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 § 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 1,2,3,4, 13,14,16,17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courtois (US 20100089484 A1), hereafter known as Courtois, in view of Gjerde (NO 310313 B1), hereafter known as Gjerde.
Regarding claim 1, Courtois discloses a protector assembly for covering a pin of a threaded pipe (abstract, fig 1A, part D, Courtois), comprising a cover (fig 1a, cover piece CP, Courtois), a retainer (fig 1A, retainer MF, Courtois) and at least one fastener for fastening the retainer to the cover (fig 1B, fastener BLS secures cover CP to retainer MF, Courtois), wherein:
the cover includes a tubular portion defining a longitudinal axis from a closed end to an open end (figs 1A and 1B, cover CP is tubular and has longitudinal axis XX from open end where the fasteners attach to other end P2, although P2 is not closed, Courtois), the open end defining a rim for axial abutment with the retainer (fig 1B, open end of cover CP has a rim for axial abutment with retainer MF, Courtois);
the retainer has an abutment face for abutment with the rim (fig 1B, retainer MF has a face to abut rim of cover CP, Courtois);
the rim comprises a bore extending therethrough (fig 1B, rim has hole through it, Courtois);
a fastener extends through the bore of the rim and engages the retainer (fig 1B, fastener BLS, Courtois), the fastener extending substantially in parallel with the longitudinal axis and exposed on the cover side of the bore of the rim for engagement by a tool or user to operate the fastener (fig 1B, fastener BLS is parallel with axis XX and is exposed on the cover side of the rim and can be engaged by a tool or user, Courtois).
Courtois does not disclose the end opposite the open end (P2 in fig 1B) to be closed, although P2 does have a flange that extends inwards to cover pipe end P1. However, Gjerde teaches a thread protection cap with a closed end (figs 3 and 4, top end of cap of Gjerde is closed). Gjerde describes a thread protecting end cap for drill pipes, a field closely related to Courtois and the claimed invention, therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Gjerde into Courtois and made the end of Courtois closed in the same manner as the end of Gjerde. Caps with closed ends are well known in the art, and a closed end for a cap prevents debris from entering the pipe during packaging and transport. The closed cap end of Gjerde also has geometry that allows the user to use tools to loosen the cap if necessary (figs 1,2, Gjerde).
Regarding claim 2, Courtois in view of Gjerde discloses the protector assembly of claim 1, wherein the retainer comprises a bore extending into the abutment face aligned with the bore of the rim ( fig 1B, retainer MF has hole extending into the face that abuts the hole of the rim of CP, Courtois).
Regarding claim 3, Courtois in view of Gjerde discloses the protector assembly of claim 1, wherein:
the rim has a rim face for axial abutment with the abutment face of the retainer (fig 1B, rim of cover CP has a face that abuts with the abutment face of retainer MF; Courtois)
and the rim face and abutment face of the retainer are perpendicular to the longitudinal axis for mutual abutment (fig 1B, the two faces are perpendicular to axis XX, Courtois).
Regarding claim 4, Courtois in view of Gjerde discloses the protector assembly claim 1, wherein the retainer has a circular opening for extending around the circumference of a pipe (fig 1a and 1B, retainer MF has circular opening such that it extends around the circumference of the pipe, Courtois).
Regarding claim 13, Courtois in view of Gjerde discloses the protector assembly of claim 1, comprising a plurality of fasteners and a complementary plurality of bores of the rim and retainer, the fasteners and bores spaced around the periphery of the rim (fig 1b, Courtois, two fasteners BLS are pictured going through two bores on rim of cover CP and retainer MF, spaced 180 degrees around the periphery of the rim).
Regarding claim 14, Courtois in view of Gjerde discloses the protector of claim 1, wherein: the cover and the retainer define a channel for receiving a radially outwardly extending protrusion of the pin (figs 1a and 1B, cover CP and retainer MF define a channel through them that receives the radially protruding portion SXE, Courtois); or the protector assembly, preferably the retainer, comprises a radially-inward extension for extending into a radial groove of the pin.
Regarding claim 16, Courtois in view of Gjerde, as applied to in claim 1, discloses the protector of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the cover comprises an internal thread for engagement with the threads of a pin, the internal thread formed in the inner surface of the tubular portion.
However, Gjerde teaches an internal threaded portion for engaging with the threads of the pin (fig 3 para 0010, threaded portion 4 engages with threads of the pin, as shown in fig 1, Gjerde). Gjerde describes a thread protecting end cap for drill pipes, a field closely related to Courtois and the claimed invention, therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Gjerde into Courtois in view of Gjerde as applied to in claim 1 and made the end of Courtois threaded to engage with the threads FE1 of the pipe. Thread protecting caps with threads are well known in the art, and the threaded portion would better secure the cap onto the pipe.
Regarding claim 17, Courtois in view of Gjerde discloses the protector of claim 1, wherein the cover is free of an insert (the cover of Courtois in view of Gjerde does not contain an insert).
Claims 5,6, 18,19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courtois in view of Gjerde in further view of Rolls Royce (FR 1466193 A), hereafter known as Rolls.
Regarding claim 5, Courtois in view of Gjerde discloses the protector assembly of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the fastener is arranged for threadable engagement with a bore of the retainer (fig 1B, para 0151, fastener BLS is a bolt, which has threads by definition, but fig 1B is unclear as to if the bolt is threadedly engaging with retainer MF.)
However, Rolls teaches a fastener threadedly engaged with a bore of a flange (fig 1, fastener 15 is threadedly engaged with bore of flange portion of 11, Rolls). Rolls describes pipes and pipe accessories joined by threaded fasteners, a field related to Courtois, Gjerde, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Rolls in to Courtois in view of Gjerde and have the bolts BLS of Courtois in view of Gjerde thread into retainer MF of Courtois in view of Gjerde in the manner shown in Rolls. Threaded connections are well known in the art, and the connections of Rolls would allow for easy assembly and disassembly.
Regarding claim 6, Courtois in view of Gjerde discloses the protector assembly of claim 1, wherein the fastener comprises a head portion at one end (fig 1B, Courtois, one end of fastener BLS is the head portion, since it is of larger diameter than the middle portion), but and a threaded portion at an opposite end (not disclosed, while bolt BLS is threaded by definition, fig 1B and Courtois is unclear as to where the threads are on the bolt), the threaded portion extends from the rim to engage the bore of the retainer (not disclosed, while bolt BLS is threaded by definition, fig 1B and Courtois is unclear as to where the threads are on the bolt).
Courtois in view of Gjerde does not disclose the location of the threaded portion of bolt BLS, or if it extends from the rim of cover CP. However, Rolls teaches a fastener with a head portion on one end and a threaded portion on the opposite end (fig 1, Rolls, fastener 15), the threaded portion extending from a rim to engage in a bore (fig 1, Rolls, threaded portion of 15 extends from rim 12 to engage with bore inside 13). Rolls describes pipes and pipe accessories joined by threaded fasteners, a field related to Courtois, Gjerde, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Rolls in to Courtois in view of Gjerde and have the bolts BLS of Courtois in view of Gjerde embody the shape of bolt 15 of Rolls and thread into retainer MF of Courtois in view of Gjerde in the manner shown in Rolls. Threaded connections are well known in the art, and the connections of Rolls would allow for easy assembly and disassembly.
Regarding claim 18, Courtois discloses a method of assembling a protector assembly on a pin of a threaded pipe, comprising the steps of:
covering the pin of the threaded connector with a cover (fig 1B, the pin of the threaded connector is covered by cover CP, Courtois) having a closed end and an open end defining a rim (fig 1B, cover CP has open end with a rim on the left side, but the other end is not closed, Courtois);
engaging the pipe body with a retainer such that the retainer surrounds the pipe body (fig 1A and 1B, retainer MF surrounds pipe PC, Courtois);
and inserting a threaded fastener through the rim of the cover from the closed end side (fig 1B, fastener BLS is a bolt, and inherently has threads, and is through the rim of cover CP, however it is unclear from which side the fastener is inserted, Courtois);
threadedly engaging the retainer with the threaded fastener (not disclosed, fig 1B is unclear as to if the bolt is threadedly engaging with retainer MF.)
Courtois does not disclose the cover to have a closed end, however, Gjerde teaches a thread protection cap with a closed end (figs 3 and 4, top end of cap of Gjerde is closed). Gjerde describes a thread protecting end cap for drill pipes, a field closely related to Courtois and the claimed invention, therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Gjerde into Courtois and made the end of Courtois closed in the same manner as the end of Gjerde. Caps with closed ends are well known in the art, and a closed end for a cap prevents debris from entering the pipe during packaging and transport. The closed cap end of Gjerde also has geometry that allows the user to use tools to loosen the cap if necessary (figs 1,2, Gjerde).
Courtois in view of Gjerde does not disclose inserting the threaded fastener through the rim of the cover from the closed end side, nor threadably engaging the retainer with the threaded fastener. However, Rolls teaches a fastener with a head portion on one end and a threaded portion on the opposite end (fig 1, Rolls, fastener 15), the threaded portion extending from a rim to engage in a bore (fig 1, Rolls, threaded portion of 15 extends from rim 12 to engage with bore inside 13). Rolls describes pipes and pipe accessories joined by threaded fasteners, a field related to Courtois, Gjerde, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Rolls in to Courtois in view of Gjerde and have the bolts BLS of Courtois in view of Gjerde embody the shape of bolt 15 of Rolls and thread into retainer MF of Courtois in view of Gjerde in the manner shown in Rolls. Threaded connections are well known in the art, and the connections of Rolls would allow for easy assembly and disassembly.
Regarding claim 19, Courtois in view of Gjerde and Rolls, as applied to in claim 18, discloses the method of claim 18, but does not disclose wherein the cover comprises an internal thread for engagement with a pin thread of the pin, the method further comprising screwing the internal thread onto the pin thread. However, Gjerde teaches an internal threaded portion for engaging with the threads of the pin (fig 3 para 0010, threaded portion 4 engages with threads of the pin, as shown in fig 1, Gjerde). Gjerde describes a thread protecting end cap for drill pipes, a field closely related to Courtois and the claimed invention, therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Gjerde into Courtois in view of Gjerde and Rolls as applied to in claim 18 and made the end of Courtois threaded to engage with the threads FE1 of the pipe. Thread protecting caps with threads are well known in the art, and the threaded portion would better secure the cap onto the pipe.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courtois in view of Gjerde and Rolls in further view of Fonda (US 3214201 A), hereafter known as Fonda.
Regarding claim 7, Courtois in view of Gjerde and Rolls discloses the protector assembly of claim 6, wherein the head portion is shaped for rotational engagement by a tool (not disclosed, Courtois shows that bolt BLS has a head, but is unclear as to the shape) and is exposed on the closed end side of the rim (fig 1B, Courtois, head of bolt BLS is exposed on the closed side of rim of CP).
Courtois in view of Gjerde and Rolls does not disclose the shape of the bolt head of BLS. However, Fonda teaches a bolt with a hexagonal head for rotational engagement by a tool (figs 2 and 3, Fonda, bolt head can be rotationally engaged with a wrench). Fonda describes pipes and pipe accessories joined by threaded fasteners, a field related to Courtois, Gjerde, Rolls, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Fonda in to Courtois in view of Gjerde and Rolls and make the head of bolt BLS a hex shape like the head of the bolt of Fonda. Hex heads on bolts are very well known in the art, and the ability to use a tool to tighten and loosen the bolt greatly reduces the effort of assembly and disassembly.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courtois in view of Gjerde in further view of Cox (US 3549179 A), hereafter known as Cox.
Regarding claim 9, Courtois in view of Gjerde discloses the protector assembly of claim 1, but does not disclose where in the retainer is a split ring.
However, Cox teaches a retainer ring that is a split ring (fig 1, Cox, ring flange 11 is split into two halves), Cox describes a flanged retaining ring for abutting against a surface, a field related to Courtois, Rolls, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Cox in to Courtois in view of Gjerde and make the retainer MF of Courtois in view of Gjerde a split ring with two pieces to be assembled together as shown in Cox. Assembling two smaller retainer pieces into a larger component would be advantageous in space limiting applications where it is impractical to mount a one piece retainer.
Claims 8,10,11, 20, 22,23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Courtois in view of Gjerde, in further view of Rolls and Cox.
Regarding claim 8, Courtois in view of Gjerde discloses the protector assembly of claim 1, wherein the retainer is ring-shaped (figs 1A and 1B, retains MF is ring shaped, Courtois)
but does not disclose a retainer that includes at least first and second ends meeting at an overlap section;
the bore extends through the overlap section;
and the fastener threadably engages the bore of the retainer to fasten together the first and second ends.
However, Cox teaches a retainer ring that includes first and second ends meeting at an overlap section (fig 1, Cox, ring flange 11 has two pieces 21a and 21b each with first and second ends that overlap at each end), the bore extends through the overlap section (figs 1 and 4, the bore 25 extends through the overlap section, Cox). Cox describes a flanged retaining ring for abutting against a surface, a field related to Courtois, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Cox in to Courtois in view of Gjerde and make the retainer MF of Courtois in view of Gjerde two pieces to be assembled around the pipe with overlapping sections as shown in Cox. Assembling two smaller retainer pieces into a larger component would be advantageous in space limiting applications where it is impractical to mount a one piece retainer.
Courtois in view of Gjerde and Cox does not disclose the fastener threadably engages the bore of the retainer to fasten together the first and second ends. However, Rolls teaches a fastener threadedly engaged with a bore of a flange (fig 1, fastener 15 is threadedly engaged with bore of flange portion of 11, Rolls). Rolls describes pipes and pipe accessories joined by threaded fasteners, a field related to Courtois, Cox, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Rolls in to Courtois in view of Gjerde and Cox and have the bolts BLS thread into retainer MF of Courtois in view of Gjerde and Cox in the manner shown in Rolls. Threaded connections are well known in the art, and the connections of Rolls would allow for easy assembly and disassembly.
Regarding claim 10, Courtois in view of Gjerde and Cox discloses the protector assembly of claim 8, wherein the retainer is a ring assembly comprising a first part having the first end and a second part having the second end (fig 1, Cox, ring 11 has first end with hole 24 and second end with hole 25).
Regarding claim 11, Courtois in view of Gjerde and Cox discloses the protector of claim 8, wherein the first and second ends define interfitting shoulders that abut in the circumferential direction around the ring-shape of the retainer and overlap to form the overlap section, (fig 1, Cox, the overlapping sections are formed due to interfitting shoulders from each of the halves 21a and 21b).
Regarding claim 20, Courtois in view of Gjerde and Rolls discloses the method of claim 18, but does not disclose wherein the retainer is a split ring with first and second ends, and the step of threadably engaging the retainer with the threaded fastener comprises threadably engaging the first and second ends with the threaded fastener.
However, Cox teaches a retainer ring that is a split ring with first and second ends meeting at an overlap section (fig 1, Cox, ring flange 11 has two pieces 21a and 21b each with first and second ends that overlap at each end). Cox describes a flanged retaining ring for abutting against a surface, a field related to Courtois, Rolls, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Cox in to Courtois in view of Gjerde and make the retainer MF of Courtois in view of Gjerde and Rolls two pieces to be assembled around the pipe with overlapping sections as shown in Cox. Assembling two smaller retainer pieces into a larger component would be advantageous in space limiting applications where it is impractical to mount a one piece retainer. After the modification, the fastener is threadably engaged with the bore of the first and second ends of retainer MF.
Regarding claim 22, Courtois in view of Gjerde, Rolls discloses the method of claim 18, but does not disclose wherein the retainer is a ring assembly comprising first and second parts and threadably engaging the retainer with the threaded fastener comprises threadably engaging a bore of the first part and a bore of the second part with the threaded fastener.
However, Cox teaches a retainer ring assembly comprising first and second parts (fig 1, Cox, ring flange 11 has first and second parts 21a and 21b), Cox describes a flanged retaining ring for abutting against a surface, a field related to Courtois, Rolls, and the claimed invention. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before time of filing to have incorporated the teachings of Cox in to Courtois in view of Gjerde and make the retainer MF of Courtois in view of Gjerde and Rolls two pieces to be assembled around the pipe with overlapping sections as shown in Cox. Assembling two smaller retainer pieces into a larger component would be advantageous in space limiting applications where it is impractical to mount a one piece retainer. After the modification, the fastener is threadably engaged with the bore of the first and second pieces of retainer MF.
Regarding claim 23, Courtois in view of Gjerde, Rolls, and Cox discloses the method of claim 22, further comprising assembling the ring assembly around the pipe body (fig 1a and 1b, Courtois, the ring is around the pipe).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12,15,21 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pajaro (US 20060266428 A1) discloses a two piece thread protection cap
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