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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US6523863 (“Ishiwata”).
Regarding claim 1, Ishiwata discloses an alignment guiding structure for quick coupler a for correcting radial offset existing between a male (11) and a female coupler (10), the alignment guiding structure comprising a rigid guiding sleeve (12) having an engaging end (bottom end, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) and a guiding end (tapered top end, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) and internally defining a guiding passage (opening extending through sleeve member 12) extended between the engaging end and the guiding end; the engaging end being a closed end (closed via threading engagement with member 11) having an engaging bore (bore within which male coupler 11 fixedly is engaged) communicable with the guiding passage; the male coupler being inserted into and assembled to the guiding sleeve via the engaging bore (see fig. 1); the guiding end being an open end defining a guiding bore (bore which accepts mating end of female coupler 10) communicable with the guiding passage and having a free end (top end, relative to the orientation of fig. 1) formed into a beveled guiding surface (tapered interior surface of sleeve 12, which accepts female coupler 10); and the female coupler being guided by the beveled guiding surface at the guiding end of the guiding sleeve to move into the guiding passage and connectable to the male coupler end to end (see assembly of fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2, Ishiwata discloses the male coupler (11) is connected to the guiding sleeve (12) in a way of tight fitting (see figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 5, Ishiwata discloses wherein the guiding passage (passage defined by interior surface of guiding sleeve 12) of the guiding sleeve (12) is internally provided with a limiting platform (abutment shoulder against which bottom end of female sleeve 30 abuts, relative to the orientation of fig. 1).
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 3, 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishiwata, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of DE3840144 (“Weinhold”).
Regarding claims 3, 4 and 6, Ishiwata discloses the invention as claimed except for the guiding sleeve being provided on an outer surface with a penetrating bore, which extends radially through the guiding sleeve and is communicable with the guiding passage;
a locating element inserted into the guiding passage via the penetrating bore to assemble to the guiding sleeve; the locating element in the guiding passage limiting the male coupler from inserting axially too deep into the guiding passage via the engaging bore of the guiding sleeve; and
wherein the locating element is a screw.
Weinhold teaches (see fig. 3) a guiding sleeve (11) provided on an outer surface with a penetrating bore (threaded bore which receives worm screw 4 to fix sleeve 11 and coupler 2 together), which extends radially through the guiding sleeve and is communicable with a guiding passage (interior passage of sleeve 11);
a locating element (4) inserted into the guiding passage via the penetrating bore to assemble to the guiding sleeve;
the locating element in the guiding passage limiting the coupler from inserting axially too deep into the guiding passage via the engaging bore of the guiding sleeve; and
wherein the locating element is a screw (worm screw 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the invention of Ishiwata by configuring the outer surface of the guiding sleeve with a penetrating bore, which extends radially through the guiding sleeve and is communicable with the guiding passage, a screw inserted into the guiding passage via the penetrating bore to assemble to the guiding sleeve, and the screw the male coupler from inserting axially too deep into the guiding passage via the engaging bore of the guiding sleeve, as taught by Weinhold, to further prevent movement between the guiding sleeve and the male coupler.
Response to Arguments
With regards to Applicant’s arguments concerning the prior art rejection of claims 1-5 over Renato in view of McGugan, and claim 6 over Renato in view of McGugan and further in view of Hagiya, Applicant’s amendment has overcome the rejection of record. However, the amended claims have necessitated new ground(s) of rejection rendering Applicant's arguments regarding the previous grounds of rejection are moot.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US4327770 and US109351076 discloses a coupler having a guiding sleeve with a beveled interior end.
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 Hailey K. Do whose direct telephone number is (571)270-3458 and direct fax number is (571)270-4458. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (8:00AM-5:00PM ET) and Friday (8:00AM-12:00PM ET).
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 supervisors, Kenneth Rinehart at 571-272-4881, or Craig M. Schneider at 571-272-3607. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/HAILEY K. DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753