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 of the Application
This action is responsive to the amendment dated 11/11/2025. Claims 1-10 remain pending. Claims 1 and 6-8 have been amended. The applicant’s amendment has necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection below. This action is Final.
Response to Remarks
Applicant's amendment to recite wherein the securing ring is enabled to be arranged uniformly directly on the waterproofing sheet when the waterproofing sheet is pressing on the adhesive sealing that is arranged exclusively between said discoidal plane and the waterproofing sheet itself without extending beyond said discoidal plane along with the other amendments has overcome the rejection of record. However, a new ground(s) of rejection is applied to the claims below. As such, applicant's arguments with respect to the 102 rejection over Carroll have not been found persuasive. A new interpretation of Carroll as stated below in the 102 rejection teaches each and every limitation including wherein the securing ring is enabled to be arranged uniformly directly on the waterproofing sheet when the waterproofing sheet is pressing on the adhesive sealing that is arranged exclusively between said discoidal plane and the waterproofing sheet itself without extending beyond said discoidal plane.
Applicant's amendments to the claims have necessitated further search and/or consideration and/or revision of the rejection, and accordingly, this action must be made Final.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 2 and 3 of claim 6, please amend the limitation of “wherein the securing ring incorporates mechanical attachment enabled for…” to instead recite --wherein the securing ring incorporates a mechanical attachment enabled for…--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 11/11/2025. These drawings are acceptable.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 8, 9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carroll et al. (US 2022/0290419, hereafter “Carroll”).
Regarding claim 1, Carroll discloses a system (Fig. 1) for connecting waterproofing with a drain pipe (comprised at least of 30, 20, 50, and 60) in indoor wet areas, suitable for being used in a main part of a drain that is in turn equipped with a discoidal plane wherein and on which a waterproofing sheet (40, 41, 42) is positioned and attached, the system comprising: an adhesive sealing (45) enabled to be interposed between the aforementioned discoidal plane (21) of the main part (20) and the waterproofing sheet and said waterproofing sheet thus being arranged on and pressing on the adhesive sealing (Fig. 1), and a secondary part (60) and a securing ring (50), wherein the secondary part is in turn enabled for connecting and supporting a grid (60 is capable of supporting a grid), wherein the securing ring is enabled to be arranged uniformly directly on the waterproofing sheet when the waterproofing sheet is pressing on the adhesive sealing that is arranged exclusively between said discoidal plane and the waterproofing sheet itself without extending beyond said discoidal plane (50 is at least capable of performing this limitation during installation of 50 when 60 is still positioned above 21 with reference to Fig. 1), both the secondary part and the securing ring being in turn enabled for coupling and interlocking with each other (para. [0032]).
Regarding claim 3, Carroll further discloses the system for connecting the waterproofing with a drain pipe in indoor wet areas according to claim 1, wherein the grid is enabled for carrying and supporting a coating element that is visible in the drain. (note that the grid is not positively recited and the system of Carroll is at least capable of performing this limitation)
Regarding claim 4, Carroll further discloses the system for connecting the waterproofing with a drain pipe in indoor wet areas according to claim 1, wherein the grid itself incorporates a coating that is visible in the drain. (note that the grid is not positively recited and the system of Carroll is at least capable of performing this limitation)
Regarding claim 5, Carroll further discloses the system for connecting the waterproofing with a drain pipe in indoor wet areas according to claim 1, wherein the main part incorporates an adapter (30).
Regarding claim 6, Carroll further discloses the system for connecting the waterproofing with a drain pipe in indoor wet areas according to claim 1 wherein the securing ring incorporates mechanical attachment (51) enabled for assembly thereof on the main part.
Regarding claim 8, Carroll further discloses the system for connecting the waterproofing with a drain pipe in indoor wet areas according to claim 1, wherein the securing ring incorporates at least one through hole (the through hole through 50), which communicates with an inner cavity (the gap between 50 and 20 along the top side of 50 when it is installed) provided between the main part and the securing ring itself.
Regarding claim 9, Carroll further discloses the system for connecting the waterproofing with a drain pipe in indoor wet areas according to claim 1, wherein the inner cavity is filled with adhesive sealing material. (Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 11, Carroll further discloses the system for connecting the waterproofing with a drain pipe in indoor wet areas according to claim 1, wherein the securing ring provides uniform compressive force on the waterproofing sheet against the adhesive sealing. (as shown in Fig. 1; when 60 is fully installed and connected to 20, this limitation is met since there is not intended to be any gap left between the waterproofing sheet and 60.)
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carroll in view of Larson (US 2019/0316334).
Regarding claim 2, Carroll further discloses the system for connecting the waterproofing with a drain pipe in indoor wet areas according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the securing ring incorporates a perimeter gasket enabled for the arrangement and adjustment thereof between the main part and the securing ring itself.
Larson teaches a securing ring (212) that incorporates a perimeter gasket (208) enabled for the arrangement and adjustment thereof between the main part and the securing ring itself. (Fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the system of Carroll to include a perimeter gasket between the main part and the securing ring since this is combining prior art elements (seals) according to known methods to yield predictable results (to provide a proper fluid seal between two parts).
The motivation for doing so is to ensure the connection between the two parts is properly sealed.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carroll in view of Wedi (US 2022/0195712).
Regarding claim 7, Carroll further discloses the system for connecting the waterproofing with a drain pipe in indoor wet areas according to claim 6, but fails to disclose wherein the mechanical attachment have a bayonet type arrangement, and comprise female elements in the securing ring which are mutually complementary with male elements that are incorporated into the main part.
Wedi teaches a mechanical attachment means comprising a bayonet type arrangement, and comprise female elements in the securing ring which are mutually complementary with male elements that are incorporated into the main part. (para. [0033], [0065])
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the mechanical attachment means of Carroll to comprise a bayonet type arrangement as taught by Wedi the equivalence of a bayonet connection and any other convention connection means is recognized for their use in the drains art and the selection of any of these known equivalents would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. (para. [0033]) The motivation for making such an equivalent substitution would be to provide a simple connection means that is strong and secure. (para. [0033])
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carroll.
Regarding claim 10, Carroll further discloses the system for connecting the waterproofing with a drain pipe in indoor wet areas according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the securing ring has transparent or translucent properties.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the securing ring of Carroll to have transparent or translucent properties since selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to provide a material that the user can see through to detect any damage after installation.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 PAUL J GRAY whose telephone number is (571)270-0544. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571 272-4881. 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.
/PAUL J GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753