DETAILED ACTION
The present application and its arguments have been reviewed and currently claims 1-2 and 5 are rejected, claims 3, 4, and 7-11 are withdrawn, and claim 6 is cancelled.
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicants arguments on page 13 that a spring cannot be placed in the device of Yano in view of Kamata, the examiner respectfully disagrees because an “escaping part for allowing” is a broad recitation where the claim does not require any specific structure, Kamata discloses a very similar “escaping part” to Yano (ex., an open area with a wall) which a spring functions perfectly fine, and adding a deformable spring to the device of Yano in the same way as shown by Kamata would not cause the device of Yano in view of Kamata to “not be used”.
Applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2 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.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 10-11 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
Species II, the non-elected species, is directed to Figs. 6-7, as previously mentioned in the election of species dated 8/4/2025 and Non-Final rejection on 10/21/2025;
Claim 10 is directed to Species II because Species II requires the sleeve to have a reversible structure.
Claim 11 is directed to Species II because the Species II requires the sleeve to be assembled from any side such as the inserting direction or hose pullout direction (ex., reversible structure).
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 10-11 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimazaki (JP-2013029193) as applied to claim 1 above and in view of Mizuguchi et al. (JP-2003343783).
In regards to claim 1, Shimazaki discloses:
A hose joint (see fig. 1a unless otherwise noted), comprising:
a guide part (1) provided on a nipple (6), and provided opposed to an inner surface (B1) of a hose body (B) having flexibility;
a tightening member (2) having a tapered surface (2a) provided opposed to an outer peripheral surface (1a) of the guide part, so as to have diameter increasing larger gradually in an inserting direction of the hose body;
a sleeve (3) provided reciprocatably in the inserting direction (N) of the hose body and a hose pullout direction (U, fig. 1b) in an opposite direction thereto along the tightening member, and
in a manner capable of undergoing diameter expansion and contraction deformation in a radial direction elastically (ex., compare fig. 1a with fig. 1b); and
an elastic member (4) provided so as to press the sleeve in the hose pullout direction along the tapered surface (see fig. 1b); and
a ring (5) holding the elastic member,
the ring has parallel surfaces with a given thickness in the inserting direction of the hose body and reciprocates in parallel with parallel surfaces of the tightening member, such that a pressing force of the elastic member acts on the sleeve uniformly in the circumferential direction,
but does not disclose:
wherein the sleeve has an extending part to be more extended in the hose pullout direction in an opposite direction to the inserting direction of the hose body than the tightening member, and the extending part functions as a pressing part for performing a pressing operation of pressing the sleeve in the inserting direction of the hose body, and causing diameter expansion thereof when the hose body that has completely undergone inserting is pulled out.
In regards to the extending part, Mizuguchi discloses a similar device comprising:
a first embodiment (see fig. 5) where a sleeve (30) does not comprise an extending part, and
a second embodiment (see fig. 6) where a sleeve (30) comprises an extending part (40) comprising a flange (41) and extending out of a tightening member (19) to provide the benefit of pushing the sleeve forward which allows teeth of the sleeve to project radially outward (see lines 242-246 in the translated document provided herein).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the tightening member and sleeve of Shimazaki such that the sleeve comprises an extending part that extends beyond the tightening member and comprises a flange because Mizuguchi discloses that there a finite number of identified solutions such as a first embodiment where a sleeve does not comprise an extending part (see fig.5) extending from a tightening member or a second embodiment where a sleeve comprises an extending part extending from a tightening member (see fig. 6) to provide the benefit of pushing the sleeve forward (ex., via the flange) which allows teeth of the sleeve to project radially outward (see lines 242-246). A person of ordinary skill could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success because modifying the sleeve with the provision of an extending part such that the extending part extends beyond the tightening member and comprises a flange is within their technical grasp and would produce no new results.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yano (JP-H071583) in view of Kamata (JP-2002195482).
In regards to claim 5, Yano discloses:
A hose joint (see fig. 1a hereinafter), comprising:
a guide part (17) provided at a nipple (12), and provided opposed to an inner surface of a hose body (100) having flexibility;
a tightening member (23) having a tapered surface (24) provided opposed to an outer peripheral surface of the guide part, so as to have diameter increasing larger gradually in an inserting direction of the hose body (ex., see the taper surface increases towards insertion direction/left);
a sleeve (37) provided reciprocatably in the inserting direction of the hose body and a hose pullout direction in an opposite direction thereto along the tightening member, and in a manner capable of undergoing diameter expansion and contraction deformation in a radial direction elastically; and
wherein the sleeve has an extending part to be more extended in the hose pullout direction in an opposite direction to the inserting direction of the hose body than the tightening member (see fig. 1a, where the sleeve extends past the tightening member), and
the extending part functions as a pressing part for performing a pressing operation of pressing the sleeve in the inserting direction of the hose body, and causing diameter expansion thereof when the hose body that has completely undergone inserting is pulled out (it is inherent that pressing the flange in the insertion direction would cause end the expand radially outward),
wherein the extending part has a flange (33), and
the flange functions as a pressing part,
wherein the nipple has an escaping part (ex., 15 in fig. 1a of Yano; ex., near 3 in figure 2) for allowing a receiving portion of the elastic member to escape while accommodating in the inserting direction the receiving part of the hose body when the pressing operation has been performed (structurally, there is nothing preventing element 15 from performing this function for the spring of Kamata),
but does not disclose:
an elastic member provided so as to press the sleeve in the hose pullout direction along the tapered surface.
In regards to the elastic member, Kamata discloses a similar device (see fig. 2) comprising a sleeve (4) that presses against a spring (3) which presses against a nipple (1) to provide the benefit of at least maintaining connection between a pipe and the sleeve (see lines 83-85 of the translated document provided herein) and supporting the sleeve (see lines 94-96).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to modify the device of Yano with the provision of a spring between the sleeve and nipple of Yano to provide the benefit of at least maintaining connection between a pipe and the sleeve and supporting the sleeve, as taught by Kamata (see lines 83-85 and 94-96).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Takada et al. (JP-2010043729) discloses a similar device to the present invention.
Takaaki et al. (JP-2008190648) discloses a similar device to the present invention.
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 ALEXANDER TYLER RUFRANO whose telephone number is (571)272-6223. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30AM to 4:30PM.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at (571) 270-3654. 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.
/A.T.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3679
/Matthew Troutman/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights