DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final Office action in reply to the response filed 01/15/2026.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-19 are pending;
Claims 1-14 are original; claims 15-19 have been withdrawn;
Claims 1-14 are rejected herein.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election without traverse of Invention I (claims 1-14) in the reply filed 01/15/2026 is acknowledged. Accordingly, claims 15-19 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted 09/19/2023 and 11/13/2024 have been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 2, 6, 8, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 2, "first component" appears to be --the first component--.
Claim 1, line 2, "second component" appears to be --the second component--.
Claim 2, line 4, "first ramps" appears to be --first locking ramps--.
Claim 6, line 3, "a corresponding second surface" appears to be --a corresponding second surfaces of the second surfaces--.
Claim 8, line 2, "and have" appears to be --and each have--.
Claim 13, line 2, "the axis" appears to be --the common axis--.
Claim 13, line 3, "the axis" appears to be --the common axis--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-14 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.
Regarding claim 1, the preamble of claim 1, "[a] clamping device for securing a first component to a second component, the clamping device, first component, and second component disposed on a common axis" in lines 1 and 2, functionally recites the "first component" and the "second component" as functional elements that are not required structures within the scope of claim 1. However, the limitations in the body of claim 1, "a mounting flange coupled to the first component; a mounting seat coupled to the second component" in lines 4 and 5, positively recite the "first component" and the "second component" as required structures within the scope of claim 1, since the language "coupled to" introduces positive recitation(s) thereafter in the instant case. As such, the positive recitations of the "first component" and the "second component" in the body of claim 1, following the functional recitations of the "first component" and the "second component" in the preamble of claim 1, render the scope of claim 1 indefinite. It is not clear as to whether claim 1 is directed to a combination of the "clamping device," the "first component," and the "second component" or directed to a subcombination of the "clamping device" adapted to be used with the "first component" and the "second component." Applicant is advised to clearly claim the combination in the preamble or properly place the "first component" and the "second component" in intended use consistently throughout claim 1. For the purpose of examination, based on the positive recitations of the "first component" and the "second component" in the body of claim 1, claim 1 is considered as directed to a combination of the "clamping device," the "first component," and the "second component." Similar rejection and similar interpretation apply to the limitations "and further comprising a retention member disposed on the first component to retain the clamping ring on the mounting flange" in claim 11 (lines 1 and 2, where the "first component" is positively recited in the body of claim 11 as a required structure within the scope of claim 11, since the language "disposed on" introduces positive recitation(s) thereafter in the instant case). Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 2, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the annular mounting flange" (line 1) in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation "the first surfaces" in claim 3 (line 1) is indefinite. It is not clear as to whether the limitation "the first surfaces" in claim 3 (line 1) refers to (a) "the first surfaces of the plurality of first [locking] ramps" in claim 2 (line 4); or (b) "the first surface of the mounting flange" in claim 2 (line 3) and "the first surfaces of the plurality of first [locking] ramps" in claim 2 (line 4). Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation "an axis of the mounting flange and mounting flange" in line 2 is indefinite. It is not clear as to how two structures, i.e., "the mounting flange" and "[the] mounting flange," have one axis. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation "the second surfaces" in claim 3 (lines 2 and 3) is indefinite. It is not clear as to whether the limitation "the second surfaces" in claim 3 (lines 2 and 3) refers to (a) "the second surfaces of the plurality of first locking ramps" in claim 2 (lines 6 and 7); or (b) "the second surface of the mounting flange" in claim 2 (line 6) and "the second surfaces of the plurality of first locking ramps" in claim 2 (lines 6 and 7). Similar rejection applies to the limitation "the second surfaces" in claim 4 (line 1). Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 5-10 and 12-14 are rejected as being dependent from a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 10, 11, 13, and 14, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dillon (US 2,283,974).
Regarding claim 1, Dillon discloses a clamping device (see Figure 1) for securing a first component (34, fig 6) to a second component (37, fig 6), the clamping device, first component, and second component disposed on a common axis (see Figure 6), the clamping device comprising: a mounting flange (45, fig 6) coupled to the first component (see Figure 6); a mounting seat (31, fig 1) coupled to the second component (see Figure 6), the mounting seat comprising a plurality of first locking ramps (38, fig 6) disposed about a circumference of the mounting seat and extending radially outward from the mounting seat (see Figure 6); and a clamping ring (49, 50, fig 6) configured to be rotatably seated on the mounting flange such that the mounting flange is disposed axially between a first end of the clamping ring and the mounting seat upon assembly (see Figures 1-10), the clamping ring comprising a plurality of second locking ramps (55, fig 8) disposed about an inner circumference and extending radially inward from a second end of the clamping ring (see Figure 8), the plurality of second locking ramps configured to engage the plurality of first locking ramps upon securing the first component to the second component (see Figures 1-10).
PNG
media_image1.png
404
340
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
310
402
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, wherein the clamping ring further comprises a handle (58, 59, fig 8) disposed on an outer circumference, the handle configured to allow a user to apply torque to the clamping ring to rotate the clamping ring relative to the mounting flange and the plurality of first locking ramps to secure the first component to the second component (see Figures 1-10).
Regarding claim 11, the clamping device and further comprising a retention member (32, fig 6) disposed on the first component to retain the clamping ring on the mounting flange (see Figure 6), the first end of the clamping ring disposed axially between the retention member and the mounting flange (see Figure 6).
Regarding claim 13, wherein the mounting flange and the mounting seat are annular (see Figure 6) and wherein the mounting flange extends a first radial distance from the axis (see Figure 6) and the plurality of first locking ramps extend a second radial distance from the axis (see Figure 6), the second radial distance greater than the first radial distance (see Figure 6).
Regarding claim 14, wherein the clamping ring comprises an annular body (52, fig 6) extending between the first end and the second end (see Figure 6), wherein the plurality of second locking ramps extend from the second end of the annular body radially inward (see Figure 8), and wherein the clamping ring further comprises an annular flange (51, fig 6), the annular flange extending from the first end radially inward (see Figure 6), wherein a radial extent of the annular flange is greater than a radial extent of the plurality of second locking ramps (see Figures 6 and 8).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 2-9, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dillon (US 2,283,974), alone.
Regarding claim 2, Dillon discloses the clamping device, wherein each of the annular mounting flange and the plurality of first locking ramps has: a first surface (see annotation below), the first surface of the mounting flange configured to be disposed adjacent with the first surfaces of the plurality of first ramps upon securing the first component to the second component (see Figure 6); and a second surface (see annotation below), the second surface of the mounting flange and the second surfaces of the plurality of first locking ramps configured to be in contact with the clamping ring
PNG
media_image1.png
404
340
media_image1.png
Greyscale
upon securing the first component to the second component (see Figure 6).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (First Surfaces)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: textbox (Second Surface)]
[AltContent: textbox (Second Surface)]
Dillon does not disclose the clamping device, wherein the first surface of the mounting flange is configured to be disposed in contact with the first surfaces of the plurality of first ramps upon securing the first component to the second component.
Dillon is analogous art because they are at least from the same field of endeavor, i.e., connections. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to size the first surface of the mounting flange (45, fig 6) to be configured to be disposed in contact with the first surfaces of the plurality of first ramps (38, fig 6) upon securing the first component (34, fig 6) to the second component (37, fig 6), with a reasonable expectation of success, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). The motivation would have been to enhance sealing by further surrounding the upper side of the sealing ring. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Dillon to obtain the invention as specified in claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, wherein the first surfaces are disposed in a plane perpendicular to an axis of the mounting flange and mounting seat (see Figure 6, after modification with respect to claim 2), and wherein the second surfaces are angled with respect to the plane (see Figures 6 and 7).
Regarding claim 4, Dillon, as modified with respect to claim 2, does not teach the clamping device, wherein the second surfaces are disposed at an angle of approximately 30 degrees from the plane.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to shape the second surfaces to be disposed at an angle of approximately 30 degrees from the plane, with a reasonable expectation of success, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). The motivation would have been to provide appropriate dimensions to the clamping devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Dillon to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, wherein the clamping ring comprises an annular flange (51, fig 6) extending radially inward from the first end, the annular flange having a third surface disposed adjacent to the first surface of the mounting flange (see Figure 6).
Regarding claim 6, wherein each second locking ramp of the plurality of second locking ramps comprises a fourth surface (see Figure 7), each fourth surface configured to provide a friction fit with a corresponding second surface of the plurality of first locking ramps upon securing the first component to the second component (see Figure 7).
Regarding claim 7, wherein the fourth surfaces of the plurality of second locking ramps and the second surfaces of the plurality of first locking ramps are inclined in a circumferential direction forming segments of a helix with a lead angle (see Figure 7).
Regarding claim 8, wherein the first locking ramps of the plurality of first locking ramps are equally spaced about the circumference of the mounting seat and have a first are length (see Figure 8, the outer arc length) and wherein each second locking ramp of the plurality of second locking ramps has a second are length (see Figure 8, the inner arc length), the second are length less than the first are length (see Figure 8).
Regarding claim 9, Dillon, as modified with respect to claim 2, does not teach the clamping device, wherein the lead angle is less than approximately two degrees.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to shape the plurality of first locking ramps (38, fig 6) and the plurality of second locking ramps (55, fig 7) with a lead angle less than approximately two degrees, with a reasonable expectation of success, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). The motivation would have been to finer movement of the clamping device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify Dillon to obtain the invention as specified in claim 9.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. See the attached PTO-892 for various clamping devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Guang H Guan whose telephone number is (571) 272-7828. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays (10:00 AM - 6:00 PM).
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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571) 272-8227. 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.
/G. H. G./Examiner, Art Unit 3631
/JONATHAN LIU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3631
Prosecution Insights