threads, teaching only internal threads as shown in Fig. 2. LaRochelle does however teach external threads such as 220, just not in the location claimed.
Saccoccio teaches at least one outlet port 122 having internal (122a) and external (122b) threads for the purpose of allowing both internal and external connections.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify LaRochelle such that the outlet port includes both internal and external threads to allow the design flexibility of both internal and external connections.
Regarding claim 16
The modified LaRochelle further teaches wherein said adapter comprises at least one of internal and external threads (external threads, Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 17
The modified LaRochelle further teaches wherein said adapter comprises an outer cylindrical surface (all outer surfaces of 140) having sections with different outer diameters (the nut portion is a greater diameter at the surface than at the threaded regions) the first said section configured to mate with one of said outlet ports (the threads are what “configures” for attachment; and as shown in Fig. 2 the adapter is positively mated with the outlet port) and the second said section configured to connect with the water circulation system (at threads positively mated to the lines as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18
The modified LaRochelle further teaches wherein said first and second sections each comprise external threads (Figs. 1 and 2).
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 WOODY A LEE JR whose telephone number is (571)272-1051. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 0800-1630.
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, Edward "Ned" Landrum can be reached at 571-272-5567. 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.
/WOODY A LEE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761