DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending.
This is in response to the amendment filed 2/19/2026.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/19/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Gurreri (US 7338214).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Since applicant’s amendments necessitated the new grounds for rejection, the action has been made Non-Final.
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 limitations in claims 3 and 4, the “protective cover” (claim 18, no reference numeral in drawing or specification), and, “front face” (claim 20, no reference numeral in drawing or specification) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: in claim 20, “the valve shuttle member includes a front face”, is not disclosed in the originally filed specification, but may be entered so long as no new matter is entered.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 20, line 3, “front face” should be - -front face of the valve shuttle member - -, in order to clarify the structure for the front face.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1- 4, 9-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bolnado et al. (US 20170106181) in view of Gurreri (US 7338214).
Regarding claim 1, Bolnado et al. disclose a fluid coupling device (1, see Fig. 3A) comprising: a main body (10) defining a longitudinal axis and including a front face (rightmost vertical surface of 20) that defines an opening (at 27) to an interior space (at 25) defined by the main body;
an aseptic attachment structure (15) at a first end (the right end) of the fluid coupling device and including a membrane (the wall of 15, para.0067) that is removably attached to the front face (see Fig. 10A, 15 is removed from the assembly)and covering the opening to the interior space;
a collar (120,see Fig. 11A) that is rotatably coupled to the main body, the collar including a projection (138) extending radially inward,
a valve shuttle member (insert 150), at least a portion (the right end of 150) of the valve shuttle member being disposed between the collar and the main body, the valve shuttle member defining a groove (159, see Fig. 21A) in which the projection is slidably disposed such that manual rotation of the collar drives translation of the valve shuttle member along the longitudinal axis (para.0079); and
a termination member (107 threads, Fig. 11A) coupled to the main body at a second end (left end in Fig. 3A) of the fluid coupling device that is opposite of the first end. (The below drawings being taken from the application file for the reference.),
wherein, the groove defined by the valve shuttle member includes a first end portion that extends longitudinally (the right end of groove159, nearest wall 144), a circumferential portion that extends circumferentially around the longitudinal axis (as shown below in Fig. 21A, the groove at 159 has a portion (the left half of the length of the groove nearest wall surface 148), the length of the groove, that extends around, in the area of, the longitudinal axis, the inherent centerline axis of through shuttle member 150).
PNG
media_image1.png
547
1268
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
727
1428
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Bolnado et al. is silent to having a middle portion that extends along a spiral or helical path, and wherein the circumferential portion is positioned between, and continuous with, the first end portion and the middle portion.
Gurreri teaches the use of a middle portion (the portion of the slot 743 that is un-numbered but between 743 and 743b lead lines, see Fig. 3 below) that extends along a spiral or helical path, and wherein the circumferential portion (the width portion of the end half of slot 743 that intersects with the middle portion as shown below) is positioned between, and continuous with, the first end portion (the front half of the slot at 743) and the middle portion.
PNG
media_image3.png
1482
1103
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the shape of the path of the slot, as taught by Gurreri for the straight path of the slot of Bolnado et al., to have a first end portion that extends longitudinally, a circumferential portion that extends circumferentially around the longitudinal axis, and a middle portion that extends along a spiral or helical path, and wherein the circumferential portion is positioned between, and continuous with, the first end portion and the middle portion, in order to provide resistance to rotation to prevent inadvertent uncoupling (Gurreri, col. 9, lns. 9-14).
Regarding claim 2, Bolnado et al. disclose wherein the valve shuttle member is translatable along the longitudinal axis between a closed position that blocks fluid from flowing through the main body and an open position that allows fluid to flow through the main body (para.0023).
Regarding claim 3, Gurreri discloses wherein the groove includes a longitudinal portion that extends parallel to the longitudinal axis (the initial right side of 743, in as much as applicant’s device).
Regarding claim 4, Gurreri discloses wherein the groove includes a portion that extends along an angle of 30 to 40 degrees relative to the longitudinal axis (the portion of the width in the middle portion extends along an angle of 30-40 degrees in as much as applicants device, depending on the origin of the angle).
Regarding claim 9, Bolnado et al. disclose comprising markings (see Fig. 11A,11B/C, para.0100,0101) that indicate whether the valve shuttle member is in: (i) a closed position that blocks fluid from flowing through the main body and (ii) an open position that allows fluid to flow through the main body.
Regarding claim 10, Bolnado et al. disclose the markings further indicate a direction to rotate the collar in order to move the valve shuttle member toward the close position and toward the open position (see Fig. 11A,11B/C, para.0100,0101).
Regarding claim 11, Bolnado et al. disclose the groove defined by the valve shuttle member is a first groove, and wherein the valve shuttle member defines a second groove that is substantially identical to the first groove (as shown in Figures 21A,14A). Additionally, Gurreri also discloses a first and second groove (743) as shown in Figures 3 and 7.
PNG
media_image4.png
453
512
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
849
1124
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Bolnado et al. disclose the projection of the collar is a first projection, and wherein the collar further comprises a second projection extending radially inward (as shown clearly in Fig. 11A, 3 projections are shown).
Regarding claim 13, Bolnado et al. disclose the first projection is slidably disposed in the first groove, and wherein the second projection is slidably disposed in the second groove (as shown clearly in Fig. 14A, see para.0086).
Regarding claim 14, Gurreri. disclose the second groove includes a circumferential portion (the helical portion of the other groove 743 between 743 and 743b) that extends circumferentially around the longitudinal axis (as shown above in Fig. 7).
Regarding claim 15, Gurreri discloses wherein the second groove (one of the other grooves for 743) includes a portion that extends along an angle of 30 to 40 degrees relative to the longitudinal axis (the portion of the width in the middle portion extends along an angle of 30-40 degrees in as much as applicants device, depending on the origin of the angle).
Regarding claim 16, Gurreri discloses an end portion of the projection (312, see Fig. 2) is hemispherical.
Regarding claim 18, Bolnado et al. disclose the aseptic attachment structure includes a protective cover (the portion of 30 that covers 15, see Fig. 3A) at the first end of the fluid coupling device, and wherein the membrane is removable from the front face of the main body (see Fig. 10A, 15 is removed from the assembly).
Regarding claim 19, Bolnado et al. when combined with Gurreri disclose the groove is configured such that the projection is circumferentially slidable to drive translation of the valve shuttle member (150) along the longitudinal axis of the main body (since Bolnado et al. disclose there is rotation during attachment or detachment, para.0079).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bolnado et al. ‘181 in view of Gurreri (US 7338214).
Regarding claim 5, Bolnado et al. in the combined device of Bolnado et al. and Gurreri, disclose all of the features of the claimed invention, including the main body includes a radially outward extending projection (50p, para.0072), and wherein the collar includes a flexible collar portion (110, para.0072) that each interface with the radially outward extending projection as the collar is rotated relative to the main body (para.0072), however is silent that the collar includes a second flexible portion to have two flexible collar portions.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a second flexible portion, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art unless a new and unexpected result is produced. In re Harza ,274 F.2d 669,124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Claim(s) 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bolnado et al. ‘181 and Gurreri (US 7338214), in view of Hallisey et al. (US 10569073).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Bolnado et al., in the combined device of Bolnado et al. and Gurreri, disclose a collar (at 120), although is silent to having the collar includes multiple lobes that extend radially outward from the collar, and, wherein the collar includes four lobes that extend radially outward from the collar.
Hallisey et al. teaches the use of multiple lobes (at 524) that extend radially outward from a collar, and includes four lobes (as shown below).
PNG
media_image6.png
481
707
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ multiple lobes and at least four lobes, as taught by Hallisey et al. in the combined device of Bolnado et al. and Gurreri, to have the collar includes multiple lobes that extend radially outward from the collar, and, wherein the collar includes four lobes that extend radially outward from the collar, in order to provide raised surfaces that make rotating the device easier, due to the higher torque that can be generated from a larger diametrical surface.
Double Patenting
Applicant’s amendment overcomes the prior rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6,17 and 20 are 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.
None of the prior art of record disclose or renders as obvious, “the collar includes four flexible collar portions that each interface with the two radially outward extending projections as the collar is rotated relative to the main body” in combination with the rest of the limitations in claim 6.
Bolnado et al. ‘181 disclose a projection 110 that interfaces with a flexible portion (50p, see Fig 5b/c (para.0072)) however an appropriate reference could not be found to set forth an obviousness rejection.
None of the prior art of record disclose or renders as obvious, the groove has a semi-circular cross-sectional shape that corresponds to the hemispherical end portion of the projection, in combination with the rest of the limitations in claim 17.
None of the prior art of record disclose or renders as obvious, the valve shuttle member includes a front face defining an opening for receiving the main body, and wherein the first end portion of the groove opens through the front face, in combination with the rest of the limitations in claim 20.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Craig Price, whose telephone number is (571)272-2712 or via facsimile (571)273-2712. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:00AM-4:30PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607, or 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.
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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CRAIG J PRICE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753