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 .
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 1,2,3,13,14,15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Leslie (US 4611485 A), hereafter known as Leslie.
Regarding claim 1, Leslie discloses a tool for applying pressure through a cylindrical unthreaded orifice to a system under test (figs 2 and 6, col 4 lines 53-64, the pipe stopper tool 30 is used for pressure testing tube through a cylindrical unthreaded orifice, Leslie) , comprising:
a tool body including a proximal end separated from a distal end along a tool axis (fig 3, proximal end on the left near 32 is separated from distal end on the right near 40 along a axis though passage 33, Leslie) and a passage extending axially from the proximal end to the distal end for delivering a pressurized fluid from a source through the cylindrical unthreaded orifice to the system under test (fig 3, channel 33, Leslie),
the tool body further comprising:
a distal portion extending from the distal end towards the proximal end (fig 3, portion from the distal (right) end of the device to just before taper 38 is the distal portion, which extends towards the proximal (left) end, Leslie), the distal portion comprising an external diameter, D1, (fig 3, distal portion has an external diameter, Leslie) the distal end configured to slide within the cylindrical unthreaded orifice (fig 6, distal end is slid into cylindrical unthreaded orifice 55, Leslie);
a tapered portion extending from the distal portion towards the proximal end and having variable external diameter decreasing from D1 to D2 (figs 3 and 4, tapered portion 38 extends towards proximal (left) end, with diameter decreasing from D1 to D2, Leslie);
an intermediate portion extending from the tapered portion along the tool axis towards the proximal end having external diameter, D2 (figs 3 and 4, intermediate portion 37, Leslie);
a threaded portion having external threading and extending from the intermediate portion along the tool axis towards the proximal end having an external diameter, D3, (figs 3 and 4, threaded portion that consists of 35 and 36 extends from intermediate portion 37 towards the proximal (left) end, and has external diameter D3, Leslie) where D1 > D3 (fig 4, distal portion has larger external diameter than threaded portion, Leslie); and a proximal portion extending from the threaded portion along the tool axis to the proximal end (figs 3 and 4, proximal portion 34, Leslie);
a wedge sleeve having a hollow cylindrical shape with an external diameter, D5 (fig 3, wedge sleeves 44 have a hollow cylindrical shape, with external diameter D5, Leslie) and an internal diameter greater than D3 (fig 3, internal diameter of 44 is greater than outer diameter of threaded portion, Leslie), and configured to slide over the threaded portion (fig 3, 44 is slid over threaded portion, Leslie);
a washer having an internal diameter also greater than D3, but less than D5 (fig 3, col 4 lines 12-17, compression sleeve 52, which can be a washer, has internal diameter larger than external diameter of threaded portion (D3) and smaller than external diameter of wedge sleeve 44 (D5), Leslie); and a nut configured with internal threading mating with the external threading of the threaded portion (fig 3, nut 51, Leslie).
Regarding claim 2, Leslie discloses the tool according to claim 1, wherein the distal portion of the tool body further comprises an O-ring groove disposed about a circumference of the distal portion (figs 3 and 4, groove 40, Leslie)
Regarding claim 3, Leslie discloses the tool according to claim 2, further comprising an O-ring configured to set within the O-ring groove and provide a seal and interference fit between the tool and the cylindrical unthreaded orifice (fig 3 and 6, o ring 41, Leslie).
Regarding claim 13, Leslie discloses a hollow tool body having a tool axis (fig 3, tool axis though passage 33, Leslie), the tool body used to apply pressure through a cylindrical unthreaded orifice (figs 2 and 6, col 4 lines 53-64, the pipe stopper tool 30 is used for pressure testing tube through a cylindrical unthreaded orifice, Leslie) ,,
the tool body comprising:
a distal portion having external diameter, D1, extending axially from a distal end toward a proximal end (fig 3, portion from the distal (right) end of the device to just before taper 38 is the distal portion, which extends towards the proximal (left) end, and has an external diameter D1, Leslie) and configured to slide within the cylindrical unthreaded orifice (fig 6, distal end is slid into cylindrical unthreaded orifice 55, Leslie);
a tapered portion having variable diameter ranging between D1, and D2, extending axially from the distal portion (figs 3 and 4, tapered portion 38 extends towards proximal (left) end, with diameter decreasing from D1 to D2, Leslie);
an intermediate portion having external diameter, D2, extending axially from the tapered portion (figs 3 and 4, intermediate portion 37, Leslie);
a threaded portion having external threading with external diameter, D3 (figs 3 and 4, threaded portion that consists of 35 and 36 and has external diameter D3, Leslie) where D1 > D3 (fig 4, distal portion has larger external diameter than the threaded portion, Leslie), and extending axially from the intermediate portion (figs 3 and 4, threaded extends from intermediate portion 37, Leslie);
and a proximal portion having external diameter, D4 (figs 3 and 4, proximal portion 34 has external diameter D4, Leslie), where D3 > D4 (fig 4, proximal portion (34) has smaller external diameter than threaded portion (35 and 36), Leslie) and extending from the threaded portion to a proximal end (figs 3 and 4, proximal portion 34 extends from threaded portion to the proximal (left) end, Leslie).
Regarding claim 14, Leslie discloses the hollow tool body according to claim 13, wherein the distal portion further comprises an O-ring groove disposed about a circumference of the distal portion (figs 3 and 4, groove 40 is an O-ring groove, Leslie)
Regarding claim 15, Leslie discloses the hollow tool body according to claim 14, further comprising an O-ring configured to rest within the O-ring groove and provide a seal and interference fit between the hollow tool body and the cylindrical unthreaded orifice (fig 3 and 6, o ring 41, Leslie).
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.
Claims 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leslie in view of Bell (US 3323551 A), hereafter known as Bell.
Regarding claim 4, Leslie discloses the tool according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the distal portion of the tool body further comprises rounding or tapering of the distal end to ease insertion within the cylindrical unthreaded orifice.
However, Bell teaches a tapered distal portion (fig 4, distal portion has taper 52, Bell). Bell describes an expanding pipe testing plug, a field closely related to Leslie and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Bell into Leslie and added a taper to the distal end of tool 30 of Leslie. Plugs with tapered ends to facilitate insertion are well known in the art, and tapering the end of Leslie in view of Bell also removes burrs or sharp edges from the manufactured product that can scratch or damage the inner walls of the tube during testing.
Regarding claim 16, Leslie discloses the hollow tool body according to claim 13, , but does not disclose wherein the distal portion of the tool body further comprises rounding or tapering of the distal end to ease insertion within the cylindrical unthreaded orifice.
However, Bell teaches a tapered distal portion (fig 4, distal portion has taper 52, Bell). Bell describes an expanding pipe testing plug, a field closely related to Leslie and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Bell into Leslie and added a taper to the distal end of tool 30 of Leslie. Plugs with tapered ends to facilitate insertion are well known in the art, and tapering the end of Leslie in view of Bell also removes burrs or sharp edges from the manufactured product that can scratch or damage the inner walls of the tube during testing.
Claims 5 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leslie in view of Misumi’s product “Adjusting Stopper Screws - Wrench Flats with Hex Socket”, hereafter known as Misumi.
Regarding claim 5, Leslie discloses the tool according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the threaded portion of the tool body further comprises opposed flats disposed adjacent to the proximal portion and parallel to the tool axis, the flats configured to receive a wrench to prevent the tool body from rotating during installation of the tool within the cylindrical unthreaded orifice, although Leslie discloses knurled surface 35 to increase grip to prevent tool body from rotating during installation of the tool (figs 2 and 3, surface 35, Leslie).
However, Misumi teaches a threaded body with wrench flats parallel to the tool axis (product image, product title, Misumi). Misumi is a product page for a threaded cylindrical device, a field related to Leslie and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Misumi into Leslie and replaced the knurled surface 35 of Leslie with the wrench flats of Misumi. Adding wrench flats to a threaded cylindrical part to improve grip while rotating is well known in the art, and the wrench flats of Misumi would allow the user to use wrenches to install the pipe stopper.
Regarding claim 17, Leslie discloses the hollow tool body according to claim 13, but does not disclose wherein the threaded portion of the tool body further comprises opposed flats disposed adjacent to the proximal portion and parallel to the tool axis, the flats configured to receive a wrench to prevent the tool body from rotating during installation of the tool within the cylindrical unthreaded orifice, although Leslie discloses knurled surface 35 to increase grip to prevent tool body from rotating during installation of the tool (figs 2 and 3, surface 35, Leslie).
However, Misumi teaches a threaded body with wrench flats parallel to the tool axis (product image, product title, Misumi). Misumi is a product page for a threaded cylindrical device, a field related to Leslie and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Misumi into Leslie and replaced the knurled surface 35 of Leslie with the wrench flats of Misumi. Adding wrench flats to a threaded cylindrical part to improve grip while rotating is well known in the art, and the wrench flats of Misumi would allow the user to use wrenches to install the pipe stopper.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leslie in view of Leroy (US 2475748 A), hereafter known as Leroy.
Regarding claim 6, Leslie discloses the tool according to claim 1, wherein the wedge sleeve further comprises at least one longitudinal slot extending from a wedge sleeve distal end (fig 2, slot in wedge sleeve 44, Leslie), but does not disclose the slot extending to a point and not completely to a wedge sleeve proximal end.
However, Leroy teaches a wedge sleeve with longitudinal slots that do not extend completely through to a wedge sleeve proximal end (figs 1-3, slots that separate sections of wedge sleeve 16 extend to a point just before part 10 of the wedge sleeve and don’t extend to the proximal end of the wedge sleeve, in other words, Leroy.) Leroy describes an expanding pipe testing plug, a field closely related to Leslie and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Leroy into Leslie and make the wedge sleeve 44 of Leslie as one component, with the slot separating them not extending completely through to a wedge sleeve proximal end, instead of several components. Making the wedge sleeve pf Leslie in view of Leroy as one component would reduce the number of parts and remove the need of O-ring 45 of Leslie, saving on components, easing assembly. It would also remove the possibility of pieces of wedge sleeve 4 detaching and getting lost in the event O-ring 45 breaks.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the wedge sleeve pieces of Leslie into one component since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893).
Regarding claim 7, Leslie in view of Leroy discloses the tool according to claim 6, wherein the wedge sleeve further comprises an internal edge beveling on the wedge sleeve distal end (fig 3, wedge sleeve 44 has internal beveled edge, Leslie) configured to push against the tapered portion without gouging the tapered portion by application of axial force in a distal direction caused by tightening of the nut pushing against the washer and in turn against the wedge sleeve proximal end during installation of the tool within the cylindrical unthreaded orifice (figs 3 and 6, 44 performs the claimed functions upon tightening of nut 51, Leslie).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leslie in view of Getty (US 0118603 A), hereafter known as Getty.
Regarding claim 8, Leslie discloses the tool according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the proximal portion further comprises a plurality of circumferential barbs disposed about an outer surface of the proximal portion configured for receiving and gripping an inner surface of a hose leading to a pressure source, although Leslie discloses threaded portion 34 on the proximal end for tube or hose connections (fig 3, threaded portion 34, Leslie).
However, Getty teaches a plurality of circumferential barbs disposed about an outer surface of the proximal portion configured for receiving and gripping an inner surface of a hose leading to a pressure source (fig 1, col 2 paragraph 1, part F is a barbed connector for gripping the inner surface of a hose leading to an air pump, Getty). Getty describes a pipe pressure testing device, a field closely related to Leslie and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Getty into Leslie and used the barbed hose connector F of Getty in place of the threaded hose connector 34 of Leslie. Barbed hose connectors are well known in the art, and the hose connector of Getty allows one to connect unthreaded hose ends to the pipe tester (fig 1, col 2 paragraph 1, Getty).
Regarding claim 9, Leslie discloses the tool according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the tool body and wedge sleeve each comprise a metal selected from the group consisting of: brass, bronze, copper, and metal alloys thereof, the components of pipe stop 30 of Leslie is mainly made of carbon steel or stainless steel, (col 5, lines 63-66, Leslie).
However, Getty teaches a pipe pressure testing tool with tool body made of brass (col 1, last paragraph, Getty). Getty describes a pipe pressure testing device, a field closely related to Leslie and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of Getty into Leslie and made the tool body of Leslie out of brass. The use of brass in pipe applications is well known in the art, and it’s easier machineability decreases the cost of manufacture.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to adjust the material of Leslie, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331.
Claims 10,11,12,18,19,20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leslie in view of TCP Global’s product “Master Airbrush Model TC-96T Air Brush Compressor Kit - Cool Runner Professional Single-Piston Airbrush Compressor with 1.5 Gallon Air Tank, Regulator, Gauge, Water Trap Filter & Air Hose”, hereafter known as TCP.
Regarding claim 10, Leslie discloses a system for applying pressure through a cylindrical unthreaded orifice to a system under test including the tool recited in claim 1 (col 4, lines 53-64, Leslie), but does not disclose further comprising a hose having a first end configured for installation on the proximal portion of the tool body.
However, TCP teaches a hose having a first end configured for installation on the proximal portion of the tool body (last page, enlarged second product image, air hose has a first end that has a threaded coupling, which can be installed onto threaded end 34 of Leslie, TCP). TCP is a product page for a pressure source that can be used to apply pressurized air to an application, a field related to Leslie and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of TCP into Leslie and use the air compressor TCP to supply the pipe plug of Leslie with pressure for testing. Air compressors are hoses are well known in the art, and the air compressor of Leslie in view of TCP is portable and the hose is long and flexible, reducing the difficulty of pressure testing multiple pipes.
Regarding claim 11, Leslie in view of TCP discloses the system according to claim 10 further comprising a pressure regulator configured for interfacing between a pressure source a second end of the hose (last page, enlarged second product image, TCP, pressure regulator is connected between the air tank pressure source and the second end of the air hose.)
Regarding claim 12, Leslie in view of TCP discloses the system according to claim 11, wherein the pressure source is an air compressor (product title, the pressure source of TCP is an air compressor, TCP).
Regarding claim 18, Leslie discloses a method of pressure testing a system under test through a cylindrical unthreaded orifice (fig 6, col 4 lines 53-64, cylindrical unthreaded orifice of a tube is pressure tested, Leslie), the method comprising:
providing a system for applying pressure through the cylindrical unthreaded orifice,
the system comprising:
a hollow tool having a distal portion configured for insertion and interference fit within the cylindrical unthreaded orifice (figs 2 and 6, col 4 lines 53-64, the pipe stopper tool 30 configured for insertion and an interference fit in a cylindrical unthreaded orifice, Leslie);
a hose with a first end configured to attachment to a proximal portion of the tool (not disclosed);
a pressure source (not disclosed, although the pipe is disclosed to be pressurized);
and a pressure regulator interfacing between a second end of the hose and the pressure source (not disclosed);
inserting the distal portion of the tool within the cylindrical unthreaded orifice to form a seal (fig 6, distal portion of tool 30 is inserted into pipe 54 to form a seal, Leslie);
tightening the tool within the cylindrical unthreaded orifice (col 4, lines 29-31, nut 51 is tightened and the tool tightens itself into pipe 55, Leslie);
and applying a preselected pressure using the pressure source through the tool and through the cylindrical unthreaded orifice to the system under test (col 4, lines 56-60, 15500 psi is applied through the tool into the pipe under testing, Leslie).
Leslie does not disclose a hose with a first end configured to attachment to a proximal portion of the tool, a pressure source, and a pressure regulator interfacing between a second end of the hose and the pressure source. However, TCP teaches a hose having a first end configured for installation on the proximal portion of the tool body (last page, enlarged second product image, air hose has a first end that has a threaded coupling, which can be installed onto threaded end 34 of Leslie, TCP), a pressure source (product title, the air compressor of TCP is a pressure source, TCP), and a pressure regulator configured for interfacing between a pressure source a second end of the hose (last page, enlarged second product image, TCP, pressure regulator is connected between the air tank pressure source and the second end of the air hose.) TCP is a product page for a pressure source that can be used to apply pressurized air to an application, a field related to Leslie and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of file to have incorporated the teachings of TCP into Leslie and use the air compressor of TCP to supply the pipe plug of Leslie with pressure for testing. Air compressors are hoses are well known in the art, and the air compressor of Leslie in view of TCP is portable and the hose is long and flexible, reducing the difficulty of pressure testing multiple pipes.
Regarding claim 19, Leslie in view of TCP discloses the method according to claim 18, further comprising: reducing the pressure applied to the system under test (col 4, lines 56-58, the pressure was applied for 5 minutes, thus the pressure was removed from the system under test afterwards, Leslie); and removing the tool from the cylindrical unthreaded orifice (col 4, lines 60-64, the pipe surface was examined and determined to be not damaged. Considering tool 30 prevents examination of the internal surfaces of the pipe if installed, the tool must have been removed from the orifice prior to examination, Leslie)
Regarding claim 20, Leslie in view of TCP discloses the method according to claim 18, wherein the pressure source is an air compressor (product title, the pressure source of TCP is an air compressor, TCP).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Flynn (US 0705059 A), Turner (US 0922544 A), Wilhelm (US 2062519 A) discloses hollow expanding pipe testing plugs.
Harold (US 2375995 A) discloses an expanding pipe testing plug with a pressure gauge
Thaxton (US 2855003 A) discloses an expanding hollow pipe testing plug with knurled portion and threaded hose connection portion
Richardson (US 4114654 A) discloses an expanding tube plug with a wedge sleeve.
Kelly (US 4602500 A) discloses an expanding tube plug with fluid pump
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAOTIAN LU whose telephone number is (571)272-0444. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:00 pm CST.
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, 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.
/H.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/KENNETH RINEHART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights