DETAILED ACTION
Claims 9-16 are pending. Claims 1-8 have been cancelled.
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 .
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 insulation recited in claims 10-11 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
Claims 9 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 9, line 1, “and second part” should be changed to --and a second part--.
In claim 16, line 2, “a first part” should be changed to --the first part--.
In claim 16, line 2, “a second part” should be changed to --the second part--.
In claim 16, line 4, it is suggested that structure to which the first part is “connected” be further clarified.
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 10-13 and 15 are rejected (wherein claim 12 inherits its rejection due to its dependency) 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.
Regarding claim 10, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). As understood, the limitations following “preferably” are not positively recited, so “preferably a vacuum insulation” isn’t positively reciting a vacuum insulation.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the chamber" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As understood, the recitation refers to the chamber making up part of the actuator.
In claim 15, it is unclear what is meant to be recited after “the coupling,” which is understood as being an incomplete limitation because a period is missing. The claim is interpreted in its broadest reasonable interpretation, so the claims is interpreted as simply reciting the coupling.
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 9-16 (as understood: 10-13 and 15) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jordan (US 2021/0080038).
Regarding claim 9, Jordan discloses in Figs. 1-47 (looking specifically at Figs. 1-21 for the coupling of the two halves of the coupling) a coupling for liquefied gas comprising a first part 300/3300 and second part 10 to be coupled to each other by insertion of the first part 300/3300 into the second part 10 (Figs. 13-15 and 17), wherein the first part 300/3300 and the second part 10 each comprises an internal liquefied gas conduit to be fluidly connected at a connection point for transfer of liquefied gas through the coupling,
a valve (comprising either the valve 352/3520 in the first part 300/3300, and/or the valve 40 in the second part 10) movable between a first position, in which transfer of liquefied gas through the coupling is blocked (Fig. 13), and a second position, in which transfer of liquefied gas through the coupling is allowed (Fig. 14),
an actuator (comprising pneumatic cylinder 500/3500, shaft 520/3520, and arm 510/3510) for moving the valve between the first and second positions (Figs. 13-14),
wherein, with the first and second parts 300/3300, 10 interconnected, the coupling has a first operating state in which no liquefied gas is transferred though the coupling (Fig. 13) and a second operating state in which liquefied gas is allowed to flow through the coupling (Fig. 14),
wherein
the actuator is provided outside of the internal liquefied gas conduit.
Regarding claim 10, Jordan discloses in Figs. 22-47 an insulation (comprising a portion of “bundle” 3250, such as either the insulation 3258 for the fill hose 3252 or the insulation 3257 for the pneumatic hose 3253 and the electrical conduit 3254, paragraphs 124-125).
Regarding claim 11, Jordan discloses in Figs. 22-47 that the actuator 3500 is provided outside of the insulation (because layer 3258 is only for the fill hose 3252, and/or because the insulation(s) of the bundle 3250, such as layers 3257 and 3258, is only disclosed as insulating hoses – fill hose 3252, pneumatic hose 3253, and electrical conduit 3254 – rather than the cylinder 3500 and the piping 3530 coupling the pneumatic hose 3253 to the cylinder 3500, paragraph 124).
Regarding claim 12, Jordan discloses in Figs. 22-47 the actuator comprises a chamber 3500 for exerting a pressure on a rigid mechanical connection with a displacement piston (which one having ordinary skill in the art would recognize from Figs. 41-42).
Regarding claim 13, Jordan discloses in Figs. 1-47 that the chamber 500/3500 is a pneumatic or hydraulic chamber 500/3500 (paragraphs 70 and 121).
Regarding claim 14, Jordan discloses in Figs. 1-47 that the coupling is for a fluid (abstract), and the specific fluid isn’t seen as having patentable weight (MPEP 2115), but Jordan discloses in Figs. 22-47 that the coupling is for cryogenic liquefied gas (paragraph 123).
Regarding claim 15, Jordan discloses in Figs. 1-47 the coupling.
Regarding claim 16, Jordan discloses in Figs. 1-47 (looking specifically at Figs. 1-21 for the coupling of the two halves of the coupling) a nozzle (abstract) for a coupling according to claim 9, comprising
a first part 300/3300 connectable to a second part 10 of the coupling, the first and second parts 300/3300, 10 to be coupled to each other by insertion of the first part 300/3300 into the second part 10,
the first part 300/3300 comprising an internal liquefied gas conduit to be fluidly connected for transfer of liquefied gas through the coupling,
wherein, with the first and second parts 300/3300, 10 interconnected, the coupling has a first operating state in which no liquefied gas is transferred though the coupling (Fig. 13) and a second operating state in which liquefied gas is allowed to flow through the coupling (Fig. 14),
wherein
the actuator is provided outside of the internal liquefied gas conduit.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Jonathan Waddy, whose telephone number is 571-270-3146. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (10:00AM-6:00PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881 or Craig 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/J. W./
Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/KEVIN F MURPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
