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 Species VII (Figures 16A-20), claims 1, 3-5, and 11-13 in the reply filed on 4/02/2026 is acknowledged. Therefore, claims 1-21 as filed 1/03/2025 are pending with claims 2, 6-10, and 14-21 withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1, 3-5, and 11-13 are treated on their merits.
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 middle opening (at least claim 1) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the internal passage extend in an axial direction” (lines 4-5 of the claim) should be “the internal passage extends in an axial direction”. 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, 3-5, and 11-13 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 1 recites “an internal passage comprising a first portion and a second portion connected at a middle opening”. The limitation of the first portion and second portion connected at a “middle opening” is unclear because it is unclear what is meant by a middle opening as claimed. As best understood it appears that the first and second portions are connected at a middle of the internal passage. It is noted that applicant’s specification as filed does not describe a “middle opening” in the figures.
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 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, 3-5, and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nick (US Patent 11,815,214).
Regarding Claim 1, Nick discloses a coupling assembly for a blind mate fluid coupling (abstract), comprising: a housing 16; a sliding base 26 disposed within the housing 16 (as best shown in Figure 3), the sliding base 26 having an internal passage (passage through the center of 26) comprising a first portion (first portion of the internal passage at the left end of the carrier 26 as shown in the annotated Figure 3 below) and a second portion (second portion of the internal passage including the portion at the right side of the O-ring 60 as shown in the annotated Figure 3 below) connected at a middle opening (middle opening defined by the opening through O-ring 60 as shown in the annotated Figure 3 below), the internal passage extend in an axial direction (i.e. through the center axis of 26), the second portion of the internal passage has a larger diameter than the first portion of the internal passage (as shown in the annotated Figure 3 below), the sliding base 26 being movable in a radial direction that is perpendicular to the axial direction (i.e. the base is movable upwardly from the position shown in Figure 3, which is a radial direction of the sliding base 26 and is perpendicular to the axial direction of 26) and relative to the housing 16 (the sliding base 26 movable relative to housing 16 as best shown between the positions of Figures 1 and 3); and an inlet valve 20 (it is noted that applicant’s “inlet valve” is merely a tube connector) at least partially disposed in the internal passage (portion 52 is disposed in the internal passage), the inlet valve 20 being movable in the axial direction (as evidenced by the gaps on both sides of the shoulder 52 in Figures 1-3, the inlet valve is movable in the axial direction) within the internal passage (as described above, portion 52 movable in the axial direction within the internal passage) and angularly pivotable at the first portion (as shown in the annotated Figure 3 below, the inlet valve is angularly pivotable including at the first portion).
PNG
media_image1.png
538
730
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, Nick is seen as further disclosing the first portion (first portion of the internal passage as shown in the annotated Figure 3 above) has a first opening (first opening on the left side of O-ring 60 as shown in the annotated Figure 3 above) opposite the middle opening (the first opening is opposite the middle opening at least relative to the left edge defining the groove for O-ring 60), the first opening is larger than the middle opening (although not clearly shown in the figures, it is seen that the middle opening defined through the O-ring 60 is necessarily smaller than the identified first opening because the O-ring must protrude radially inward farther than the first opening to ensure a seal is achieved with shoulder 52), and the inlet valve is angularly pivotable at the middle opening (as shown in the annotated Figure 3 above, the inlet valve is angularly pivotable including at the middle opening).
Regarding Claim 4, Nick further discloses a first spring 46 disposed in the second portion of the internal passage (the spring extends through the second portion of the internal passage as shown in the annotated Figure 3 above), the first spring 46 is compressible by the inlet valve in the axial direction (compressible by portion 22 of the inlet valve in the axial direction).
Regarding Claim 5, Nick further discloses the second portion of the internal passage includes a second opening opposite to the middle opening (second opening defined by the second portion of the internal passage; the second opening is opposite the middle opening at least relative to the right edge defining the groove for O-ring 60 as shown in Figure 3), and the coupling assembly further includes a cap structure (cap structure provided on the end of the sliding base as shown in the annotated Figure 3 above) on the sliding base that caps the first spring and the inlet valve (the cap radially surrounds the first spring 46 and the inlet valve 20 and therefore is seen to cap the first spring and the inlet valve).
Regarding Claim 11, Nick further discloses the first portion (first portion of the internal passage as shown in the annotated Figure 3 above) further has a first opening (first opening on the left side of O-ring 60 as shown in the annotated Figure 3 above) opposite the middle opening (the first opening is opposite the middle opening at least relative to the left edge defining the groove for O-ring 60), the second portion further has a second opening opposite the middle opening (second opening defined by the second portion of the internal passage; the second opening is opposite the middle opening at least relative to the right edge defining the groove for O-ring 60 as shown in Figure 3), and an outlet valve 28 disposed outside of the internal passage and connected with an end of the inlet valve 20 that is positioned outside of the first opening of the first portion (as shown in Figures 3 and 12).
Regarding Claim 12, Nick further discloses the inlet valve 20 is configured to connect with a quick connect fitting 14.
Regarding Claim 13, Nick further discloses the inlet valve 20 is a quick connect fitting (i.e. the inlet valve 20 is a push to connect fitting with valve member 32 and therefore forms a quick connect fitting).
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.
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 3 is/are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nick (US Patent 11,815,214) in view of Torrence et al. (US Patent 5,354,103).
Regarding Claim 3, Nick is seen as disclosing all of the elements of this claim as described above. Alternatively, in the event that Nick is not seen as disclosing the middle opening defined through the O-ring 60 is necessarily smaller than the identified first opening, Torrence teaches a coupling assembly (Figure 2 especially) such that a middle opening (opening through O-ring 26) is smaller than an adjacent opening (opening through port 16) as shown in Figure 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Nick such that the O-ring defines a middle opening smaller than the first opening as taught by Torrence for the purpose of ensuring that the O-ring seals against the shoulder of the inlet valve.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lutzer (US Patent 9,599,263) teaches a coupling allowing for radial and angular adjustments (Figures 4A-4E). Tiberghien et al. (US Patent 8,028,718) teaches an angularly adjustable coupling (Figure 4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN MURPHY whose telephone number is (571)270-5243. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached on (571) 272-3607. 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.
/KEVIN F MURPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights