Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claims 1-20 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. In each of claims 1 and 12, the “at least one longitudinal gap” is indefinite because it is further defined to match “a number of sets of threads” where that number is defined as “a plurality of thread sets”; so, the possibility of one gap is indefinite. In claim 2 and 13 there are a number of double inclusions based on what was already introduced in claims 1 and 12 for example: protrusion are oriented longitudinally, at least one longitudinal gap, and the longitudinal slots and set of threads. Claims 4 and 15, are indefinite because the longitudinal gap is not on the male component as claimed because it was introduced to be of the female component. In claims 5 and 16, it is unclear how the thread protrusion would be spaced evenly when the dimension of the slots separating them differ. In claim 9, there is no antecedent basis for “the desired position”. In claim 12, lines 2 and 6, there is no antecedent basis for “each set”; and in lines 15-19 each of: a plurality of sets of thread protrusions, a plurality of longitudinal slots, and a plurality of sets of thread are double inclusions. The claims should be further reviewed and revisited as necessary to ensure complete compliance with section 112. They were examined as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Whitehead (US 2,288,864). Whitehead discloses a coupling device and method comprising: a female coupling component in the form of a nut (8) with a through bore having a cylindrical internal surface including a plurality of threaded protrusions (14, 14a) extending therefrom longitudinally the length of the bore; and a male component in the form of a bolt (6) with a cylindrical bolt body (7) including a plurality of longitudinal slots (13, 13a) corresponding to the threaded protrusions and a plurality of thread sets (10) separated by the slots corresponding to longitudinal gaps between the threaded protrusions; wherein the circumferential dimensions of each of the threaded protrusions, the longitudinal gaps, the thread sets and the slots differ in their arc length and are unequally spaced. The method includes aligning the protrusions with slots, translating the nut first in a longitudinal direction until reaching a desired position then rotating it (second column, first paragraph) and once connected the nut and bolt provide a threaded fitting.
PNG
media_image1.png
342
352
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 4, 12-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitehead as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kelzer (US 6,811,364). Whitehead does not disclose the slots to end with an other continuous thread between the slots and bolt head. Kelzer discloses a coupling device similar to Whitehead including a male component (11) with slots (20) but in Kelzer the slots end short of a head (15) with an other continuous thread (26) between the end of the slots and the head. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the male component of Whitehead with an other continuous thread as disclosed in Kelzer which can provide a more secure locking mechanism as discussed in Kelzer (column 3, paragraph beginning line 9).
PNG
media_image2.png
356
856
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claims 5, 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitehead and Whitehead in view of Kelzer as applied to claims 1 and 15 above, and further in view of Leifer (US 2012/0315778). Neither Whitehead nor Whitehead in view of Kelzer discloses three “equally spaced” sets of threaded protrusions. Leifer discloses a connecting device similar to Whitehead and Kelzer including thread set separated by slots but in Leifer there are disclosed three “equally spaced” thread sets (24). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the thread sets of Whithead as three “equally spaced” sets, and accordingly the corresponding threaded protrusions, as disclosed in Kelzer because it is one of a number different configuration which would yield the same predictable results and selecting any one of that group would have been obvious.
PNG
media_image3.png
486
648
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited ore of general interest teaching other examples of quick connect fasteners.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FLEMMING SAETHER whose telephone number is (571)272-7071. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 7:00 eastern.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. 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.
/FLEMMING SAETHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights