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 .
Status of the Application
This action is responsive to the amendment dated 9/02/2026. Claims 16-28 remain pending. Claim 16 has been amended. The applicant’s amendment has necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection below. This action is Final.
Response to Remarks
Applicant argues that the amendment to claim 16 to recite “the seat being configured to abut the first end of the inner hose after coupling” overcomes the current 102 rejection over Knotten. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s arguments are not commensurate with the scope of the claim. The invention in claim 16 is directed to a coupling device for hoses. The outer hose, inner hose, and any respective parts of the outer hose or inner hose are not positively recited. The amendment noted above is capable of being met depending on how the inner hose and outer hose are designed. In this case, since the seat of Knotten is at least capable of being configured to abut a first end of an inner hose after coupling, this limitation is met.
Applicant's amendments to the claims have necessitated further search and/or consideration and/or revision of the rejection, and accordingly, this action must be made Final.
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) 16-18 and 20-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Knotten (US 2010/0175772).
Regarding claim 16, Knotten discloses a coupling device for hoses (Figs. 1 and 2), comprising: an outer tube (the tube portion at 22) configured to removably couple a first end of an outer hose onto the coupling device; an inner tube (the tube portion at 21) configured to removably couple a first end of an inner hose onto the coupling device (Figs. 1 and 2); and wherein the outer tube and the inner tube are concentric and made as a unitary device (Figs. 1 and 2), and wherein the unitary device comprises a seat (the portion of 13 that transitions from 21 to 22 and extends radially between 21 and 22) between the inner tube and the outer tube (Figs. 1 and 2), the seat being configured to abut the first end of the inner hose after coupling (note that the inner hose is not positively recited and the coupling device of Knotten is at least capable of performing this limitation based on the design of the inner hose).
Regarding claim 17, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 16, wherein the inner tube and the outer tube are configured with threads (the threads at 21 and 22) for threading engagement with the first end of the outer hose and the first end of the inner hose. (Figs. 1 and 2)
Regarding claim 18, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 16, wherein the inner tube and the outer tube are configured to removably couple with the outer hose and the inner hose by way of one of a quick-connect coupling, push-fit connectors, barbed fittings, bayonet connectors, camlock couplings, compression fittings, magnetic connectors, grooved coupling and Storz coupling and adaptors. (Figs. 1 and 2; the system of Knotten is at least capable of performing this limitation)
Regarding claim 20, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 16, wherein the coupling device is configured to contain a fluid leak from the inner tube between the inner tube, the outer tube, and the coupling device. (para. [0031] – [0036])
Regarding claim 21, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 16, wherein the coupling device is configured with concentric tubes, wherein a smaller tube, is coupled to a larger tube. (Figs. 1 and 2)
Regarding claim 22, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 21, wherein the coupling device has one or more grooves on an exterior portion of each of the smaller tube and the larger tube and wherein the one or more grooves facilitate affixing the first end of the inner hose into the smaller tube and the first end of the outer hose into the larger tube. (as shown at the end portions of 21, 22; Figs. 1 and 2)
Regarding claim 23, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 22, wherein the coupling device further comprises a seat on which an end of the inner hose sits upon after coupling. (the portion that 11 can rest upon at the end of the passageway as shown in Fig. 1)
Regarding claim 24, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 16, further comprising an inner hose clamp (the portion of 11 directly below the threaded nut of 17 that connects the threaded nut at the top of 17 to the hose 16) configured to clamp the inner hose to the coupling device and an outer hose clamp (the portion of 12 directly below the threaded nut of 19 that connects the threaded nut at the top of 19 to the hose 18) configured to clamp the outer hose to the coupling device. (note that the hose, including components of the hose, are not positively recited)
Regarding claim 25, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 24, wherein the inner hose clamp comprises one or more removeable sections and wherein the outer hose clamp comprises one or more removable sections. (the clamps are able to be removed)
Regarding claim 26, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 16, wherein the inner hose and the outer hose are crimped onto the coupling device using one or more fittings. (this is a product by process limitation)
Regarding claim 27, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 26, wherein the one or more fittings include one or more of barbed fittings, threaded fittings, quick-connect couplings, compression fittings, camlock couplings, push-to-connect fittings, flanged fittings, bayonet couplings, and grooved couplings. (this limitation is further defining the product by process limitation above)
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) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knotten.
Regarding claim 19, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 16, but fails to disclose wherein the coupling device comprises one of metal, plastic, thermoplastic, composite material, rubber, and PVC.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the coupling device of Knotten to comprise one of metal, plastic, thermoplastic, composite material, rubber, and PVC since selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to utilize a known material that are cost effective, strong, and/or durable.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richards (GB 2467536).
Regarding claim 28, Knotten further discloses the coupling device of claim 16, but fails to disclose further comprising one or more of gaskets, 0-rings, ferrules, and sealant tape coupled to the coupling device.
Richards teaches a coupling device comprising one or more of gaskets, 0-rings, ferrules, and sealant tape coupled to the coupling device. (page 12, 1st para.)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the coupling device of Knotten to utilize sealant tape as taught by Richards in order to ensure a leak tight connection is established. (page 12, 1st para.)
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL J GRAY whose telephone number is (571)270-0544. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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.
/PAUL J GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
