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 .
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.
Claims 4-6, 9, 10, 14, 15 and 21 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.
Claims 4-6 and 14-15 recite “combination thereof,” which would make implausible combinations.
Claims 9 and 10: vertical and horizontal orientations are indefinite – orientation in space. The vertical and horizontal will reverse when the object is rotated 90 degrees in space.
Claim 21: claim recites “polyethylene/ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (PE/UPE,)” which is unclear as to what it is. Claim also recites polyethylene separately.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 2 only gives a function to the insertion slot which does not further limit claim 1. The discontinuity in claim 22 is the result of the slot already claimed in claim 8. Therefore, claim 22 is not further limiting. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and 103
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.
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) 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Zuk Jr., (US 6,251,292) in view of CN 204226863 (IDS, 7/21/26)
PNG
media_image1.png
649
942
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Zuk Jr. teaches a filter capsule having the inlet and the outlet shell halves, as marked in fig. 1 copied herein (see fig. 11 as well), and the filter media/stack contained within, which assembly forms the upstream and downstream sub-chambers.
PNG
media_image2.png
644
766
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Perspective figures of the capsule assembly of Zuk, figs. 16 a and b are also copied herein, which show inlet 287 and outlet 288 extending from the top/bottom halves, and tubes from these ports being passed through “tube clips” (two of them - plurality) having holes therein.
Zuk teaches an opening in the clip, but fails to teach an insertion slot. However, having a slot is only a minor change in shape of clip of Zuk.
In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant.).
Also, clips are often designed with a slot for tube insertion, instead of having a whole length of tube to be pulled through the opening. The CN reference applicant submitted on 7/21/26 in an IDS shows this structure for a clip, further evidence that such structure is known in the art.
Claims 3-4: the clip opening shows a tube each. The filter media is a stack of filters – see the figures.
Claims 5 and 6: the filter in Zuk is made of polyethylene or polypropylene (see the references incorporated in col. 1, lines 40-55. However, it really does not matter; claims 5 and 6 together recite any and all possible filter media.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 11-13 and 18-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In claim 8, the clip is defined as having two clip openings and two insertion slots; the corresponding disclosure being applicant’s fig. 7. Such a modification is not suggested, or obvious over the teaching of Zuk, the closest prior art. No reason to modify Zuk, even if the CN reference teaches the double-slot clip.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/21/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Arguments appear to completely dismiss the explanation in the rejection including annotated drawings showing the claimed filter structure.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISHNAN S MENON whose telephone number is (571)272-1143. The examiner can normally be reached Flexible, but generally Monday-Friday: 8:00AM-4:30PM.
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, Prem C Singh can be reached at 571-272-6381. 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.
/KRISHNAN S MENON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777
Prosecution Insights