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 .
Status
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 01/09/2026. The drawing objection and 35 U.S.C. 112b rejection are withdrawn. Claims 1-2, 9-10 and 16 remain pending for consideration on the merits.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grooms et al (US 20100065131 A1, hereinafter Grooms) in view of Oh (KR 20120052493 A, hereinafter Oh).
Regarding claim 1, Grooms teaches a liquid-collecting arrangement (figure 2) including: a container (sump pit 12) having a cavity (within sump pit 12, paragraph 0021 and figure 2) for collecting liquid (paragraph 0021); at least one extraction fitting (suction pipe 36) coupled to the cavity (as show on figure 2) for extracting liquid from the cavity (paragraph 0022) by means of negative pressure (via suction, paragraph 0022); one or more first liquid feeds (multiple gravity lines 14, figure 2) opening into the cavity (figure 2) on a first side (left side of sump pit 12, figure 2) of the container for feeding liquid into the cavity (paragraph 0021); one or more second liquid feeds (right side gravity line 14) opening into the cavity (as shown on figure 2) on the first side or on a second side (right side of sump pit 12, figure 2) of the container (sump pit 12) for feeding liquid into the cavity (paragraph 0021), wherein the first side (left side of sump pit 12, figure 2) is opposite to the second side (right side of sump pit 12, figure 2); preferably a pressure compensation fitting (gravity vent 18) connected to the one or more first liquid feeds (connected to left side of gravity line 14, paragraph 0021, and right side of gravity line 14, as shown on figure 2).
Grooms teaches the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the at least one extraction fitting (104) opens laterally into the cavity at a height adjacent to the one or more first liquid feeds.
However, Oh teaches wherein the at least one extraction fitting (drain pipe 180, figure 2) opens laterally into the cavity (opening laterally to hollow body 110, figures 2 and 4a) at a height adjacent to the one or more first liquid feeds (at a height adjacent to inlet 116, as shown on figures 2 and 4a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the arrangement of Grooms to include wherein the at least one extraction fitting (104) opens laterally into the cavity at a height adjacent to the one or more first liquid feeds in view of the teachings of Oh in order to yield the predictable result implementing the operator to work to improve the connection workability significantly easier.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grooms as modified by Oh, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Munoz (FR 2663058 A1, hereinafter Munoz).
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the at least one extraction fitting includes multiple extraction fittings which are coupled to one another by means of the cavity.
However, Munoz teaches wherein the at least one extraction fitting (outlet 18, as shown on figure 3B) includes multiple extraction fittings (pipe 17 as an outlet via illustrated arrows, figure 3B) which are coupled to one another by means of the cavity (coupled to the cavity of hull 1, figures 1 and 3B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the arrangement of the combined teachings to include wherein the at least one extraction fitting includes multiple extraction fittings which are coupled to one another by means of the cavity in view of the teachings of Munoz in order to provide the predictable result of providing evacuation of wastewater.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grooms as modified by Oh, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Carr et al (GB 2514682 A).
Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the multiple first liquid feeds (108) include four or more liquid feeds.
However, Carr teaches wherein the multiple first liquid feeds (inlet means 16, figures 2-3) include four or more liquid feeds (as shown on figure 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the arrangement of the combined teachings to include wherein the multiple first liquid feeds (108) include four or more liquid feeds in view of the teachings of Carr in order to provide the predictable result of allowing one or more connections to be made between the first and at least second chambers as required in use.
Regarding claim 10, the combined teachings teach wherein the multiple second liquid feeds (inlet means 16, figures 2-3 of Carr) include four or more liquid feeds (as shown on figure 3 of Carr).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grooms as modified by Oh, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Park (KR 20090105045 A).
Regarding claim 16, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach wherein the at least one extraction fitting (104) opens into a fluid guiding device (1450) which includes an overflow protection device (1440) and/or a suction protection device (1442),wherein the fluid guiding device (1450) is configured to guide a fluid exchange path (1411) along which fluid reaches the at least one extraction fitting (104), wherein the overflow protection device (1440) includes a first wall that protrudes into the container (102) from below, and wherein the suction protection device (1442) is configured to block a gas exchange through the overflow protection device (1440) and includes a second wall that protrudes into the container (102) from above.
However, Park teaches wherein the at least one extraction fitting (drain port 105) opens into a fluid guiding device (malodor blocking device 200) which includes an overflow protection device (malodor blocking portion 225) and/or a suction protection device (drip tray 210), wherein the fluid guiding device (malodor blocking device 200) is configured to guide a fluid exchange path (domestic wastewater, paragraph 0002) along which fluid reaches the at least one extraction fitting (odor blocking device 200 is mounted on any one of the inlet port 110, and serves to flow the domestic wastewater flowing out of the inlet port 110b to the drain port 105, paragraphs 0011-0012), wherein the overflow protection device (malodor blocking portion 225) includes a first wall (as shown on figures 4 and 9) that protrudes into the container (fig 9) from below, and wherein the suction promoting device (drip tray 210) is configured to block a gas exchange (the malodor blocking portion 225 is in contact with the water accumulated in the drip tray 210 and eventually becomes locked, thereby preventing the malodor from flowing back through the inlet 221, paragraph 0015) through the overflow protection device (malodor blocking portion 225) and includes a second wall (as shown on figure 4) that protrudes into the container (as shown on figure 9) from above.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the arrangement of the combined teachings to include wherein the at least one extraction fitting (104) opens into a fluid guiding device (1450) which includes an overflow protection device (1440) and/or a suction protection device (1442),wherein the fluid guiding device (1450) is configured to guide a fluid exchange path (1411) along which fluid reaches the at least one extraction fitting (104), wherein the overflow protection device (1440) includes a first wall that protrudes into the container (102) from below, and wherein the suction promoting device (1442) is configured to block a gas exchange through the overflow protection device (1440) and includes a second wall that protrudes into the container (102) from above in view of the teachings of Park in order to provide the predictable result of providing a drain sewage collecting device and an odor preventive device which can be mounted at the same to prevent the overflow of the odor.
Further, it is understood, claim 16 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DARIO DELEON whose telephone number is (571)272-8687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Jerry Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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.
/DARIO ANTONIO DELEON/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763