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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 1, line 2, “the pipe wall” should read --a pipe wall--; claim 1, line 5, “the other end of the liquid-outlet joint and the other end of the liquid-inlet joint” should read --another end of the liquid-outlet joint and another end of the liquid-inlet joint--; claim 2, line 12, “the other end” should read --another end--; claim 6, line 1, “wherein one end” should read --wherein the one end--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims not specifically referenced are objected to as being dependent on an objected to base claim.
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 1-10 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 2, the limitations “a liquid cooling cabinet” in claim 1, lines 8 and 9 and in claim 2, line 16, are unclear and indefinite. It is unclear and indefinite how many liquid cooling cabinets are being claimed.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the middle part" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the connecting part" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the connecting part" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims not specifically referenced are rejected as being dependent on a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 and 8-10, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Abdul Gafar et al. (U.S. 2021/0378143).
PNG
media_image1.png
400
760
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 3 from Abdul Gafar.
Regarding claim 1, Abdul Gafar discloses:
A water distributor of a liquid-cooling cabinet, comprising:
a pipeline main body (110), a liquid-outlet joint (122) and a liquid-inlet joint (120), wherein a pipe wall of the pipeline main body (110) is provided with a branch-pipeline joint (see annotated figure above) configured to externally connect to a cooling distribute unit 230 (see paragraphs 0030 and 0032)
one end of the liquid-outlet joint (122) and one end of the liquid-inlet joint (120) are respectively connected with two ends (see annotated figure above ) of the pipeline main body (110), and another end of the liquid-outlet joint and another end of the liquid-inlet joint are mutually insertable (see Figure 3)
when the liquid-outlet joint (122) is inserted with a liquid-inlet joint (222) of an adjacent water distributor (230) of a second liquid-cooling cabinet (200), the liquid-outlet joint (122) is communicated with the liquid- inlet joint (222) of the adjacent water distributor (230) of the second liquid-cooling cabinet 200 (see Figure 1A)
the liquid-outlet joint (122) and the liquid-inlet joint (120) are self-sealing joints
Further regarding this limitation, when connected, the joints are sealed and therefore are seen as being self-sealing.
Regarding claim 8, Abdul Gafar discloses:
wherein the pipeline main body (110) is detachably connected with the liquid-inlet joint (120), and the pipeline main body (110) is detachably connected with the liquid-outlet joint 122
Regarding claim 9, Abdul Gafar discloses:
a sealing joint (see annotated figure above), and the sealing joint (see annotated figure above) is connectable with any end of the pipeline body 110
Further regarding this limitation, the sealing joint is not further defined. Therefore, since the annotated joint above provides sealing along the perimeter of the joint, it is seen as a sealing joint.
Regarding claim 10, Abdul Gafar discloses:
a connecting joint (see annotated figure above), and the connecting joint (see annotated figure above) fixes a plurality of pipeline bodies (110, 114) during transportation, wherein one end of the connecting joint (see annotated figure above) is connected with the pipeline body (110), and another end of the connecting joint (see annotated figure above) is connected with an adjacent pipeline body 114 (through element 200)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-8 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Smith III, discloses a hydraulic coupling comprising two joints that when connected, a valve stem of one joint moves and opens the valve body of the other joint.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELSEY E CARY whose telephone number is (571)272-9427. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am-5:30pm.
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 supervisors, Craig Schneider can be reached at (571)-272-3607 or Kenneth 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 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.
/KELSEY E CARY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights