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 “diverter block disposed inside the conduit adjacent to at least one of the plurality of inlets, configured to split a fluid flow from the at least one inlet; and the inner tube disposed inside the conduit, the inner tube including a first end connected to at least one of the plurality of inlets, and a second end opposite the first end and pointing to a center of the conduit” in claims 1 and 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). None of the figures of embodiments show both a diverter block and an inner tube inside an adapter. Therefore, claims 1 and 9 must be an additional embodiment. No new matter should be entered.
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 § 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) 14-16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Connelly et al (CN 110869110A), hereinafter Connelly.
Regarding claim 14, Connelly teaches a method comprising: delivering a plurality of fluid feeding materials (22 & 24) from a fluid delivery component (26) to a plurality of inlets (62 & 62, via 30 & 32) of an adapter (44); and transferring the plurality of fluid feeding materials from the plurality of inlets to an outlet (72 & 74) of the adapter such that the plurality of fluid feeding materials are not substantially mixed with each other when exiting from the outlet (Machine Translation Pg 5, main ¶1-¶5 to Pg 6, ¶1-¶2).
Connelly further teaches in claim 15 delivering the plurality of fluid feeding materials from the outlet of the adapter to a mixer tip (50, Fig 1; MT Pg 5, main ¶1);
in claim 16 mixing the plurality of fluid feeding materials in the mixer tip to form a mixture (inherent purpose of mixer); and
in claim 18 controlling a mixing speed to control a delivery of the mixture from a mixer outlet of the mixer tip (via 28).
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.
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connelly.
Regarding claim 17, Connelly is silent regarding the step of controlling a delivery of the mixture from a mixer outlet of the mixer tip via a shut off valve.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to add a shut off valve to control a delivery of the mixture from a mixer outlet of the mixer tip, since it was known in the art that shut off valves are old and well known and widely practiced in all types of industries. Applicant also has not disclosed that the use of shut off valve to control a delivery of the mixture achieves any unexpected result other than an already known frictional connection. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to further modify Connelly to arrive at the claimed invention as specified in claim 17 because such a modification would have been a mere design consideration. (See MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A)).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4-13 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for allowance: claims 1 & 9 are allowed primarily because the prior art of record cannot anticipate Applicant’s claimed invention by a single reference nor render Applicant’s claimed invention obvious by the combination of more than one reference.
The prior art of record, Connelly et al (CN 110869110A) (US 1,234,567), does not teach “an adapter comprising a diverter block disposed inside the conduit adjacent to at least one of the plurality of inlets, configured to split a fluid flow from the at least one inlet; and an inner tube disposed inside the conduit, the inner tube including a first end connected to at least one of the plurality of inlets, and a second end opposite the first end and pointing to a center of the conduit, wherein the conduit, the plurality of inlets, and the outlet are configured such that the plurality of fluid feeding materials are not substantially mixed with each other when exiting from the outlet” as within the context of the claimed invention as disclosed and within the context of the other limitations present in claims 1 & 9.
Therefore, the prior art of record cannot anticipate Applicant’s claimed invention by a single reference nor render Applicant’s claimed invention obvious by the combination of more than one reference.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 8,960,501 to Pappalardo is directed to the state of the art as relevant teachings of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER C CHIANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5613. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10 AM- 6 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, Paul Durand can be reached at (571) 272-4459. 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.
/JENNIFER C CHIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754