DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 26 February 2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claim 21 is directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: the inventions of claims 1-12, 14, and 18-19 (i.e. the subcombination device) and of claim 21 (i.e. the combination system) lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of “a device for the pressure-tight passage of a line through a feedthrough in a wall that separates a first pressure area from a second pressure area, the line having a deformable jacket, the device comprising a sleeve for surrounding the line in the area of the feedthrough, the sleeve having at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves, between which a material of the jacket is configured to be compressed by forming into an integral ring seal acting between the jacket and the sleeve, wherein an axial spacing between the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves is the same as an axial width of each of the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves, and wherein the sleeve is configured to be pressure-tightly connected to the wall around the feedthrough, at least from one side”, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of US 7,080,860. Specifically see the prior grounds of rejection in the 01 December 2025 non-final rejection which details how Takagi discloses each of these limitations.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claim 21 is withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
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 (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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-12, 14, and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwarz et al. (US 2015/0303675) in view of Takagi et al. (US 7,080,860).
With regard to claim 1, Schwarz discloses a device (10, as seen in Figs. 1-2) for the pressure-tight passage of a line through a feedthrough in a wall that separates a first pressure area from a second pressure area, the line having a deformable jacket (Examiner notes these recitations in the preamble are considered intended use limitations and are given little patentable weight. As the device of Schwarz is capable of such as use (e.g. as can receive a line (11) with a deformable jacket (13), and as it can be passed through a feedthrough (i.e. as all lines are capable of) in a wall that separates two pressure areas (i.e. as all walls are capable of) it anticipates such), the device comprising a sleeve (18 with 23) for surrounding the line in the area of the feedthrough (as seen in Figs. 1-2 it surrounds the line and is capable of doing such in an area of a feedthrough), the sleeve having an annular constriction, notch, or groove (as seen in Fig. 2 at 27 when crimped), between which a material of the jacket is configured to be compressed by forming into an integral ring seal acting between the jacket and the sleeve (as seen in Fig. 2 it is capable of this. Examiner notes this is a further narrowing of the prior intended use/capability), and wherein the sleeve is configured to be pressure-tightly connected to the wall around the feedthrough (Examiner notes that this is considered an intended use limitation which Schwarz is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, etc. it can in some manner be connected as claimed (e.g. directly or indirectly)), at least from one side (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation which Schwarz is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, etc. depending on what wall and feedthrough it is used with), and wherein the sleeve is an integral part of a radially outwardly extending flange (27, as seen as radially outwardly extending in Figs. 1-2 and monolithic/integral with the sleeve) which can be connected to the wall (i.e. as seen in Figs. 1-2 as the illustrated flange is capable of such as it could abut a wall in some manner, could be connected to a wall through intervening elements, etc.).
Schwarz fails to disclose that the sleeve has at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves, and wherein an axial spacing between the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves is the same as an axial width of each of the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves.
Takagi discloses a device (as seen in Fig. 2B, etc.) for the pressure-tight passage of a line through a feedthrough in a wall that separates a first pressure area from a second pressure area, the line having a deformable jacket (Examiner notes these recitations in the preamble are considered intended use limitations and are given little patentable weight. As Takagi is capable of such as use (e.g. as it has a deformable jacket 24, as can receive a line therein, and as it can be passed through a feedthrough (i.e. as all lines are capable of) in a wall that separates two pressure areas (i.e. as all walls are capable of) it anticipates such), the device comprising a sleeve (16) for surrounding the line in the area of the feedthrough (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation which Takagi is capable of as seen in Fig. 2B, etc.), the sleeve having at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, grooves (i.e. at the outer surface of 16 as seen in Fig. 2B, etc.), between which a material of the jacket is configured to be compressed by forming into an integral ring seal acting between the jacket and the sleeve (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation which Takagi is capable of as seen in Fig. 2B, etc.), wherein an axial spacing between the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves (i.e. one of the plurality of different spacings between the spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves) is the same as an axial width (i.e. one of the plurality of different axial widths the spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves) of each of the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves (i.e. as there are a plurality of each axial width and axial spacing due to the curved portions thereof Examiner has selected each to be equal. Furthermore Examiner notes that a narrower interpretation would likely necessitate a 112(a) rejection as the original disclosure does not appear to disclose a specific interpretation of the axial spacing and widths that are exactly the same), and wherein the sleeve is configured to be either pressure-tightly connected to the wall around the feedthrough (Examiner notes that this is considered an intended use limitation which Takagi is capable of as seen in Fig. 2B, etc. it can in some manner be connected as claimed (e.g. directly or indirectly)), at least from one side (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation which Takagi is capable of as seen in Fig. 2B, etc. depending on what wall and feedthrough it is used with).
It would have been considered obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to have modified the device of Schwarz to have the sleeve have at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves, and wherein an axial spacing between the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves is the same as an axial width of each of the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves as taught by Takagi. Such a modification would have provided the expected benefit of providing plural barriers to fluid leakage of the approximate same strength to provide additional balanced sealing. Additionally and/or alternatively such could also be considered to provide easier deformation during crimping (i.e. as opposed to one larger crimp).
With regard to claim 2, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the line is an electrical line (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use) which Takagi is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with any elongated tubular element run therethrough. Additionally see para. [0001], etc.).
With regard to claim 3, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the line is an optical line (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use) which Takagi is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with any elongated tubular element run therethrough).
With regard to claim 4, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the line a fluid line (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use) which Schwarz is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with any elongated tubular element run therethrough).
With regard to claim 5, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the jacket is either plastic or metal (examiner notes that this limitation is also an intended use limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use) which Schwarz is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with such a material jacket of the line).
With regard to claim 6, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the sleeve is made of a ductile metal (as detailed in para. [0008], etc. it is a metal and due to its illustrated deformation (see between Figs. 1 and 2, etc.) it at least has some amount of ductility).
With regard to claim 7, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that a material of the sleeve (as detailed in para. [0008], etc. it is a metal) is matched to a material of the wall with regard to the coefficient of thermal expansion (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use) which Takagi is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with any wall including one of the same material as the sleeve and thus having at least approximately the same coefficient of thermal expansion).
With regard to claim 8, the combination discloses that the material of the jacket is configured to be compressed and formed into another integral ring seal between one of the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves and another of the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves (i.e. as seen in Figs. 2, etc. of Takagi in combination with Figs. 1-2 of Schwarz as there are three spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves the sleeve is capable of forming another integral ring seal between another two of them, and thus the material of the jacket is configured for such. Additionally Examiner notes the portions of the claim related to the jacket are still considered a further narrowing of the prior intended use as the jacket was not previously positively required by claim 1 on which this claim relies).
With regard to claim 9, the combination discloses that each of the at least two spaced apart annular constrictions, notches, or grooves are arranged equidistantly from one another and are each the same size (i.e. similar to the rejection of claim 1 above, i.e. as there are a plurality of each axial width and axial spacing due to the curved portions thereof, as seen in Fig. 2B of Takagi, Examiner has selected each to be equal. Furthermore Examiner notes that a narrower interpretation would likely necessitate a 112(a) rejection as the original disclosure does not appear to disclose a specific interpretation of the axial spacing and widths that are exactly the same).
With regard to claim 10, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the jacket is configured to have a support sleeve provided directly or indirectly under the jacket, which sleeve serves as an abutment when the sleeve is formed (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use/capability limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use/capability of the sleeve) which Schwarz is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with any jacket including one having a support sleeve).
With regard to claim 11, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the sleeve is further configured to be an integral part of the wall (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use of the sleeve) which Schwarz is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with housing/wall and be integral thereto in some manner (e.g. rigidly affixed directly thereto)).
With regard to claim 12, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the sleeve is further configured to be bonded or welded to the wall at least from one side (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use of the sleeve) which Schwarz is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with wall and can be welded thereto as it is at least a metal).
With regard to claim 14, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the wall is part of a housing of an electrical device (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use of the device) which Schwarz is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with essentially any wall in some manner).
With regard to claim 18, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the line is a fiber optical cable (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use) which Schwarz is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with any elongated tubular element).
With regard to claim 19, the combination (Schwarz) discloses that the line is a pneumatic or hydraulic line (Examiner notes that this is also an intended use limitation (e.g. it is a further narrowing of the prior intended use) which Schwarz is capable of as seen in Fig. 2, as it can be used with any elongated tubular element).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-12, 14, and 18-19 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS L FOSTER whose telephone number is (571)270-5354. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571) 272-7376. 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.
/NICHOLAS L FOSTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights