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 of Group I in the reply filed on 12/16/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 1-6 remain pending, and Applicant has cancelled claims 7-20.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent 10,208,467 (hereinafter Lin).
Regarding claim 1, Lin discloses a drain system comprising: a sink basin (10), wherein the sink basin is comprised of at least one sink sidewall (see fig. 1) and a sink bottom wall (11); a drain (12) seamlessly connected to the sink bottom wall (11) (col. 4, ln. 4-6), wherein the drain is comprised of at least one drain sidewall (13) and the at least one drain sidewall is configured to extend below the sink bottom wall (fig. 2); and an attachment bayonet (30, 31) connected to a distal end of the drain sidewall.
Regarding claim 2, Lin discloses “the sink bottom 11 of the metal sink 10 has a circle frame 13 integratedly extending outward from the sink bottom 11 at a periphery of the water outlet 12” (emphasis added; col. 4, ln. 4-6). Regarding the limitation that the drain is welded to the sink bottom wall, the limitation is a product-by-process recitation. “Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product in the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even through the prior product was made by a different process” (In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698,227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Circ. 1985) (see MPEP 2113). In the instant case, Lin teaches the same or obvious product since the drain (13) is “integratedly” part of the sink bottom.
Regarding claim 3, Lin discloses wherein the attachment bayonet (30, 31) is removably connected to the distal end of the drain sidewall (col. 4, ln. 62-col. 5, ln. 3) (Examiner’s note: the use of the word “permanent” as described in col. 5, ln. 3-4 is not interpreted as non-removable. In the context of the specification, it is best understood that the intended installation of the attachment bayonet sleeve (30) is not desired to be movable (non-rotatable), but this does not preclude removal or destroy the reference if a user so chose to unbend the tabs (130) to remove the bayonet sleeve (30, 31) to for example, make repairs or replace the sleeve as needed.) Applicant is reminded that in an apparatus claim, so long as the structure presented is capable of performing the intended use, the claim is met by the prior art. In the instant case, the user can unbend the tabs (130) which would permit “removable connection”.
Regarding claim 4, Lin discloses wherein the attachment bayonet (30, 31) comprises at least one flange (30) configured to rotatably engage (via studs 31 mounted on the flange 30) with at least one corresponding tab (portion of locking sleeve 24 that is located above guide slot 25) on an attachment piece (20).
Regarding claim 6, Lin discloses wherein the attachment piece (20) comprises a drainpipe adaptor (22).
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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin in view of US Patent 8,214,934 (hereinafter Sullivan).
Regarding claim 5, Lin fails to show wherein the attachment piece comprises a garbage disposal. Attention is turned to Sullivan which shows it is common to include a garbage disposal (10) beneath a sink drain to macerate waste (fig. 6) via a bayonet coupling. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have the attachment piece be a garbage disposal to allow a user to macerate waste as is well-known and established in the art as evidenced by the teachings above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent 9,863,129 is directed to the state of the art of seamless sink drains with attachment pieces where the drain is welded to the bottom of the sink (col. 2, ln. 7-9).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANIE M LOEPPKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5208. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM ET.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. 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.
/JANIE M LOEPPKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754