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 .
Response to Preliminary Amendment
The preliminary amendment to the claims and specification dated 10/5/2024 has been received and accepted. By way of amendment, claim 16 has been canceled. Claims 1-15 and 17-21 are being examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) dated 10/5/2024 has been received.
The information disclosure statement filed 10/5/2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the lined through information referred to therein has not been considered.
A copy of the Non-Patent Literature document cite no. 2 “CNIPA First Office Action” cannot be found in the file wrapper. This reference has been lined through. All other references have been considered.
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 1-15, and 20 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.
Claim 1 recites that “a flattered part” is provided at a rear end of the female-end rear stem. It is unclear what or how the part is “flattered” as this does not appear to be an understood and customary term of the art and the applicant has provided no special definition in the specification.
Claim 2 recites that the support ribs of the female-end stem are fixedly connected to a female-end body. The scope of claim 2 is unclear as, per the preamble, the claimed invention is directed solely to the stem. However, claim 2 recites that the stem is fixedly connected to another component that is not part of the stem (the female-end body). Thus, it is unclear if claim 2 is intending to be directed only to the subcombination of the stem, or the combination including the female-end body. This is further unclear as, based on claim differentiation, applicant intends to claim separate combination claims with the female-end body positively recited, see claim 7. Amending claim 2 to recite that the support ribs are --configured to be-- fixedly connected to a female-end body would resolve this issue.
Claims 3-15 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 2.
Claim 5 is further rejected as it is unclear what is meant by the flat surfaces being “gradually close to each other”.
Claim 8 is further rejected as the claim recites the limitation "the mating cambered surfaces" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The mating cambered surfaces are not introduced until claim 3. Claim 8 does not depend, either directly or indirectly, from claim 3.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the male-end elastic member" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites that the male-end piston stepped surfaces have the male-end elastic member arranged on the stepped surfaces. The scope of claim 20 is unclear as, per the preamble, the claimed invention is directed solely to the male-end piston. However, claim 20 recites that there is an additional component that is not part of the structure of the male-end piston (the male-end elastic member). Thus, it is unclear if claim 20 is intending to be directed only to the subcombination of the male-end piston, or the combination including the male-end elastic member. Amending claim 20 to recite that the stepped surfaces of the projecting plate parts are located on a same cylindrical surface and configured to have a male-end elastic member arranged on the stepped surfaces would resolve this issue.
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(s) 1, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tiberghien et al. (U.S. 2020/0032942).
Tiberghien discloses a female-end valve stem of a fluid connector (best shown in fig. 2), comprising a female-end rear stem part (towards 226) and a female-end front column part (at 216) arranged at a front end of the female-end rear stem part, wherein a flattered part (at 226, the flatter appearing portions, see also para. 83 describing this area as flared, and as best understood per the 112 rejection above) is provided at a rear end of the female-end rear stem part and configured to guide a flow forward (fig. 2).
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huawei Tech Co Ltd (CN215908622)(cited by the applicant in the IDS dated 10/5/2024)(machine translation included herewith and referred to below, hereinafter “Huawei”).
Huawei discloses a male-end piston of a fluid connector (fig. 8), comprising a male-end front column part (toward the right in fig. 8) and a male-end rear stem part being coaxial with the male-end front column part (toward the left in fig. 8), wherein a plurality of projecting plate parts (406, notice 3 of them in fig. 8) are evenly arranged on the male-end rear stem part in a circumferential direction and extend radially (fig. 8), outer edges of the projecting plate parts are located on a same cylindrical surface (fig. 8).
Regarding claim 18, Huawei further discloses wherein the male-end rear stem part is connected to the male-end front column part via a circular truncated cone part (at 407) so as to form a continuous convergence (fig. 8); a front end of each of the projecting plate parts contacts and is connected with the circular truncated cone part (fig. 8).
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(s) 2, 7, and 11, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tiberghien et al. in view Boothe et al. (U.S. 9,791,087).
Tiberghien discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to disclose wherein support ribs extend laterally from both sides of the flattered part in a width direction, and are fixedly connected to a female-end body. Rather, Tiberghien has an annular ring at the rear end of the female-end valve stem.
Boothe teaches it was known in the art to have a similar valve coupling with a hub (220) that has a plurality of circumferentially spaced legs (222) extending outwardly from the hub with the legs providing the coupling to the valve body (200)(see also col. 6, ll. 43-54).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rear end of the stem of Tiberghien by having the rear end have a plurality of legs (support ribs) to fixedly connect the stem to a female-end body as taught by Boothe in order to provide a similar fixed connection but uses less material as a complete ring like member is not necessary.
Regarding claim 7, Tiberghien as modified discloses a female-end structure of a fluid connector (200, fig. 2), comprising a female-end body (202), a female-end valve sleeve (212), a female-end elastic member (222), and the female-end valve stem according to claim 2 (see the rejection of claim 2 above), wherein the female-end valve stem is connected to the female-end body (fig. 2), a female-end interface annular gap is formed between the female-end front column part of the female-end valve stem and an interface of the female-end body (the gap that is filled by 212 and in the same manner as the applicant’s device), the female-end valve sleeve is movably arranged in the female-end body and connected to the female-end body via the female-end elastic member (fig. 2), the female-end valve sleeve has a sealing part (212) matched with the female-end interface annular gap (fig. 2 and in the same manner as the applicant’s device).
Regarding claim 11, Tiberghien as modified discloses a fluid connector comprising a male-end structure (100), and the female-end structure according to claim 7 (see the rejection of claim 7 above), wherein the male-end structure comprises a male-end body (102), a male-end piston (108) and a male-end elastic member (116), a front end of the male-end body has a front interface part matched with the female-end interface annular gap of the female-end structure (best shown in the position in fig. 3 and fig. 6 and in the same manner as the applicant’s device), a rear enlarged hole is formed at a rear inner side of the front interface part so as to form a clearance for flow of fluid when the rear enlarged hole moves to the female-end interface annular gap (at the left end in fig. 1), the male-end piston is movably connected to the male-end body via the male-end elastic member (see figs. 1 and 6).
Claim(s) 12, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tiberghien in view of Boothe as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Liu (U.S. 10,247,341).
Tiberghien discloses the claimed invention and while Tiberghien does discuss a ball locking coupling system (see para. 124), Tiberghien does not disclose the details of the ball locking system such as a first locking ball connected to the female-end body of the female-end structure in such a manner as to be movable laterally, a sliding sleeve connected to the female-end body in such a manner as to be slidable in a forward and backward direction, and a locking elastic member configured to prevent the sliding sleeve from moving away from a locking position, wherein a locking groove is provided on an outer side of the male-end body and configured to be engaged with the first locking ball; the sliding sleeve is configured to prevent the first locking ball from disengaging from the locking groove when being in the locking position and to enable the first locking ball to be disengaged from the locking groove when the sliding sleeve slides relative to the female-end body and moves away from the locking position.
Liu teaches it was known in the art to have a coupling with a ball locking system comprised of a first locking ball (97) connected to the female-end body of the female-end structure in such a manner as to be movable laterally (as is known in the art due to the coupling action), a sliding sleeve (94) connected to the female-end body in such a manner as to be slidable in a forward and backward direction (as is known in the art due to the coupling action, see figs. 9-10 and col. 1, ll. 16-49), and a locking elastic member (95) configured to prevent the sliding sleeve from moving away from a locking position (due to the bias of the spring and in the same manner as the applicant’s device), wherein a locking groove is provided on an outer side of the male-end body and configured to be engaged with the first locking ball (see the unlabeled groove of 98 which receives 96 in fig. 9); the sliding sleeve is configured to prevent the first locking ball from disengaging from the locking groove when being in the locking position and to enable the first locking ball to be disengaged from the locking groove when the sliding sleeve slides relative to the female-end body and moves away from the locking position (as is known in the art due to the coupling action, see figs. 9-10 and col. 1, ll. 16-49).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Tiberghien by having a first locking ball connected to the female-end body of the female-end structure in such a manner as to be movable laterally, a sliding sleeve connected to the female-end body in such a manner as to be slidable in a forward and backward direction, and a locking elastic member configured to prevent the sliding sleeve from moving away from a locking position, wherein a locking groove is provided on an outer side of the male-end body and configured to be engaged with the first locking ball; the sliding sleeve is configured to prevent the first locking ball from disengaging from the locking groove when being in the locking position and to enable the first locking ball to be disengaged from the locking groove when the sliding sleeve slides relative to the female-end body and moves away from the locking position as taught by Liu as Tiberghien discloses the use of a ball locking coupling system but is silent to the details and the ball locking system of Liu is known to provide a secure coupling connection that maintains coupling until the sleeve is moved to uncouple the two valve couplings.
Claim(s) 14-15, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tiberghien in view of Boothe as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Huawei.
Tiberghien as modified discloses the claimed invention and further discloses wherein the male-end piston comprises a male-end front column part and a male-end rear stem part being coaxial with the male-end front column part (the right and left ends of 108 in fig. 7).
Tiberghien does not appear to disclose a plurality of projecting plate parts are evenly arranged in a circumferential direction on the male-end rear stem part and extend radially, an outer edge of each of the projecting plate parts is in contact fit with the rear enlarged hole.
Huawei teaches it was known in the art to have a male-end piston with a plurality of projecting plate parts (406) evenly arranged in a circumferential direction on the male-end rear stem part and extend radially (see fig. 8, notice the three instances of 406), an outer edge of each of the projecting plate parts is in contact fit with a rear enlarged hole (see the sealing contact in fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Tiberghien by having the male-end piston have a plurality of projecting plate parts evenly arranged in a circumferential direction on the male-end rear stem part and extend radially, an outer edge of each of the projecting plate parts is in contact fit with a rear enlarged hole as taught by Huawei in order to provide a similar functioning valve but can allow for more laminar flow through the coupling when the valves are in the open position due to the plate parts evenly spaced circumferentially.
Regarding claim 15, Tiberghien as modified further discloses wherein the male-end rear stem part is connected to the male-end front column part via a flow guiding circular truncated cone part so as to form a continuous convergence (as taught by Huawei, see element 407); a front end of each of the projecting plate parts contacts and is connected with the flow guiding circular truncated cone part (fig. 8 of Huawei); or wherein the male-end rear stem part has a rear end in a conical structure for guiding flow of fluid.
Claim(s) 19-20, claim 20 as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huawei in view of Boothe.
Huawei discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to disclose wherein the male-end rear stem part has a rear end in a conical structure for guiding flow of fluid.
Boothe teaches it was known in the art to have a male-end rear stem part having a rear end in a conical structure for guiding flow of fluid (see 224 for male member 14 in fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huawei by having the male-end rear stem part have a rear end in a conical structure as taught by Boothe in order to provide a similar functioning valve but can allow for more laminar flow through the coupling when the valves are in the open position due to the conical structure.
Regarding claim 20, Huawei as modified further discloses wherein a stepped surface is formed on each of the projecting plate parts (at 409, see fig. 8); the stepped surfaces of the projecting plate parts are located on a same cylindrical surface (fig. 8 and the cylindrical surface facing leftward in the figure and in the same manner as the applicant’s device, which are formed on each project plate part and the same cylindrical surface as described in paras. 27 and 76 of the applicant’s specification), the male-end elastic member is arranged on the stepped surfaces (per the 112 rejection above, the stepped surfaces are capable of having an elastic member arranged on them, but see also para. 51, the bottom of page 22 and the first few lines at the top of page 23 of the included machine translation).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huawei.
Huawei discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to disclose wherein each of the projecting plate parts has a thickness gradually decreased outwardly in a radial direction.
Rather, Huawei discloses the opposite, the plate parts having a gradually increasing thickness outward in the radial direction.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Huawei by having each of the projecting plate parts has a thickness gradually decreased outwardly in a radial direction, since a reversal of parts and/or change in shape of a component has been held to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP2144.04. The motivation for doing so would be to have a similar functioning valve but is more structurally rigid at the radial center, improving strength at the radial center.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 8-10, and 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 3, as best as currently can be understood, especially due to the 112 rejection of claim 2 above for the term “flattered part”, the prior art does not appear to exhibit a flattered part with mating cambered surfaces and location as claimed in claim 3.
Similarly in claim 5, as best as currently can be understood, the prior art does not appear to exhibit a flattered part with flat surfaces on both sides that are gradually close to each other until they merge.
The reasoning for no art rejection(s) being present for claim 8 is similar to that for claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 13, while Liu teaches a second ball (97), the second ball does not interact with other components such as the inclined surfaces as recited in claim 13.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Abura et al. (U.S. 9,032,997) discloses a coupling assembly with similar stems for the male and female valve members.Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL R REID whose telephone number is (313)446-4859. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-5pm 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 supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607, or Ken 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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/MICHAEL R REID/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753