Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/620,092

METHOD OF MAKING A WELD CONNECTION FOR A FLUID LINE, METHOD OF DISCONNECTING IT, WELDED FLUID LINE CONNECTION, AND MOUNTING TOOL

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Mar 28, 2024
Examiner
STONER, KILEY SHAWN
Art Unit
1735
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Airbus Operations GmbH
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
1148 granted / 1418 resolved
+16.0% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1466
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
44.7%
+4.7% vs TC avg
§102
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
§112
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1418 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “sealing element extends on the flat connection surfaces of both the first fastener and the second fastener” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Clearly Figure 1 of the original disclosure, shows the sealing element 16 recessed in at least one of the fasteners, does not show this feature. PNG media_image1.png 292 274 media_image1.png Greyscale 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The limitation “sealing element extends on the flat connection surfaces of both the first fastener and the second fastener” is not supported by the original disclosure and constitutes new matter. Paragraph [0043] of the original disclosure states that “[b]oth flanges 11, 13 have a flat connection surface 19 for mutual connection. In other embodiments, the fasteners 11, 13 may have another shape providing a common connection surface where they are contacting each other when they are being connected”. While, paragraph [0044] of the original disclosure states that “[t]he sealing element or sealing 16 is annular and extends on connection surface 19 around the inner piping 17 in order to seal it from the outside”. These two paragraphs and Figure 2 establish that the connection surface (19) is where the flanges (11, 13) are contacting each other and are mutually connected. The examiner’s position is reinforced by the applicants remarks of 1/5/26, wherein the applicant states “the connection surface (i.e., the surface that contacts the opposite fastener).” PNG media_image2.png 662 822 media_image2.png Greyscale Accordingly, when a sealing element is positioned between the two flat surfaces of the fasteners there would intrinsically be a gap between the two fasteners at the point where the sealing element is interposed. Likewise, the two fasteners would not be connected at the point where the sealing element is interposed. Consequently, although there is support for a flat connection surface and the sealing element extends on connection surface separately, there is not explicit support for the limitation the “sealing element extends on the flat connection surfaces of both the first fastener and the second fastener”. Claim 5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. It is unclear how each fastener can have a flat connection surface for mutual connection (in the context of applicant’s remarks filed on 1/5/26) when the sealing element extends on the flat connection surfaces of both the first fastener and the second fastener because providing a sealing element between flat surfaces of the first and second fasteners would intrinsically create a gap and prevent contact and connection between the first and second fasteners at least at the point the sealing element is positioned. Clarification is respectfully requested. 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 and 7-8 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (CN-114623295A IDS) (hereafter Lin) in view of Patel et al. (US 5,490,680) (hereafter Patel). With respect to claim 5, Lin teaches a welded fluid line connection (title; and figures), comprising: a first fastener (left flange 1) connected to a first fluid line (left side “a”) and a first/second fastener (right flange 1) connected to a second fluid line (right side “a”), wherein each fastener comprises a flat connection surface (broadest reasonable interpretation, i.e., any portion of a surface/edge that is ultimately being joined is a connection surface) for mutual connection (figures 2-3). PNG media_image3.png 492 254 media_image3.png Greyscale Lin also teaches wherein the first and second fasteners are welded together at a welding area (111) which forms a continuous weld joint (1111+1112+1113) which completely surrounds and seals an inner piping of the first and second fasteners, a sealing element (141) provided between the first fastener and the second fastener, wherein the sealing element is positioned between the inner piping and the welding area and completely surrounds and seals the inner piping (figures 2-3 and 7; and the machine translation), wherein the sealing element (14) extends on the flat connection surfaces (the right vertical surface/edge of left flange 1) for mutual connection of both the first fastener (left flange 1) and the second fastener (right flange 1) (figures 2-3; and the machine translation). Lin also teaches that the sealing ring 141 is made of ethylene propylene diene rubber food grade silica gel ring (machine translation), but does not explicitly state that the sealing element is compressed between the first fastener and the second fastener. However, Patel teaches using a sealing ring (31, 31’) in a similar configuration in which the sealing ring is compressed (figures 1-3 and 7; column 4, lines 8-57; and column 5, line 57-column 6, line 17). At the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the compression seal of Patel in the arrangement of Lin in order to enhance the seal between the two flanges. With respect to claim 7, Lin teaches wherein the first fluid line, or the second fluid line, or both are configured as a pipe (title; figures; and paragraph [n0001]); or the first fluid line, or the second fluid line, or both is configured as an equipment unit of a fluid line installation; or the first and second fasteners are configured as flanges (figures 2-3); or the first and second fluid lines are configured to transport liquid hydrogen; or any combination thereof (title; figures; and paragraph [n0001]). With respect to claim 8, Lin teaches wherein locating elements (13/131 or 15/16) provided are between the first and second fasteners and are configured to exactly position the first and second fasteners relative to each other (figures 2-3 and 7; and the machine translation). Claim(s) 5 and 7-8 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 58-18180) (IDS) (hereafter JP ‘180) in view of Patel et al. (US 5,490,680) (hereafter Patel). With respect to claim 5, JP ‘180 teaches a welded fluid line connection (title; and figures), comprising: a first fastener (left flange 1) connected to a first fluid line (left side pipe and a first/second fastener (right flange 2) connected to a second fluid line (right side pipe”), wherein each fastener comprises a flat connection surface (broadest reasonable interpretation, i.e., any portion of a surface/edge that is ultimately being joined is a connection surface) for mutual connection (figures 2-3). PNG media_image4.png 441 216 media_image4.png Greyscale JP ‘180 also teaches wherein the first and second fasteners are welded together at a welding area (5) which forms a continuous weld joint which completely surrounds and seals an inner piping of the first and second fasteners, a sealing element (6) provided between the first fastener and the second fastener, wherein the sealing element is positioned between the inner piping and the welding area and completely surrounds and seals the inner piping (figures 1-3), wherein the sealing element (6) extends on a connection surface (the left vertical surface/edge of right flange 2) for mutual connection of the first fastener (left flange 1) and the second fastener (right flange 1) (figures 1-3). JP ‘180 does not explicitly state that the sealing element is compressed between the first fastener and the second fastener. However, Patel teaches using a sealing ring (31, 31’) in a similar configuration in which the sealing ring is compressed (figures 1-3 and 7; column 4, lines 8-57; and column 5, line 57-column 6, line 17). At the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the compression seal of Patel in the arrangement of JP ‘180 in order to enhance the seal between the two flanges. With respect to claim 7, JP ‘180 teaches wherein the first fluid line, or the second fluid line, or both are configured as a pipe (broadest reasonable interpretation) (figure 1); or the first fluid line, or the second fluid line, or both is configured as an equipment unit of a fluid line installation; or the first and second fasteners are configured as flanges (figures 1 and 3); or the first and second fluid lines are configured to transport liquid hydrogen; or any combination thereof (figures 1 and 3). With respect to claim 8, JP ‘180 teaches wherein locating elements (the stepped and mating interface(s) in figures 1-3) provided are between the first and second fasteners and are configured to exactly position the first and second fasteners relative to each other. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 1/5/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With respect to the Lin, Patel, and JP ‘180 references the applicant argues that while the sealing element in such configurations might contact a flat connection surface of the opposite fastener, none of these sealing elements contact the flat connection surface (i.e., the surface that contacts the opposite fastener) of the fastener which holds the sealing element. Rather, as shown above, the sealing element is held in a groove away from the flat connection surface. Thus, none of the cited references, even if combined, disclose or suggest that "each fastener comprises a flat connection surface for mutual connection" and that "the sealing element extends on the flat connection surfaces of both the first fastener and the second fastener." As discussed above, such a configuration allows for a better seal and allows for variation in the installation process. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Specifically, the applicant’s argument that none of these sealing elements contact the flat connection surface (i.e., the surface that contacts the opposite fastener) of the fastener which holds the sealing element is not commensurate in scope with the claims. In addition, the usage of “comprising” language in claim 5 does not exclude the sealing element being held in a groove that has a flat surface. The examiner maintains that in view of the broadest reasonable interpretation any portion of a surface/edge that is ultimately being joined is a connection surface for the purposes of applying prior art. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KILEY SHAWN STONER whose telephone number is (571)272-1183. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday. 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, Keith Walker can be reached on 571-272-3458. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /KILEY S STONER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 28, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Oct 02, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 06, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jan 05, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 04, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 09, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599986
ULTRASONIC HORN, SECONDARY BATTERY, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592621
COLD PRESSURE WELDING APPARATUS, COIL MANUFACTURING APPARATUS, COIL, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589453
ORBITAL WELDING DEVICE WITH IMPROVED RESIDUAL OXYGEN MEASUREMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589446
WIRE-FEED FRICTION STIR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS, DEVICES, AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583062
Welding Apparatus, Welding Method, and Electrode Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+15.5%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1418 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month