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 . This application is a continuation of application 18/538,636.
Claims 11-15 are currently being examined.
Drawings
Figures 1-7 are of a reduced size, lines are not distinct, some feature areas are shaded versus provided with cross-hatching which all make difficult the discernment of features of Applicant’s invention. Please provide the Figures in a greater size, with distinct lines, and no shading.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore,
“the clamp collar is elastically deformed” and “a ratchet” in claim 11; and
“a locking means” and “a stop” in claim 15 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “47”.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 Objections
Claims 11 and 13-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11: in line 1, “A device” should read as – An attachment [[a]] device --, and in lines 1-2, “said device” should read as – said attachment device --. Note that if in claim 11, “A device” is not -- An attachment device --, then claims 12-15 which are dependent upon claim 11 would be rejected under 112(d) for failing to include all the limitations of claim 11.
Claim 11: in line 2, “a nozzle holder” should read as – the [[a]] nozzle holder --, “a supply line” should read as the fluid [[a]] supply line --; in each of lines 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 14, 16 and 18, “the supply line” should read as – the fluid supply line --; in line 6, “the direction” should read as – a [[the]] direction --; in lines 8-9, “the contact” should read as – the cylindrical surface contact --; in each of lines 9 and 11, “the receiving support” should read as – the at least one receiving support --; in each of lines 11, 17 and 18-19, “the pin” should read as – the receiving support pin --; in lines 11-12, “a clamp collar elastically deformable into an undeformed initial shape” should read as (in light of specification [0018]) – a clamp collar elastically deformable, the clamp collar in [[into]] an undeformed initial shape --; in line 12, “said pin” should read as – said receiving support pin --; in line 15, “its initial shape” should read as – the undeformed [[its] initial shape --, “the contact” should read as – [[the]] contact --.
Claim 13: in line 2, “the supply line” should read as – the fluid supply line --.
Claim 14: in line 1, “the clamp” should read as – the clamp collar --.
Claim 15: in each of lines 2 and 3, “the receiving support” should read as – the at least one receiving support --; in line 3, “the weight” should read as -- a [[the]] weight --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 15 recites “a locking means” which is interpreted as invoking 112(f) but the specification and drawings do not describe or show what a locking means is or is equivalent to.
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 12-13 and 15 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.
Claim 12 recites “a first receiving support” in lines 1-2 and “a second receiving support” in line 2 which are unclear whether each of these is the same as or different from the at least one receiving support recited in base claim 11 which renders claim 12 as indefinite.
Claim 13 is rejected as being indefinite for the same reason as base claim 12.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the hinges" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim which renders claim 13 as indefinite.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the two receiving supports" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim which renders claim 13 as indefinite.
Claim 13 recites “a pivot axis” which is unclear whether this is the same as or different from either of a first pivot axis and a second pivot axis recited in base claim 11 which renders claim 13 as indefinite.
Claim 15 recites “each latch” which seems to indicate there is more than one latch being claimed but base claim 11 recites a latch, such that claim 15 is unclear whether more than one latch is being claimed which renders claim 15 as indefinite.
Claim 15 recites “a locking means in the closing position on the receiving support” which is unclear whether this is the same as or different from “a receiving support pin for locking the latch in the closing position” recited in base claim 11 which renders claim 15 as indefinite.
Claim 15 limitation “a locking means” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification recites a locking means in [0024] but does not describe what a locking means is and does not have a reference number for a locking means, and there is no label showing a locking means in the drawings. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is allowable over the prior art but correction of claim objections and drawing objections described above is required, and dependent claim 14 inherits the allowable subject matter of claim 11.
Dependent claims 12-13 and 15 inherit the allowable subject matter of claim 11 but are rejected under 112(b) as described above and also include claim objections and drawing objections as described above.
Regarding independent claim 11, closest prior art Garuti et al. 20150289443 discloses with reference to Figs. 1-2, 4:
a device (13) for attaching a nozzle holder (1) to a fluid supply line ([0045] describes a distribution bar, i.e., a fluid supply line) of a spray system ([0045] describes a spraying machine), said device being configured to attach a nozzle holder (1) comprising a body (2; [0037]) and a casing (casing of electromechanical actuation means 11b per [0042]-[0043]) to a supply line ([0045] describes a distribution bar, i.e., a fluid supply line), the supply line extending between the body of the nozzle holder and the casing of the nozzle holder (in Fig. 2 supply line as inserted through 13 extends between 2 and casing of 11b), the attachment device comprising:
at least one receiving support (2b in Fig. 4) in cylindrical surface contact with the supply line (as shown in Fig. 2, opening in 13 through which supply line is inserted is cylindrical in shape, with surface of 2b shaped as half a cylinder to have cylindrical surface contact with the supply line);
a receiving support hinge (labeled in annotated Fig. 2) for pivoting a latch (14) about a first pivot axis (labeled in annotated Fig. 2) parallel to the direction of the supply line (labeled in annotated Fig. 2), the latch being movable between a closing position (position of 14 in Fig. 2 is closing position) in which the latch surrounds the supply line on an outer periphery of the supply line (14 surrounds an outer periphery of the supply line in Fig. 2) and an opening position in which the contact between the receiving support and the supply line can be broken (with 14 in open position contact between 2b and supply line can be broken). Garuti discloses a screw 15 for locking the latch 14 in the closing position by inserting into coaxial holes of the latch 14 and the receiving support 2b as shown in Fig. 4, the screw inserted in a direction perpendicular to the direction of the supply line.
PNG
media_image1.png
480
568
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Garuti is silent regarding a receiving support pin for locking the latch in the closing position by inserting into coaxial holes of the latch and the receiving support, the pin comprising a clamp collar elastically deformable into an undeformed initial shape, said pin being able to pivot about a second pivot axis parallel to the first pivot axis between a clamping position in which the clamp collar is elastically deformed to surround and clamp the outer periphery of the supply line by a ratchet, and a free position in which the clamp collar is left free in its initial shape, the contact between the clamp collar and the supply line being broken; wherein the clamp collar of the pin comprises an eccentric protruding radially relative to the direction of the supply line, the eccentric being configured to, in the clamping position of the pin, cover the latch.
It would not be obvious to modify Garuti to have a receiving support pin for locking the latch in the closing position by inserting into coaxial holes of the latch and the receiving support, the pin comprising a clamp collar elastically deformable into an undeformed initial shape, said pin being able to pivot about a second pivot axis parallel to the first pivot axis, and it would not be obvious to include a clamp collar.
Pertinent prior art Davis et al. 20200113170 discloses an agricultural spray system in Fig. 1 with a nozzle holder with spray nozzles 30 and a supply line 34 in Fig. 2. The supply line 34 is cylindrical in shape as best shown in Fig. 14. Davis discloses a latch 62 in Fig. 3 with a hinge (labeled in annotated Fig. 3) and pivot axis (labeled in annotated Fig. 3) parallel to direction of 34 and a screw inserted in a direction perpendicular to the direction of 34.
PNG
media_image2.png
765
602
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Davis is also silent regarding a receiving support pin for locking the latch in the closing position by inserting into coaxial holes of the latch and the receiving support, the pin comprising a clamp collar elastically deformable into an undeformed initial shape, said pin being able to pivot about a second pivot axis parallel to the first pivot axis between a clamping position in which the clamp collar is elastically deformed to surround and clamp the outer periphery of the supply line by a ratchet, and a free position in which the clamp collar is left free in its initial shape, the contact between the clamp collar and the supply line being broken; wherein the clamp collar of the pin comprises an eccentric protruding radially relative to the direction of the supply line, the eccentric being configured to, in the clamping position of the pin, cover the latch.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSON JOAN HARRINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2359. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 5 pm EST.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached at (571) 270-5426. 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.J.H./ /GERALD L SUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741 Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights