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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) dated 12/2/2024 and 12/6/2024 have been received and considered.
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 167-169 and 171 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 167 recites a second valve-biasing member that biases the second seal assembly. This limitation is indefinite for multiple reasons. First, there is no second valve previously claimed so it is unclear how there is a “second valve-biasing member”. Additionally, is the second valve-biasing member the same feature as the “second conduit-biasing member” recited in claim 160? Based off the applicant’s disclosure, this appears to be the same feature as there is only a single biasing member (16/18/51/68) associated with the second coupler. For the purposes of examination, the second valve-biasing member in claim 167 will be interpreted to be the same feature as the second conduit-biasing member recited in claim 160.
Claims 168-169 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 167.
Claim 171 recites the limitation "said second valve" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 160-164, 170-178 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Uchida et al. (U.S. 4,625,761).
Uchida discloses connector system (in particular the embodiment of figures 4-6, with like reference numerals from the embodiment of figures 1-3 being referred to below for the purposes of more clearly conveying the features from the embodiment of figures 4-6, see col. 7, ll. 45-58) comprising: a first coupler (1A’) comprising: a first conduit (1f’) defining a first passageway (within and along 1f’); a first valve (8) operable to interrupt fluid flow through said first passageway; a fluid-tight seal (10) between a first valve inner surface of said first valve and a first conduit outer surface of said first conduit (fig. 4); and a first valve-biasing member (7) disposed outside of said first passageway, said first valve-biasing member operable to bias said first valve toward a first valve closed position (fig. 4); and a second coupler (2A’) comprising: a second conduit (23) defining a second passageway (23f), said second conduit capable of longitudinal travel within said second coupler (fig. 5, fig. 6); a second conduit-biasing member (24) disposed outside of said second passageway, said second conduit-biasing member operable to bias said second conduit to provide a second passageway closed condition (fig. 5); wherein upon releasable matable axial coupling of said first and second couplers, a connected condition of said connector system is achieved (fig. 6); and wherein in said connected condition, said first valve is forcibly urged toward a first valve open position to allow fluid to flow through said first passageway and said second conduit is forcibly urged to provide a second passageway open condition to allow said fluid to flow through said second passageway (fig. 6); and wherein in said connected condition, said first passageway fluidicly communicates with said second passageway to provide a fluid flow path through which said fluid can flow between connector system first and second ends (fig. 6).
Regarding claim 161, Uchida further discloses wherein said first valve telescopingly disposes about said first conduit (fig. 4, fig. 6).
Regarding claim 162, Uchida further discloses wherein said first valve is capable of longitudinal travel over said first conduit (fig. 4, fig. 6).
Regarding claim 163, Uchida further discloses wherein said first valve inner surface disposes adjacent said first conduit outer surface (fig. 4).
Regarding claim 164, Uchida further discloses wherein a portion of said first conduit outer surface provides a first valve seat in which said first valve is movable (fig. 4 near the right end of the conduit).
Regarding claim 170, Uchida further discloses wherein a second valve is provided by said second conduit (fig. 5).
Regarding claim 171, Uchida further discloses wherein said second valve-biasing member disposes radially outwardly from said second valve (fig. 5, radially outward of the movable valve).
Regarding claim 172, Uchida discloses a connector system (in particular the embodiment of figures 4-6, with like reference numerals from the embodiment of figures 1-3 being referred to below for the purposes of more clearly conveying the features from the embodiment of figures 4-6, see col. 7, ll. 45-58) comprising: a first coupler (1A’) comprising: a first conduit (1f’) defining a first passageway (within and along 1f’); a first valve (8) operable to interrupt fluid flow through said first passageway; a fluid-tight seal (10) between a first valve inner surface of said first valve and a first conduit outer surface of said first conduit (fig. 4); and a first valve-biasing member (7) disposed outside of said first passageway, said first valve-biasing member operable to bias said first valve toward a first valve closed position (fig. 4); and a second coupler (2A’) comprising: a second conduit (the right approximately 75% of 23 from the right to the shoulder where the spring abuts up against, below and to the right of the lead line for numeral 21a’ in fig. 5) defining a second passageway (23f); and a second valve (the left approximately 25% of 23 from the leftmost end to the shoulder where the spring abuts up against, below and to the right of the lead line for numeral 21a’ in fig. 5) operable to interrupt fluid flow through said second passageway; wherein said second conduit and said second valve are formed as a one-piece construct (as it is a single component, see fig. 5, like the applicant’s device); and a second valve-biasing member (24) disposed outside of said second passageway, said second valve-biasing member operable to bias said second valve toward a second valve closed position (fig. 5); wherein upon releasable matable axial coupling of said first and second couplers, a connected condition of said connector system is achieved; and wherein in said connected condition, said first valve is forcibly urged toward a first valve open position to allow fluid to flow through said first passageway and said second valve is forcibly urged toward a second valve open position to allow said fluid to flow through said second passageway (fig. 6); and wherein in said connected condition, said first passageway fluidicly communicates with said second passageway to provide a fluid flow path through which said fluid can flow between connector system first and second ends (fig. 6).
Regarding claim 173, Uchida discloses a connector system (in particular the embodiment of figures 4-6, with like reference numerals from the embodiment of figures 1-3 being referred to below for the purposes of more clearly conveying the features from the embodiment of figures 4-6, see col. 7, ll. 45-58) for releasably connecting tubes, comprising: a first coupler (1A’) comprising: a first conduit (1f’) defining a first passageway (within and along 1f’); a first valve (8) operable to interrupt fluid flow through said first passageway; a fluid-tight seal (10) between a first valve inner surface of said first valve and a first conduit outer surface of said first conduit (fig. 4); and a first valve-biasing member (7) disposed outside of said first passageway (fig. 4), said first valve-biasing member operable to bias said first valve toward a first valve closed position (fig. 4); and a second coupler (2A’) comprising: a second conduit (the right approximately 75% of 23 from the right to the shoulder where the spring abuts up against, below and to the right of the lead line for numeral 21a’ in fig. 5) defining a second passageway (23f); and a second valve (the left approximately 25% of 23 from the leftmost end to the shoulder where the spring abuts up against, below and to the right of the lead line for numeral 21a’ in fig. 5) operable to interrupt fluid flow through said second passageway; wherein said second valve is fixedly coupled to said second conduit (as they form a single component, like the applicant’s device); a second valve-biasing member (24) disposed outside of said second passageway, said second valve-biasing member operable to bias said second valve toward a second valve closed position (fig. 5); wherein upon releasable matable axial coupling of said first and second couplers, a connected condition of said connector system is achieved; and wherein in said connected condition, said first valve is forcibly urged toward a first valve open position to allow fluid to flow through said first passageway and said second valve is forcibly urged toward a second valve open position to allow said fluid to flow through said second passageway (fig. 6); and wherein in said connected condition, said first passageway fluidicly communicates with said second passageway to provide a fluid flow path through which said fluid can flow between connector system first and second ends (fig. 6).
Regarding claim 174, Uchida further discloses wherein a portion of said first conduit outer surface provides a first valve seat in which said first valve is movable (fig. 4, near the right end of the conduit).
Regarding claim 175, Uchida discloses a connector system (in particular the embodiment of figures 4-6, with like reference numerals from the embodiment of figures 1-3 being referred to below for the purposes of more clearly conveying the features from the embodiment of figures 4-6, see col. 7, ll. 45-58) for releasably connecting tubes, comprising: a first coupler (1A’) comprising: a first conduit (1f’) defining a first passageway (within and along 1f’); a first valve (8) operable to interrupt fluid flow through said first passageway; a fluid-tight seal (10) between a first valve inner surface of said first valve and a first conduit outer surface of said first conduit (fig. 4); and a first valve-biasing member (7) disposed outside of said first passageway, said first valve-biasing member operable to bias said first valve toward a first valve closed position (fig. 4); and a second coupler (2A’) comprising: a second conduit (23) defining a second passageway (23f); a second conduit-biasing member (24) disposed about said second conduit (reasonably close to the second conduit; alternatively around the second conduit) and outside of said second passageway (fig. 5), said second conduit-biasing member operable to bias said second conduit to provide a second passageway closed condition (fig. 5); wherein upon releasable matable axial coupling of said first and second couplers, a connected condition of said connector system is achieved (fig. 6); and wherein in said connected condition, said first valve is forcibly urged toward a first valve open position to allow fluid to flow through said first passageway and said second conduit is forcibly urged to provide a second passageway open condition to allow said fluid to flow through said second passageway (fig. 6); and wherein in said connected condition, said first passageway fluidicly communicates with said second passageway to provide a fluid flow path through which said fluid can flow between connector system first and second ends (fig. 6).
Regarding claim 176, Uchida further discloses wherein said first valve-biasing member biases said first valve toward a first seal assembly (the biasing force being applied to the first valve in the direction of left to right in figs. 4 and 6, which is toward a first seal assembly such as 26 in fig. 3).
Regarding claim 177, Uchida further discloses wherein said first valve-biasing member comprises a resiliently compressible member (spring 7).
Regarding claim 178, Uchida further discloses wherein said resiliently compressible member comprises a spring (spring 7).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
U.S. Patent No. 10,293,150
Claims 160-178 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 10,293,150. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while instant claim 160 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit capable of longitudinal travel, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claim 1 of the ‘150 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit capable of longitudinal travel, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 160 and claim 1 of the ‘150 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’150 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 160 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 1 of the ‘150 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 160 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 1 of the ‘150 patent.
Regarding instant claim 161, claim 2 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 162, claim 3 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 163, claim 4 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 164, claim 5 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 165, claim 6 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 166, claim 7 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 167, claim 8 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 168, claim 9 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 169, claim 10 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 170, claim 11 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 171, claim 12 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Instant claim 172 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second conduit and second valve formed as a one-piece construct, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claim 13 of the ‘150 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second conduit and second valve formed as a one-piece construct, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 172 and claim 13 of the ‘150 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’150 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 172 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 13 of the ‘150 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 172 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 13 of the ‘150 patent.
Instant claim 173 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second valve fixedly coupled to the second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claim 14 of the ‘150 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second valve fixedly coupled to the second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 173 and claim 14 of the ‘150 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’150 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 173 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 14 of the ‘150 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 173 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 14 of the ‘150 patent.
Regarding instant claim 174, claim 15 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Instant claim 175 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed about the second conduit and outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claim 16 of the ‘150 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed about the second conduit and outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 175 and claim 16 of the ‘150 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’150 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 175 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 16 of the ‘150 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 175 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 16 of the ‘150 patent.
Regarding instant claim 176, claim 17 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 177, claim 18 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 178, claim 19 of the ‘150 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
U.S. Patent No. 11,478,626
Claims 160-163, and 173 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4 and 6-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,478,626. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while instant claim 160 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit capable of longitudinal travel, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claims 1-2 of the ‘626 patent similarly recite a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit capable of longitudinal travel, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 160 and claims 1-2 of the ‘626 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’626 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 160 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claims 1-2 of the ‘626 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 160 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claims 1-2 of the ‘626 patent.
Regarding instant claim 161, claim 1 of the ‘626 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 162, claim 3 of the ‘626 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 163, claim 4 of the ‘626 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Instant claim 173 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second valve fixedly coupled to the second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claims 6-7 of the ‘626 patent similarly recite a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second valve fixedly coupled to the second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 173 and claims 6-7 of the ‘626 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’626 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 173 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claims 6-7 of the ‘626 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 173 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claims 6-7 of the ‘626 patent.
U.S. Patent No. 11,478,625
Claims 160-161, 170, 173, and 179 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4 of U.S. Patent No. 11,478,625. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while instant claim 160 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit capable of longitudinal travel, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claims 1-4 of the ‘625 patent similarly recite a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit capable of longitudinal travel, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 160 and claims 1-4 of the ‘625 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’625 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 160 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claims 1-4 of the ‘625 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 160 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claims 1-4 of the ‘625 patent.
Regarding instant claim 161, claim 2 of the ‘625 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 170, claim 1 of the ‘625 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Instant claim 173 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second valve fixedly coupled to the second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claims 1-4 of the ‘625 patent similarly recite a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second valve fixedly coupled to the second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 173 and claims 1-4 of the ‘625 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’625 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 173 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claims 1-4 of the ‘625 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 173 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claims 1-4 of the ‘625 patent.
Instant claim 179 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway, a catch coupled to the first coupler, a catch-receiving element coupled to the second coupler, and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers with the catch engaging with the catch-receiving element to fix an axial position, and wherein in a disconnected condition, the portions of the first and second couplers are disposed entirely axially inward from the matable ends, claim 1 of the ‘625 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway, a catch coupled to the first coupler, a catch-receiving element coupled to the second coupler, and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers with the catch engaging with the catch-receiving element to fix an axial position, and wherein in a disconnected condition, the portions of the first and second couplers are disposed entirely axially inward from the matable ends. The difference between instant claim 179 and claim 1 of the ‘625 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’625 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 179 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 1 of the ‘625 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 179 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 1 of the ‘625 patent.
U.S. Patent No. 12,115,334
Claims 160-161, 170, 173, and 180-181 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4 and 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,115,334. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while instant claim 160 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit capable of longitudinal travel, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claims 1-4 of the ‘334 patent similarly recite a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit capable of longitudinal travel, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 160 and claims 1-4 of the ‘334 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’334 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 160 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claims 1-4 of the ‘334 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 160 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claims 1-4 of the ‘334 patent.
Regarding instant claim 161, claim 2 of the ‘334 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 170, claim 2 of the ‘334 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Instant claim 173 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second valve fixedly coupled to the second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claims 1-4 of the ‘334 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second valve fixedly coupled to the second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 173 and claims 1-4 of the ‘334 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’334 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 173 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claims 1-4 of the ‘334 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 173 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claims 1-4 of the ‘334 patent.
Instant claim 180 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a first seal assembly fixedly coupled to the conduit in axially spaced apart relation, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, a second valve-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway, fluid flowing through the connector system does not contact the first or second valve-biasing members, and when in a disconnected condition, the portions of the first and second couplers disposed entirely axially inward from the coupler matable ends, claim 1 of the ‘334 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a first seal assembly fixedly coupled to the conduit in axially spaced apart relation, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, a second valve-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway, fluid flowing through the connector system does not contact the first or second valve-biasing members, and when in a disconnected condition, the portions of the first and second couplers disposed entirely axially inward from the coupler matable ends. The difference between instant claim 180 and claim 1 of the ‘334 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’334 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 180 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 1 of the ‘334 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 180 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 1 of the ‘334 patent.
Instant claim 181 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, a second valve-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway, a second seal assembly fixedly coupled to the conduit in axially spaced apart relation, fluid flowing through the connector system does not contact the first or second valve-biasing members, and when in a disconnected condition, the portions of the first and second couplers disposed entirely axially inward from the coupler matable ends, claim 18 of the ‘334 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, a second valve-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway, a second seal assembly fixedly coupled to the conduit in axially spaced apart relation, fluid flowing through the connector system does not contact the first or second valve-biasing members, and when in a disconnected condition, the portions of the first and second couplers disposed entirely axially inward from the coupler matable ends. The difference between instant claim 181 and claim 18 of the ‘334 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’334 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 181 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 18 of the ‘334 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 181 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 18 of the ‘334 patent.
U.S. Patent No. 12,144,955
Claims 160-170 and 172-178 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,144,955. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because while instant claim 160 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit capable of longitudinal travel, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claim 1 of the ‘955 patent similarly recite a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit capable of longitudinal travel, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 160 and claim 1 of the ‘955 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’955 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 160 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 1 of the ‘955 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 160 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 1 of the ‘955 patent.
Regarding instant claim 161, claim 2 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 162, claim 3 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 163, claim 4 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 164, claim 5 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 165, claim 1 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 166, claim 6 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 167, claim 7 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 168, claim 8 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 169, claim 9 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 170, claim 10 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Instant claim 172 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second conduit and second valve formed as a one-piece construct, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claim 11 of the ‘955 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second conduit and second valve formed as a one-piece construct, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 172 and claim 11 of the ‘955 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’955 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 172 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 11 of the ‘955 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 172 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 11 of the ‘955 patent.
Instant claim 173 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second valve fixedly coupled to the second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claim 12 of the ‘955 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second valve, the second valve fixedly coupled to the second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 173 and claim 12 of the ‘955 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’955 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 173 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 12 of the ‘955 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 173 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 12 of the ‘955 patent.
Regarding instant claim 174, claim 13 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Instant claim 175 recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed about the second conduit and outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers, claim 14 of the ‘955 patent similarly recites a connector system with first coupler having a first conduit, a first valve, a fluid tight seal between a first valve inner surface and a conduit outer surface, a first valve biasing member disposed outside the first passageway, a second coupler having a second conduit, a second conduit-biasing member disposed about the second conduit and outside the second passageway and releasable matable axial coupling of the couplers. The difference between instant claim 175 and claim 14 of the ‘955 patent being the couplers recited as “female” and “male” couplers in the ’955 patent. The “first” coupler in instant claim 175 is seen to be met by the “female” coupler of claim 14 of the ‘955 patent. The “second” coupler in instant claim 175 is seen to be met by the “male” coupler of claim 14 of the ‘955 patent.
Regarding instant claim 176, claim 15 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 177, claim 16 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Regarding instant claim 178, claim 17 of the ‘955 patent is seen to meet these further limitations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 165-166 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 and the above double-patenting rejection(s) are overcome.
Claims 167-169 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and the above double-patenting rejection(s) are overcome.
Claims 179-181 would be allowable if the above double-patenting rejection(s) are overcome.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lemay et al. (U.S. 9,810,360) discloses a quick coupling assembly with male and female couplings and spring biasing.
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