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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/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 3, the claim is dependent on claim 1 which has been canceled. Claim 3 should depend on claim 2.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over McCabe (US Pub. 2010/0306912 A1).
Regarding claim 2, McCabe discloses a needle having a proximal end and a distal end (Fig. 2, linear portion 42, conduit 40) wherein the distal end is configured for insertion into a soil and comprising dispensing holes with the distal end being pointed to prevent clogging (Fig. 2, nozzle 46 is substantially pointed);
the proximal end comprising a threaded fitting configured to make an airtight seal onto a pressurized container (Fig. 2, fitting 66) and comprising a reducer fitting for an air tight seal on alternate sources (Fig. 2, fitting comprising threaded outlet 64, 68).
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCabe (US Pub. 2010/0306912 A1) in view of Larson (US Pub. 2014/0120265 A1) and Eifert (US Pub. 8,373,999 B1).
Regarding claim 3, McCabe discloses the needle having a needle diameter (Fig. 2, linear portion 42, conduit 40 has a diameter);
the threaded fitting having a threaded fitting diameter (Fig. 2, fitting 66 has a diameter);
said needle diameter being lesser in value than said threaded fitting diameter (Fig. 2, linear portion 42 is narrower than the fitting 66);
said reducer fitting further configured to create an airtight seal with the threaded fitting (Fig. 2, a seal is created when fittings 66 and 64 are fastened together);
However, McCabe discloses the claimed invention except for as taught by Larson, similarly drawn to a nozzle for a liquid spraying device, a tapered support connector located between said needle and said threaded fitting, said tapered support connector being frustoconical (Fig. 1, nozzle 1 tapers down in a frustoconical manner towards the opening).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of McCabe to have the frustoconical connector of Larson to provide a smoother transition between the components.
Furthermore, McCabe fails to disclose as taught by Eifert, similarly drawn to a fitting, the reducer fitting comprising an interior threaded surface (Fig. 7, interior threading 30) and an exterior threaded surface (Fig. 6, exterior threading 32), the exterior threaded surface configured for threaded attachment to said threaded fitting (The exterior threaded surface of Eifert is male while the interior threaded surface of McCabe is female);
the reducer fitting further comprising a hexagonal distal end (Fig. 8, head portion 20 is hexagonal);
said reducer fitting further configured to create an airtight seal at the hexagonal distal end (Bolts of this nature are known to make seals with their threads).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of McCabe to have the reducer fitting of Eifert to allow for connection of different sized hoses to the needle.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 HENRY HOOPER MUDD whose telephone number is (571)272-5941. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Joshua Michener can be reached at 5712721467. 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.
/HENRY HOOPER MUDD/Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642