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) submitted on 02/06/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
Figs. 1 and 5 appear to be hand drawn which makes it difficult to read the reference numerals and view the distinct parts of the invention. For example, “22B” looks like “2213” and “1” looks like “7” and the pipe P looks like it is extending into the core. See Fig. 6 that includes typed out reference numerals as an appropriate example of proper legibility. See CFR 1.84(p) that requires numbers, letters, and reference characters must be plain and legible.
Figs. 1 and 5 appear to be partially or completely lacking cross-hatching which makes it difficult to distinguish the various parts. For example, Fig. 1 in the area of 24A and 28, are difficult to view which parts belong to the nut and which parts belong to the core since the drawing is hand drawn and lacks proper cross-hatching. See CFR 1.84(h)(3) that require hatching must be used to indicate section portions of an object, and must be by regularly spaced oblique parallel lines spaced sufficiently apart to enable the lines to be distinguished without difficulty.
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 abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the phrase "a connector is provided" is implied language. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b)(I)(C). A suggestion is to delete the phrase “is provided”.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[0025] recites “core tread” and should be “core thread”.
[0030] recites “fist” and should be “first”
Claim Objections
Claims 1-18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1-18 include reference numerals in parenthesis and should all be deleted to avoid any ambiguity of anything implied within the parenthesis.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the holding arm” and should be “wherein the at least one holding arm”.
Claim 7 recites “as protrusion” and should be “as a protrusion”.
Claim 7 recites “the holding arm” and should be “the at least one holding arm”.
Claim 10 recites “section as a sharp edge” and should be “section has a sharp edge”.
Claim 13 recites “said a second attachment section” and should be “said [[a]] second attachment section”.
Claim 13 recites “the gripping portion” and should be “the gripping section
Claim 14 recites “core tread” and should be “core thread”.
Claim 14 recites “the core locking protrusion” and should be “the at least one core locking protrusion”.
Claim 15 recites “the first and the second attachment section” and should be “the first attachment section and the second attachment section”.
Claim 17 recites “inserting a pipe” and should be “inserting [[a]] the pipe”.
Claim 17 recites “the nut forces the first attachment section towards the second attachment section” and should be “the nut forces the second attachment section towards the first attachment section” since it is the second attachment section that moves toward the first attachment section.
Claim 18 recites “the fist” and should be “the first”.
Claim 18 recites “without a pipe” and should be “without [[a]] the pipe”.
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 1-18 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 in line 1 recites "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “A connector
Claim 3 recites "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “the outer surface
Claim 6 recites “the holding arm’s length…the holding arm’s extension length” which lack antecedent basis and seems unclear of a length of the holding arm is a multiple of an extension length of the holding arm. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “an axial length of the at least one holding arm greater than a thickness of the at least one holding arm
Claim 7 recites “the second contact surface” which lacks antecedent basis and unclear if claim 7 intended to initially introduce a second contact surface or depend from claim 2. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “ a second contact surface”.
Claim 8 recites "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “shape or a semicircular shape”.
Claim 9 recites “the second contact surface” which lacks antecedent basis and unclear if claim 9 intended to initially introduce a second contact surface or depend from claim 2 that initially introduces a second contact surface. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “ a second contact surface” as initially introduced in claim 9.
Claim 10 recites “the outer surface” which lacks antecedent basis and unclear if claim 10 intended to initially introduce an outer surface or depend from claim 3 that initially introduces an outer surface. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “ an outer surface” such that claim 10 initially introduces a second contact surface.
Claim 12 recites "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “which
Claim 14 recites "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “wherein
Claim 15 recites "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Additionally, claim 15 recites “use” without any active, positive steps delimiting how this use is actually practiced. See MPEP 2173.05(q). For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “A pipe system
Claim 15 recites “a connector according to one of the preceding claims…a pipe…a mounting direction…a nut locking protrusion…a core locking protrusion…” which is unclear because claim 1 previously and initially introduced a mounting direction and claim 14 previously and initially introduced a pipe and at least one core locking protrusion and a nut locking protrusion. It is unclear if the mounting direction is the same or different from claim 1 and if claim 15 intended to exclude depending from claim 14 that initially introduced a pipe and a core locking protrusion and a nut locking protrusion. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “a connector according to one of claims 1 and 3-13 the mounting direction…a nut locking protrusion…a core locking protrusion…”.
Claim 17 recites “providing a connector of claim 1…a nut…a core…a mounting direction…a second attachment section” which is unclear if these limitations are the same or different from the ones also recited in claim 1. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as “providing a connector of claim 1…[[a]] the nut…[[a]] the core…[[a]] the mounting direction…[[a]] the second attachment section” such that these features are the same recited in claim 1.
All dependent claims of these claims are rejected under 112th second paragraph by virtue of their dependency. Thus, claims 2, 4-5, 11, 13, 16, and 18 are rejected under 112th second paragraph.
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.
Claims 1-8, 11-12, and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fukano et al. (US 7,240,925 hereinafter “Fukano”).
In regard to claim 1, Fukano discloses a connector for connecting pipes (Fig. 2 shows a connector for at least pipe 16),
comprising a core (Fig. 2, joint body 14 defines a core) and a nut (Fig. 2, nut 20),
wherein the core is formed as a hollow body with an inner channel (Fig. 2, 14 has a hollow body with an inner channel for fluid flow) comprises a first attachment section (Fig. 2, 30 defines a first attachment section) and at least one second attachment section (Figs. 1 and 3, at least one 40 defines a second attachment section),
wherein the nut comprises a nut thread (Fig. 2, threads at 44) which is adapted to interact with a core thread to move the nut along a rotation axis in a mounting direction or in an opposing securing direction (Fig. 2, 22a defines a core thread and 44 interacts with 22a to move the nut along a rotation axis in a mounting direction towards 14 and an opposing securing direction away from 14),
wherein the nut comprises a compression face (Fig. 2, 56 defines a compression face of 20) which is adapted and arranged to press the second attachment section towards the first attachment section (Fig. 3 shows how 56 presses 40 toward 30),
wherein the compression face is arranged at a first distal end of the nut (Fig. 2, 56 is at least at a distal end within 20 and at a distal end of the nut threads),
wherein the second attachment section comprises a first contact surface (Fig. 3, at 40 has at least a first contact surface perpendicular to 36a) which is adapted to receive a compressive force from the compression face (Fig. 3, shows how 40 receives a compressive force from 56 in order to bite into an outer surface of a pipe),
wherein the first contact surface has an inclined orientation in relation to the rotation axis (Fig. 3, at 40, the perpendicular surface relative to 36a is inclined as shown relative to the rotation axis when pressed inwards and in Fig. 1 prior to being pressed, it is at least inclined at 90 degrees) and at least partially faces towards the core thread (Fig. 3, the first contact surface at least partially faces the core thread).
In regard to claim 2, Fukano discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the second attachment section comprises a second contact surface which is formed at least partially cylindrical around the rotation axis (Figs. 1 and 3, outer surface at 36 of 36b is at least partially cylindrical around the rotation axis and defines a second contact surface) and is adapted to exert a holding force on a pipe (Fig. 3, the second contact surface of 36 exerts a holding force by the force of 56 pressing inward to hold onto the pipe shown).
In regard to claim 3, Fukano discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the first attachment section has an outer surface (Fig. 2, 30 has an outer surface) which outer diameter inclines along the mounting direction (Fig. 2, inclination at 32),
wherein the outer surface has a conical shape (Fig. 2, conical surface at 32).
In regard to claim 4, Fukano discloses the connector according to according to claim 3,
wherein the second attachment section is arranged substantially at the same axial position along the rotation axis as the largest diameter of the outer surface (Fig. 8, the largest diameter is at a bead 68 of the outer surface which 40 is substantially at the same axial position as 68).
In regard to claim 5, Fukano discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the core comprises at least one holding arm (Fig. 8, section between 40 and 38 define a holding arm for 40), which extends from the core thread parallel to and along the securing direction to the second attachment section (Figs. 2 and 8, the holding arm extends from the core thread along the securing direction to 40),
wherein the at least one holding arm is formed as one piece with the core and the second attachment section (Figs. 2 and 8, the at least one holding arm is formed as one piece with the core as shown).
In regard to claim 6, Fukano discloses the connector according to according to claim 5,
wherein an axial length of the at least one holding arm parallel to the rotation axis is greater than a thickness of the at least one holding arm (Figs. 2 and 8, the at least one holding arm at 36 has an axial length greater than a thickness of the at least one holding arm such that the at least one holding arm extends further than its own thickness similar to the applicant’s invention).
In regard to claim 7, Fukano discloses the connector according to claim 5,
wherein at least one tooth is formed as a protrusion at the at least one holding arm (Fig. 2, 40 defines at least a tooth as a protrusion at the at least one holding arm),
wherein the tooth faces towards the first attachment section (Fig. 2, 40 faces 30).
In regard to claim 8, Fukano discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the second attachment section has an at least partial ring shape (Fig. 1, each at 36 at the tip ends include a respective second attachment section 40 which each 40 is at least partially ring shaped) or a semicircular ring shape (Fig. 1, half of the total 36 defines at least a semicircular shape).
In regard to claim 11, Fukano discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the core comprises two second attachment sections, which are each held by one holding arm and are arranged on opposing sides of the first attachment section (Fig. 1, there are at least two opposite 36 having respective holding arms, therefore, the core comprises two second attachment sections arranged on opposing sides of 30).
In regard to claim 12, Fukano discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the core furthermore comprises a gripping section (Fig. 1, gripping section at 28), which comprises an ergonomically shaped geometry (Fig. 1, the section at 28 have plural flat surfaces to allow ease of using a wrench. See ERGONOMICS Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster that defines ergonomic that allows efficient and safe interaction. In this case, the section 28 is ergonomically shaped to allow efficient and safe use of a wrench.),
wherein the gripping section is arranged adjacent to the core thread (Fig. 1, the section at 28 is adjacent to the core threads similar to the applicant’s invention).
In regard to claim 14, Fukano discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the core comprises at least one core locking protrusion which is arranged adjacent to the core thread (Fig. 1, ridge 26 defines at least one core locking protrusion arranged adjacent to the core threads at 22a),
wherein the nut comprises a nut locking protrusion which is arranged at a second distal end of the nut (Figs. 2 and 5, protrusion 60 defines a nut locking protrusion which is arranged at a second distal end of 20 as shown),
wherein the at least one core locking protrusion and the nut locking protrusion engage with each other when the nut is screwed completely on the core to secure the nut against rotation relative to the core (Figs. 2 and 6, 60 engages with 26 when 20 is completely screwed on the core 14 which secures 20 against rotation relative to the core since 20 would not at least screw any further) and
wherein the at least one core locking protrusion and the nut locking protrusion also engage with each other when the nut presses the second attachment section on a pipe to secure the nut in this respective rotational position relative to the core (Figs. 2 and 5-6, 60 and 26 engage when 20 presses against the second attachment section as shown on a pipe 16 to secure 20 in this respective rotational position relative to the core 14).
In regard to claim 15, Fukano discloses a pipe system for irrigation systems (Fig. 2 shows at least a pipe system capable of being used for irrigation systems. See note below.), comprising a connector according to one of claims 1 and 3-13 (See above claims 1, 3-8, and 11-12) and a pipe (Fig. 2, pipe 16),
wherein the connector has a disassembled state in which the nut and the core are not connected to each other (Fig. 2, 20 and 14 are separate parts and can be in a disassembled state prior to connecting 20 and 14),
wherein the connector has a mounted state in which the nut completely screwed on the core along the mounting direction (Figs. 2 and 6 shows a mounted state in which 20 is completely screwed on the core along the mounting direction) and a nut locking protrusion engages with a core locking protrusion (Figs. 1 and 2, nut locking protrusion 60 and core locking protrusion 26),
wherein the connector has a secured state in which the nut applies a force on the second attachment section (Fig. 2 shows at least a secured state in which 20 applies a force on the second attachment section at 40 and this state is at least prior to complete screwing of 20 because it is prior to 60 being deformed as shown in Fig. 6) and the pipe is secured against displacement between the first attachment section and the second attachment section (Fig. 2, in the secured state shown, 16 is at least secured against displacement between the first and second attachment sections as shown).
A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ 2d 1647. See MPEP § 2114. In this case, the recitation “for irrigation systems” is a functional recitation of intended use of the pipe system which does not structurally differentiate from the pipe system of Fukano and does not add any further structure other than the pipe system. Additionally, the pipe system of Fukano is also capable of being used for irrigation systems since it is a pipe connector for transferring fluid.
In regard to claim 16, Fukano discloses the pipe system according to claim 15,
wherein in the secured state, compared to the mounted state the nut is offset along the securing direction (Fig. 2 shows the secured state which is offset along the securing direction as compared to the mounted state which the nut 20 moves along the mounting direction).
In regard to claim 17, Fukano discloses a process for assembling a connector and a pipe (Fig. 2 shows a connector for a pipe 16), comprising:
providing a connector of claim 1 (See claim 1 above);
screwing the nut on the core along the mounting direction (Fig. 2, 20 is screwed along the mounting direction) until a core locking protrusion formed at the core engages with a nut locking protrusion formed at the nut (Fig. 2, core locking protrusion 26 engages with a nut locking protrusion 60),
wherein the engagement between the core locking protrusion and the nut locking protrusion secures the nut and the core against relative rotational movements (Figs. 2 and 6, when 60 deforms against 26, the engagement secures 20 and 14 against relative rotational movements);
inserting the pipe between the first attachment section and the second attachment section of the core (Fig. 2, pipe 16 is inserted between 30 and 40);
applying a rotational momentum between the nut and the core to overcome the engagement of the nut locking protrusion and the core locking protrusion to move the nut along the securing direction relative to the core (Fig. 2, since 20 is threaded to 14, a rotational momentum can be applied in the securing direction to disengage 60 and 26),
wherein the nut forces the second attachment section towards the first attachment section (Fig. 2 shows 20 forces 40 towards 30), such that the pipe is secured between the first and the second attachment section (Fig. 2, pipe 16 is secured between 40 and 30).
Claims 1, 3-4, and 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maple et al. (US 4,257,629 hereinafter “Maple”).
In regard to claim 1, Maple discloses a connector for connecting pipes (Fig. 7 shows a connector for pipe 12’),
comprising a core (Fig. 7, core 14) and a nut (Fig. 7, nut 34),
wherein the core is formed as a hollow body with an inner channel (Fig. 7, 14 is formed as a hollow body with an inner channel for fluid flow) comprises a first attachment section (Fig. 7, nipple 16 defines a first attachment section) and at least one second attachment section (See image below, indicated second attachment section is at least one second attachment section. See Fig. 4 such that there are plural sections at 40.),
wherein the nut comprises a nut thread (Fig. 7, 34 has internal threads) which is adapted to interact with a core thread to move the nut along a rotation axis in a mounting direction or in an opposing securing direction (Fig. 7 shows the threads of 34 engages with threads on 14 defining core threads in order to move 34 along a rotation axis in a mounting direction or an opposing securing direction),
wherein the nut comprises a compression face which is adapted and arranged to press the second attachment section towards the first attachment section (See image below, indicated compression face of nut 34 is for pressing against the second attachment section towards 16),
wherein the compression face is arranged at a first distal end of the nut (See image below, the compression face is arranged at a first distal end of 34),
wherein the second attachment section comprises a first contact surface (See image below, indicated first contact surface is from an inclined surface of one of the teeth of the second attachment section) which is adapted to receive a compressive force from the compression face (See image below, the first contact surface receives a compressive force from the compression face in order to bite into pipe 12’),
wherein the first contact surface has an inclined orientation in relation to the rotation axis (See image below, indicated first contact surface is inclined in an orientation in relation to the rotation axis) and at least partially faces towards the core thread (See image below, indicated first contact surface in the position shown at least partially faces towards the core threads).
PNG
media_image1.png
416
589
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 3, Maple discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the first attachment section has an outer surface (See image below, the first attachment section 16 has at least an outer surface as indicated) which outer diameter inclines along the mounting direction (See image below, indicated outer surface inclines along the mounting direction),
wherein the outer surface has a conical shape (See image below, indicated outer surface has a conical shape).
PNG
media_image2.png
313
432
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 4, Maple discloses the connector according to according to claim 3,
wherein the second attachment section is arranged substantially at the same axial position along the rotation axis as the largest diameter of the outer surface (See image above for claim 3, indicated outer surface has a largest diameter which is arranged substantially at the same axial position as the second attachment section).
In regard to claim 8, Maple discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the second attachment section has an at least partial ring shape (Figs. 4 and 5 shows the second attachment section has at least a partial ring shape) or a semicircular ring shape (Fig. 5, six of the second attachment sections at 40 define at least a semicircular shape).
In regard to claim 9, Maple discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the second attachment section comprises at least one recess at the first contact surface which extends from the first contact surface towards a second contact surface (See image below, there is at least one recess at the first contact surface and the recess extends from the first contact surface towards the indicated second contact surface).
PNG
media_image3.png
327
570
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regard to claim 10, Maple discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the first attachment section has a sharp edge at the largest diameter of an outer surface (See image above for claim 3, the outer surface of 16has a sharp edge at the largest diameter of the indicated outer surface).
In regard to claim 11, Maple discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the core comprises two second attachment sections, which are each held by one holding arm and are arranged on opposing sides of the first attachment section (Figs. 4-5 and 7, since there are plural 40 then there are at least two second attachment sections which are held by a respective holding arm at 30 and can be arranged on opposing sides of 16).
In regard to claim 12, Maple discloses the connector according to claim 1,
wherein the core furthermore comprises a gripping section (Fig. 7, gripping section at 56), which comprises an ergonomically shaped geometry (Fig. 7, the gripping section at 56 is at least an ergonomically shaped geometry similar to applicant’s invention shown in Fig. 1 at 3 having a plurality of protrusions),
wherein the gripping section is arranged adjacent to the core thread (Fig. 7, the gripping section at 56 is arranged adjacent to the core thread of 14).
In regard to claim 13, Maple discloses the connector according to claim 12,
wherein said core thread, said first attachment section and said second attachment section are part of a first group (Fig. 7, the core thread, 16, and the second attachment section can define a first group),
wherein the core comprises a second group of a core thread, a first attachment section and a second attachment section (Fig. 1 shows how a second group opposite the first group can be formed at an opposing end),
wherein said second group is arranged plane symmetrically to the first group adjacent to the gripping section (Figs. 1 and 7, the second group is arranged plane symmetrical to the first group adjacent to the gripping section).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukano (US 7,240,925) in view of Maple (US 4,257,629).
Fukano discloses the connector according to claim 12,
wherein said core thread, said first attachment section and said second attachment section are part of a first group (Fig. 2, the core thread, the first attachment section and the second attachment section can define a first group),
Fukano does not expressly disclose wherein the core comprises a second group of a core thread, a first attachment section and a second attachment section,
wherein said second group is arranged plane symmetrically to the first group adjacent to the gripping section.
In the related field of pipe connectors, Maple teaches a connector having identical connections at both ends of the connector and can also have one be formed with a female nut connector (Fig. 1 shows a connector having identical connection ends and Fig. 2 shows one end can be formed with a female nut connector 20) in order to have at least the advantage of reliably extending a pipe length by having identical connection ends or join free ends of a pipeline system with a female connector to connect to other standard fittings (In 3:19-37 discloses Fig. 2 is for a free end of a pipeline system to attach to standard fittings, therefore, Fig. 1 allows for extending plural lengths of pipes to define a pipeline system).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the male screw section 22b of Fukano to include a second group of a core thread, a first attachment section and a second attachment section, wherein said second group is arranged plane symmetrically to the first group adjacent to the gripping section with a reasonable expectation of success in order to have the advantage of reliably connecting plural lengths of pipes to define a pipeline system and extending the pipeline system for situations that require a long length of pipe as taught by Maple.
Additionally, see MPEP 2143(I)(G) with regard to a motivation to combine references may be implicit and when the ‘improvement’ is technology-independent and the combination of references results in a product or process that is more desirable, for example because it is stronger, cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable, or more efficient. In this case, Maple would reasonable suggest having a connector with identical ends to reliably connect pipe ends together to form a longer length of pipeline instead of a different type of connection. It would also be more efficient to use identical connection ends of the connector for connecting pipe ends instead of different connections.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 18 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance of claim 18:
Fukano discloses the process of claim 7, but does not show or suggest assembling the nut and the core is only possible without the pipe being placed between the first attachment section and the second attachment section because the nut 20 can be assembled with the core with or without the pipe 16. In Fig. 1 of applicant’s invention, if the pipe is inserted between 24A and 24B, the nut 4 would not be able to connect to the core, therefore, the nut 4 is only possible to connect to the core when the pipe is not inserted between 24A and 24B. It would not have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fukano to include assembling the nut and the core is only possible without the pipe being placed between the first attachment section and the second attachment section with a reasonable expectation of success because such a modification would require hindsight reasoning and reconstruction.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The following prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Muller (US 996,114), Weatherhead, Jr. (US 2,015,541), Lombardi, III (US 2012/0299296 A1), Law (US 4,900,068), and Paul (US 2014/0252760 A1) disclose critical features similar to applicant’s claimed invention that includes a connector having a nut that presses a second attachment section over a pipe that fits over a first attachment member.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William S. Choi whose telephone number is (571)272-8223. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:30-5:30.
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 at (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.
/WILLIAM S. CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679