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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 16 Sept 2025 has been entered. Claims 10-17, 19, 21-23, 25-27 and 29-33 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims, the Drawings and the Specification overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 16 June 2025.
Drawings
The newly added Figure 7 was received on 16 Sept 2025. This drawing is acceptable.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “an external thread on the service side connectable to an internal thread on an external sealing cap” from Claims 19, 25 and 29 and “wherein the groove on the tube side of the adapter housing has a rectangular cross-section” from Claim 30 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 30 recites the limitation “wherein the groove on the tube side of the adapter housing has a rectangular cross-section”. This amendment appears to lack support in the application as originally filed and therefore would qualify as new matter. Applicant relies on Figures 4A-4B and 5A-5B and ¶s 14-18 and ¶s 26-28 for these limitations. However, ¶s 14-18 and ¶s 26-28 are moot to these particular limitations. ¶ 18 and ¶ 26 discuss a rectangular ring sealing device, but not a rectangular groove. Figures 4a and 5a do not appear to show the rectangular cross section, but instead a semicircular cross section and the description of the drawings in the Specification describe Figures 4a and 4b to be the same embodiment and Figures 5a and 5b to be the same embodiment.
Therefore, this limitation appears to lack support in the application as originally filed and therefore would qualify as new matter.
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.
Claim 33 is 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.
Claim 33 recites the limitation "the adapter side opening" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination “the adapter side opening” will be interpreted as “the tube side opening”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
(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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 10, 15-17, 21-22 and 30-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Schultz et al (US 5,769,465) in view of Woodling (US 2477676).
Regarding Claim 10, Schultz et al disclose an adapter (Figures 1-3). The adapter comprising:
an adapter housing (10) defining an internal passageway (20 comprising both the horizontal and vertical portions from the service side opening to the tube side opening as seen in Annotated Figure A) permitting fluid communication through a tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) on a tube side of the adapter housing (to the right at the tube side opening as shown in Annotated Figure A) and a service side opening (see Annotated Figure A) on a service side (at top at the service side opening as shown in Annotated Figure A) of the adapter housing (10), wherein the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) is adapted to receive a tube fitting (12);
a valve core (18) positioned within the internal passageway (20 comprising both the horizontal and vertical portions from the service side opening to the tube side opening as seen in Annotated Figure A) and between the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) and the service side opening (see Annotated Figure A), wherein the valve core (18) is movable between an open state (when the valve is moved downward in the orientation of Figure 1 and the valve seat shown in Annotated Figure A unseats) and a closed state (shown in Figure 1), wherein the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) is in fluid communication with the service side opening (see Annotated Figure A) when the valve core is in the open state (when the valve is moved downward in the orientation of Figure 1 and the valve seat shown in Annotated Figure A unseats), and wherein the valve core (18) prevents fluid communication between the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) and the service side opening (see Annotated Figure A) when the valve core is in the closed state (Figure 1);
wherein the adapter housing (10) further comprises:
a deformable flange (22) on the tube side (see Annotated Figure A) of the adapter housing (10), wherein the deformable flange (22) is configured to be deformed over a shoulder (16) of the tube fitting (12) to couple the tube fitting (12) to the housing (10);
a groove (26; forming a groove on the interior surface of the body 10) on the tube side (see Annotated Figure A) of the adapter housing (10) between the deformable flange (22) and the valve core (18); and
a circumferential seal (o-ring 28) positioned and retained within the groove (Figure 2 with seal 28 within groove 26) wherein the circumferential seal (o-ring 28) is configured to provide a fluid seal between the tube fitting and the adapter housing (Figure 2 shows the o-ring seal 28 located between the housing 10 and tube fitting 12 to seal the area between them, thereby forming a fluid seal).
However, in the event the Applicant successfully argues that a recess is not a groove, Shultz et al fails to disclose a groove.
Woodling teaches a pipe coupling with a groove (35; Figures 3-4; Col 3, lines 41-45) into which a seal is positioned (Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the recess to be in the shape of a groove since a change in shape of an element involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to allow for the introduction of a differently shaped seal. Furthermore, absent a teaching as to criticality that having a groove, this particular arrangement is deemed to have been known by those skilled in the art since the instant specification and evidence of record fail to attribute any significance (novel or unexpected results) to a particular arrangement. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553,555,188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
PNG
media_image1.png
750
841
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure A
Regarding Claim 15, Schultz et al disclose where the deformable flange (22) further comprises raised portions (24; Col 2, lines 42-47) configured to grip the tube fitting (Col 3, lines 17-22 disclose where the raised portions prevent rotation of the tube fitting, which would read on the limitation since the grip of the raised portions prevents the rotation of the tube fitting).
Regarding Claim 16, Schultz et al disclose where the raised portions (24) are knurls (Col 2, lines 42-47).
Regarding Claim 17, Schultz et al disclose where the deformable flange (22) further comprises an elongate portion (32) that extends past the shoulder (16) of the tube fitting (12) when the deformable flange (22) is deformed (Figure 3) and is configured to provide stability to the coupling of the tube fitting to the housing (Col 3, lines 14-17 disclose where the elongate portion 32 is provided to support the tube, thereby reading on the limitation because providing support provides stability to the coupling between the tube fitting and the housing).
Regarding Claim 21, Schultz et al disclose where a length of the deformable flange (22 in Figures 1-3) is sized to extend past the shoulder (16) of the tube fitting (12) when the deformable flange is undeformed (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 22, Schultz et al disclose an adapter (Figures 1-3). The adapter comprising:
an adapter housing (10) defining an internal passageway (20 comprising both the horizontal and vertical portions from the service side opening to the tube side opening as seen in Annotated Figure A) permitting fluid communication through a tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) on a tube side (to the right at the tube side opening as shown in Annotated Figure A) of the adapter housing (10) and a service side opening (see Annotated Figure A) on a service side (at top at the service side opening as shown in Annotated Figure A) of the adapter housing (10), wherein the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) is adapted to receive a tube fitting (12);
a valve core (18) positioned within the internal passageway (20 comprising both the horizontal and vertical portions from the service side opening to the tube side opening as seen in Annotated Figure A) and between the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) and the service side opening (see Annotated Figure A), wherein the valve core (18) is movable between an open state (when the valve is moved downward in the orientation of Figure 1 and the valve seat shown in Annotated Figure A unseats) and a closed state (shown in Figure 1), wherein the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) is in fluid communication with the service side opening (see Annotated Figure A) when the valve core is in the open state (when the valve is moved downward in the orientation of Figure 1 and the valve seat shown in Annotated Figure A unseats), and wherein the valve core (18) prevents fluid communication between the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) and the service side opening (see Annotated Figure A) when the valve core is in the closed state (Figure 1);
wherein the adapter housing (10) further comprises:
a deformable flange (22) on the tube side (see Annotated Figure A) of the housing (10) comprising an elongate portion (32) that extends past a shoulder (16) of the tube fitting (12) when the deformable flange (22) is deformed (Figure 3), wherein the deformable flange (22) is configured to be deformed over the shoulder (16) of the tube fitting (12) to couple the tube fitting (12) to the adapter housing (10); and the elongate portion (32) is configured to provide stability to a coupling of the tube fitting to the adapter housing (Col 3, lines 14-17 disclose where the elongate portion 32 is provided to support the tube, thereby reading on the limitation because providing support provides stability to the coupling between the tube fitting and the housing);
a groove (26; forming a groove on the interior surface of the body 10) on the tube side (see Annotated Figure A) of the adapter housing (10) between the deformable flange (22) and the valve core (18); and
a circumferential seal (o-ring 28) positioned and retained within the groove (Figure 2 with seal 28 within groove 26), wherein the circumferential seal (o-ring 28) is configured to provide a fluid seal between the tube fitting and the adapter housing (Figure 2 shows the o-ring seal 28 located between the housing 10 and tube fitting 12 to seal the area between them, thereby forming a fluid seal).
However, in the event the Applicant successfully argues that a recess is not a groove, Shultz et al fails to disclose a groove.
Woodling teaches a pipe coupling with a groove (35; Figures 3-4; Col 3, lines 41-45) into which a seal is positioned (Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the recess to be in the shape of a groove since a change in shape of an element involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to allow for the introduction of a differently shaped seal. Furthermore, absent a teaching as to criticality that having a groove, this particular arrangement is deemed to have been known by those skilled in the art since the instant specification and evidence of record fail to attribute any significance (novel or unexpected results) to a particular arrangement. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553,555,188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
Regarding Claim 30, Woodling teaches where the groove (35; Figure 3) on the tube side of the adapter housing (disclosed by Schultz et al as discussed above) has a rectangular cross-section (Col 3, lines 41-45).
Regarding Claim 31, Woodling teaches where a height of the groove is generally equal to a height of the circumferential seal (of seal 34 seen in Figure 4 uncompressed).
Regarding Claim 32, Schultz et al disclose all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose a diameter of the tube side opening between the valve core and the groove is the same as a diameter of the tube side opening between the groove and the deformable flange.
Woodling teaches a diameter of the tube side opening between the valve core and the groove (at 23 to the left of groove 35 as seen in the orientation of Figure 3 where the valve core disclosed by Schultz et al, and located approximate 21 as the coupling of Woodling is incorporated into the valve of Schultz et al) is the same as a diameter of the tube side opening between the groove and the deformable flange (at 23 to the right of groove 35 as seen in the orientation of Figure 3 and Schultz et al disclose the deformable flange).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diameter of the tube side opening of Schultz et al with the diameters as taught by Woodling since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component, since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentable distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). 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). MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A): Smith v. Nichols, 88 U.S. 112, 118-19 (1874) (a change in form, proportions, or degree "will not sustain a patent"); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). In the instant case, the diameters of the tube side opening of Schultz et al, as modified by Woodling would not operate differently with the claimed housing dimensions since the diameters function in the same manner as the inventor’s disclosed diameters.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al (US 5,769,465) in view of Woodling (US 2477676) in further view of Bechu (US 4,993,756).
Regarding Claim 11, Schultz et al, as modified by Woodling teach all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose where the circumferential seal is made of an elastomeric material.
Bechu teaches an adapter (5 generally), a tube fitting (2 generally), a deformable flange (10) and a circumferential seal (9), where the circumferential seal (9) is made of an elastomeric material (Col 5, line 10).
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 circumferential seal of Schultz et al, as modified by Woodling to be made from an elastomeric material as taught by Bechu 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 commonly used material that is inexpensive and durable.
Regarding Claim 12, Schultz et al disclose where the circumferential seal (28) is one of an O- ring, butterfly ring, or rectangular ring (an o-ring is disclosed in Col 2, line 56).
Claim(s) 13, 19 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al (US 5,769,465) in view of Woodling (US 2477676) in further view of Mullins (US 3,815,624).
Regarding Claim 13, Schultz et al, as modified by Woodling teach all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose where the adapter housing further comprises a pair of opposing flat surfaces positioned on an exterior surface of the adapter housing.
Mullins teaches an adapter housing (12) where the adapter housing (12) further comprises a pair of opposing flat surfaces (Figure 1 at 28) positioned on an exterior surface of the adapter housing (Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adapter housing of Schultz et al, as modified by Woodling, with the pair of opposing flat surfaces as taught by Mullins for the advantage of providing wrench flats (Col 3, lines 11-14) to assist in connecting the housing adapter to the system, as taught by Mullins (Col 3, lines 65-67).
Regarding Claim 19, Schultz et al disclose all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose where the adapter housing further comprising an external thread on the service side connectable to an internal thread on an external sealing cap.
Mullins teaches where the adapter housing (12) further comprising an external thread (Figure 4; Col 3, lines 29-31) on the service side (the top side shown in Figure 4 with the bottom side being the tube side as shown in the orientation of Figure 4), the external sealing cap (40) comprising an internal thread (Figure 4 to mate with the external threads of the adapter housing disclosed at Col 3, lines 29-31) on an internal surface of the external sealing cap (Figure 4), wherein the internal thread of the external sealing cap (Figure 4) is configured to engage the external thread of the adapter housing (Col 3, lines 29-31) to secure the external sealing cap to the adapter (Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adapter housing of Schultz et al with the cap and threaded coupling as taught by Mullins for the advantage of protecting the valve when the system is not in use, as taught by Mullins (Col 3, lines 29-31).
PNG
media_image2.png
381
677
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure B
Regarding Claim 25, Schultz et al disclose all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose where the adapter housing further comprising an external thread on the service side connectable to an internal thread on an external sealing cap.
Mullins teaches where the adapter housing (12) further comprising an external thread (Figure 4; Col 3, lines 29-31) on the service side (the top side shown in Figure 4 with the bottom side being the tube side as shown in the orientation of Figure 4), the external sealing cap (40) comprising an internal thread (Figure 4 to mate with the external threads of the adapter housing disclosed at Col 3, lines 29-31) on an internal surface of the external sealing cap (Figure 4), wherein the internal thread of the external sealing cap (Figure 4) is configured to engage the external thread of the adapter housing (Col 3, lines 29-31) to secure the external sealing cap to the adapter (Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adapter housing of Schultz et al with the cap and threaded coupling as taught by Mullins for the advantage of protecting the valve when the system is not in use, as taught by Mullins (Col 3, lines 29-31).
Claim(s) 14, 23, 26-27 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al (US 5,769,465) in view of Woodling (US 2477676) in further view of Wöhner et al (US 10,328,767).
Regarding Claim 14, Schultz et al disclose where the adapter housing (10) further comprises a retainable shoulder (see Annotated Figure A) on an exterior surface (the outside surface as seen in Figure 1) of the service side (see Annotated Figure A at the service side opening) of the adapter housing (10), wherein the retainable shoulder comprises a retainable surface (at the service side opening of Annotated Figure A), but fails to expressly disclose where the retainable surface is connectable to an automobile servicing equipment.
Wöhner et al teach an adapter system (Figures 1-2) with a first adapter (one of the adapters 22; Col 2, lines 27-36) with a retainable surface (exterior of 28) where the retainable surface is connectable to an automobile servicing equipment (Col 2, lines 27-36).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to provide the adapter of Schultz et al, as modified by Woodling to be used in the automobile air conditioning system of Wöhner et al for the purpose of utilizing the adapter of Schultz et al in an automobile air conditioning system in which adapters are known and desired.
Regarding Claim 23, Schultz et al disclose where the adapter housing (10) further comprises a retainable shoulder (see Annotated Figure A) on an exterior surface (the outside surface as seen in Figure 1) of the service side (see Annotated Figure A at the service side opening) of the adapter housing (10), wherein the retainable shoulder comprises a retainable surface (at the service side opening of Annotated Figure A), but fails to expressly disclose where the retainable surface is connectable to an automobile servicing equipment.
Wöhner et al teach an adapter system (Figures 1-2) with a first adapter (one of the adapters 22; Col 2, lines 27-36) with a retainable surface (exterior of 28) where the retainable surface is connectable to an automobile servicing equipment (Col 2, lines 27-36).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to provide the adapter of Schultz et al, as modified by Woodling to be used in the automobile air conditioning system of Wöhner et al for the purpose of utilizing the adapter of Schultz et al in an automobile air conditioning system in which adapters are known and desired.
Regarding Claim 26, Schultz et al disclose an adapter system (Col 1, lines 5-12). The adapter system comprising:
an adapter (Figures 1-3) comprising:
an adapter housing (10) defining an internal passageway (20 comprising both the horizontal and vertical portions from the service side opening to the tube side opening as seen in Annotated Figure A) permitting fluid communication through a tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) on a tube side of the adapter housing (see Annotated Figure A at the tube side opening) and a service side opening (see Annotated Figure A) on a service side (see Annotated Figure A) of the adapter housing (10), wherein the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) is adapted to receive a tube fitting (12) of the automobile air conditioning system (Col 1, lines 5-12);
a valve core (18) positioned within the internal passageway (20 comprising both the horizontal and vertical portions from the service side opening to the tube side opening as seen in Annotated Figure A) and between the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) and the service side opening (see Annotated Figure A), wherein the valve core (18) is movable between an open state (when the valve is moved downward in the orientation of Figure 1 and the valve seat shown in Annotated Figure A unseats) and a closed state (shown in Figure 1), wherein the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) is in fluid communication with the service side opening (see Annotated Figure A) when the valve core is in the open state (when the valve is moved downward in the orientation of Figure 1 and the valve seat shown in Annotated Figure A unseats), and wherein the valve core (18) prevents fluid communication between the tube side opening (see Annotated Figure A) and the service side opening (see Annotated Figure A) when the valve core is in the closed state (Figure 1);
wherein the housing (10) further comprises:
a deformable flange (22) on the tube side (see Annotated Figure A) of the adapter housing (10), wherein the deformable flange (22) is configured to be deformed over a shoulder (16) of the tube fitting (12) to couple the tube fitting (12) to the adapter housing (10);
a groove (26; forming a groove on the interior surface of the body 10) on the tube side (see Annotated Figure A) of the adapter housing (10) between the deformable flange (22) and the valve core (18); and
a circumferential seal (o-ring 28) positioned and retained within the groove (Figure 2 with seal 28 within groove 26) wherein the circumferential seal (o-ring 28) is configured to provide a fluid seal between the tube fitting and the adapter housing (Figure 2 shows the o-ring seal 28 located between the housing 10 and tube fitting 12 to seal the area between them, thereby forming a fluid seal),
but fails to expressly disclose a first adapter connectable to a high-pressure side of an automobile air conditioning system; and a second adapter connectable to a low-pressure side of the automobile air conditioning system.
Additionally, the Applicant may successfully argue that a recess is not a groove, Shultz et al fails to disclose a groove.
Therefore, Woodling teaches a pipe coupling with a groove (35; Figures 3-4; Col 3, lines 41-45) into which a seal is positioned (Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the recess to be in the shape of a groove since a change in shape of an element involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to allow for the introduction of a differently shaped seal. Furthermore, absent a teaching as to criticality that having a groove, this particular arrangement is deemed to have been known by those skilled in the art since the instant specification and evidence of record fail to attribute any significance (novel or unexpected results) to a particular arrangement. In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553,555,188 USPQ 7, 9 (CCPA 1975).
Wöhner et al teach an adapter system (Figures 1-2) with a first adapter (one of the adapters 22; Col 2, lines 27-36) connected to a high-pressure side of an automobile air conditioning system (Col 2, lines 27-36) and a second adapter (the other of adapters 22; Col 2, lines 27-36) connected to a low-pressure side of the automobile air conditioning system (Col 2, lines 27-36).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to provide the adapter of Schultz et al to be used in the automobile air conditioning system of Wöhner et al for the purpose of utilizing the adapter of Schultz et al in an automobile air conditioning system in which adapters are known and desired.
Regarding Claim 27, Schultz et al disclose where the deformable flange (22) further comprises an elongate portion (32) that extends past the shoulder (16) of the tube fitting (12) when the deformable flange (22) is deformed (Figure 3) and is configured to provide stability to a coupling of the tube fitting to the adapter housing (Col 3, lines 14-17 disclose where the elongate portion 32 is provided to support the tube, thereby reading on the limitation because providing support provides stability to the coupling between the tube fitting and the housing).
Regarding Claim 33, as best understood, Schultz et al, as modified by Woodling, teach all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly teach where the service side opening and the adapter side opening are axially aligned.
Wöhner et al teach an adapter system (Figures 1-2) with a service side opening (upwards in the orientation of Figure 2) and an adapter side opening (being interpreted as the tube side opening as discussed above; downward in the orientation of Figures 1-2) where the openings are axially aligned (see Figures 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the location of the openings to be axially aligned since rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to provide an optimal arrangement of the ports based on user defined criteria.
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz et al (US 5,769,465) in view of Woodling (US 2477676) in further view of Wöhner et al (US 10,328,767) in further view of Mullins (US 3,815,624).
Regarding Claim 29, Schultz et al, as modified by Woodling and Wöhner et al teach essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose where the adapter housing further comprising an external thread on the service side connectable to an internal thread on an external sealing cap.
Mullins teaches where the adapter housing (12) further comprising an external thread (Figure 4; Col 3, lines 29-31) on the service side (the top side shown in Figure 4 with the bottom side being the tube side as shown in the orientation of Figure 4), the external sealing cap (40) comprising an internal thread (Figure 4 to mate with the external threads of the adapter housing disclosed at Col 3, lines 29-31) on an internal surface of the external sealing cap (Figure 4), wherein the internal thread of the external sealing cap (Figure 4) is configured to engage the external thread of the adapter housing (Col 3, lines 29-31) to secure the external sealing cap to the adapter (Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adapter housing of Schultz et al, as modified by Woodling and Wöhner et al, with the cap and threaded coupling as taught by Mullins for the advantage of protecting the valve when the system is not in use, as taught by Mullins (Col 3, lines 29-31).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment has overcome the rejection of record. However, a new ground of rejection is applied to the amended claims.
Applicant amends Claims 10, 22 and 26 to incorporate the limitations of a groove on the tube side of the adapter housing and argues that Schultz et al fails to disclose these newly added limitations. While Schultz et al appear to disclose a groove (at 26), in the event the Applicant successfully argues that a recess is not a groove, Woodling teaches a groove.
Additionally, Applicant argues that the o-ring of Schultz is provided on the tube that the housing is connected to, and not to the housing, Figures 2-3 at least show that o-ring positioned and retained in the groove of the adapter housing, as required by the claims. Any other features are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Therefore, this argument is unpersuasive.
Next, Applicant argues that the o-ring of Schultz et al is positioned at the end of the tube, such that the o-ring is free to move along the length of the end of the tube. While this argument appears to be a mischaracterization of Schultz et al, even if this argument was supported in the disclosure of Schultz et al, an o-ring retained in a recess or groove of the adapter housing would still be able and allowed to move along the length of the end of the tube during installation. Therefore, this argument is unpersuasive.
Therefore, these arguments are unpersuasive.
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 NICOLE GARDNER whose telephone number is (571)270-0144. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM-4PM 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://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors, KENNETH RINEHART (571-272-4881) or CRAIG SCHNEIDER (571-272-3607) can be reached by telephone. 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.
/NICOLE GARDNER/
Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/REINALDO SANCHEZ-MEDINA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753