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 . Examiner acknowledges the response filed 2/12/2026.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-3, 11, 14, 17, and 20-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inose et al. (US 2022/0010894).
Re Clm 1: Inose et al. disclose (fig 1) a threaded connection comprising: a central longitudinal axis (clearly as shown by centerline “CL”; a first tubular member (20) comprising a convex circular sealing surface (23) with a first seal radius (see curvature), the convex circular sealing surface being circular in longitudinal section (circular sealing surfaces are circular in the axial/longitudinal direction of the pipes); and a second tubular member (10) comprising a first concave circular sealing surface (13) with a second seal radius (see curvature), the first concave circular sealing surface being circular in longitudinal direction (circular sealing surfaces are circular in the axial/longitudinal direction of the pipes). Also see paragraph 0054, “curve”, “arc”.
Re Clm 2: Inose et al. disclose wherein the first seal radius is different from the second seal radius (see separation of the surfaces at the sides).
Re Clm 3: Inose et al. disclose wherein the second seal radius is larger than the first seal radius (see fig 1).
Re Clms 11 and 17: Inose et al. disclose wherein the second tubular member further comprises a substantially planar surface (16) that is axially separate from the first concave circular sealing surface and angled with reference to a central longitudinal axis (CL) of the connection.
Re Clm 14: Inose et al. disclose wherein the second tubular member further comprises a second concave circular surface (15b) with a third radius (curvature disclosed in paragraph 0059).
Re Clm 20: Inose et al. disclose wherein the second tubular member further comprises a transition region axially located between the substantially planar surface and the first concave circular sealing surface (fig 1).
Re Clm 21: Inose et al. disclose wherein the transition region comprises a substantially convex surface (left side of convex sealing surface, see fig below).
PNG
media_image1.png
128
168
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re Clm 22: Inose et al. disclose wherein the first tubular member comprises a pin member and the second tubular member comprises a box member (Examiner notes that paragraph 0060 discloses that the concave/convex sealing surfaces could be swapped on the pin/box member).
Re Clm 23: Inose et al. disclose wherein the box member further comprises a transition region axially located between the substantially planar surface and the first concave circular sealing surface (fig 1).
Re Clm 24: Inose et al. disclose wherein the transition region comprises a substantially convex surface (left side of convex sealing surface, see fig above).
Re Clm 25: Inose et al. disclose wherein the substantially convex surface comprises a radially innermost point (innermost point of convex surface 23) at a first radial distance from the central longitudinal axis.
Re Clm 26: Inose et al. disclose wherein the first radial distance is less than the radial distance from the central longitudinal axis to any point within the first concave circular sealing surface (see fig 1, flipped concave and convex portions of pin/box as described in paragraph 0060 would result in a convex pin innermost point distance from CL is less than a point within the first concave surface).
Re Clm 27: Inose et al. disclose wherein the first tubular member comprises a box member and the second tubular member comprises a pin member (fig 1).
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.
Claims 13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inose et al. (US 2022/0010894), as applied to claims 1-3, 11, 14, 17, and 20-27 above and further in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (AAPA).
Re Clms 13 and 19: Inose et al. fail to disclose wherein the first tubular member and second tubular member further comprise wedge threads. AAPA discloses that wedge threads are common knowledge in the art. Examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have provided the connection threads of the prior art of Inose et al. to be commonly known and used wedge threads for the purpose of creating the largest possible contact surface area at make-up to provide superior compression and several times the torque strength of most competing technologies.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-10, 12, 15-16, and 18 remain 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/12/2026 regarding the sealing surfaces have already been addressed by the Examiner in previous Office Actions.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JONATHAN PETER MASINICK whose telephone number is (571)270-3060. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8a-5p 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, Amber Anderson can be reached at (571)270-5281. 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.
/JONATHAN P MASINICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678