DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 status of the claims for this application is as follows.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 10/10/2024.
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) 1-7 and 11-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 9-14556, (hereinafter, JP-556) in view Traugott (US 3124370).
At the outset the applicant is reminded that:
1. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
2. 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 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987).
Re Clm 1: JP-556 discloses a manifold (see Figs. 1-3) comprising:
a pipe (5) ;
a nut member (7) at an outer circumferential surface of the pipe (see Figs. 1 and 7); and
a manifold body (the body of 11 and 10) comprising a port (12) having a concave shape extending into the manifold body from an outer surface of the manifold body (see Figs. 1 and 7),
wherein a first portion of the nut member is inserted into the port (the portion of 7 that penetrates 10 and 11), and the manifold body comprises the outer surface, and a second portion of the nut member (the portion of 7 that extends out of 10 and 11) and the nut member inserted into the port.
JP-556 fails to disclose a locking part protruding on the disclosed outer surface and engaging with a disclosed second portion of the nut member to prevent the disclosed nut member inserted into the disclosed port from being rotated and loosened.
However, Traugott discloses members that are threadedly secured together, similar to that of JP-556. Traugott also teaches a locking part (65’ and see Col. 4, lines 40-55, alternatively, 50 and see Col. 4, lines 3-15) between two members and the locking member extending from the surface of one member to the surface of another member to prevent any relative rotation between the members (Col. 4, lines 40-55, alternatively, Col. 4, lines 3-15). Where such would aid in securing members together and prevent any relative rotation between the members, alternatively, for aiding in the prevention of debris from entering the joint.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of JP-556, to have included a locking part protruding on the disclosed outer surface and engaging with a disclosed second portion of the nut member to prevent the disclosed nut member inserted into the disclosed port from being rotated and loosened, as taught by Traugott, with a reasonable expectation of success because one is merely adding a device between the head of the nut and the manifold, for the purpose of providing a means to secure members together and prevent any relative rotation between the members, alternatively, for aiding in the prevention of debris from entering the joint.
Note that applicant in their specification, for this instant application, indicates in [0009-0010 and [0012]) that:
“[0009]An embodiment of the present disclosure can provide a manifold capable of improving the air tightness between a pipe and a manifold body.
[0010] An embodiment of the present disclosure can provide a manifold capable of preventing a pipe inserted into a manifold body from being released.
[0012] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, a manifold may include a pipe, a nut member at an outer circumferential surface of the pipe, and manifold body including a port having a concave shape extending into the manifold body from an outer surface of the manifold body, wherein a first portion of the nut member is inserted into the port, and the manifold body including a locking part protruding on the outer surface and engaging with a second portion of the nut member to prevent the nut member inserted into the port from being rotated and loosened.”
While Traugott indicates in Col. 4, lines 40-55 and Col. 4, lines 3-15 that: “Spacer 65 is provided with serrations 66 along the opposite end edge thereof so as to prevent relative rotation between the components as discussed previously.”, and “These serrations are provided such that when the assembly is tightened into its operative position, the serrations will tend to dig into the adjacent components so as to prevent any relative rotation between the various components.”
Both Traugott and applicant’s instant application are directed towards the prevention of relative rotation (loosening of mating components) of mating components. Accordingly, Traugott is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, making Traugott analogous art.
Re Clm 2: JP-556 as modified by Traugott above, discloses the limitations wherein the locking part comprises a wedge protruding from the outer surface (Traugott, the serration(s), see Figs. 2 and 5).
Re Clm 3: JP-556 as modified by Traugott above, discloses the limitations wherein the wedge is arranged in a circumferential direction of the pipe (JP-556 as modified by Traugott would have had the wedge arranged in a circumferential direction of the pipe).
Re Clm 4: JP-556 as modified by Traugott above, discloses the limitations wherein the first portion of the nut member comprises a nut fixing part (JP-556, the threads) inserted into the port and fixed to the manifold body (JP-556, see Fig. 1), wherein the second portion of the nut member comprises a nut head part positioned outside the port to face the locking part (JP-556, see Fig. 1), and wherein the wedge protrudes toward the nut head part from the outer surface to fix the nut head part (JP-556 as modified by Traugott would have had the wedge protrudes toward the nut head part from the outer surface to fix the nut head part).
Re Clm 5: JP-556 as modified by Traugott above, discloses the limitations wherein the manifold body comprises: a discharge surface (JP-556, the surface at 3) defining a manifold fluid passage (JP-556, see Fig. 1) configured to discharge a fluid through the port; and a guide surface (JP-556, the surface at 3’) having a sectional area widened toward outside of the manifold body from the discharge surface (JP-556, see Fig. 1).
Re Clm 6: JP-556 as modified by Traugott above, discloses the limitations wherein the pipe comprises: a pipe body extending in a first direction (radially and longitudinally inwards) in which the pipe is inserted into the port (JP-556, see the pipe in Fig. 1), and including the outer circumferential surface of the pipe (JP-556, see the outer surface of the pipe); and an inflowing part (JP-556, the tapered part) provided at one end portion of the pipe body and inserted into the port to engage the guide surface (JP-556, see Fig. 1).
Re Clm 7: JP-556 as modified by Traugott above, discloses the limitations wherein the inflowing part comprises: an inflowing surface shaped to correspond to the guide surface (JP-556, see Fig. 1); and a circumferential rib (the tubular portion adjacent the conical portion) provided in a second direction (it extending away), the second direction being opposite to the first direction (radially outwards with respect to the narrowed tip, (its width) from the pipe, and longitudinally away from the first direction (its thickness)), to protrude radially outward of the pipe body (JP-556, see Fig. 1).
Re Clm 11: JP-556 as modified by Traugott above, discloses the limitations wherein a depth of the port (the entire depth) in a direction in which the nut member is inserted, is greater than a diameter of the pipe (the diameter of the inside of eh pipe).
Re Clm 12: JP-556 discloses a manifold (see Figs. 1-3) comprising:
a manifold body (the body of 11 and 10) including a manifold fluid passage (2) and a port (12) formed in a concave shape from an outer surface of the manifold body (se Figs. 1 and 3);
a pipe (5) inserted into the port of the manifold body in a first direction (see Fig. 1), and
including a pipe fluid passage (3) fluidly connected to the manifold fluid passage via the port (see Fig. 1); and
a nut member (7) inserted into the port and coupled to the manifold body while supporting the pipe (see Fig. 1),
wherein a diameter (D) of the pipe (the diameter of the inside, of 20) and a depth (Pd) of the port in the first direction (from the external surface of 10 to 3) has a ratio (Pd/D) of the depth (Pd) of the port to the diameter (D) of the pipe equal to or greater than 1.3 (see Fig. 1).
JP-556 fails to disclose a locking part protruding on the disclosed outer surface and engaging with the disclosed nut member to prevent the nut member inserted into the port from being rotated and loosened.
However, Traugott discloses members that are threadedly secured together, similar to that of JP-556. Traugott also teaches a locking part (65’ and see Col. 4, lines 40-55, alternatively, 50 and see Col. 4, lines 3-15) protruding on an outer surface (see Fig. 2), and engaging with a member to prevent rotation and loosening (Col. 4, lines 40-55, alternatively, Col. 4, lines 3-15). Where such would aid in securing members together and prevent any relative rotation between the members, alternatively, for aiding in the prevention of debris from entering the joint.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of JP-556, to have included a locking part protruding on the disclosed outer surface and engaging with the disclosed nut member to prevent the nut member inserted into the port from being rotated and loosened, as taught by Traugott, with a reasonable expectation of success because one is merely adding a device between the head of the nut and the manifold, for the purpose of providing a means to secure members together and prevent any relative rotation between the members, alternatively, for aiding in the prevention of debris from entering the joint.
Note that applicant in their specification, for this instant application, indicates in [0009-0010 and [0012]) that:
“[0009]An embodiment of the present disclosure can provide a manifold capable of improving the air tightness between a pipe and a manifold body.
[0010] An embodiment of the present disclosure can provide a manifold capable of preventing a pipe inserted into a manifold body from being released.
[0012] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, a manifold may include a pipe, a nut member at an outer circumferential surface of the pipe, and manifold body including a port having a concave shape extending into the manifold body from an outer surface of the manifold body, wherein a first portion of the nut member is inserted into the port, and the manifold body including a locking part protruding on the outer surface and engaging with a second portion of the nut member to prevent the nut member inserted into the port from being rotated and loosened.”
While Traugott indicates in Col. 4, lines 40-55 and Col. 4, lines 3-15 that: “Spacer 65 is provided with serrations 66 along the opposite end edge thereof so as to prevent relative rotation between the components as discussed previously.”, and “These serrations are provided such that when the assembly is tightened into its operative position, the serrations will tend to dig into the adjacent components so as to prevent any relative rotation between the various components.”
Both Traugott and applicant’s instant application are directed towards the prevention of relative rotation (loosening of mating components) of mating components. Accordingly, Traugott is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, making Traugott analogous art.
Re Clm 13: JP-556 discloses wherein the manifold body comprises s an inner circumferential surface defining the port (the narrowest surface at 3), and wherein the depth (Pd) of the port in the first direction is a length of the inner circumferential surface in the first direction (see Fig. 1; it is a length plus more).
Re Clm 14: JP-556 discloses wherein the manifold body includes comprises: a discharge surface defining the manifold fluid passage (see Fig. 1); and a guide surface having a sectional area widened toward outside of the manifold body from the discharge surface.
Re Clm 15: JP-556 discloses wherein the pipe comprises: a pipe body (see Fig. 1, the body of the pipe) extending in the first direction (see Fig. 1), and including an outer circumferential surface (see Fig. 1, the outer surface); and an inflowing part (the tapered part) provided at one end portion of the pipe body and inserted into the port to the guide surface (see Fig. 1), and the inflowing part protruding from the outer circumferential surface and radially outward of the pipe body (see Fig. 1).
Re Clm 16: JP-556 discloses wherein the nut member comprises an inner circumferential surface (the narrowest surface) configured to support the outer circumferential surface of the pipe body, and wherein a height (Nh) of the inner circumferential surface (the entire length of the inner surface) in the first direction (see Fig. 1) and the diameter (D) of the pipe has a ratio (Nh/D) of the height (Nh) of the inner circumferential surface to the diameter (D) of the pipe greater than or equal to 1.5 (see Fig. 1).
Re Clm 17: JP-556 a manifold system (see Figs. 1-3) comprising: manifold body (11 and 10) having a first outer surface (see the exterior surface), a port (12) extending into the manifold body from the first outer surface (see Fig. 1), the port having a female-threaded portion (see Fig. 1) with a port diameter (see the diameter of the port), a guide surface (3’) extending from a bottom surface of the port into the manifold body (see Fig. 1), the guide surface having a first conical-shape (see Fig. 1), and a manifold fluid passage (3) extending from the guide surface into the manifold body (see Fig. 1),
a pipe (5) having a pipe body (see the body of 5) with a first outer diameter having an outer circumferential surface (see the outer surface of the smallest diameter portion), a flange part (see the larger diameter cylindrical portion) having a flange part outer diameter larger than the first outer diameter (see the larger diameter cylindrical part and its diameter), an flowing part (the part containing 18) at a distal end of the pipe at the flange part (see Fig. 1), the flowing part having a second conical-shape (see Fig. 1) configured to mate with the first conical-shape (see Fig. 1), the flowing part widening to the flange part outer diameter (see Fig. 1), the flowing part having a pipe hole exit configured to align with the manifold fluid passage (see Fig. 1) when the flowing part of the pipe is engaged with the guide surface of the manifold body such that the pipe is fluidly coupled to the manifold fluid passage (see Fig. 1); and
a nut member (7) having an inner circumferential surface (see the inner surface) configured to receive and support the outer circumferential surface of the pipe body therein (see Fig. 1), the nut member having a male-threaded portion on a first nut outer surface (see Fig. 1; the surface that mates with 10), the male-threaded portion being configured to threadedly engage with the female-threaded portion of the port (see Fig. 1), the nut member having a nut shoulder (that forms the wider head portion) extending radially outward from the first nut outer surface (see Fig. 1), the nut shoulder having a shoulder nut width greater than the port diameter of the port (see Fig. 1), the nut shoulder having a locking surface (the surface that faces 10) configured to face the manifold when the nut member is threadedly engaged with the port.
JP-556 fails to disclose a locking part protruding from the disclosed first outer surface, the locking part having a group of wedge-shaped features arranged in a circumferential direction adjacent the disclosed port; and the disclosed nut shoulder having a disclosed locking surface configured to face and engage the locking part.
However, Traugott discloses members that are threadedly secured together, similar to that of JP-556. Traugott also teaches a locking part (65’ and see Col. 4, lines 40-55, alternatively, 50 and see Col. 4, lines 3-15) protruding from a first surface, the locking part having a group of wedge-shaped features arranged in a circumferential direction; and configured to face and engage a second surface (Col. 4, lines 40-55, alternatively, Col. 4, lines 3-15). Where such would aid in securing members together and prevent any relative rotation between the members, alternatively, for aiding in the prevention of debris from entering the joint.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of JP-556, to have included a locking part protruding from the disclosed first outer surface, the locking part having a group of wedge-shaped features arranged in a circumferential direction adjacent the disclosed port; and the disclosed nut shoulder having a disclosed locking surface configured to face and engage the locking part, as taught by Traugott, with a reasonable expectation of success because one is merely adding a device between the head of the nut and the manifold, for the purpose of providing a means to secure members together and prevent any relative rotation between the members, alternatively, for aiding in the prevention of debris from entering the joint.
Note that applicant in their specification, for this instant application, indicates in [0009-0010 and [0012]) that:
“[0009]An embodiment of the present disclosure can provide a manifold capable of improving the air tightness between a pipe and a manifold body.
[0010] An embodiment of the present disclosure can provide a manifold capable of preventing a pipe inserted into a manifold body from being released.
[0012] According to an embodiment of the present disclosure, a manifold may include a pipe, a nut member at an outer circumferential surface of the pipe, and manifold body including a port having a concave shape extending into the manifold body from an outer surface of the manifold body, wherein a first portion of the nut member is inserted into the port, and the manifold body including a locking part protruding on the outer surface and engaging with a second portion of the nut member to prevent the nut member inserted into the port from being rotated and loosened.”
While Traugott indicates in Col. 4, lines 40-55 and Col. 4, lines 3-15 that: “Spacer 65 is provided with serrations 66 along the opposite end edge thereof so as to prevent relative rotation between the components as discussed previously.”, and “These serrations are provided such that when the assembly is tightened into its operative position, the serrations will tend to dig into the adjacent components so as to prevent any relative rotation between the various components.”
Both Traugott and applicant’s instant application are directed towards the prevention of relative rotation (loosening of mating components) of mating components. Accordingly, Traugott is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor, making Traugott analogous art.
Re Clm 18: JP-556 as modified by Traugott above, discloses the limitations wherein the first outer diameter (D) of the pipe and a depth (Pd) of the port (from the external surface of 10 to 3) has a ratio (Pd/D) of the depth (Pd) of the port to the first outer diameter (D) of the pipe equal to or greater than 1.3 (see Fig. 1 which illustrates this ratio of almost 2; even though the dimensions are not explicitly defined the drawings are clear as to what they show and even if the draw’s scale was changed the relationship between the structures would remain the same and so would their size relationship(s)).
Re Clm 19: JP-556 as modified by Traugott above, discloses the limitations, wherein a height (Nh) of the inner circumferential surface (the entire length of the inner surface) of the nut member and the first outer diameter (D) of the pipe has a ratio (Nh/D) of the height (Nh) of the inner circumferential surface to the first outer diameter (D) greater than or equal to 1.5 (see Fig. 1 which illustrates this ratio of almost 2; even though the dimensions are not explicitly defined the drawings are clear as to what they show and even if the draw’s scale was changed the relationship between the structures would remain the same and so would their size relationship(s)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, on page 8 in line 7 through page 9 the last line, that neither JP 9-14556 nor Traugott illustrate a manifold body with a locking part. That Traugott does not have the claimed nut and the manifold. JP 9-14556 and Traugott
are not analogous art.
This is not persuasive.
The examiner would like to remind the applicant that a manifold is defined as a whole composed of diverse elements, and that, both JP 9-14556 and Traugott illustrate a whole structure composed of diverse elements.
The examiner would like to point out that it is the combination of both JP 9-14556 and Traugott that has been used to reject the claimed manifold body and locking part.
Where JP 9-14556 is being used to disclose the nut and the manifold and Traugott is being used to teach the locking part.
In response to applicant's argument of nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, JP 9-14556 is in the same field of endeavor as the applicant’s and Traugott is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, that is, having a means to prevent unwanted rotation and loosening of mating pats.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 JAMES A LINFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-3066. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday: 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Eastern Time.
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.
JAMES ALBERT LINFORD
Examiner
Art Unit 3679
01/16/2025
/Matthew Troutman/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3679