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 statement (IDS) dated 12/2/2024 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 circumferential channel from claims 2 and 8 and O-ring nested in the circumferential channel from claims 3 and 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “130” has been used to designate both the wrench flats and distal end. 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. 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.
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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: page 5, lines 1-9, element “130” is alternatively referred to as “distal end” (line 3), “wrench flats” (line 4), and “body” (line 9). One consistent term should be used for element “130”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 2, “extend” should be --extending--.
Claim 7, line 2, “extend” should be --extending--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-13 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 1, interpreting the claims in light of the specification, it is unclear what is meant by the hood shrouding approximately half of the cylindrical fitting. Shrouding is generally defined as to cover or surround. In the applicant’s disclosure, the cylindrical fitting is element 110 and the hood is element 120. As shown in figure 1 and 2, the cylindrical fitting and hood element are both components of the same unitary structure. The fitting element 110 is the portion that is more towards the first end 101 while the hood 120 is the portion more towards the central area in the direction toward the second end 102. It is unclear how the hood could be “shrouding” or covering/surround the cylindrical fitting when, per the applicant’s disclosure, they are portions of the same unitary component. The only feature that appears to be shrouding the fitting portion is wrench flats 130. Based off of applicant’s dependent claims 5 and 6, it appears the hood that is “shrouding” the fitting portion 110 is actually “wrench flats 130”. As this structural feature covers or surrounds at least a portion of the cylindrical fitting. And this feature further has the interior threading 133 as is claim in claim 5 and also has a recessed surface 131 along the distalmost face. As such, for the purposes of examination, feature 130 is interpreted to be the “hood” as claimed by the applicant.
Claim 1, it is additionally unclear what is meant by the cylindrical fitting “for one and one-quarter of an inch thread”. Interpreting the claims in light of the specification, it is not the cylindrical fitting (110) that has any threading, it is the inner surface of the wrench flats (130, see interior surface 133 having threads in fig. 3. Thus, it is unclear how the cylindrical fitting that does not have any threading can be “for one and one-quarter of an inch thread”. For the purposes of examination, claim 1 will be interpreted to have the cylindrical fitting be of a size such that a one and one-quarter of an inch threading member can be threaded to an internally threaded hood portion of the adapter.
Regarding claim 7, the above reasoning with respect to the use of the phrase “hood shrouding” applies to the similar limitation found in claim 1 and is rejected in a similar manner to that of claim 1.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the valve access opening" in the third to last line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-6 and 8-12 are rejected due to their dependencies on a claim rejected above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art alone or in combination is not seen to disclose or teach the applicant’s claimed invention as best understood, including, and in combination with other recited limitations, the adapter with bore extending between a first end and second end with the first end having a cylindrical fitting for a one and one-quarter of an inch thread, a hood shrouding approximately half the cylindrical fitting, and the second end comprising a male threaded fitting dimensioned for a three-quarters of an inch female fitting for claim 1 and the conduit adapter with bore extending between a first end and second end, the first end comprising a cylindrical fitting and a hood shrouding approximately half of the cylindrical fitting and the second end comprising a male threaded fitting dimensioned for a three-quarters of an inch female fitting and a valve access opening between the hood and second end that enables a valve fluidly connecting to the through bore to selectively control flow (the valve is seen to be implicitly within the adapter to necessarily control the flow through the bore) for claim 7.
It is noted the applicant places a criticality on the dimensional aspects claimed, as they provide connection to specific components within the overall system, the one and one-quarter of an inch connection fitting is used to connect to a commercial water supply control stop (pg. 4, ll. 18-22) and the three-quarter of an inch connection fitting is used to connect to a standard garden hose (pg. 5, ll. 6-8). As such, case law from MPEP2144.04, in particular change of size, is not seen to be obvious to apply due to the criticality as stated by the applicant in the specification.
The closest prior art of record includes the following:
Robinson (U.S. 5,419,363) discloses an adapter (10) with a through bore (52 to 62) between a first and second end, the first end has a cylindrical fitting (70), a hood (80) that shrouds the cylindrical fitting (fig. 3), and a second end comprising a male threaded fitting (60). However, the cylindrical fitting is not for one and one-quarter of an inch thread, the hood does not shroud approximately half of the cylindrical fitting, and the second end is not dimensioned for a three-quarters of an inch female fitting.
Usher (U.S. 9,416,523) discloses a retro flush toilet with various pipe diameter sizes including a 1.25” or greater pipe if high pressure water of at least 30psi is used for the flush toilet but does not disclose there being a 1.25” threaded end connection.
Usher (U.S. 10,968,615) discloses a toilet flushing apparatus and, in the background, discloses that main pipelines from a street to a home can be 0.75” or 1” and supply branches being 0.75” pipe. However, the pipes for individual components (like toilets, sinks, etc.) are 0.5” or smaller.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Andre (U.S. 7,108,296) discloses a connector with a hood shroud that appears to cover approximately half of a cylindrical fitting.
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