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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figures 5-8 depict shading which has the potential to not reproduce properly. Please resubmit with unshaded drawings and if the drawings do depict a cut-away view then utilize the proper cross-hatching for the cut away section. This also applies to Figures 1-4 for cross-hatching in cut away sections of the Figures. The drawings further fail to depict the vents as claimed in claims 4, 12, and 16. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 4, 12, and 16 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.
It is unclear what constitutes the vent aperture as claimed. In the Figure 6 it is not clear what 550 is pointing to for the vent apertures. Figure 6 appears to be a box like structure which is not indicative of a hose. It is disclosed that the apertures are at the end of the hose but these appear to be in addition of the open ends. Figure 6 does not indicate what structure would be disclosed to meet the vent apertures.
Claim 7 is 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 claim 7, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7-11, and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lewis (4,478,661).
Lewis discloses an air hose (20) comprising a woven polyamide fabric (22 made up of 24) having an edge (col. 3, lines 17-27), a weldable surface coating (21 made up of 23) extending along the edge, and a welded seam (25 and 26) extending along the edge to form a tube (col. 3, lines 32-40). Note: The thermoplastic outer includes polyamides of the outer layer.
Regarding claim 2, the hose comprising a multilayer material having an inner layer and an outer layer, wherein the inner layer comprises a woven polyamide fabric and the weldable surface coating, and wherein the inner layer is welded along the edge to form the welded seam. As seen in Figure 11 there is a weldable layer 21E then the inner layer 22E which is further covered by an outer layer 95E. Layer 22E meets the inner layer description and 95E is the outer layer.
Regarding claim 7, wherein the weldable surface coating (23) comprises a thermoplastic (col. 3, lines 13-31).
Regarding claim 8, wherein the woven polyamide fabric comprises a first edge and a second edge (section where the stitching is applied), each of the first edge and the second edge comprising the weldable surface coating and wherein the first edge is welded to the second edge to form the welded seam.
Regarding claim 9, the hose comprising a first sheet and a and a second sheet (as can be seen in Figure 1, the hose comprises two parts and the outer layer of each part is considered a first and a second sheet, so two 22s comprise the first and second sheet), each of the first and the second sheet comprising the woven polyamide fabric, wherein each of the first and second comprise a weldable surface coating extending along a first edge and a second edge (layer 21 on each of the upper and lower halves), wherein the first edge of the first sheet is welded to the second sheet to form a first welded seam, and wherein the second edge of the first sheet is welded to the second edge of the second sheet to form a second welded seam as seen in Figure 1.
Regarding claim 10, wherein the welded seam further comprises stitches as seen in Figure 1 (col. 3, lines 55-62).
Regarding claim 11, wherein the stiches extend substantially continuously along the welded seam as seen in Figure 1.
Regarding claim 13, a method of manufacturing an air hose is met by the apparatus of claim 1 and further claim 9.
Regarding claim 14, the method of claim 14 is met per the rejection of claim 9 above.
Regarding claim 15, further comprising stitching through the welded seam is addressed per the rejection of claim 11 above.
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lewis in view of Sarneo et al. (11,549,726).
Lewis disclose all the features of the claimed invention except that the outer layer as rejected above in the rejection of claim 2 has a woven polyamide fabric. Sarneo et al. discloses that the tube (2) is made of a woven material made of polyamide (col. 6, lines 50-54).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to utilize an outer layer as disclosed by Sarneo et al. with the tubing of Lewis, in order to add an extra layer of water impermeability and further to add another sealing material to the overall hose.
Claim(s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lewis in view of Resendes (20210/0212768).
Lewis discloses all the features of the claimed invention except that wherein the multilayer material further comprises an insulation layer between the inner layer and the outer layer and wherein the insulation layer comprises a foil. Resendes discloses a insulation layer on an air hose that utilizes a foil (para. 33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to utilize a foil insulation layer as taught by Resendes with the hose of Lewis, in order to add an insulation layer to aid in preventing cooling/heating loss in the line of Lewis.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CRAIG M SCHNEIDER whose telephone number is (571)272-3607. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Alford Kindred can be reached at571-272-4037. 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.
/CRAIG M SCHNEIDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights