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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-17 in the reply filed on 1/16/2026 is acknowledged.
Non-elected claims 18-20 have been canceled.
Claim 21 has been newly presented. Claims 1-17 and 21 are being examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) dated 11/14/2024 has been received and considered.
Drawings
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 first shaft coupled to the adapter body and second shaft coupled to the adapter body with the first shaft having a different cross-section than the cross-section of the second shaft from claims 1, 9, and 21 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). It is noted that, in the dependent claims, additionally recited features of the first and second shafts do not appear to be in the drawings as well. 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.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: there is no description of a second shaft as claimed.
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 3-6, 10-11, 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.
Claim 3, it is unclear what is meant by the first shaft being “interchangeable” so that the first cross-section can be changed by the addition or removal of a bit. Per claim 1, the first shaft is coupled to the adapter body. If the first shaft was to be interchanged (exchanged, swapped, traded) so that the first cross-section is changed by the addition or removal of a bit, it appears the first shaft would no longer be present and thus not coupled to the adapter body as claimed in claim 1.
The scope of claim 4 is unclear as, per the preamble, the invention is directed to a mixing valve adapter (i.e. the subcombination). However, claim 4 positively recites features that fall outside the scope of the subcombination – a handle. Thus, it is unclear in claim 4 if the invention is solely intending to be directed to the adapter or if the invention is directed to the combination of the adapter and a valve handle.
Claim 5 is rejected due to its dependency on claim 4.
The scope of claim 6 is unclear as, per the preamble, the invention is directed to a mixing valve adapter (i.e. the subcombination). However, claim 6 positively recites features that fall outside the scope of the subcombination – a mixing. Thus, it is unclear in claim 6 if the invention is solely intending to be directed to the adapter or if the invention is directed to the combination of the adapter and a mixing valve.
Claim 10 is rejected as the claim introduces the feature of “a handle” while claim 9 has already introduced to feature of “a handle”. It is unclear how many handles are intending to be claimed in claim 10.
Claim 11 is rejected as the claim introduces the feature of “a mixing valve” while claim 9 has already introduced to feature of “a mixing valve”. It is unclear how many mixing valves are intending to be claimed in claim 11.
Claim 16, it is unclear what is meant by the first shaft being “interchangeable” so that the first cross-section can be changed by the addition or removal of a bit. Per claim 9, the first shaft is coupled to the adapter body. If the first shaft was to be interchanged (exchanged, swapped, traded) so that the first cross-section is changed by the addition or removal of a bit, it appears the first shaft would no longer be present and thus not coupled to the adapter body as claimed in claim 9.
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) 1-8 and 21, claims 3-6 as far as they are definite, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kristynik (U.S. 10,865,908).
Kristynik discloses a mixing valve adapter for a plumbing fixture for controlling a mixture of two supplies of water having different temperatures, the mixing valve adapter comprising: an adapter body (110); a first shaft (60) coupled to the adapter body; and a second shaft (H, H’, H’’) coupled to the adapter body, wherein the first shaft has a first cross-section different than a second cross-section associated with the second shaft (the first shaft has a hollow square appearing cross-section at 66, while H is circular, H’ is a solid square, and H” is also circular, see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 2, Kristynik further discloses wherein the first cross-section corresponds to a first manufacturer and the second cross-section corresponds to a second manufacturer (the cross-sections are deemed to correspond to any manufacturer that manufactures the cross-sections as shown, especially as the recitation of the cross-section corresponding “to a first manufacturer” and “to a second manufacturer” is broad and subjective, but see also the list of manufacturers in col. 3, ll. 56-61 the adapter can be coupled with).
Regarding claim 3, Kristynik further discloses wherein the first shaft is interchangeable so that the first cross-section can be changed through an addition or removal of a bit (as best understood, the first shaft is capable of being interchanged by having a component (such as a bit) that changes the cross-section).
Regarding claim 4, Kristynik further discloses wherein the first shaft is coupled to a handle (100).
Regarding claim 5, Kristynik further discloses wherein the first cross-section of the first shaft has a hollow section configured to mate with the handle (the first shaft 60 is a hollow tube and thus capable of mating with the handle, but see also fig. 1 and shaft 60 and handle 100).
Regarding claim 6, Kristynik further discloses wherein the second shaft is coupled to a mixing valve (see abstract, col. 3, ll. 56-61, col. 4, ll. 50-52, col. 5, ll. 27-30).
Regarding claim 7, Kristynik further discloses wherein the first cross-section of the first shaft has a star shape, a square shape, a rectangular shape, a hexagonal shape, a heptagonal shape, or an octagonal shape (square shape, to mate with the square shaped end at 112, see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, Kristynik further discloses wherein the second cross-section of the second shaft has a star shape, a square shape, a rectangular shape, a hexagonal shape, a heptagonal shape, or an octagonal shape (H’ is square shaped, see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 21, Kristynik discloses an apparatus comprising: a mixing valve (see abstract, col. 3, ll. 56-61, col. 4, ll. 50-52, col. 5, ll. 27-30); and a mixing valve adapter (110, 60, H, H’, H’’) connected to the mixing valve and the handle (figs. 1-2), the mixing valve adapter comprising: an adapter body (110); a first shaft (60) coupled to the adapter body; and a second shaft (H, H’, H’’) coupled to the adapter body, wherein the first shaft has a different cross-section than the second shaft (the first shaft has a hollow square appearing cross-section at 66, while H is circular, H’ is a solid square, and H” is also circular, see fig. 2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 9-17, claims 10-11 and 16 as far as they are definite, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh (U.S. 7,575,019) in view of Kristynik.
Oh discloses a shower panel comprising: a plurality of water dispensing outlets (102, 104); a mixing valve (the hot and cold water valves associated with handles 88 and 90 which will provide for hot, cold, mixed, or no flow of water; alternatively, the mixing valve associated with handle 58 to direct the flow to the shower and/or tub, see fig. 6); a plurality of pipes connecting the mixing valve to the plurality of water dispensing outlets (fig. 5); a handle (88, 90; alternatively 58) configured to operate the mixing valve.
While Oh discloses in figure 5 the handles 88, 90, and 58 being coupled with mixing valves and in figure 6 the handle 58 being coupled with a mixing valve via at least a stem, Oh does not appear to disclose a mixing valve adapter connected to the mixing valve and the handle, the mixing valve adapter comprising: an adapter body; a first shaft coupled to the adapter body; and a second shaft coupled to the adapter body, wherein the first shaft has a different cross-section than the second shaft.
Kristynik teaches it was known in the art to couple a mixing valve (see abstract, col. 3, ll. 56-61, col. 4, ll. 50-52, col. 5, ll. 27-30) to a handle (100) via a mixing valve adapter with an adapter body (110); a first shaft (60) coupled to the adapter body; and a second shaft (H, H’, H’’) coupled to the adapter body, wherein the first shaft has a different cross-section than the second shaft (the first shaft has a hollow square appearing cross-section at 66, while H is circular, H’ is a solid square, and H” is also circular, see fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Oh such that there is an adapter body that connects the mixing valve and handle and the adapter body has first and second shafts coupled to the adapter body with the first shaft having a different cross-section from the second shaft as taught by Kristynik in order to provide a handle to valve coupling system adapter kit that can be easily removed and replaced and can be used in conjunction with numerous brands of plumbing fixtures (see col. 3, ll. 51-61 of Kristynik).
Regarding claim 10, Oh as modified further discloses wherein the first shaft is coupled to a handle (handles 88, 90, and 58 of Oh and as taught by Kristynik with handle 100 coupled to 60).
Regarding claim 11, Oh as modified further discloses wherein the second shaft is coupled to a mixing valve (the mixing valves for the hot and cold water of Oh, the mixing valve as described in the abstract, col. 3, ll. 56-61, col. 4, ll. 50-52, col. 5, ll. 27-3 of Oh and as taught above by Kristynik).
Regarding claim 12, Oh as modified further discloses wherein the cross-section of the first shaft has a star shape, a square shape, a rectangular shape, a hexagonal shape, a heptagonal shape, or an octagonal shape (as taught above by Kristynik, square shape, to mate with the square shaped end at 112, see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13, Oh as modified further discloses wherein the cross-section of the second shaft has a star shape, a square shape, a rectangular shape, a hexagonal shape, a heptagonal shape, or an octagonal shape (as taught above by Kristynik, H’ is square shaped, see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 14, Oh as modified further discloses wherein the cross-section of the first shaft has a hollow section configured to mate with the handle (as taught above by Kristynik, the first shaft 60 is a hollow tube and thus capable of mating with the handle, but see also fig. 1 and shaft 60 and handle 100).
Regarding claim 15, Oh as modified further discloses wherein the cross-section of the first shaft corresponds to a first manufacturer and the cross-section of the second shaft corresponds to a second manufacturer (as taught above by Kristynik, the cross-sections are deemed to correspond to any manufacturer that manufactures the cross-sections as shown, especially as the recitation of the cross-section corresponding “to a first manufacturer” and “to a second manufacturer” is broad and subjective, but see also the list of manufacturers in col. 3, ll. 56-61 the adapter can be coupled with).
Regarding claim 16, Oh as modified further discloses wherein the first shaft is interchangeable so that the cross-section can be changed through an addition or removal of a bit (as best understood, the first shaft is capable of being interchanged by having a component (such as a bit) that changes the cross-section).
Regarding claim 17, Oh as modified further discloses wherein the mixing valve adapter is a first mixing valve adapter (the adapter as taught by Kristynik), and the mixing valve is a first mixing valve for temperature selection (by turning on the hot and/or cold water valves), the shower panel further comprising: a second mixing valve for outlet selection (the mixing valve associated with handle 58, see fig. 6 which diverts the fluid to the shower and/or tub); and a second mixing valve adapter coupled to the second mixing valve (cartridge 60 or the unlabeled stem and/or threaded bolt shown in fig. 6 of Oh).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rosen (U.S. 4,670,959) discloses a means for adapting plumbing valve stems to desired trim.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL R REID whose telephone number is (313)446-4859. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-5pm 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 supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607, or Ken Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/MICHAEL R REID/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753