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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of species I in the reply filed on 2/20/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the field of search is identical and will not result in a serious search burden.
This is not found persuasive because a search of additional mutually exclusive features in patentably distinct inventions constitutes a burdensome search and examination. To establish burden of search, there are three criterions: The species or groupings of patentably indistinct species have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification; The species or groupings of patentably indistinct species have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; The species or groupings of patentably indistinct species have acquired a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries). In the instant case, the mutually exclusive characteristics of the third pipe body having a retaining ring with blades and cutouts, and the liquid cooled plate of the species II and III, constitutes a search burden as the features require a different search queries which require different search strategies or search queries.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 7-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 2/20/2026.
Claim 1 link(s) inventions for species I-III, and will be examined with the elected species. The restriction requirement between the linked inventions is subject to the non-allowance of the linking claim(s), claim 1.
Upon the indication of allowability of the linking claim(s), the restriction requirement as to the linked inventions shall be withdrawn and any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable linking claim(s) will be rejoined and fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104 Claims that require all the limitations of an allowable linking claim will be entered as a matter of right if the amendment is presented prior to final rejection or allowance, whichever is earlier. Amendments submitted after final rejection are governed by 37 CFR 1.116; amendments submitted after allowance are governed by 37 CFR 1.312.
Applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, the allowable linking claim, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or non-statutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Where a restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/13/2024 was filed prior to the mailing date of the mailing of this action. The submission complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 2/13/2024. These drawings are accepted.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the first through-hole” which does not have antecedent basis in the claim 1
Claim 4 recites the limitation " at least one second flowing through-hole for fluid passing therethrough runs through the cone-shape side part" is unclear as to how fluid “runs through the cone shaped side part” (1110 in Figure 4 of applicant’s invention) since this part is a solid part, it would appear that the fluid runs through the through hole adjacent this part. It is suggested that the limitation be changed to - - at least one second flowing through-hole for fluid passing therethrough runs through the at least one second flowing through hole adjacent the cone-shape side part - -.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Deyang Dongqi Power Station Equipment Co (CN 213064759U, as supplied by applicant). Herein-after referred to as “Deyang”.
Regarding claim 1, Deyang discloses a connector, comprising a first connector body (22), a ball body (40) and a mesh baffle (411), wherein the first connector body is provided with a hollow inner cavity (the space of the cavity within 222 and including the cavity to 221), a first inlet (at 10) disposed at one end of the hollow inner cavity, and a first outlet (the opening in 222 surrounding 42) disposed at the other end of the hollow inner cavity; the mesh baffle is disposed in the hollow inner cavity, and the mesh baffle is provided with a plurality of first flowing through-holes (numerous holes are shown within 411), an annular protrusion part (the angled part of 222 that abuts 40) located between the first inlet and the mesh baffle is provided inside the hollow inner cavity, the annular protrusion part is enclosed to form an annular through-hole (the smallest inner opening of 22), a diameter of the annular through-hole and a diameter of the first through-hole are both smaller than a diameter of the ball body ( as shown below the diameter of the ball is larger than the “first through hole in 411 and the annular through hole in 22); and the ball body is disposed between the annular protrusion part and the mesh baffle.
PNG
media_image1.png
777
1011
media_image1.png
Greyscale
When the reference is a utility patent, it does not matter that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained in the specification. The drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979). See MPEP 2125.
Here, the drawings clearly show the claimed features in the Deyang reference.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Bell (US 4246002).
Regarding claim 1, Bell discloses a connector, comprising a first connector body (29), a ball body (31) and a mesh baffle (35, screen), wherein the first connector body is provided with a hollow inner cavity (the entire space within 29), a first inlet (at 25) disposed at (considered as being “near” in a broadest reasonable interpretation) one end of the hollow inner cavity, and a first outlet (the leftmost opening in 29) disposed at the other end of the hollow inner cavity; the mesh baffle is disposed in the hollow inner cavity, and the mesh baffle is provided with a plurality of first flowing through-holes (the specification discloses that 35 is a screen and therefore inherently a plurality of openings are present), an annular protrusion part (at 27) located between the first inlet and the mesh baffle is provided inside the hollow inner cavity, the annular protrusion part is enclosed to form an annular through-hole (the opening of 25), a diameter of the annular through-hole and a diameter of the first through-hole are both smaller than a diameter of the ball body (as shown below, the ball is larger than the through-hole at 25 and inherently larger than one of the openings in the screen and therefore the diameters are smaller); and the ball body is disposed between the annular protrusion part and the mesh baffle (as shown below).
PNG
media_image2.png
208
462
media_image2.png
Greyscale
When the reference is a utility patent, it does not matter that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained in the specification. The drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979). See MPEP 2125.
Here, the drawings clearly show the claimed features in the Bell reference. Inherently the diameter of the openings of the screen are smaller than the ball diameter, since the ball itself is nearly as big as the entire screen.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Szabo et al. (US 6508269).
Regarding claim 1, Szabo et al. disclose a connector, comprising a first connector body (72,74), a ball body (126) and a mesh baffle (110), wherein the first connector body is provided with a hollow inner cavity (the space within 72,74), a first inlet (at 79) disposed at one end of the hollow inner cavity, and a first outlet (at 78) disposed at the other end of the hollow inner cavity; the mesh baffle is disposed in the hollow inner cavity, and the mesh baffle is provided with a plurality of first flowing through-holes (the holes 132 between arms 122, see Fig. 4,5), an annular protrusion part (at shoulder 128) located between the first inlet and the mesh baffle is provided inside the hollow inner cavity, the annular protrusion part is enclosed to form an annular through-hole (the hole at the intersection of 110 and 128 wall), a diameter of the annular through-hole and a diameter of the first through-hole are both smaller than a diameter of the ball body (as shown in Figures 2 and 4 the diameters are smaller than the diameter of the ball); and the ball body is disposed between the annular protrusion part and the mesh baffle (as shown in Figure 2).
PNG
media_image3.png
556
960
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
867
596
media_image4.png
Greyscale
When the reference is a utility patent, it does not matter that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained in the specification. The drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979). See MPEP 2125.
Here, the drawings clearly show the claimed features in the Szabo et al. reference.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 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.
None of the prior art of record discloses or renders as obvious, “the second pipe body comprises a connection part and a thimble part, one end of the connection part is connected to an end of the first pipe body away from the mesh baffle, and the other end of the connection part is connected to the thimble part, the thimble part is configured to be inserted into a second connector and opens an elastic retaining ring of the second connector; the first inlet is disposed at an end of the first pipe body close to the second pipe body” in combination with the rest of the limitations in claim 2.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Craig Price, whose telephone number is (571)272-2712 or via facsimile (571)273-2712. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:00AM-4:30PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3607, 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.
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) Form at Form at;
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
/CRAIG J PRICE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753