DETAILED ACTION
This is the second office action for US Application 18/931,983 for a Support Sleeve for a Firefighting Accessory.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2008/0001400 to Winzeler. Regarding claim 1, Winzeler discloses a support sleeve (30) that can be used with a firefighting accessory (can be attached to 22). The support sleeve comprises a tube (formed by 36) having a length that extends between a first and a second end, and the second end of the tube is configured to frictionally fit (via 34 and 26) within a hose coupler (10). The second end of the tube is press fit inside the hose coupler (via 34 and 26)
Regarding claim 2, the firefighting accessory can be a spray nozzle (a spray nozzle can be attached to threads 22). Regarding claim 3, the firefighting accessory can be a fire hose (the threads 22 can be attached to a fire hose). Regarding claim 4, the firefighting accessory can be a fire hydrant (the threads 22 can be attached to a fire hydrant). Regarding claim 6, there is a shoulder feature (34).
Regarding claim 7, Winzeler discloses support sleeve (30) that can be used with a firefighting accessory (can be attached to 22). The support sleeve comprises a tube (36) having a length that extends between a first and a second end. There is a shoulder feature (34), and the second end of the tube is configured to frictionally fit within a hose coupler (10) using a press fit connection (between 26 and 34). The hose coupler has threaded connectors (22) and the first end of the tube is configured to guide the threaded connectors of the hose coupler in alignment with threaded connectors of the firefighting accessory (a user can grab the device at the first end of the hose at 30 to align the threads with a firefighting accessory).
Regarding claim 8, Winzeler discloses support sleeve (30) that can be used with a firefighting accessory (can be attached to 22). The support sleeve comprises a tube (36) having a length that extends between a first and a second end. There is a shoulder feature (34), and the second end of the tube is configured to frictionally fit within a hose coupler (10) using a press fit connection (between 34 and 26). The first end of the tube is configured to guide the threaded connectors of the hose coupler in alignment with threaded connectors of the firefighting accessory (a user can grab the device at the first end of the hose at 30 to align the threads with a firefighting accessory). The shoulder feature (34) is configured to engage an outer surface of hose coupler to prevent over insertion of the support sleeve into the hose coupler (34 engages the outer surface of 26 which prevents the coupler from being inserted further into coupling 10)
Regarding claim 9, Winzeler discloses a support sleeve (30) that can be used with a firefighting accessory (can be attached to 22). The support sleeve comprises a tube (36) having a length that extends between a first end and a second end, and wherein the first end of the tube is configured to frictionally fit with a hose coupler using a press fit connection (via 26 and 34) such that the first end of the tube is received inside the hose coupler without threaded engagement.
Regarding claim 10, the tube (36) defines an open central bore extending continuously from the first end to the second end (see lines 1 and 2 of paragraph 0015 describing the sleeve 30 as hollow). Regarding claim 11, the second end of the tube is sized smaller than an inner bore of the hose coupler (see figure 3 showing coupling 30 as sized smaller than the inner bores of 20). Regarding claim 12, there is a shoulder feature (34) located between the first end and the second end, and the shoulder feature projects radially outward from the tube and is configured to engage an outer surface of the hose coupler (34 engages an outside surface of 26) to prevent over insertion of the support sleeve into the hose coupler.
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(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Winzeler. Regarding claim 5, Winzeler discloses the support sleeve as comprising brass (see paragraph 0015, lines 3 and 4), rather than stainless steel. However, both are metals and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have substituted one metal for another as a design preference. One of ordinary skill in the art would know that different metals can be utilized depending on strength and cost considerations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 STEVEN M MARSH whose telephone number is (571)272-6819. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9 am-7:30 pm.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
STEVEN M. MARSH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3632
/STEVEN M MARSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights