DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figs. 6 and 7 are cross-sectional views but lack proper cross-hatching. See 37 CFR 1.84(h)(3).
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 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.
Claims 5-8 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.
Claim 5 recites “petal-like” which renders the claim indefinite because “like” extends the scope of “petal” to unknown bounds. It is unclear what is and is not encompassed by “petal-like”. Similarly, it is been held that the addition of the word "type" to an otherwise definite expression (e.g., Friedel-Crafts catalyst) extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite. Ex parte Copenhaver, 109 USPQ 118 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1955).
The remaining claims are rejected based on their dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Frey et al. (USP 4,105,226 hereinafter “Frey”).
In regards to claim 1, at the onset it is noted that a claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). See MPEP § 2114. The recitation “oil tubing” is a nominal recitation of the intended manner of operation of the system, and does not add any further structure than the “connector". Therefore, little patentable weight is given to "oil tubing".
Frey discloses an oil tubing connector (see fig. 6 and fig. 3 for details of the connection), comprising:
a tube body (120), an oil nozzle (14), and a connector head (12);
a first connection structure disposed between the tube body and the oil nozzle, with the oil nozzle being snap-fitted (see snap fit ring 60) to one end of the tube body through the first connection structure;
a second connection structure disposed between the tube body and the connector head, with the connector head being snap-fitted (see snap fit ring 60) to the other end of the tube body through the second connection structure;
wherein both the first and second connection structures include a snap-fit component (60) and a snap-fit slot (40), with the snap-fit component being composed of two or more snap-fit pieces (see pieces between each slot 90a, 90b, 90c) ;
the snap-fit slot of the first connection structure is formed by a first groove (26) on the tube body and a second groove (40) on the oil nozzle, while the snap-fit slot of the second connection structure is formed by a third groove (40) on the tube body and a fourth groove (26) on the connector head;
the first connection structure also includes a first seal groove (100), a first sealing ring (102), a second seal groove (100), and a first sealing element (102), with the first seal groove located on the tube body and the second seal groove located on the oil nozzle.
In regards to claim 2, Frey further discloses the first sealing ring is fitted at the first seal groove, forming a first sealing structure between the tube body and the oil nozzle (shown in fig. 3).
In regards to claim 3, Frey further discloses the first sealing element includes any of the following: a second sealing ring (102), a sealing gasket ,or a sealing sleeve.
In regards to claim 5, Frey further discloses the snap-fit component has a “petal-like structure” (shown in fig. 1), with the snap-fit pieces including an L-shaped insertion part (62) and a bending part, where the bending part (66) extends outward.
In regards to claim 6, Frey further discloses the snap-fit pieces are made of elastic metal (see column 4, lines 48-57).
In regards to claim 8, Frey further discloses the third groove is located on the outer surface of the tube body, and the fourth groove is located on the inner surface of the connector head; the third groove includes an inward-facing third limiting slot, into which the protruding part of the L-shaped insertion part fits; the fourth groove includes an outward-facing fourth limiting slot, where the bending part is positioned (shown in fig. 3).
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.
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.
Claim 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frey as applied to claim 1 above.
In regards to claim 10, Frey discloses the connector of claim 1 but does not disclose the outer surface of the oil nozzle is provided with external threads, and the inner surface of the connector head is provided with internal threads, but rather shows external threads on the connector head and an open connection for welding to conduit on the oil nozzle.
The examiner is taking Official notice that internal threaded connections, external threading connections, and welded connections are well-known in the art of tubing connectors and are freely interchangeable depending on what is being connected.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the oil nozzle with external threads and the connecter head with internal threads in order to allow them to be threadedly connected to matching threading tubing, achieving no new or unexpected results.
Claims 4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frey as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Mortensen et al. (USP 8,328,241 hereinafter “Mortensen”).
In regards to claim 4, Frey discloses the connector of claim 2, but does not disclose the second sealing ring, sealing gasket, or sealing sleeve is placed in the second seal groove, forming a second sealing structure between the tube body and the oil nozzle, i.e. both sealing rings and seal grooves being on the same side of the tube body.
However, Mortensen shows a similar snap-fit connection (see snap-fit 23) with two sealing grooves (17) and sealing rings (15) on one side of the connector.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the connection between the tube body and the oil nozzle with a second sealing ring and seal groove in order to create a redundant seal in case of a failure of the first sealing ring, thus preventing leakage.
In regards to claim 9, Frey discloses the connector of claim 1, but does not disclose the second connection structure also includes a third seal groove and a third sealing ring, with the third seal groove located on the tube body and the third sealing ring fitted on the tube body, forming a third sealing structure between the tube body and the connector head, i.e. a second sealing ring and groove between the tube body and the connector head.
However, Mortensen shows a similar snap-fit connection (see snap-fit 23) with two sealing grooves (17) and sealing rings (15) on one side of the connector.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the connection between the tube body and the connector head with a second sealing ring and seal groove in order to create a redundant seal in case of a failure of the first sealing ring, thus preventing leakage.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 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. Each of the remaining cited prior art shows a similar tubing connector.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY T DRAGICEVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-0505. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 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 supervisor, Matthew D. Troutman can be reached at (571) 270-3654. 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.
/ZACHARY T DRAGICEVICH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
08/13/2025