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
The applicant’s arguments have been considered but they are not persuasive.
First, the applicant argues that the Examiner improperly maps Dumont’s plunger 36 to the claimed “pump body.” Applicant contends that the cylindrical member 34, rather than plunger 36, corresponds to the claimed structure. Applicant’s Arguments, pgs. 6-7. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The applicant has not defined the claimed term “pump body” in his specification, nor does the specification or the art establish that “pump body” has a particular structural meaning. In fact, the applicant’s specification does not require the “pump body” to be a stationary housing, nor does it distinguish the claimed “pump body” from any other pump components.
Further, Merriam Webster Online Dictionary defines “body” as “the main, central, or principal part.” Dumont element 36 is labeled as “plunger,” which is recognized to be the principal operative component of a pump. As a result, the examiner designating Dumont’s plunger 36 as the claimed “pump body” is not improper under broadest reasonable interpretation. If the applicant considers a “pump body” to be a stationary housing, such as Dumont’s element 34, the examiner recommends amending the claim language to reflect such a limitation.
Similarly, the applicant argues that Dumont’s cylindrical member 34, rather than plunger 36, constitutes the claimed “pump body.” Applicant’s Arguments, pg. 7. However, the examiner respectfully notes that Dumont does not expressly identify any particular structure as a “pump body,” nor does the present application provide a limiting structural definition for that term. Dumont states, “[m]ixing chamber 32 is defined within a generally cylindrical member 34. A pump is provided by a plunger 36 which is slidably disposed within cylindrical member 34 and accessible to manual contact from above cap 26.” Dumont, pg. 10, ll. 4-7. Accordingly, Dumont directly associates plunger 36 with the pumping function, while cylindrical member 34 structurally cooperates with the pumping assembly by housing mixing chamber 32 and associated fluid passages. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, Dumont’s plunger 36 reasonably corresponds to the claimed “pump body,” or alternatively, cylindrical member 34 together with plunger 36 collectively define the claimed pumping structure.
Second, applicant argues that Dumont fails to disclose the claimed “endpiece.” Applicant’s Argument, pg. 7. However, the claims do not define “endpiece” as requiring a separate nozzle component, terminal outlet structure, or independently manufactured part. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, Dumont’s cylindrical member 34 (that includes flange 78) reasonably correspond to the claimed endpiece. In particular, Dumont discloses that “[m]ember 34 may be grasped by a knurled, ridged, or otherwise textured collar or flange 78… and rotated to vary the cross sectional exposed area of openings 74, 76.” Dumont, pg. 13, ll. 20-23. Thus, Dumont’s cylindrical member 34 that includes flange 78 provides the external manipulation and rotational interface functionality reasonably corresponding to the claimed “endpiece” under broadest reasonable interpretation.
Further, applicant’s argument that cylindrical member 34 forms part of Dumont’s pumping arrangement does not preclude member 34 from additionally corresponding to the claimed “endpiece.” Claim 1 does not require the claimed “endpiece” to be structurally excluded from the pumping arrangement, nor does claim 1 require the “pump body” and “endpiece” to be entirely separate assemblies lacking cooperative functionality. Rather, Dumont discloses a cooperative pumping and fluid routing structure in which plunger 35 performs the pumping function while cylindrical member 34 defines mixing chamber 32, associated fluid passages, and rotatable openings establishing selective communication with conduits 42 and 44. Accordingly, the fact that cylindrical member 34 participates in the disclosed pumping/mixing arrangement does not preclude cylindrical member 34 (including flange 78) from reasonably corresponding to the claimed “endpiece” under broadest reasonable interpretation.
Third, the applicant argues that, in Dumont’s invention, mixing occurs within cylindrical member 34 rather than within a separate nozzle structure. Applicant’s Arguments, pg. 8. However, this argument is not persuasive because claim 1 does not require the claimed “pump body” to be structurally distinct from the mixing structure, nor does claim 1 require the “pump body” to exclude internal mixing functionality.
Further, applicant’s arguments improperly import unclaimed architectural limitations into claim 1. Claim 1 does not require the recited “fluid product pump” to be a conventional single inlet pump, nor does claim 1 exclude a pump arrangement in which multiple fluid paths communicate with a mixing chamber associated with the pumping structure. The claims likewise do not require the claimed “endpiece” or “pump body” to be structurally separate from a mixing chamber or valve arrangement. Accordingly, applicant’s distinction between a purported “standard pump” and Dumont’s disclosed mixing arrangement relies on limitations that are not expressly recited in claim 1.
35 USC § 102 Rejection
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Dumont et al (WO 01/00521).
Regarding claim 1, Dumont discloses a fluid product dispenser comprising:
a fluid product pump (36, 38, 40, 46) comprising a pump body (36) defining a fluid product inlet (bottom orifice of 46);
at least two fluid reservoirs (20, 22);
a cap (26) rigidly connected to the fluid product reservoirs, the cap forming a reception cavity (inner cavity of 26), the cap defining at least two connecting conduits (42, 44) each connecting respectively a fluid product reservoir;
wherein the dispenser further comprises an endpiece (34 including 78, the member defining mixing chamber 32 and being externally graspable and rotatable to vary exposed openings 74, 76; see Dumont pg. 13, ll. 20-23) rigidly connected to the pump body, the endpiece defining an interior space (32) which communicates with the fluid product inlet of the pump body and at least two through holes (below 48, 50) connecting the outside of the endpiece with its interior space, the endpiece being rotatably mounted (capable of being rotated during mounting; also via selective rotational alignment of member 34 relative to conduits 42 and 44) in the reception cavity of the cap, in order to establish fluid paths between the connecting ducts of the cap and the through holes of the endpiece.
Regarding claim 3, in addition to the limitations in claim 1, Dumont further discloses wherein the through holes of the endpiece are axially offset (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, in addition to the limitations in claim 1, Dumont further discloses wherein the endpiece comprises a pump neck (78 and upper portion of 34), the pump comprising a fixing ring (threading) engaged with the pump neck.
Regarding claim 6, in addition to the limitations in claim 1, Dumont further discloses wherein the pump body forms an inlet pipe (lowest portion of 36 surrounding 46) internally defining the fluid product inlet, the endpiece forming a sleeve for the sealed reception of the inlet pipe.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is allowable. Claims 5 and 7-11 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.
Recommended Amendment
The examiner recommends amending claim 1 to include the following amendment (from applicant’s specification, pg. 14, final paragraph): “wherein fluid product from each of the at least two fluid product reservoirs is mixed in the interior space of the endpiece before entering the fluid product inlet of the pump body.” Please note that the recommended amendment is consistent with similar concepts originally presented in claims 9 and 10, as well as later presented claim 16.
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 SPE DAVID ANGWIN whose telephone number is (571)-270-3735. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5 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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. 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: httos://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 P ANGWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights