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 as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “α”.
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. 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 7, 8, 18, and 19 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.
The term “close” in claims 7 and 18 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “”close” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 8 recites “there are two bosses”. It is unclear if this is the same two bosses recited in claim 1 or two new bosses. This renders the claim indefinite.
Claim 19 recites “there are two bosses”. It is unclear if the claim is intending to require two additional bosses or further define the boss of claim 10 as two bosses. This renders the claim indefinite.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by CN 204805772U. For portions of the rejection, please see the annotated fig. 3 below:
PNG
media_image1.png
383
544
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claims 1 and 10, CN 204805772U discloses an anti-disassembly
connector, comprising:
a connecting portion (shown in annotated fig.), wherein a threaded connecting section
(shown in annotated fig.) is disposed on the connecting portion; and
at least two bosses (5), wherein the at least two bosses protrude from a peripheral wall of
the connecting portion, the at least two bosses extend along a circumferential edge of
the connecting portion or a peripheral wall of the connecting portion (shown in fig. 3), each of
the at least two bosses has a force-bearing surface (51) and a force-releasing surface (52) that are
disposed opposite to each other, the at least two bosses are disposed at intervals along the circumferential edge of the connecting portion or the peripheral wall of the connecting portion (shown in fig. 5), and a gap between two adjacent bosses forms a clamping interval; and
a junction of the force-releasing surface and the connecting portion is a circular arc transition (shown in fig. 5).
In regards to claims 2 and 12, CN 204805772U further discloses each of the at least
two bosses further comprises an outer cambered surface (shown in annotated fig.), the outer cambered surface is disposed between the force-bearing surface and the force-releasing surface, and a junction between the outer cambered surface and the force-releasing surface is a circular arc transition (shown in annotated fig. and fig. 5).
In regards to claims 3 and 13, CN 204805772U further discloses the connecting portion is a connecting pipe, and a thickness of each of the at least two bosses is greater than a thickness of a pipe wall of the connecting pipe (fig. 5 shows that there is an area on the connection portion with a thickness less than the thickness of the bosses).
In regards to claims 4 and 14, CN 204805772U further discloses a force-bearing sideline (shown in annotated fig.) is formed on a side of the force-bearing surface that is away from the connecting portion, and the force-bearing sideline (211) is parallel to an axial line of the connecting portion (shown in annotated fig.).
In regards to claims 5 and 16, CN 204805772U further discloses the force-releasing surface is a curved surface, and the force-releasing surface recesses toward an interior of a boss (shown in fig. 5).
In regards to claims 6 and 17, CN 204805772U further discloses an included angle between the force-releasing surface and a radial cross-section of the connecting portion is a, and 20° ≤ a ≤ 50° (fig. 5 shows that an angle exists somewhere along the surface within the current range).
In regards to claims 7 and 18, CN 204805772U further discloses each of the at least two bosses has a reinforcing portion, a reinforcing end face (see annotated fig.) is formed at an end of the reinforcing portion away from the threaded connecting section, and the reinforcing end face is parallel to an end face of the connecting portion (shown in annotated fig.); and a machining plane (see annotated fig.) is disposed at the clamping interval close to the threaded connecting section and facing the reinforcing end face, and the machining plane is parallel to the reinforcing end face (shown in annotated fig.).
In regards to claims 8 and 19, CN 204805772U further discloses there are two bosses, and the two bosses are symmetrically disposed at the end portion of the connecting portion or the peripheral wall of the connecting portion (shown in fig. 5).
In regards to claims 9 and 20, CN 204805772U further discloses the anti-disassembly connector is of an integrally formed structure (shown in fig. 5).
In regards to claims 11 and 15, CN 204805772U further discloses the force-releasing surface is a curved surface (shown in fig. 5).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 4, 10, and 14 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 6 and 15 of copending Application No. 18/568,857 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 4, 10, and 14 are generic to all that is recited in claims 6 and 15 of the reference application. In other words, claims 6 and 15 of the reference application fully encompasses the subject matter of claims 1, 4, 10, and 14. Thus, the invention of claims 6 and 15 of the reference application is in effect a “species” of the “generic” invention of claims 1, 4, 10, and 14. It has been held that the generic invention is anticipated by the species, see In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Since claims 1, 4, 10, and 14 are anticipated by claims 6 and 15 of the reference application, claims 1, 4, 10, and 14 are not patentably distinct from claims 6 and 15, regardless of any additional subject matter presented in claims 6 and 15. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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 anti-disassembly 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 on (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
01/16/2025