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 .
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 11/21/2025 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 12,169,037 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8 recites “with an outer surface” and should be “with the outer surface”.
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.
Claim 15 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.
Claim 15 recites “an end portion of the collapse-resistant hose” which is unclear if this is the same or different end portion of the hose previously recited in claim 1. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “ the end portion of the collapse-resistant hose” such that it is the same end portion recited in claim 1.
Claim 15 recites “an outer surface of the at least one inner layer” which is unclear if this is the same or different outer surface previously recited in claim 1. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “ the outer surface of the at least one inner layer” such that it is the same outer surface recited in claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Somers (US 3,148,898).
In regard to claim 1, Somers discloses a hose fitting assembly (Fig. 2) for a collapse-resistant hose (Fig. 2, hose 10) with at least one inner layer and an outer sheath layer (Fig. 2, inner layer at 11 and outer sheath layer 12), the hose fitting assembly comprising:
a sleeve (Fig. 2, sleeve 32) having a forward sleeve end portion and a rearward sleeve end portion, the rearward sleeve end portion having an opening adapted to receive an end portion of the collapse-resistant hose (Fig. 2, 32 has a forward sleeve end portion at 33 and a rearward sleeve end portion having an opening at 35 for receiving an end portion of 10);
a fitting having a rearward fitting end portion that is operatively coupled to the forward sleeve end portion (Fig. 2, 24 defines a fitting that has a rearward fitting end portion from 34 to 28 and the rearward fitting end portion is operatively coupled to 32 at 34);
the rearward fitting end portion having an internal surface that forms an internal cavity configured to receive an end portion of the at least one inner layer of the collapse-resistant hose (Fig. 2, at 28 has an internal surface that forms an internal cavity which receives an end portion of 11);
a nipple operatively coupled to the fitting and extending in a rearward direction through the internal cavity of the fitting (Fig. 2, 15 defines a nipple which is coupled to 24 and has a portion at 19 which extends through the internal cavity in a rearward direction), the nipple being configured to fit within an internal passage of the collapse-resistant hose (Fig. 2, 15 fits within an internal passage of 11 as shown); and
wherein the rearward fitting end portion is flared radially outwardly to receive the end portion of the collapse-resistant hose and is configured to be crimped radially inwardly into a sealed state with an outer surface of the at least one inner layer of the collapse-resistant hose (Fig. 2, flared portion at 30 at least defines the rearward fitting end portion is outwardly flared to receive the end portion of 11 of 10 and it is crimped radially inwardly into a sealed state with an outer surface of 11).
In regard to claim 2, Somers discloses the hose fitting assembly according to claim 1, wherein an inner surface of the sleeve is configured to engage an outer surface of the rearward fitting end portion when the hose fitting assembly is in a radially inwardly crimped state (Fig. 2, at 33 the sleeve 32 engages an outer surface of 24 when the hose fitting assembly is in a radially inwardly crimped state).
In regard to claim 3, Somers discloses the hose fitting assembly according to claim 2, wherein the inner surface of the sleeve is configured to engage with an outer surface of at least one hose layer when the hose fitting assembly is in the radially inwardly crimped state (Fig. 2, at 34 the sleeve 32 engages an outer surface of 12 when the hose fitting assembly is in the radially inwardly crimped state).
In regard to claim 7, Somers discloses the hose fitting assembly according to claim 1, wherein:
the hose fitting assembly has an uncrimped state in which the rearward fitting end portion is flared radially outwardly (Fig. 2, at 30 is flared in an uncrimped state in order for 11 to insert through);
the hose fitting assembly has an uncrimped intermediate state in which the end portion of the collapse-resistant hose is inserted into the opening of the rearward sleeve end portion (Fig. 2, intermediate state prior to crimping when 11 inserts through 30); and
the hose fitting assembly has a sealed state in which the rearward fitting end portion is radially inwardly crimped (Fig. 2, sealed state as shown when the portion at 28 is crimped radially inwardly).
In regard to claim 15, Somers discloses the hose fitting assembly of claim 1, further comprising
an uncrimped state in which the rearward fitting end portion is flared radially outwardly (Fig. 2, in 2:51-72 discloses 28 is deformed inwardly after inserting the end portion at 11, therefore, prior to deformation and prior to inserting the end portion at 11, the rearward fitting end portion has at least an uncrimped state);
an uncrimped intermediate state in which the end portion of the collapse-resistant hose is inserted into the opening of the rearward sleeve end portion (Fig. 2, prior to inwardly deforming 28, the end portion at 11 is inserted into the opening of the rearward sleeve end portion); and
a sealed state in which the rearward fitting end portion is radially inwardly crimped to seal against the outer surface of the at least one inner layer of the collapse- resistant hose (Fig. 2 and in 2:51-72 discloses 28 is deformed radially inwardly seal against the outer surface of 11).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Somers (US 3,148,898) in view of Thomas et al. (US 3,140,106, hereinafter “Thomas”).
In regard to claim 4, Somers discloses the hose fitting assembly according to claim 3, but not expressly disclose wherein the inner surface of the sleeve comprises at least one tooth configured to engage at least a portion of the outer sheath layer of the hose.
In the related field of hose fittings with crimped sleeves for multi-layered hoses, Thomas teaches a crimped sleeve having at least one tooth to engage at least a portion of an outer sheath layer in order to have at least the advantage of a stronger grip (Figs. 1 and 2, sleeve 20 has a crimped section 21 that includes at least one tooth at 23 for engaging an outer sheath layer of a hose which the teeth at 23 provides at least a known and reliable strong gripping feature).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sleeve of Somers to include at least one tooth with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have the advantage of a stronger grip as taught by Thomas. See MPEP 2143(I)(G) with regard to a motivation to combine references may be implicit and when the ‘improvement’ is technology-independent and the combination of references results in a product or process that is more desirable, for example because it is stronger, cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, or more efficient. In this case, a person of ordinary skill in the art in view of Somers and Thomas would reasonably understand the addition of teeth compared to a smooth surface would provide a stronger grip.
In regard to claim 5, Somers and Thomas disclose the hose fitting assembly according to claim 4, wherein the nipple has an outward thread that is configured to threadedly engage with an inner surface of the collapse-resistant hose that forms an internal fluid passage of the hose.
Somers discloses serrations 23 for gripping an inner surface of the hose 10 that forms an internal fluid passage of the hose as shown in Fig. 2.
Thomas teaches gripping means 23 in 1:71-72 to 2:1-5 can be ribs or threads which would reasonably suggest to a person of ordinary skill in the art alternative and suitable gripping structures.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the serrations of Somers for threads with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have the advantage of a suitable and reliable gripping structure as taught by Thomas. See MPEP 2143(I)(B) with regard to simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
In regard to claim 6, Somers and Thomas disclose the hose fitting assembly according to claim 5, and Somers further discloses wherein at least a portion of the rearward fitting end portion restricts at least the outer sheath layer from entering the internal cavity of the fitting (Fig. 2, a portion at 28 restricts 12 from entering the internal cavity of the fitting).
Claims 10, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Somers (US 3,148,898) in view of Dhagat et al. (US 2021/0156498 A1, hereinafter “Dhagat”).
In regard to claim 10, Somers discloses a collapse-resistant hose assembly comprising the hose fitting assembly according to claim 1 (See claim 1 above), and the collapse-resistant hose (Fig. 2, hose 10); wherein:
the collapse-resistant hose comprises an inner portion, a core tube (Fig. 2, core tube 11 which defines at least an inner portion), and an outer portion (Fig. 2, layer 12 defines at least an outer portion of 10); and
the outer portion includes a fiber-reinforced layer and the outer sheath layer (Figs. 1 and 2, the outer portion includes at least the layer 12 which is a fiber-reinforced layer as shown).
Somers does not expressly disclose the inner portion includes a structural carcass.
In the related field of hose fittings with a nipple and a crimped sleeve, Dhagat teaches an inner portion includes a structural carcass layer (Fig. 8, carcass layer 37 which is at least part of an inner portion of the hose) in order to have the advantage of improved collapse and/or crush resistance of the hose (In [0047] discloses a carcass layer provides improved collapse and/or crush resistance).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hose fitting assembly of Somers to include a structural carcass layer to the inner portion with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have the advantage of improved collapse and/or crush resistance as taught by Dhagat.
In regard to claim 12, Somers and Dhagat disclose the collapse-resistant hose assembly according to claim 10, and Dhagat further teaches wherein at least an inner surface comprises an inner passage of the structural carcass is threadedly engageable with the nipple (Fig. 13 and [0098] discloses the carcass layer 37 can be threaded over a nipple at 115. The other figures also show alternative ways to orient a structural carcass relative to a nipple in order to have at least the advantage of improved collapse and crush resistance. See claim 10 above for the same reasons to combine Somers and Dhagat.).
In regard to claim 14, Somers discloses a collapse-resistant hose assembly comprising the hose fitting assembly according to claim 7 (See claim 7 above), and the collapse-resistant hose (See claim 1 above);
and Somers and Dhagat disclose wherein:
the collapse-resistant hose comprises an inner portion, a core tube, and an outer portion;
the inner portion includes a structural carcass; and
the outer portion includes a fiber-reinforced layer and the outer sheath layer (See claim 10 above for the same reasons to combine Somers and Dhagat to disclose all the features of claim 14).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9, 11, and 13 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments that Somers does not provide a fitting that has a rearward end portion, however, the Examiner respectfully disagree because in Fig. 2 of Somers, the portion from 34 (near 33) to the portion at 28 can be reasonably interpreted as a rearward end portion similar to the applicant’s invention for receiving an end portion of a hose. Applicant’s arguments quote “34 to 38” of the Examiner’s Office Action, however, that is incorrect as the Office Action states from 34 to 28. Therefore, applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments that the Examiner errs in the assertion that Somers ring portion is crimped radially inwardly and lines 49-52 and 55-64 of Somers column 2 describes the portion at 28 prevents being bent or damaged and has “a sufficiently thick cross-section to withstand” crimping, however, the Examiner respectfully disagree because in column 2, lines 49-64, describes the rearward fitting end portion at 28 is intended to be radially inwardly deformed “thereby pressing it against the serrations 23 formed on the body member 15 and firmly holding the inner tube 11 in the fitting” which can also be seen in Fig. 2 such that 28 is radially inwardly deformed against serrations 23. The increased thickness is described to prevent damage from subsequent crimping as shown in Fig. 2 where 32 is crimp radially over 28. Accordingly, applicant’s arguments failed to reasonably consider column 2, lines 49-52 and 55-64, and appears to skip over the fact that the portion at 28 is indeed radially inwardly deformed. Therefore, applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments that Somers does not disclose the three configurations of claim 15, however, the Examiner respectfully disagree because Somers has at least a flared portion at 30 prior to inward deformation, an uncrimped intermediate state when the end portion 11 is inserted prior to radial deformation, and a seal state when 28 is radially inwardly deformed. See the updated rejection. Therefore, applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive.
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 William S. Choi whose telephone number is (571)272-8223. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30-5:30.
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.
/WILLIAM S. CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679