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 .
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-8) in the reply filed on 11/14/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 9-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/14/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/11/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
Changes to the specification filed on 05/11/2026 are accepted.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites “an end of the composite pipe” and should be “[[an]] the end of the composite pipe” since it was previously recited in claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Granderson (WO 2020237199 A1).
In regard to claim 1, Granderson discloses an end fitting assembly (Fig. 15 shows an end fitting assembly) for a composite pipe (In [031] discloses the end fitting is for a composite pipe), the end fitting assembly comprising:
a socket portion having a cylindrical shape (See image below, indicated socket portion has at least one cylindrical shape similar to applicant’s invention) and comprising a socket internal surface and a socket external surface (See image below, the socket portion has an internal surface and an external surface), the socket portion configured to fit within an end of the composite pipe (See image below, the socket portion is for fitting within an end of the composite pipe similar to applicant’s invention);
a connector portion having a cylindrical shape (See image below, indicated connector portion has a cylindrical shape) and comprising a connector internal surface and a connector external surface (See image below, the connector portion has an internal surface and an external surface);
a stop located between the socket external surface and the connector external surface (See image below, indicated stop is a radially protruding portion of the end fitting and the stop is between the socket external surface and the connector external surface), wherein the connector portion extends from the stop (See image below, the connector portion extends from the stop similar to applicant’s invention);
a collar that attaches to the stop (Fig. 15 and see image below, the part 306 defines a collar that attaches to the stop) by sliding longitudinally without rotation along an axis onto an outer surface of the stop (Fig. 2 and see image below, the threaded surface 120 which is the threaded connection between 306 and the stop can alternatively be a ratchet system where internal teeth of 306 slides longitudinally without rotation over external teeth of the stop along an axis defined by the longitudinal fluid axis of the end fitting as disclosed in [036]), the axis passing through a center of the socket portion and a center of the connector portion (See image below and Fig. 15, an axis can be defined as the longitudinal fluid axis which passes through a center of the socket portion and the a center of the connector portion), the collar having a cylindrical shape (Figs. 1 and 15, 306 has a cylindrical outer surface, therefore, has a cylindrical shape); and
at least two wedges (See image below, indicated two wedges) that are positioned between an external surface of the composite pipe and a collar internal surface (See image below, the two wedges are radially between an external surface of the composite pipe and a collar internal surface),
wherein each wedge of the at least two wedges comprises a series of wedge cone sections along an outer surface of the at least two wedges (See image below, indicated two wedges define at least a series of wedge cone sections that are inclined along an outer surface of the at least two wedges), and
wherein the collar internal surface comprises a series of collar cone sections (See image below, the collar has complementary inclined surfaces against the two wedges which define a series of collar cone sections in contact with the two wedges).
PNG
media_image1.png
651
759
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 2, Granderson discloses the end fitting assembly of claim 1, wherein the collar has a constant outer diameter (Figs. 1 and 15, the collar has at least one constant outer diameter at an outer surface of 306), and when the socket portion is fitted within the end of the composite pipe, the stop abuts a termination of the composite pipe (Fig. 15, the composite pipe would abut the stop when fitted over the socket portion).
In regard to claim 3, Granderson discloses the end fitting assembly of claim 1, wherein the end fitting assembly is configured to attach to one of: another end fitting assembly, a bulkhead, and a flowline end termination (See image above for claim 1, the end fitting is configured to at least attach to another end fitting assembly, a bulkhead, and a flowline end termination in a similar manner as applicant’s invention. See note below.).
It is noted that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ 2d 1647. See MPEP § 2114. In this case, the recitation “configured to attach to one of…” is a functional recitation of the claimed apparatus to which it is intended to be attached to one of another end fitting assembly, a bulkhead, and a flowline end termination which does not structurally differentiate the claimed apparatus from the end fitting of Granderson since the end fitting of Gianluca is also an end fitting configured to couple to other pipeline components.
In regard to claim 4, Granderson discloses the end fitting assembly of claim 1, wherein when the collar and the at least two wedges are fitted around the external surface of the composite pipe (Fig. 15, the two wedges are intended to fit around the external surface of the composite pipe) and, when the composite pipe is inserted into an outer pipe to form a pipe-in-pipe assembly (Fig. 15, the composite pipe is capable of being inserted into an outer pipe to form a pipe-in-pipe assembly similar to applicant’s invention), an external surface of the collar is parallel to an internal surface of the outer pipe of the pipe-in-pipe assembly (Fig. 15 and see image above for claim 1, an external surface of the collar would be parallel to an internal surface of the outer pipe if the collar and composite pipe are fitted within the outer pipe to define the pipe-in-pipe assembly).
It is noted that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ 2d 1647. See MPEP § 2114. In this case, the claims are to an end fitting assembly and not a pipe-in-pipe assembly and the recitation of “when the composite pipe is inserted into an outer pipe to form a pipe-in-pipe assembly” is a recitation of intended use of the end fitting assembly which does not structurally differentiate the end fitting of Granderson to the claimed end fitting.
In regard to claim 5, Granderson discloses the end fitting assembly of claim 1, wherein the at least two wedges surround the external surface of the composite pipe (See image above for claim 1, the two wedges surround the external surface of the composite pipe similar to applicant’s invention in order to grip along an outer surface of the composite pipe).
In regard to claim 6, Granderson discloses the end fitting assembly of claim 1, wherein when the collar is moved toward the stop and the connector portion, the series of collar cone sections compress each of the series of wedge cone sections thereby compressing the composite pipe (See image above for claim 1, when 306 is moved toward the stop and connector portion, the series of collar cone sections compress the series of wedge cone sections of the two wedges in order to compress the composite pipe similar to applicant’s invention).
In regard to claim 7, Granderson discloses the end fitting assembly of claim 1, wherein, when a clamping force is applied to the collar toward the stop and the connector portion, a thicker cone end of each collar cone section is moved toward a thicker cone end of each wedge cone section (See image above for claim 1, when collar 306 moves toward to stop and the connector portion, 306 provides a clamping force from a thicker cone end of the collar cone section toward a thicker cone end of each wedge cone section similar to applicant’s invention in order to grip over the composite pipe).
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.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Granderson (WO 2020237199 A1) in view of Zaborszki et al. (US 2018/0259097 A1, hereinafter “Zaborszki”).
Granderson discloses the end fitting assembly of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose wherein the collar attaches to an outer circumferential surface of the stop by a weld. However, welding is a known type of connection for pipe couplings and is within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art.
In the related field of pipe couplings, Zaborszski teaches welding a collar over a stop (Fig. 1, collar at 142 welded over a stop of 130 as shown and disclosed in [0021]) in order to have the advantage of gas impermeable connection and a leak tight connection (In [0013] and [0021] discloses the advantages of welding).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted or included in the connection between the collar and the stop of Granderson for a welding connection with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have the advantage of gas impermeable connection and a leak tight connection as taught by Zaborszski. See MPEP 2143(I)(B) with regard to simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
It is noted that the particular connection between the collar and the stop lacks criticality since applicant’s specification lacks sufficient facts and evidence that the various connections of a dowel, weld, or threads provide any nonobvious or unexpected results. Therefore, the connection as described in applicant’s specification of a dowel, weld, or threads appear to be arbitrary. Accordingly, the crux of the connection between the collar and the stop appears to be a known type of connection within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art to hold a collar and a stop together.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Granderson (WO 2020237199 A1) in view of Gilbreath et al. (US 2015/0292661 A1, hereinafter “Gilbreath”).
Granderson discloses the end fitting assembly of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose wherein the collar attaches to an outer circumferential surface of the stop by a dowel. However, radial dowels/pins/rods are a known type of connection for pipe couplings and is within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art.
In the related field of pipe couplings, Gilbreath teaches a collar attached to an outer circumferential surface of a stop by a dowel (Fig. 3, collar at 104 attached to an outer circumferential surface of a stop at 218 by a dowel inserted into hole at 192 to a groove 222) in order to have at least the advantage of preventing unwanted rotation (In [0049] discloses having a pin/dowel inserted into 192 and 222 allows a connection between 104 and 218 and preventing unwanted rotation).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted or included in the connection between the collar and the stop of Granderson for a dowel connection with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have the advantage of preventing unwanted rotation as taught by Gilbreath. See MPEP 2143(I)(B) with regard to simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. Also, see the same notes above for claim 8 of Granderson in view of Zaborszski.
Claims 1, 3, and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman (US 5,558,375) in view of Granderson (WO 2020237199 A1).
In regard to claim 1, Newman discloses an end fitting assembly (Fig. 2 shows an end fitting assembly) for a composite pipe (Fig. 2, the end fitting is for a pipe 10 and is also capable of attaching to a composite pipe in the same manner as pipe 10. See note below.), the end fitting assembly comprising:
a socket portion (Fig. 2, socket portion at 28) having a cylindrical shape (Fig. 2, 28 has a cylindrical shape) and comprising a socket internal surface and a socket external surface (Fig. 2, 28 has an internal surface and an external surface), the socket portion configured to fit within an end of the composite pipe (Fig. 2, 28 is configured to fit within 10 as shown);
a connector portion having a cylindrical shape (Fig. 1, section at 14 defines a connector portion having a cylindrical shape) and comprising a connector internal surface and a connector external surface (Fig. 1, 14 has an internal surface and an external surface);
a stop located between the socket external surface and the connector external surface (Fig. 1, section at 26 defines a stop for at least an end of pipe 10 and is between 28 and 14), wherein the connector portion extends from the stop (Fig. 1, 14 extends from 26);
a collar that attaches to the stop by sliding longitudinally along an axis onto an outer surface of the stop (Fig. 2, nut 22 defines a collar that attaches to stop at 26 by at least longitudinally sliding along an axis by threading on an outer surface of the stop 26), the axis passing through a center of the socket portion and a center of the connector portion (Fig. 2, the axis is the longitudinal fluid axis which at least passes through a center of the socket portion and a center of the connector portion), the collar having a cylindrical shape (Fig. 2, 22 has a cylindrical shape); and
at least two wedges (Fig. 1, the part 16 have slots 49 that define at least two identical wedges in the circumferential direction) that are positioned between an external surface of the composite pipe and a collar internal surface (Fig. 2, the at least two wedges of 16 are radially between an external surface of 10 and a collar internal surface of 22 as shown),
wherein each wedge of the at least two wedges comprises a series of wedge cone sections along an outer surface of the at least two wedges (Fig. 1, conical sections 38 and 42 define at least a series of wedge cone sections along an outer surface of each of the at least two wedges), and
wherein the collar internal surface comprises a series of collar cone sections (Fig. 2, 22 has at least conical sections 56 and 60 that define a series of collar cone sections).
It is noted that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ 2d 1647. See MPEP § 2114. In this case, the recitation “for a composite pipe” is a recitation of intended use of the end fitting assembly which does not structurally differentiate the claimed apparatus from the end fitting of Newman which is for a pipe 10, and therefore, capable of attaching to a composite pipe.
Newman does not expressly disclose the sliding longitudinally of the collar onto the stop is without rotation because the connection is by threading which requires rotation. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably consider mechanically equivalent connections of threading which can include connections that are without rotations.
In the related field of end fittings with collars, Granderson teaches a collar that attaches to a stop by sliding longitudinally along an axis onto an outer surface of the stop without rotation (See the rejection to claim 1 by Granderson under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) such that in [036] discloses longitudinal sliding without rotation by a ratchet system which is at least a mechanically equivalent connection to a threading system).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the threaded connection of the collar and stop of Newman for the ratchet system that does not require rotation of Granderson with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have the advantage of a known and reliable alternative connection to threading as taught by Granderson. See MPEP 2143(I)(B) with regard to simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Additionally, see MPEP 2143(I)(G) with regard to a motivation to combine references may be implicit and when the ‘improvement’ is technology-independent and the combination of references results in a product or process that is more desirable, for example because it is stronger, cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, or more efficient. In this case, the ratchet system of Granderson also provides an advantage over threads such that the ratchet system would prevent any slipping in the opposite direction since threads can be prone to becoming loose over time. Therefore, a ratchet system of corresponding teeth sliding over each other would be a stronger connection that prevents disconnection as compared to threads.
In regard to claim 3, Newman and Granderson disclose the end fitting assembly of claim 1, and Newman further discloses wherein the end fitting assembly is configured to attach to one of: another end fitting assembly (Fig. 2, the opposite end of pipe 10 not shown is at least configured to couple to another end fitting shown in Fig. 2), a bulkhead, and a flowline end termination (Fig. 2, the end fitting shown is at least configured to connect to other pipeline components such as a bulkhead and a flowline end termination. See note below.).
It is noted that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ 2d 1647. See MPEP § 2114. In this case, the recitation “configured to attach to one of…” is a functional recitation of the claimed apparatus to which it is intended to be attached to one of another end fitting assembly, a bulkhead, and a flowline end termination which does not structurally differentiate the claimed apparatus from the end fitting of Newman since the end fitting of Newman is also an end fitting configured to couple to other pipeline components.
In regard to claim 5, Newman and Granderson disclose the end fitting assembly of claim 1, and Newman further discloses wherein the at least two wedges surround the external surface of the composite pipe (Fig. 2, wedges of 14 surround the external surface of 10 as shown).
In regard to claim 6, Newman and Granderson disclose the end fitting assembly of claim 1, and Newman further discloses wherein when the collar is moved toward the stop and the connector portion, the series of collar cone sections compress the each of the series of wedge cone sections thereby compressing the composite pipe (Fig. 2, when 22 moves toward 26 and 14 by the threads at 26, the cone sections of 22 compress each of the series of cone sections of the wedges of 14).
In regard to claim 7, Newman and Granderson disclose the end fitting assembly of claim 1, and Newman further discloses wherein, when a clamping force is applied to the collar toward the stop and the connector portion, a thicker cone end of each collar cone section is moved toward a thicker cone end of each wedge cone section (Fig. 2, when a clamping force is applied to 22 toward 26 and 14 when 22 is threaded onto 26, at least a thicker cone end of each of the collar cone section is moved toward a thicker cone end of each of the cone sections of the wedges 14 in order to compress 14 toward pipe 10).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman (US 5,558,375) in view of Granderson (WO 2020237199 A1) and further in view of Zaborszki (US 2018/0259097 A1).
Newman and Granderson disclose the end fitting assembly of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose wherein the collar attaches to an outer circumferential surface of the stop by a weld. However, welding is a known type of connection for pipe couplings and is within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art.
In the related field of pipe couplings, Zaborszski teaches welding a collar over a stop (Fig. 1, collar at 142 welded over a stop of 130 as shown and disclosed in [0021]) in order to have the advantage of gas impermeable connection and a leak tight connection (In [0013] and [0021] discloses the advantages of welding).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted or included in the connection between the collar and the stop of Newman in view of Granderson for a welding connection with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have the advantage of gas impermeable connection and a leak tight connection as taught by Zaborszski. See MPEP 2143(I)(B) with regard to simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
It is noted that the particular connection between the collar and the stop lacks criticality since applicant’s specification lacks sufficient facts and evidence that the various connections of a dowel, weld, or threads provide any nonobvious or unexpected results. Therefore, the connection as described in applicant’s specification of a dowel, weld, or threads appear to be arbitrary. Accordingly, the crux of the connection between the collar and the stop appears to be a known type of connection within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art to hold a collar and a stop together.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman (US 5,558,375) in view of Granderson (WO 2020237199 A1) and further in view of Gilbreath (US 2015/0292661 A1).
Newman and Granderson disclose the end fitting assembly of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose wherein the collar attaches to an outer circumferential surface of the stop by a dowel. However, radial dowels/pins/rods are a known type of connection for pipe couplings and is within the skill of one of ordinary skill in the art.
In the related field of pipe couplings, Gilbreath teaches a collar attached to an outer circumferential surface of a stop by a dowel (Fig. 3, collar at 104 attached to an outer circumferential surface of a stop at 218 by a dowel inserted into hole at 192 to a groove 222) in order to have at least the advantage of preventing unwanted rotation (In [0049] discloses having a pin/dowel inserted into 192 and 222 allows a connection between 104 and 218 and preventing unwanted rotation).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted or included in the connection between the collar and the stop of Newman in view of Granderson for a dowel connection with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have the advantage of preventing unwanted rotation as taught by Gilbreath. See MPEP 2143(I)(B) with regard to simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. Also, see the same notes above for claim 8 of Newman and Granderson in view of Zaborszski.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/26/2026 have been fully considered with respect to claims 1-8 but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same references applied in the prior rejection of record for all teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. See the updated rejection above that includes the prior art Granderson that discloses all the features of claim 1 and also teaches alternative connections to threading which can include a longitudinally sliding without rotation ratchet system.
Conclusion
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 William S. Choi whose telephone number is (571)272-8223. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30-5:30.
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.
/WILLIAM S. CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
Prosecution Insights