Detailed Action
Amendment
1. This office action is in response to applicant’s amendments dated 10-28-25 and this office action is a final rejection.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
2. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the gasket, the first thread hole, the first thread hole, the second thread hole and the threaded shaft in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
3. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification should be amended to include newly added claim terms found in the amendments dated 10-28-25 such as stop collar, handle, gasket, handle rod, threaded shaft, wing nut, enlarged plate etc. Further, any corrections to the drawings given the drawing objections detailed earlier that include the addition of new reference numerals in the drawings would need to also be detailed in the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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 1 and 4-10 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claim limitations of the gasket detailed in amended claim 1 are not detailed in applicant’s originally filed disclosure in that there is no mention of a gasket or sealing element in applicant’s originally filed specification.
5. 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 1 and 4-10 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The phrase “outside the stop collar” in line 23 of the claim makes it unclear as to whether the handle rod goes through an outside surface of the handle rod or if the handle rod goes through another component located outside the stop collar. Further, claim 1 lacks antecedent basis for “the inserting hole” in line 25 and therefore it is unclear as to whether the inserting hole is the same or different than the movable holes, adjustment holes, first thread hole and/or through hole. Further, it is unclear as to whether “the movable holes” in lines 22-23 is the same as the plurality of movable holes detailed earlier in the claim. Further, it is unclear as to whether items 7 and 8 detailed as a limit part and an inserting piece are both considered part of the newly claimed stop collar in that as seen in applicant’s originally filed disclosure the first thread hole and through hole are detailed as part of the limit part and the first and second rotating holes are part of the inserting piece and then in the claim amendments dated 10-28-25, the first thread hole, the through hole and first and second rotating holes are detailed as all being part of the stop collar. However, items 7 and 8 as seen in applicant’s originally filed disclosure are shown as separate components and are not disclosed as being part of an assembly of components. Further, given the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections with respect to the claimed gasket detailed earlier, it is unclear as to how the threaded shaft rotates relative to the gasket.
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 1 and 4-10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.SC. 112(a) and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph and 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant’s amended abstract dated 10-28-25 obviates the objections detailed in the last office action dated 9-23-25.
Applicant’s claim amendments and remarks/arguments dated 10-28-25 obviates the claim objections detailed in the last office action dated 9-23-25.
Applicant’s claim amendments and remarks/arguments dated 10-28-25 obviates the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections detailed in the last office action dated 9-23-25.
Applicant’s claim amendments and remarks/arguments dated 10-28-25 obviates the prior art rejections of claims 1-2 and 4-10 detailed in the last office action dated 9-23-25. However, applicant’s claim amendments dated 10-28-25 necessitates the new grounds of rejection detailed earlier in paragraphs 4-5 of this office action.
Conclusion
8. 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID J PARSLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-6890. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-4pm 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, Peter Poon can be reached at (571) 272-6891. 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.
/DAVID J PARSLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3643
Prosecution Insights