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 III, claims 97-102 in the reply filed on 17 June 2026 is acknowledged. The applicant added new claims 103-115 (new group IV, claims 103-114 & new group V, claim 115). These are not readable on the elected group as explained below.
Inventions III (combo) and IV (subcombo), & IV (subcombo) and V (combo) are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)). In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because the combination does not require the specifically claimed body, wall, opening, and identifier relative another identifier. The subcombination has separate utility such as an identifier for a hot or cold washing machine hose.
The examiner has required restriction between combination and subcombination inventions. Where applicant elects a subcombination, and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Inventions III and V are related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together in a single combination. The subcombinations are distinct if they do not overlap in scope and are not obvious variants, and if it is shown that at least one subcombination is separately usable. Group V requires a second identifier on a differing tubes connected to differing ports. Group III requires a second identifier on the same tubing but on a different end than the first identifier. In the instant case, subcombination V has separate utility such as an identification system for a hot and cold washing machine hose set. See MPEP § 806.05(d).
The examiner has required restriction between subcombinations usable together. Where applicant elects a subcombination and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Accordingly, Claims 103-115 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 17 June 2026. Claims 81-96 were withdrawn by the applicant in the 17 June 2026 reply. Claims 97-102 are pending.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 97-101 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Provost (2018/0177938).
In re claim 97, Provost discloses a fill and finish assembly (best shown in figs.12-13), comprising;
a surge bag (860) comprising at least one inlet port (unlabeled port on the left bottom side) and one outlet port (unlabeled port on the right lower side to which the needle assembly/tubing is connected);
a needle assembly (802, 862, paras.3, 46) connected to the outlet port by a tubing (802); and
a first line identifier (822) secured to the tubing.
In re claim 98, Provost discloses the fill and finish assembly of claim 97, further comprising a second line identifier (823) secured to the tubing.
In re claim 99, Provost discloses the fill and finish assembly of claim 98, wherein the first and second line identifiers have a same color (para.90) or an identical reference numeral printed.
In re claim 100, Provost discloses the fill and finish assembly of claim 99, wherein the line identifiers comprise a body (body shown in figs.7a-b) having a cylindrical wall structure (main cylindrical structure shown in figs.7a-b).
In re claim 101, Provost discloses the fill and finish assembly of claim 100, wherein the cylindrical wall structure comprises an opening (opening defining the clip portion) in the wall structure configured to grip onto the tubing.
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.
Claim(s) 102 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Provost combined with the following reasons.
In re claim 102, Provost fails to explicitly discloses the dimensions of the tubing the line identifiers are capable of securing thereto. The examiner notes that Provost discloses medical tubing which is in the same field as the applicant’s inventions. The dimensions of such tubing are generic. It requires no skill to dimension a color-coding clip to the size of tubing it is intended to be employed therewith.
The applicant is advised that it has been held by the courts that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The cited prior art not relied upon shows various color, or otherwise coded, clips for tubes, hoses, or the like.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Timothy P. Kelly whose telephone number is (571)270-7615. The examiner can normally be reached from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (ET) on Monday, Thursday, and Friday.
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 M Schneider can be reached at (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.
/Timothy P. Kelly/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights