DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 status of the claims for this application is as follows.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/24/2025 was considered by the examiner.
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 "The method of claim 1, further comprising: after coupling the clamp to the two mating flanges, sterilizing the clamp by one of autoclaving or gamma radiation.” (claim 14) and “The method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the mating flanges is connected to a hose barb connector, and wherein the method further comprises coupling tubing to the hose barb connector.” (claim 16) 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.
Specification
The recitation(s) “latch”, “autoclaving” and “gamma radiation” is/are not identified in the descriptive portion of the specification by reference to the drawing in accordance with MPEP § 608.01 (o).
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(s) 1-5, 7-9, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weinhold (US 3902747) in view of Weinhold (DE 2365394), (hereinafter, DE-394).
PNG
media_image1.png
663
862
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re Clm 1: Weinhold discloses a method (see Figs. 1-5 and the Figs. above) of using a clamp (the clamp in Fig. 1 that retains the flange of both 14 and 15, respectively)
for coupling two mating flanges (the flanges of 14 and 15 as illustrated in Fig. 1),
wherein the clamp comprises first (1039’) and second (32) jaw members,
the first jaw member (1039’) being pivotally mounted by a pivot member (37) to the second jaw member (32) and having at its free end an articulated lever (1039) having a proximal end (the end the closest to 32 and containing 41) with a latch (41), the proximal end located proximal to the free end of the first jaw member (see above), the latch engageable with a catch (42) disposed at the free end of the second jaw member (see above);
wherein the method comprises: with the clamp in an open configuration in which the free ends of the jaw members are displaced apart and the two mating flanges may be received between the jaw members (see Col. 2, ln. 62 through Col. 4, ln. 25),
placing the two mating flanges between the first and second jaw members (see Col. 2, ln. 62 through Col. 4, ln. 25);
fitting the clamp around the two mating flanges by adjusting the clamp into a closed configuration in which the free ends of the jaw members are proximal to one another (see Col. 2, ln. 62 through Col. 4, ln. 25); and
securing the clamp in place by moving the articulated lever (1039) between an unlocked configuration wherein the latch is displaced away from the catch (see Col. 2, ln. 62 through Col. 4, ln. 25), and
a locked configuration wherein the latch is received by and engages with the catch (see Col. 2, ln. 62 through Col. 4, ln. 25 and see above);
wherein the lever (1039) has an arch-shaped distal end opposite the proximal end (see Fig. 5), wherein the arch-shaped distal end is on a farthest end of the lever further away from the free end of the first jaw member than the proximal end (see Fig. 5), and
wherein the proximal end adjacent the arch-shaped distal end is at least partially embedded in the second jaw member (41 in 42) when the lever is in the locked configuration.
Weinhold fails to disclose that the disclosed arch-shaped distal end of the disclosed lever overlaps the disclosed pivot member and when the disclosed lever is in the disclosed locked configuration by at least partially encircling the disclosed pivot member.
However, DE-394 discloses a clamp for tubular members, similar to that of Weinhold. DE-394 also teaches an arch-shaped distal end of a lever overlaps a pivot member when the lever is in a locked configuration by at least partially encircling the pivot member (see Fig. 2, the end containing 42a). Where such would allow for a tighter fitment of the end of the lever to the pivot member/clamp, for the purpose of having a more compact configuration, alternatively, such a configuration would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be fully closed around the ends of pipes in order to form a secure lek free joint.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of Weinhold, to have included the disclosed arch-shaped distal end of the disclosed lever overlaps the disclosed pivot member and when the disclosed lever is in the disclosed locked configuration by at least partially encircling the disclosed pivot member, as taught by DE-394, with a reasonable expectation of success because one would have merely added a feature to the level end to aid in having a tighter fitment of the end of the lever to the pivot member/clamp, for the purpose of having a more compact configuration, alternatively, such a configuration would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be fully closed around the ends of pipes in order to form a secure lek free joint.
Re Clm 2: Weinhold as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the jaw members of the clamp are arcuate in shape (see above).
Re Clm 3: Weinhold as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the jaw members of the clamp form a closed circular body when in the closed configuration (see above).
Re Clm 4: Weinhold as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the clamp has a predefined internal diameter to join, secure and/or seal the two mating flanges of a correspondingly sized diameter (see above).
Re Clm 5: Weinhold as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the clamp further comprises a channel (see the channel in Figs. 1 and 3) for receiving compatible flanges disposed at the ends of two pipes to be coupled (see Fig. 1).
Re Clm 7: Weinhold as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the clamp has a 100% material construction (see above).
Weinhold as modified by DE-394 fails to disclose that the disclosed material is 100% polymer-based.
Polymer-based materials are relatively inexpensive, can have a high strength to weight ratio, are easy to form, and can withstand harsh environments. Where such would enhance the life and strength of the structures made of a polymer-based material and reduce the cost and reduce production time, alternatively, having 100% polymer- based material would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be made from said material, which clamp could be used in forming a joint member for connecting tubular members.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of Weinhold as modified by DE-394, to have employed the use of 100% polymer-based material, with a reasonable expectation of success because one material is being replaced with another material, for the purpose of enhancing the life and strength of the structures made of a polymer-based material and to reduce the cost and production time of forming the final structure(s) made of said material, alternatively, having 100% polymer-based material would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be made from said material, which clamp could be used in forming a joint member for connecting tubular members.
Note that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Re Clm 8: Weinhold as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the clamp is formed from one or more materials (see above).
Weinhold as modified by DE-394 fails to disclose that the disclosed one or more material is of nylon, polypropylene, polysulfone or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer.
Nylon, polypropylene, polysulfone or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer are relatively inexpensive, can have a high strength to weight ratio, are easy to form, and can withstand harsh environments. Where such would enhance the life and strength of the structures made of a polymer-based material and reduce the cost and reduce production time, alternatively, employing nylon, polypropylene, polysulfone or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be made from said material, which clamp could be used in forming a joint member for connecting tubular members.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of Weinhold as modified by DE-394, to have employed the use of nylon, polypropylene, polysulfone or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer, with a reasonable expectation of success because one material is being replaced with another material, for the purpose of enhancing the life and strength of the structures made of a polymer-based material and to reduce the cost and production time of forming the final structure(s) made of said material, alternatively, using Nylon, polypropylene, polysulfone or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be made from said material, which clamp could be used in forming a joint member for connecting tubular members.
Note that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Re Clm 9: Weinhold as modified by DE-394 discloses all of the claimed structural elements of the claim and thus when pushing the two jaw members of the clamp together there is an over-centre self-locking operation (see the Figs. above and Col. 2, ln. 62 through Col. 4, ln. 25; the over-centre self-locking operation is a functional means based off of the claimed design and note that Weinhold as modified by DE-394 has all of the claimed structural limitations and thus Weinhold as modified by DE-394 has then the claimed over-centre self-locking operation).
Re Clm 13: Weinhold as modified by DE-394 discloses all of the claimed structural elements of the claim and thus the clamp has a pre-set over-centre locking force (see the Figs. above and Col. 2, ln. 62 through Col. 4, ln. 25; the over-centre self-locking element is a function based off of the claimed design and note that Weinhold as modified by DE-394 has all of the claimed structural limitations and thus Weinhold as modified by DE-394 has then the claimed pre-set over-centre locking force).
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perrin et al. (US 3828403), (hereinafter, Perrin) in view of Weinhold (DE 2365394), (hereinafter, DE-394).
PNG
media_image2.png
577
472
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re Clm 1: Perrin discloses a method (see Figs. 1-8 and the Fig. above) of using a clamp (10) for coupling two mating flanges (the flanges of 12 and 14 as illustrated in Fig. 8),
wherein the clamp comprises first (18) and second (16) jaw members,
the first jaw member being pivotally mounted by a pivot member (70) to the second jaw member and having at its free end an articulated lever (the clamp at its free end has an articulated lever comprising elements 30 and 28 or when the clamp is closed as in Fig. 4) having a proximal end (the end adjacent 26) with a latch (38), the proximal end located proximal to the free end of the first jaw member (see above), the latch engageable with a catch (42) disposed at the free end of the second jaw member (see above);
wherein the method comprises: with the clamp in an open configuration in which the free ends of the jaw members are displaced apart and the two mating flanges may be received between the jaw members (see Fig. 2),
placing the two mating flanges between the first and second jaw members (such as in Fig. 8);
fitting the clamp around the two mating flanges by adjusting the clamp into a closed configuration in which the free ends of the jaw members are proximal to one another (such as in figs. 1 and 8); and
securing the clamp in place by moving the articulated lever (such as from Fig. 2 to Fig. 3) between an unlocked configuration wherein the latch is displaced away from the catch (see Fig. 3), and
a locked configuration wherein the latch is received by and engages with the catch (see Fig. 3);
wherein the lever has an arch-shaped distal end (the end way from 26) opposite the proximal end, wherein the arch-shaped distal end is on a farthest end of the lever further away from the free end of the first jaw member than the proximal end (see Figs. 1-3), and
wherein the proximal end adjacent the arch-shaped distal end is at least partially embedded in the second jaw member (see Fig. 4) when the lever is in the locked configuration.
Perrin fails to disclose that the disclosed arch-shaped distal end of the disclosed lever overlaps the disclosed pivot member and when the disclosed lever is in the disclosed locked configuration by at least partially encircling the disclosed pivot member.
However, DE-394 discloses a clamp for tubular members, similar to that of Perrin. DE-394 also teaches an arch-shaped distal end of a lever overlaps a pivot member when the lever is in a locked configuration by at least partially encircling the pivot member (see Fig. 2, the end containing 42a). Where such would allow for a tighter fitment of the end of the lever to the pivot member/clamp, for the purpose of having a more compact configuration, alternatively, such a configuration would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be fully closed around the ends of pipes in order to form a secure lek free joint.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of Perrin, to have included the disclosed arch-shaped distal end of the disclosed lever overlaps the disclosed pivot member and when the disclosed lever is in the disclosed locked configuration by at least partially encircling the disclosed pivot member, as taught by DE-394, with a reasonable expectation of success because one would have merely added a feature to the level end to aid in having a tighter fitment of the end of the lever to the pivot member/clamp, for the purpose of having a more compact configuration, alternatively, such a configuration would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be fully closed around the ends of pipes in order to form a secure lek free joint.
Re Clm 2: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the jaw members of the clamp are arcuate in shape (see above).
Re Clm 3: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the jaw members of the clamp form a closed circular body when in the closed configuration (see above).
Re Clm 4: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the clamp has a predefined internal diameter to join, secure and/or seal the two mating flanges of a correspondingly sized diameter (see above).
Re Clm 5: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the clamp further comprises a channel (Perrin, see the channel in Figs. 1 and 3) for receiving compatible flanges disposed at the ends of two pipes to be coupled (Perrin, see Figs. 1, 7, and 8).
Re Clm 6: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the method further comprises mating a first flange of a first pipe to a second flange of a second pipe and placing the first flange and the second flange within the channel (Perrin, see Figs. a1-8 and Col. 1, lns. 30-59).
Re Clm 7: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the clamp has a 100% material construction (see above).
Perrin as modified by DE-394 fails to disclose that the disclosed material is 100% polymer-based.
Polymer-based materials are relatively inexpensive, can have a high strength to weight ratio, are easy to form, and can withstand harsh environments. Where such would enhance the life and strength of the structures made of a polymer-based material and reduce the cost and reduce production time, alternatively, having 100% polymer- based material would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be made from said material, which clamp could be used in forming a joint member for connecting tubular members.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of Perrin as modified by DE-394, to have employed the use of 100% polymer-based material, with a reasonable expectation of success because one material is being replaced with another material, for the purpose of enhancing the life and strength of the structures made of a polymer-based material and to reduce the cost and production time of forming the final structure(s) made of said material, alternatively, having 100% polymer-based material would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be made from said material, which clamp could be used in forming a joint member for connecting tubular members.
Note that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Re Clm 8: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the clamp is formed from one or more materials (see above).
Perrin as modified by DE-394 fails to disclose that the disclosed one or more material is of nylon, polypropylene, polysulfone or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer.
Nylon, polypropylene, polysulfone or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer are relatively inexpensive, can have a high strength to weight ratio, are easy to form, and can withstand harsh environments. Where such would enhance the life and strength of the structures made of a polymer-based material and reduce the cost and reduce production time, alternatively, employing nylon, polypropylene, polysulfone or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be made from said material, which clamp could be used in forming a joint member for connecting tubular members.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of Perrin as modified by DE-394, to have employed the use of nylon, polypropylene, polysulfone or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer, with a reasonable expectation of success because one material is being replaced with another material, for the purpose of enhancing the life and strength of the structures made of a polymer-based material and to reduce the cost and production time of forming the final structure(s) made of said material, alternatively, using Nylon, polypropylene, polysulfone or polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) polymer would yield the same predictable result of allowing a clamp to be made from said material, which clamp could be used in forming a joint member for connecting tubular members.
Note that it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Re Clm 9: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses all of the claimed structural elements of the claim and thus when pushing the two jaw members of the clamp together there is an over-centre self-locking operation (Perrin, see Figs. 1-3, Col. 2, lines 30-50; note that the over-centre self-locking operation is a functional means based off of the claimed design and Perrin as modified by DE-394 has all of the claimed structural limitations and thus Perrin as modified by DE-394 has then the claimed over-centre self-locking operation).
Re Clm 10: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the clamp further comprises a safety feature (Perrin, 43, and see Col. 2, lines 30-50) to permanently lock the clamp in the closed configuration by preventing the lever from being displaced away from its locked configuration (Perrin, see Figs. 1-3, Col. 2, lines 30-50).
Re Clm 11: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the clamp further comprises a sacrificial security seal (Perrin, 43, and see Col. 2, lines 30-50) operable to perform at least one of: prevent accidental opening of the clamp, and provide evidence of any tampering with the clamp or the mating sanitary seal (Perrin, see Figs. 1-3, Col. 2, lines 30-50).
Re Clm 12: Perrin as modified by DE-394 wherein the sacrificial security seal is a locking pin (Perrin, 43) inserted through a first aperture in the articulated lever and a second aperture elsewhere on the clamp (Perrin, see Figs. 1-3, Col. 2, lines 30-50).
Re Clm 13: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses all of the claimed structural elements of the claim and thus the clamp has a pre-set over-centre locking force (Perrin, see Figs. 1-3, Col. 2, lines 30-50; the over-centre self-locking element is a function based off of the claimed design and note that Perrin as modified by DE-394 has all of the claimed structural limitations and thus Perrin as modified by DE-394 has then the claimed pre-set over-centre locking force).
Re Clm 14: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses after coupling the clamp to the two mating flanges.
Perrin as modified by DE-394 fails to disclose sterilizing the disclosed clamp by one of autoclaving or gamma radiation.
Autoclaving sterilization or gamma radiation sterilization decontaminates a structure to insure that it is safe to use with humans or other living things by killing pathogens, for the purpose of extending life or protecting life from the effects of being exposed to harmful pathogens.
The examiner is taking Official notice that autoclaving sterilization or gamma radiation sterilization is old and well-known, for the purpose of decontaminating a structure to insure that it is safe to use with humans or other living things by killing pathogens, in order to extend life or to protect life from the effects of being exposed to said harmful pathogens.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of Perrin as modified by DE-394, to have employed sterilizing the disclosed clamp by one of autoclaving or gamma radiation, with a reasonable expectation of success because one is merely using a known means of disinfecting an item, for the purpose of decontaminating a structure to insure that it is safe to use with humans or other living things by killing pathogens, in order to extend life or to protect life from the effects of being exposed to said harmful pathogens.
Re Clm 15: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein each of the mating flanges is connected to tubing (12 and 14, respectively) that is one of flexible or rigid (see Fig. 8), and wherein the method further comprises passing liquid through a first tube element, through the two mating flanges, and through a second tube element (see Figs. 1 and 8, Col. 4, lns. 3-68).
Re Clm 16: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein at least one of the mating flanges is connected to a connector (either the end of 12 or 14).
Perrin as modified by DE-394 fails to disclose a hose barb connector and coupling tubing to the hose barb connector.
Hose barb connectors and said connector being connected to a hose allows for a leak free connection to be made that directs a fluid to a desired location, for the purpose of containing a fluid in a leak free manner as it is transported.
The examiner is taking Official notice that a hose barb connector and coupling tubing to the hose barb connector is old and well-known, for the purpose of having/forming a leak free connection that directs a fluid to a desired location.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to have modified the device of Perrin as modified by DE-394, to have employed a hose barb connector and coupling tubing to the hose barb connector, with a reasonable expectation of success because one is merely adding a known means of connecting and directing a fluid, for the purpose of having/forming a leak free connection that directs a fluid to a desired location.
Re Clm 17: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein each of the pivot members comprises a rivet pin (a rivet being defined as a pin with a head, for example, 70 has a groove that retains 74 and the head is on the external side of the clamp) disposed in a sleeve (sleeve being defined as a structure that covers at least part of a member contained within, such as 74).
Re Clm 18: Perrin as modified by DE-394 discloses wherein the articulated lever comprises a first rigid member (28) coupled to the first jaw member, a lever pivot member linking the first rigid member (35), and a second rigid member (30) coupled to the lever pivot member, the second rigid member having the latch (38).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 20 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following documents have structural features (clamps with a plurality of segments) which are similar to the applicant’s claimed invention; FR-1061821-A.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES A LINFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-3066. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday: 8:00 am to 5:00 pm Eastern Time.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached on (571) 270-3654. 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.
JAMES ALBERT LINFORD
Examiner
Art Unit 3679
01/08/2026
/Matthew Troutman/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3679