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 .
Claims 12, 13, 19, and 20 are withdrawn.
Claims 1-11, and 14-18 are being examined in this office action.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 12, 13, 19, and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on March 27th, 2026.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: elements 312, 314, 316, 318, 412, 418, 422 are shown in the drawings, but not mentioned within the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10, and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flynn (US 9249912 B2) in view of Hirako (JP 2017133577 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Flynn discloses a method (Fig. 5), comprising:
disposing a collar (20) around an outer surface of a tubing (22, Fig. 5);
advancing a coupling portion (tubing at hose stop 18 in Fig. 5) of the tubing around a spigot extension (16, Fig. 5) of a spigot (12);
advancing the collar toward the coupling portion of the tubing around the spigot extension (Fig. 6, Col. 5 Line 65 through Col. 6 line 3); and
axially and radially retaining the tubing with the spigot via the collar (Col. 6 Lines 3-6).
Flynn does not expressly disclose melting a portion of the collar to radially engage the coupling portion of the tubing around the spigot extension.
Hirako teaches melting a portion of the collar (annular fabric made of warp yarn 7 and weft yarn 8) to radially engage the coupling portion of the tubing around the spigot extension (Fig. 2, “when the annular fabric 4 is heated in this state, as shown in FIG. 2, the monofilament of the weft 8 is thermally contracted, the diameter of the annular fabric 4 is reduced, and the insertion portion 3 of the fitting 2 is annularly connected” – Page 2 Paragraph 8).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by Flynn wherein melting a portion of the collar to radially engage the coupling portion of the tubing around the spigot extension as taught by Hikaro so that the tubing is properly secured to the spigot (Hikaro, Page 2 Paragraph 9).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising:
frictionally engaging the outer surface of the tubing at a friction surface (Hikaro, area where hose 1 is engaged with annular fabric 4 in Fig. 2) of the collar by melting the portion of the collar (Hikaro, Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by Flynn further comprising frictionally engaging the outer surface of the tubing at a friction surface of the collar by melting the portion of the collar as taught by Hikaro so that so that the tubing is properly secured to the spigot (Hikaro, Page 2 Paragraph 9).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising:
advancing the coupling portion (Flynn, portion of tubing at 18 in Fig. 5) of the tubing past a flared portion of the spigot extension (Flynn, 28, Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 3, further comprising:
advancing the collar (Flynn, 20) past the flared portion (Flynn, 28) of the spigot extension (Flynn, Fig. 5, Col. 5 Lines 56-64).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 4, further comprising:
radially expanding the collar over the flared portion of the spigot extension (Flynn, Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein the coupling portion of the tubing comprises a coupling inner diameter equal to or larger than a spigot extension outer diameter (Flynn, tubing 22 contacting and forming with coupling nipple 16 in Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 14, Flynn discloses a method (Fig. 5), comprising:
disposing a collar (20) with a helical body (20 with a helical shape in Fig. 2) around an outer surface of a tubing (22, Fig. 5);
advancing a coupling portion of the tubing (tubing at hose stop 18 in Fig. 5) around a spigot extension (16, Fig. 5) of a spigot (12);
advancing the collar toward the coupling portion of the tubing around the spigot extension (Fig. 6, Col. 5 Line 65 through Col. 6 line 3);
radially expanding the helical body over a flared portion of the spigot extension (Fig. 1); and
axially and radially retaining the tubing with the spigot via the collar (Col. 6 Lines 3-6).
Flynn Does not expressly disclose melting a portion of the collar to radially engage the coupling portion of the tubing around the spigot extension.
Hirako teaches melting a portion of the collar (annular fabric made of warp yarn 7 and weft yarn 8) to radially engage the coupling portion of the tubing around the spigot extension (Fig. 2, “when the annular fabric 4 is heated in this state, as shown in FIG. 2, the monofilament of the weft 8 is thermally contracted, the diameter of the annular fabric 4 is reduced, and the insertion portion 3 of the fitting 2 is annularly connected” – Page 2 Paragraph 8);
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by Flynn wherein melting a portion of the collar to radially engage the coupling portion of the tubing around the spigot extension as taught by Hikaro so that the tubing is properly secured to the spigot (Hikaro, Page 2 Paragraph 9).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 14, further comprising:
frictionally engaging the outer surface of the tubing at a friction surface (Hikaro, area where hose 1 is engaged with annular fabric 4 in Fig. 2) of the collar by melting the portion of the collar (Hikaro, Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by Flynn further comprising frictionally engaging the outer surface of the tubing at a friction surface of the collar by melting the portion of the collar as taught by Hikaro so that the tubing is properly secured to the spigot (Hikaro, Page 2 Paragraph 9).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 14, further comprising:
advancing the coupling portion (Flynn, portion of tubing at 18 in Fig. 5) of the tubing past the flared portion of the spigot extension (Flynn, 28, Fig. 5).
Claim(s) 6, 7, 17, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Flynn in view of Hikaro, further in view of Nakano et al. (Pub. No. US 20080197624 A1, herein Nakano).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 1.
Modified Flynn in view of Hikaro does not expressly disclose applying a solvent between the coupling portion of the tubing and the spigot extension of the spigot.
Nakano teaches applying a solvent (8) between the coupling portion of the tubing (6) and the spigot extension (2-2) of the spigot (2).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by modified Flynn in view of Hikaro by applying a solvent between the coupling portion of the tubing and the spigot extension of the spigot as taught by Nakano so that the connection properly adhered (Nakano, Paragraph [0079]).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro and Nakano discloses the method of Claim 6, further comprising:
curing the solvent to bond the tubing and the spigot (Nakano, Paragraph [0072]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by modified Flynn in view of Hikaro by curing the solvent to bond the tubing and the spigot as taught by Nakano so that the resin has a high adhesive strength (Nakano, Paragraph [0073]).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 14.
Modified Flynn in view of Hikaro does not expressly disclose further comprising: applying a solvent between the coupling portion of the tubing and the spigot extension of the spigot.
Nakano teaches applying a solvent (8) between the coupling portion of the tubing (6) and the spigot extension (2-2) of the spigot (2).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by modified Flynn in view of Hikaro by applying a solvent between the coupling portion of the tubing and the spigot extension of the spigot as taught by Nakano so that the connection properly adhered (Nakano, Paragraph [0079]).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro and Nanako discloses the method of Claim 17, further comprising:
curing the solvent to bond the tubing and the spigot (Nakano, Paragraph [0072]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by modified Flynn in view of Hikaro by curing the solvent to bond the tubing and the spigot as taught by Nakano so that the resin has a high adhesive strength (Nakano, Paragraph [0073]).
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flynn in view of Hikaro, further in view of Friedman (US 2375357 A).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 1.
Modified Flynn in view of Hikaro does not expressly disclose further comprising: extruding a collar stock; and cutting the collar stock to form the collar.
Friedman teaches extruding a collar stock (10); and cutting the collar stock to form the collar (Col. 3 Lines 37-48).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by modified Flynn in view of Hikaro further comprising: extruding a collar stock; and cutting the collar stock to form the collar as taught by Friedman so that it is more economical to form collars (Friedman, Col. 2 Lines 28-30).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro and Friedman discloses the method of Claim 8, further comprising:
helically winding the collar stock (Friedman, Figs. 2-3, Col. 3 Lines 43-44).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by modified Flynn in view of Hikaro further comprising helically winding the collar stock as taught by Friedman so that a helical spring made of a continuous piece of plastic can be made (Friedman, Col. 3 Lines 30-32).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flynn in view of Hikaro, further in view of Kinghorn et al. (US 5770139 A, herein Kinghorn).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Flynn in view of Hikaro discloses the method of Claim 10.
Modified Flynn in view of Hikaro does not expressly disclose further comprising: coupling an expander sleeve to the tubing to define the coupling portion.
Kinghorn teaches coupling an expander sleeve (18) to the tubing (14) to define the coupling portion (area where sleeve 18 overlaps tubing 14 in Fig. 2B).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by modified Flynn in view of Hikaro further comprising: coupling an expander sleeve to the tubing to define the coupling portion as taught by Kinghorn so that disengagement of the tubing is prevented (Kinghorn, Col. 2 Lines 63-65).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mark Golovan whose telephone number is (571)272-2119. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30am-4:30pm Alt. Fri. off.
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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at 571-270-1744. 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.
/MARK GOLOVAN/ Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/CHELSEA E STINSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights