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
This application, which claims a priority under “Continuation” of prior Application No. 17/245,692, filed 04/30/2021, appears to include the process claims 17-20 that were restricted and withdrawn in the ‘692 Application. As such, although the instant Application Data Sheet (ADS) claims priority under continuation, the instant claims may constitute this application to a divisional application. Applicant is entitled to make appropriate corrections. In addition, since the instant process claims 1-4 were first disclosed in ‘692 Application and not Application No. 16/815,638 and Provisional Application No. 62/823,772, therefore the earliest effective filing date of 04/30/2021 is granted to the instant application.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is not directed to the invention captured by the pending method claims.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: METHOD OF PRESS JOINING A PIPING COMPONENT WITH A PIPE AND A SEALING ELEMENT.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-4 are objected to because of the following informalities: I
In claim 1, lines 1-2, the limitation ”a pressing tool, comprising the steps of:” could be amended to - - a pressing tool, the method comprising the steps of: - - for better clarity.
In claim 1, lines 6-7, the limitation “Minimum Sealing Element Thickness Value” is awkwardly written by capitalizing the first letter of each word as if the claim tries to show any significance to the phrase. Unless Applicant can provide support that such phrase is a term of art that is written in this particular way, Applicant is suggested to use lower case lettering for all the words for consistency and for preventing any misunderstanding of the meaning of the phrase.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: pressing tool in claim 1.
The limitation "pressing tool" invokes 112, sixth paragraph because: (A) the claim limitation uses the generic placeholder "tool"; (B) the generic placeholder "tool" is modified by functional language e.g., "pressing"; and (C) the generic placeholder "tool" is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. The disclosed associated structure is a pressing tool depicted in Figures 8A-B, 9A-B, 10A-C, and 11 as described in paragraphs [0065] to [0067] of the originally filed specification. As such, the recitation "pressing tool" will be interpreted as being a tool comprising a pair of handles and press jaws as depicted in Figures 8A-B, 9A-B, 10A-C, and 11 and any structural/functional equivalents.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
In claim 1, lines 5-6 recites the limitation of “wherein the sealing element has a sealing element thickness and the sealing element thickness of the sealing element is about equal to and not less than a Minimum Sealing Element Thickness Value of the sealing element.” First, the examiner understanding is that the relative term of “about” is interpreted very broadly as disclosed in paragraph [0036] of the instant specification. Second, the minimum sealing element thickness value of the sealing element is interpreted as any element that is used as a sealing element and has a thickness would meet this claim limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 1, lines 12-14, the limitation of “the pipe is operable to withstand 2 million vibration cycles at an amplitude of 0.125 inches and a frequency of 16.67 Hertz under a UL 109 vibration test without breakage along the rim of the first end” is vague and unclear as to which UL 109 vibration test is being claimed. It appears that standard and testing manuals and codes are constantly reviewed and updated. In addition, it is not clear if the UL 109 is directed to a vibration test or to tubes and pipes in general. Furthermore, Applicant has failed to provide any guidance and support in the disclosure and in form of an IDS as to which year and edition of UL test is being claimed. Therefore, as best understood, any standard operational pipe that is used in the claimed assembly can be operable to withstand the vibration test under claimed UL 109 standards.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 4, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Viegener (US 6,581,983).
As applied to claim 1, Viegener teaches a method of press joining a piping component (1 with end section 2 made of metal like copper, red bronze, Niro or steel, col. 2, lines 30-32) with a pipe (3) via a pressing tool (11), the method comprising the steps of:
inserting the pipe into the piping component (Fig. 4), wherein the piping component has a sealing element (7) received within a sealing recess (8) defined by a sealing recess wall of the piping component, wherein the sealing element has a sealing element thickness and the sealing element thickness of the sealing element is about equal to and not less than a minimum sealing element thickness Value of the sealing element (the sealing ring 7 has certain acceptable thickness which is suitable to be used in the joint assembly and as such, that thickness has a value which is considered as minimum sealing element thickness value); and pressing the pipe and piping component with the pressing tool (Fig. 5), such that a sealing recess-pressing portion of the pressing tool presses the sealing recess wall of the piping component (wall of 8) and a first end-crimping portion of the pressing tool crimps (right hand side of tool, Fig. 5) a first end of the piping component (free end of 2 on right hand side, Fig. 5) between the sealing recess wall and a rim of the first end (the very tip of 2 on the right hand side) positioned distally from the sealing recess wall, and such that the pipe is operable (fluid, air and gas is filled into crimped assembly, col. 2, line 54).
Regarding the limitation of “such that the pipe is operable to withstand 2 million vibration cycles at an amplitude of 0.125 inches and a frequency of 16.67 Hertz under a UL 109 vibration test without breakage along the rim of the first end” since the material of the pipe is a metal such as steel and niro (stainless steel), then depending on the value of the thickness, the pipe is capable of being operable to withstand 2 million vibration cycles at an amplitude of 0.125 inches and a frequency of 16.67 Hertz under a UL 109 vibration test without breakage along the rim of the first end. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to employ a sufficient thickness to the metal pipe of Viegener as an effective means of allowing the pipe to operably withstand the claimed vibration cycles under the claimed testing condition.
As applied to claim 3, Viegener teaches the invention cited including a sealing element received within the sealing recess of the piping component. Viegener further teaches wherein the pressing tool comprises first and second pressing jaws (11, 11, Figs. 2-3) operable between open (Fig. 2) and closed (Fig. 3) conditions, wherein the first pressing jaw includes a first pressing geometry that forms the first end-crimping portion (farthest tip feature of 11 in contact with 2 shown to the right of Annotated Figure 4 below) and a second pressing geometry that forms the sealing recess-pressing portion (the center feature of 11 in contact with 8, see Annotated Figure 4 below), the first pressing geometry is spaced apart axially (axis from left to right of Figs. 4-5) from the second pressing geometry and extends axially from an inner periphery a first distance from the second pressing geometry to an outer periphery a second distance from the second pressing geometry, and the second distance is greater than the first distance (outer periphery on the right hand side of first pressing geometry), and wherein, in the step of pressing the pipe and piping component, the outer periphery of the first pressing geometry contacts the first end between the rim and the sealing recess wall, such that the first end is crimped between the rim and the sealing recess wall (see Annotated Figure 4 below and Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
390
718
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As applied to claim 4, Viegener teaches the invention cited including a sealing element received within the sealing recess of the piping component. Viegener further teaches wherein the first pressing jaw further includes a third pressing geometry that forms a body-crimping portion that is spaced apart axially from the first pressing geometry such that the second pressing geometry is positioned axially between the first and third pressing geometries, wherein the third pressing geometry extends axially away from the second pressing geometry from an inner periphery to an outer periphery (see Annotated Figure 4 above).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Viegener (US 6,581,983) in view of Spence (US 9,188,260).
As applied to claim 2, Viegener teaches the invention cited including a sealing element received within the sealing recess of the piping component but does not explicitly teach rotating the sealing element received within the sealing recess of the piping component, wherein the rotation of the sealing element is prompted by interference between the pipe and at least one protrusion extending from an inner surface of the sealing element as the pipe is inserted into the piping component.
Spence teaches that it is well-known in the art of fabricating plumbing system including providing seals for crimp connections between plumbing fittings (col. 1, lines 14-27) wherein a O-ring seal (20) with segmented flange (protrusion 22) extended radially inwardly of the inner surface of the ring is inserted into the recess (18) of the piping component (10) followed by rotating the sealing element (20) prompted by contact between the pipe and at least one protrusion (22) as the pipe (12) is inserted into the piping component (10, col. 4, lines 37-59). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the sealing element of Viegener with a sealing element having at least one protrusion extended from an inner surface of the sealing element and rotated the sealing element received in the sealing recess of the piping component by contacting the pipe as being inserted into the piping component, as taught by Spence, as an effective means of aiding the installer in inserting the pipe into the piping component, preventing the sealing surface of the sealing element/sealing ring from contacting the inserted pipe surface to possibly become damaged and retain the piping component on the pipe during dry fitting of a plumbing system before crimping occurs (col. 5, lines 8-16).
Claim(s) 1 and 2, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spence (US 9,188,260).
As applied to claim 1, Spence teaches (col. 2, lines 48-67, col. 3, lines 1-3, Fig. 1) a method of press joining a piping component (fitting 10 with open end 16 made of copper) with a pipe (12 made of copper) via a pressing tool (crimping tool, not shown), the method comprising the steps of:
inserting the pipe (12) into the piping component (10, Fig. 1), wherein the piping component has a sealing element (O-ring 20) received within a sealing recess (18) defined by a sealing recess wall of the piping component, wherein the sealing element has a sealing element thickness and the sealing element thickness of the sealing element is about equal to and not less than a minimum sealing element thickness Value of the sealing element (the sealing 20 has certain acceptable thickness which is suitable to be used in the joint assembly and as such, that thickness has a value which is considered as minimum sealing element thickness value); and pressing the pipe and piping component with the pressing tool (commercially available crimping too, not shown), such that a sealing recess-pressing portion of the pressing tool presses the sealing recess wall of the piping component (wall of inner surface 17) and a first end-crimping portion of the pressing tool crimps (the examiner takes official notice that any commercially available crimping tool includes such portion) a first end of the piping component (free end of 12 on left hand side, Fig. 1) between the sealing recess wall and a rim of the first end (the very tip of 12 on the left hand side) positioned distally from the sealing recess wall, and such that the pipe is operable (pressurized fluid flows through the connection with no leakage, col. 3, lines 51-53).
Regarding the limitation of “such that the pipe is operable to withstand 2 million vibration cycles at an amplitude of 0.125 inches and a frequency of 16.67 Hertz under a UL 109 vibration test without breakage along the rim of the first end” since the material of the pipe is a metal such as copper, then depending on the value of the thickness, the pipe is capable of being operable to withstand 2 million vibration cycles at an amplitude of 0.125 inches and a frequency of 16.67 Hertz under a UL 109 vibration test without breakage along the rim of the first end. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to employ a sufficient thickness to the metal pipe of Spence as an effective means of allowing the pipe to operably withstand the claimed vibration cycles under the claimed testing condition.
As applied to claim 2, Spence teaches that it is well-known in the art of fabricating plumbing system including providing seals for crimp connections between plumbing fittings (col. 1, lines 14-27) wherein a O-ring seal (20) with segmented flange (protrusion 22) extended radially inwardly of the inner surface of the ring is inserted into the recess (18) of the piping component (10) followed by rotating the sealing element (20) prompted by contact between the pipe and at least one protrusion (22) as the pipe (12) is inserted into the piping component (10, col. 4, lines 37-59).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bohman (US 4,371,179) teaches A sealing ring for sealing the space between two substantially cylindrical, concentric surfaces, as for example, the outer surface of a spigot end of a pipe and the inner surface of a socket. The sealing ring comprises a main portion adapted sealingly to engage one of the surfaces and a sealing lip projecting from said main portion. The sealing lip is adapted to engage the other of said surfaces while being deflected against the main portion. The main portion includes a projecting engagement part which is engaged by the free end portion of the sealing lip when the sealing lip is deflected against the main portion (abstract, Figs. 1-2).
Pozzetti et al. (US 20210285576A1) teaches a universal pipe connection system includes a fitting with a tubular body and an annular bulge defining an annular groove on the inner side of a tubular body, which houses a sealing gasket. The tubular body receives the end portion of a pipe so that a pressing tool having opposite pressing jaws can engage the tubular body and generate a circumferential band adjacent to the bulge by mechanically clamping the tubular body in the circumferential and axial directions and causing a deformation of the annular bulge, which presses the gasket, and generates a seal between the tubular body and the end of the pipe inserted therein. The annular bulge and the corresponding annular groove have a geometry and size adapted to cooperate with two different types of pressing tools, one with a M profile and one with a V profile, which may be present in the alternative or in combination (abstract, Figs. 1-4).
Cygler, III et al. (US 20100253066A1 as submitted by Applicant in IDS filed 07/10/2024) teaches a coupling installed by a conventional crimping an angularly oriented conical surface at an open end surrounded by a ring which receives a pipe element. Dies move radially toward the coupling on jaws of a crimping tool and engage the conical surface along a single line of contact to effect a crimp which secures the coupling to the pipe. The radially applied force has radial and axial components. The radial component effects the crimp, the axial component deforms a channel in the coupling in which a seal is located. The seal is deformed between the coupling and the pipe to effect a fluid tight joint. The coupling may have a circumferential rib which projects radially outwardly. Registration dogs engage the coupling and provide a reaction surface against the axial force component (abstract, Figs. 3-16).
Jones (US 6,488,319 as submitted by Applicant in IDS filed 07/10/2024) teaches a method and apparatus for restraining pipe against internal forces at a pipe or fitting connection and to join and seal at least two pipes to form a pipeline featuring an improved self-restrained pressure gasket. The pressure gasket has a rigid ring formed as an integral part of the gasket thus making the gasket easy to install. The rigid ring which forms the restraining mechanism has rows of teeth of varying lengths that, when assembled, engage at various points around the circumference of a mating pipe. The teeth adjust to the tolerances allowed in pipe manufacturing without losing gripping capacity (abstract, Figs. 1-6).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARANG AFZALI whose telephone number is (571)272-8412. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am - 4 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, Thomas Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/SARANG AFZALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726 08/14/2026
Prosecution Insights