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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/11/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ellis et al (US 9151734 B2).
Regarding claim 14 Ellis et al teaches a tubing 50 having a recessed groove 50A (interpreted as a recessed groove) at a distal end and a tapered ferrule for (Intended use recitation) forming a swaged engagement with the tubing at the recessed groove.
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.
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.
Claim 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ellis et al (US 9151734 B2).
Regarding claim 15 Ellis et al teaches a tubing 50 structure for high pressure chromatography. Ellis et al does not discloses the tubing is glass lined tubing with an internal diameter in the range 0.05 to 1 mm.
Since Ellis et al at the very least discloses a liquid chromatography tubing structure, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art of high-pressure chromatography systems before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the tubing as taught by Ellis et al to be manufactured as glass, metallic and / or ceramic with specific dimensions for the purpose of withstanding high temperatures. Furthermore, it has been held that the selection of a known material based upon its suitability for the intended use is a design consideration within the skill of the art. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). In this particular instance it would be well within the skill set without undue experimentation to research and test the most optimal material readily available to the manufacture for the purpose of successfully producing a tube that can withstand extreme environments.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 and 18-22 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claims 1 & 4 the cited prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious engaging a first threaded nut with a threaded pre-swaging tool and using the resulting threaded connection to perform a pre-swaging operation in which a narrow end of a tapering ferrule is deformed into engagement with a recessed groove; removing the threaded pre-swaging tool; inserting the distal end of tubing into a threaded end fitting having a sealing surface for receiving the distal end of the tubing; engaging the first threaded nut, or a second threaded nut, with the threaded end fitting in order to apply axial force from said threaded nut to the wide end of the tapered ferrule and thereby press the distal end of the tubing against the sealing surface of the threaded end fitting.
Claims 2-3, 5-13 and 18-22 are allowed based on their dependency of claim 1.
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.”
Claim 16 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:
Regarding claim 16 the cited prior art doe not anticipate nor render obvious the sub-assembly being formed from a kit of by use of a threaded pre-swaging tool to deform a narrow end of the tapered ferrule into swaged engagement with the recessed groove.
Claim 17 is objected based on its dependency of claim 16.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20180104737 A1 CONTROLLED PULLUP GAGEABLE PRESWAGE TOOL
US 9188569 B2 High pressure fitting with self-releasing ferrule
US 8931808 B2 High pressure fitting with self-releasing ferrule
US 8740261 B2 Fitting assembly
US 20140026647 A1 Connection assembly, useful in analytical instrument system, comprises component having first and second ends, ferrule having first externally tapered end and second end, and ferrule tip having first and second externally tapered ends
US 8569070 B2 Connection assembly for ultra high pressure liquid chromatography
WO 2013133920 A1 HIGH PRESSURE FITTING FOR A LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY SYSTEM
US 5938919 A Fused silica capillary columns protected by flexible shielding
US 5709413 A Low carryover fitting and method for coupling tubing to a device using the same
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE J ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2174. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 9am-5PM.
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, Kristina M Deherrera can be reached at (303) 297-4237. 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.
/ANDRE J ALLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights