DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 01/07/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse, where applicant has amended the claims in such a manner that claims 14-20 are no longer considered as a sub-combination group in the reply filed on 01/07/2026 is acknowledged and is found persuasive.
The restriction requirement mailed on 10/28/2025 is hereby withdrawn and all claims filed on 01/07/2026 have been enter for the purpose of examination.
The status of the claims for this application is as follows.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 09/22/2023 were not considered and have been replaced and superseded with the IDS filed on 06/12/2025, see applicant’s response filed on 06/13/2025. The IDS filed on 06/12/2025 was considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 10 recites “The gasket of claim 9”, however, the claim should recite --The coupling of claim 9--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: contacting portion, support portion, and node protruding in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 07/11/2023.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-13 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Vandal et al. (US 8282136) in view of Bowsher (US 5058931).
At the outset the applicant is reminded that:
1. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
2. A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Re Clm 1: Vandal discloses a coupling (see Figs. 1-14) comprising:
a segment (105 or 106) comprising:
a central portion (see the portion that is formed centrally) having an inner surface (see the inside surface); and
an edge portion (see the portion at the edge) oriented relative to the central portion and configured to interact with a pipe (for example see Figs. 3c and 6d),
the edge portion comprising: a contacting portion (see the portion at the edge) configured to contact the pipe (for example see Figs. 3c and 6d);
a support portion (a portion of the inner surface that forms a shoulder) defining a shoulder (see the inner portion) oriented relative to the contacting portion (for example see Figs. 3c and 6d); and
a gasket (see the gasket internal 105 or 106) defining a sealing surface (see the inner surface of the gasket) opposite a radial outer surface (see the concaved outer surface) defining a deformation groove (see the concaved outer surface),
wherein in a compressed state the inner surface of the segment compresses the deformation groove of the gasket and forms a seal at the sealing surface (for example, see Fig. 6d).
Vandal fails to disclose a node protruding from the disclosed edge portion between the disclosed support portion and the disclosed contacting portion.
However, Bowsher discloses a pipe clamping configuration, similar to that of Vandal. Bowsher also teaches a node (such as: 86 or 88 or 90 or 92, and see Figs. 1-8) protruding from an edge portion between a disclosed support portion and a disclosed contacting portion (see Figs. 1-8). Where such would aid in strengthening the structure, like a support rib, or would aid in the retention of members by gripping a pipe, alternatively, such a structural member would yield the same predictable result of allowing a secure joint to be assembled and secured in place.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of Vandal, to have included a node protruding from the disclosed edge portion between the disclosed support portion and the disclosed contacting portion, as taught by Bowsher, with a reasonable expectation of success because such a structural arrangement would be a mere modification to include a member that provides strength and gripping, for the purpose of strengthening the structure, like a support rib, or would aid in the retention of members by gripping a pipe, alternatively, such a structural member would yield the same predictable result of allowing a secure joint to be assembled and secured in place.
Re Clm 2: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein the sealing surface is positioned between the support portion and the contacting portion of the segment in the compressed state (Vandal, for example see Fig. 6d).
Re Clm 3: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein when the gasket is in an uncompressed state, the deformation groove defines a circular shape (Vandal, see Fig. 4).
Re Clm 4: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein the sealing surface defines an inner diameter (Vandal, see Figs. 5 and 6a on the outer portions of the outer leg members) of the gasket and when the coupling is disposed over the pipe defining an outer diameter, the inner diameter of the gasket is greater than the outer diameter of the pipe in an uncompressed state (Vandal, see Figs. 5 and 6a on the outer portions of the outer leg members), and in the compressed state the contacting portion of the segment compresses the sealing surface of the gasket against the outer diameter of the pipe (see Fig. 6c).
Re Clm 5: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein the gasket comprises a sealing rib (Vandal, see Figs. 5 and 6a-6c, on the left side, see the leg/rib) defining an axially outer drafted edge (the tapered edge) extending axially outward and radially outward from the sealing surface at a nonzero angle from a radial direction (Vandal, see Figs. 5 and 6a-6c).
Re Clm 6: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein the gasket comprises a sealing rib defining an axially inner drafted edge (Vandal, see Figs. 5 and 6a-6c, on the right side, see the leg/rib) extending axially inward and radially outward from the sealing surface at a non-zero angle from a radial direction (Vandal, see Figs. 5 and 6a-6c).
Re Clm 7: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses a first node protruding from the edge portion between the support portion and the contacting portion (see Bowsher, see Figs. 1-8).
Re Clm 8: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein the first node defines a width that decreases from the support portion to the contacting portion (see Bowsher, see Figs. 1-8).
Re Clm 9: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein the gasket further comprises a center rib extending radially inward from an annular body, and wherein the center rib is axially positioned between a pair of sealing ribs (Vandal, see Figs. 5 and 6a-6c).
Re Clm 10: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein the annular body defines a radially outer surface and the radially outer surface defines the deformation groove (Vandal, see Figs. 5 and 6a-6c).
Re Clm 11: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein the central portion and the edge portion are located between a first shoulder and a second shoulder of the segment (Vandal, the shoulders that the bolts penetrate).
Re Clm 12: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein the first shoulder and the second shoulder each comprise a radiused portion extending beyond a fastener hole through a draft portion of each shoulder (Vandal, see the outer curved outer portion of each shoulder in Figs, 1-2c and 8-10).
Re Clm 13: Vandal as modified by Bowsher discloses wherein the first shoulder and the second shoulder each comprise a taper portion (Vandal, the inner portion of the shoulder) that terminates at an end (the outer end) and melds at an opposite end (towards the main structure) with a parallel portion of each shoulder (Vandal, the portion of the shoulder that is adjacent to the main structure, Figs, 1-2c and 8-10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following documents have structural features which are similar to the applicant’s claimed invention; US-9528642-B2.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A LINFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-3066. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday: 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Eastern Time.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at (571) 270-3654. 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.
JAMES ALBERT LINFORD
Examiner
Art Unit 3679
01/22/2025
/Matthew Troutman/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3679