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
Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention/species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/22/26.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim limitation “angle detection system” in claim 13 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The claim is indefinite as a result. Please see the further discussion under 112(b) below. As discussed in MPEP 2181, “A means- (or step-) plus-function limitation that is found to be indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) based on failure of the specification to disclose corresponding structure, material or act that performs the entire claimed function also lacks adequate written description”, thus a written description rejection under 112(a) is also being raised.
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 7 and 13 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 7 recites “the bore”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for this term. “a primary through bore” and “a secondary through bore” have been introduced in the claim or parent claim.
Claim limitation “angle detection system” in claim 13 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The limitation invokes 112(f), however, the specification does not describe the corresponding structure. Para 0034 merely discusses a “conventional angle detection unit 110” and refers to a schematic illustration in Fig 10. This does not adequately disclose the structure, as required. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Angstmann (US 20210032951 A1).
1. (Original) A rapidly separable conduit comprising:
a first coupling member (Fig 11, 10A1);
a second coupling member (Fig 11, 10B1) configured to connect with the first coupling member (Fig 11, coupled as seen) to form a fluid conduit having a primary through bore (Fig 11, 60);
wherein the first and second coupling members are each configured with passages to form at least one secondary through bore separate and apart from the primary through bore (Fig 11, bore accommodating 10D);
wherein the first and second coupling members are configured to accept at least one explosively frangible fastener (Fig 11, fastener 10C/10D) to maintain the first and second coupling members joined to one another when the fluid conduit is formed (Fig 11, 10A1 and 10B1 are joined together with the fastener 10C/10D);
wherein the at least one explosively frangible fastener is configured for electronic triggering to set off an explosive charge disposed thereon (Para 0007, “At least one explosively frangible nut is configured for electronic triggering to set off the at least one explosive charge disposed on the nut.”);
wherein the explosively charge is sealed off from the external environment when the fluid conduit is formed (Fig 11, charge with is on the nut 10C is sealed within chamber 80).
2. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 1 wherein the first and second coupling members are configured to accept a plurality of explosively frangible fasteners to maintain the first and second coupling members joined to one another (see e.g. Fig 12, plurality of fastening arrangements), with the plurality of fasteners being sealed off from the external environment when the fluid conduit is formed (Fig 11, see parent claim, although one environment is shown there are a plurality of arrangements as discussed above).
3. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 2 wherein the plurality of explosively frangible fasteners are configured for selective activation (Para 0019, 0025, 0053).
4. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 2 wherein the plurality of explosively frangible fasteners each comprise a nut configured for electronic triggering to set off an explosive charge disposed on each nut (Para 0007, “At least one explosively frangible nut is configured for electronic triggering to set off the at least one explosive charge disposed on the nut.”).
5. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 1 wherein the first and second coupling members are each configured with passages to form a plurality of secondary through bores separate and apart from the primary through bore, with the plurality of secondary through bores configured to surround the primary through bore (see e.g. Fig 12, plurality of fastening arrangements with corresponding secondary bores).
6. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 5 wherein the first and second coupling members are each configured with ports to permit external connections for separate fluid passage through the primary through bore and/or the plurality of secondary through bores (Fig 11-12, openings at the upper and lower ends of 10B1 and 10A1, respectively are ports which permit access to bore 60).
7. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 5 wherein each secondary through bore is configured to receive a sleeve configured for disposal within the bore (Fig 11-12, each secondary bore is sized/capable of receiving another sleeve, which is not positively recited and required by the claim).
8. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 1 wherein the at least one explosively frangible fastener comprises an explosively frangible nut configured with at least two explosive charges disposed thereon (Fig 7-9, frangible nut 10C is seen with charges 34/32, see Para 0054).
9. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 8 further comprising a pyrotechnic crossover disposed on the explosively frangible nut to link the at least two explosive charges on the nut such that activation of one explosive charge sets off activation of each linked explosive charge (Para 0053-0054, Fig 7-9, crossover 24).
10. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 1 wherein the first or second coupling member is configured with at least one recess to house the explosive charge to seal the charge off from the external environment (Fig 11, recess 80 seals in the explosive charge of 10C).
11. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 1 further comprising a sleeve configured for disposal within the primary through bore (Fig 5, sleeved portion at the bottom of 10A, note the distinct cross catching. Sleeve is also depicted and visible in Fig 12).
12. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 1 wherein the first and second coupling members are configured for coupling to a fluid conveyance system comprising a blowout preventer and/or a riser (Para 0045, Fig 5-6, capable of connecting to BOP stack).
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) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Angstmann (US 20210032951 A1), in view of Official Notice.
13. (Original) The rapidly separable conduit of claim 1 Angstmann teaches the angle-based triggering for separation (“the frangible nut 10C is triggered for separation as described herein, the enlarged receptacle 67 facilitates passage of the stud 10D end through the receptacle, preventing binding, particularly if the stud is stressed at an angle with respect to the flange 10A1”, Para 0058), but Angstmann is silent on the angle-based triggering for separation being accomplished by an angle detection system.
The examiner takes Official Notice that an angle detection system is known in the art, the examiner additionally noted applicant’s statement regarding a “conventional” angle detection unit 110.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Angstmann by having the angle detection system as is known in the art because Angstmann teaches the accomplishment of a functional outcome, but is silent as to the specific means for accomplishing that outcome, one would look to a means as is known in the art and would be required to use the invention of Angstmann.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Angstmann (US 20190338614 A1) teaches a coupling system includes a lower marine riser package having a connector at a bottom end and at least one blowout preventer pressure control element coupled to a wellhead and having a connector at an upper end. Explosively frangible fasteners are used to couple the connector on the lower marine riser package to the connector.
Maloberti (US 5108133 A) teaches a connector for quick release under load, particularly for pipes for transporting fluids such as hydrocarbons, characterized by the fact that it comprises, between two opposite structural elements (1, 2) or between two parts of an element connecting the two structural elements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE N YAO whose telephone number is (571)272-8745. The examiner can normally be reached typically 8am-4pm ET.
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, TARA SCHIMPF can be reached at (571) 270-7741. 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.
/THEODORE N YAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights