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) because they fail to show a first and second scaffold in the annular cavity embedded in the solidifying compound as described in the specification (Para. 32). Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11-20 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.
Claim 11, lines 2 and 4 iterates “an outer surface” of the hose. The duplicate recitation defining an outer surface on the hose renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear if the second recitation of “outer surface” is referring to the same element or an entirely different outer surface. Claims 12-20 rejected by virtue of their dependence upon claim 11.
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.
Claims 1, 5-6, 9, 11, 15-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hammer et. al. (US 20180009180).
Regarding claims 1 and 11: A self-healing sleeve system for protecting a hose of a freight truck, the system comprising: an outer sleeve surrounding and spaced a distance from the hose and defining an annular cavity between an outer surface of the hose and an inner surface of the outer sleeve (outer sleeve 3 spaced a distance from the hose 2 and defining an annular cavity 5 [Fig. 4 and Para. 63]); and a solidifying compound contained within the annular cavity, wherein when the outer sleeve is breached the solidifying compound is exposed to ambient air (Solidifying material 11 placed within the annular cavity 5 and exposed to ambient air when outer sleeve is breached [Fig. 5 and Para. 74]. Furthermore, with respect to the limitation of outer sleeve being breached and the hose being that of a freight truck, while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function, because apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does (Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inv., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1190)). Thus, if a prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble, or elsewhere in a claim, then it meets the claim.).
Regarding claims 5 and 15: The system of claim 1, wherein the system further comprises a scaffold embedded in the solidifying compound between the inner surface of the outer sleeve and the outer surface of the hose (Scaffold 15 embedded in cavity 5 between the outer sleeve 3 and hose 2 [Fig. 8 and Para. 77]).
Regarding claims 6 and 16: The system of claim 1, wherein the solidifying compound is composed of one or more of the following: polymeric olefins, polyurethane, polypropylene, or polyethylene, poly viny nitrile, and/or air curing foams or liquids (the solidifying material 11 can be air-curing epoxy [Para. 31, lines 1-8]).
Regarding claims 9 and 19: The system of claim 1, wherein the system further comprises a first scaffold and a second scaffold embedded in the solidifying compound between the inner surface of the outer sleeve and the outer surface of the hose (First scaffold 15 and second scaffold 17 embedded in cavity 5 between outer sleeve 3 and hose 2 [Fig. 8 and Para. 77]).
Claims 1-3, 7-8, 10-13, 17-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hochberg et. al. (US 3830261).
Regarding claims 1 and 11: A self-healing sleeve system for protecting a hose of a freight truck, the system comprising: an outer sleeve surrounding and spaced a distance from the hose and defining an annular cavity between an outer surface of the hose and an inner surface of the outer sleeve (outer sleeve 38 spaced a distance from hose 30 which creates an annular cavity between the two [Fig. 4]); and a solidifying compound contained within the annular cavity, wherein when the outer sleeve is breached the solidifying compound is exposed to ambient air (Solidifying compound 36 and when 38 is breached, would be exposed to air as the pipe is used for aircraft [Col. 1, lines 9-14 and Fig. 1 and 4]. Furthermore, with respect to the limitation of outer sleeve being breached and the hose being that of a freight truck, while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function, because apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does (Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inv., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1190)). Thus, if a prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble, or elsewhere in a claim, then it meets the claim.).
Regarding claims 2 and 12: The system of claim 1 and 11, wherein the system further comprises a protective sleeve positioned between the solidifying compound and the outer surface of the hose shielding the hose from the solidifying compound (Protective sleeve 32 positioned between solidifying compound 36 and hose 30 [Fig. 4]).
Regarding claims 3 and 13: The system of claim 2 and 12, wherein the protective sleeve is coupled to the outer surface of the hose (Protective sleeve 32 coupled to hose 30 [Fig. 4 and Col. 6, lines 6-10]).
Regarding claims 7 and 17: The system of claim 1 and 11, wherein the system further comprises a separation sleeve contained between the inner surface of the outer sleeve and the outer surface of the hose (A separation layer is contained between layers 34 and 36 for separation of the two materials [Col. 6, lines 16-20]), and wherein the solidifying compound includes a first solidifying compound contained between the outer sleeve and the separation sleeve and a second solidifying compound contained between the separation sleeve and the hose (A second material 22/34 made of polyurethane [Col. 4, lines 42-47] and first material 36 of silicone rubber [Col. 2, line 65 – Col. 3, line 7]).
Regarding claims 8 and 18: The system of claim 7 and 17, wherein the first solidifying compound has a curing rate that is faster than a curing rate of the second solidifying compound (First material 36 silicone cures faster than second material 22/34 made of polyurethane [NPL - Fospak Page 2, table 1 “Comparing Silicone Sealant Vs Polyurethane Sealant: Which One to Use?”]).
Regarding claims 10 and 20: The system of claim 1, wherein the outer sleeve is composed of one or more of polyurethane, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), or polypropylene (Outer sleeve 38 composed of a selection including polyurethane [Col. 3, lines 23-30]).
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.
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hochberg et. al. (US 3830261) in view of Plata (US 20220307628).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Hochberg et. al. teaches: The system of claim 2 and 12, wherein the protective sleeve is coupled to the outer surface of the hose (Protective sleeve 32 coupled to hose 30 [Fig. 4 and Col. 6, lines 6-10] and the use of adhesive between layers [Co. 6, lines 16-20])
Hochberg et. al. fails to teach an adhesive layer between the hose and the protective layer.
Plata teaches: a protective sleeve 10 coupled to the outer surface of a hose 20b using an adhesive material 20a (Para. 43 and Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the hose sleeve system of Hochberg et. al. with the adhesive component between polymeric materials of Plata in order to further mitigate the deterioration of the tubular device and extend the lifetime (Para. 9, lines 2-4) by applying an adhesive layer to couple the protective layer to the hose.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Bard (US 20230213124) teaches: a multilayer hose containing a filler material comprised of a self-sealing material (abstract).
Morrisey (US 3901281) teaches: a multilayer fuel line comprised of protective/reinforcing sleeve and self-sealing material (abstract).
Wiggins (US 3980106) teaches: a multilayer conduit containing a self-sealing material for sealing a puncture (abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA DENNIS LEARY whose telephone number is (571)272-1685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. If Craig Schneider cannot be reached, please contact Kenneth Rinehart 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.
/JOSHUA D LEARY/Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/CRAIG M SCHNEIDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights