DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 1, Figures 1-4, claims 1-4, in the reply filed on April 6, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the search of multiple species would not impose a serious burden on the examiner. This is not found persuasive because Species 1 and 2 comprise patentably distinct features which require the search of different subclasses due to the claimed structural differences between such species. Examining multiple species together would impose a serious burden on the examiner, as such would require the search of multiple patentably distinct features that otherwise would not have to be searched for, applying appropriate prior art rejections and having to consider and respond to attorney arguments regarding such multiple patentably distinct features and rejections.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 5-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on April 6, 2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1 (line 10) “a spring” should recite –the spring--.
In claim 1 (lines 12-13) “the steel pipe” should recite –the pipe--.
In claim 2 (line 6) “the steel pipe” should recite –a steel pipe--.
For the purpose of examining the application, it is assumed that appropriate correction has been made.
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 1, 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng (US 5,230,851) in view of Tinnerman (US 2,618,009).
As to claim 1, Deng discloses a connecting member for connecting a multifunctional high-strength pipe with other components, comprising:
a spring piece 2’, and
a shaft sleeve A,A’ (Figure 8 reprinted below with annotations), wherein an annular protruding block B is arranged at the top end of the shaft sleeve, wherein the spring piece is arranged outside the shaft sleeve, thereby connecting a component 4’ needing to be connected with the pipe 3 (Figures 4,5,8).
[AltContent: textbox (B)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (A)][AltContent: textbox (A’)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
286
367
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Deng fails to disclose a connecting member comprising an upper supporting plastic member and a lower supporting plastic member jointly sleeved outside the shaft sleeve, wherein one end of the upper supporting plastic member abuts against the annular protruding block, and the spring piece is arranged between the upper and the lower supporting plastic members.
Tinnerman teaches a connecting member comprising a supporting plastic member 17 sleeved outside a shaft sleeve 11,11a, wherein one end of the upper supporting plastic member abuts against a spring piece 20,30 arranged outside the sleeve shaft; the supporting plastic member preventing tilting of the shaft sleeve and spring piece within pipe 1 (Figures 1-4). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connecting member disclosed by Deng to comprise supporting plastic members, as taught by Tinnerman, disposed on the shaft sleeve on opposing sides of the spring piece and such that one of the supporting plastic members abuts against the annular protruding block, in order to prevent tiling of the shaft sleeve and the spring piece within the pipe.
As to claim 3, Deng discloses a connecting member wherein the interior of the shaft sleeve A’ is provided with an internal thread (Figures 7-8).
As to claim 4, Deng discloses a connecting member wherein the periphery of the spring piece 2’ is provided with a plurality of arc-shaped elastic claws (Figures 4,8).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 2, Deng in view of Tinnerman discloses the claimed connecting member with the exception of wherein an inner wall of the lower supporting plastic member is provided with a groove, and an outer wall of the shaft sleeve is provided with a convex block for interacting with the groove, wherein an outer wall of the lower supporting plastic member is provided with an annular supporting platform, and the annular supporting platform is clamped with an outer wall of a steel pipe.
There is no teaching or suggestion, absent the applicant’s own disclosure, for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the connecting member disclosed by Deng in view of Tinnerman to have the above mentioned elemental features. Furthermore, such modifications would not be obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL P FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7081. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (10:00 am-7:00 pm 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, Anna Momper can be reached at (571)270-5788. 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.
04/22/26
/MICHAEL P FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights