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 following limitations must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Claim 14 recite the following:
14. The fitting of claim 10, further comprising, at the proximal end portion of the fitting: a gas coupler connector for connecting the fitting to a gas tank; and a valve for selectively controlling a flow of gas through the fitting.
It is noted that “a gas tank” and “a valve for selectively controlling a flow of gas through the fitting” are not shown in the drawings. In particular, it is noted that the sole support for the limitation “a valve for selectively controlling a flow of gas through the fitting” is in this claim and nowhere else is mentioned in the specification. It is further noted that it is unclear if the valve is part of the fitting (such as being an internal component of the fitting) or if the valve is a component related to the gas tank such as the valve used for shutting off gas flow from the tank or a tank regulator often used in combination with gas lines to provide gas at a desired pressure. Regardless, both the gas tank and the valve are not shown. If the valve is merely connected between the tank coupler 13 and the gas tank (such as acting as a supply shut-off valve for the incoming gas from the gas tank to the gas distribution system 10), the Office suggests that the gas tank with the valve are added schematically to at least Fig. 1 such as showing a first box/cylinder representing the gas tank and a second box representing the valve with both being fluidly connected to the tank coupler 13 of Fig. 1. The specification will need to be amended to include reference numbers for these representations. If the valve is somehow part of the manifold/fitting rather than something connected to them, this feature will require to be explicitly shown in the drawings which may trigger new matter rejections if they go beyond what is supported by the original disclosure. If the latter case, the Office suggests that the feature of the valve is cancelled and the connection to the gas tank is shown schematically as previously mentioned.
---Claim 19 recite the following:
19. The gas distribution system of claim 17, wherein at least one of the plurality of manifolds is fitted with a fitting having a gas coupler connector configured to sealingly connect to a gas tank such that the gas distribution system is in fluid communication therewith.
Similar to claim 14 above, notice that “a gas tank” is not shown in the drawings. The Office suggests that the gas tank is added schematically to at least Fig. 1 in the same manner as mentioned in claim 14 above.
---Claim 20 recites the following:
20. The gas distribution system of claim 17, in combination with a recreational vehicle, wherein the gas distribution system is retained on the recreational vehicle for use in selectively distributing propane to gas powered appliances of the recreational vehicle.
Notice that a recreational vehicle and its gas powered appliances are not shown in the drawings. The Office suggests that the recreational vehicle and the gas powered appliances are shown at least schematically in Fig. 1 with a square box encircling the system 10 representing the recreational vehicle and various boxes fluidly connected to hoses 12 representing the gas powered appliances connected to the manifold system. The specification will need to be amended to include reference numbers for these representations.
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
Claim(s) 3 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
---Claim 3 recite the following:
3. The manifold of claim 2, wherein the serif portion is configured to permit partial retraction of the fitting while the bayonet pin aligned therewith, and wherein the fitting is rotatably fixed within the port when partially retracted into the serif portion.
Notice that “the bayonet pin aligned therewith” should be “the bayonet pin is aligned therewith” in a similar manner as it was done in claim 17.
As such claim 3 should be amended as follows:
3. The manifold of claim 2, wherein the serif portion is configured to permit partial retraction of the fitting while the bayonet pin is aligned therewith, and wherein the fitting is rotatably fixed within the port when partially retracted into the serif portion.
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 2-4, 6 and 16-20 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 2 recites the following:
2. The manifold of claim 1, wherein the at least one bayonet slot comprises a transverse locking portion extending circumferentially around a portion of the port opening and a serif portion extending longitudinally along a portion of the port opening.
Notice the double recitation of the limitation “a portion of the port opening”. It is unclear and indefinite if the latter recitation of this limitation is the same as the previous recitation or if they are distinct. Based on at least Fig. 10, the Office will assume that they are the same limitation.
If so, the Office suggests that claim 2 is amended as follows:
2. The manifold of claim 1, wherein the at least one bayonet slot comprises a transverse locking portion extending circumferentially around a portion of the port opening and a serif portion extending longitudinally along [[a]] the portion of the port opening.
---Claim 6 recites the following:
6. The manifold of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of ports defines two diametrically opposed bayonet slots.
It is noted that intervening claim 1 that “wherein each of the plurality of ports defines … at least one bayonet slot”. This makes it unclear and indefinite if the latter recitation of the “two diametrically opposed bayonet slots” is in addition to the previously recited “at least one bayonet slot” or if it is part of the same limitation (i.e. are there at least three bayonet slot or at least two bayonet slots with two of them being on opposite ends?). Based on the disclosure, the Office will assume the latter situation with the two diametrically opposed bayonet slots being part of the at least one bayonet slot.
If so, the Office suggest that claim 6 is amended as follows:
6. The manifold of claim 1, wherein the at least one bayonet slot comprises two diametrically opposed bayonet slots.
---Claim 16 recites the following:
16. A gas distribution system comprising:
a plurality of manifolds, each manifold including:
a manifold body defining a manifold passage;
a plurality of ports on the manifold body, wherein each of the plurality of ports defines i) a port opening extending through a front of the port to and in communication with the manifold passage, and ii) at least one bayonet slot extending from and in registration with the port opening; and
a plurality of hoses connected to the plurality of manifolds, wherein each hose includes
a hose body having opposite longitudinal ends;
a fitting having opposite proximal and distal end portions, the fitting including a hose connector at the proximal end portion of the fitting and connected to one of the longitudinal ends of the hose body, and a manifold connector at the distal end portion of the fitting, wherein the manifold connector includes a generally cylindrical connector body received in the port opening of one of the ports of the manifold, at least one bayonet pin extending radially outward from the connector body and received in at least one bayonet slot extending from and in registration with the port opening, and at least one annular seal on the connector body sealingly engaging an interior of the port defining the port opening.
Notice the double recitation of “at least one bayonet slot” which makes it unclear and indefinite if the latter recitation is the same as the previous recitation or if they are distinct. Based on the disclosure, the Office will assume that they are the same limitation.
If so, the Office suggests that claim 16 is amended as follows:
16. A gas distribution system comprising:
a plurality of manifolds, each manifold including:
a manifold body defining a manifold passage;
a plurality of ports on the manifold body, wherein each of the plurality of ports defines i) a port opening extending through a front of the port to and in communication with the manifold passage, and ii) at least one bayonet slot extending from and in registration with the port opening; and
a plurality of hoses connected to the plurality of manifolds, wherein each hose includes
a hose body having opposite longitudinal ends;
a fitting having opposite proximal and distal end portions, the fitting including a hose connector at the proximal end portion of the fitting and connected to one of the longitudinal ends of the hose body, and a manifold connector at the distal end portion of the fitting, wherein the manifold connector includes a generally cylindrical connector body received in the port opening of one of the ports of the manifold, at least one bayonet pin extending radially outward from the connector body and received in the at least one bayonet slot extending from and in registration with the port opening, and at least one annular seal on the connector body sealingly engaging an interior of the port defining the port opening.
---Claim 17 recites the following:
17. The gas distribution system of claim 16, wherein the at least one bayonet slot includes a transverse locking portion extending circumferentially around a portion of the port opening, and a serif portion extending longitudinally along a portion of the port opening, wherein the serif portion is configured to permit partial retraction of the fitting while the bayonet pin is aligned therewith, and wherein the fitting is rotatably fixed within the port when partially retracted within the serif portion.
Similar to claim 2 above, notice the double recitation of the limitation “a portion of the port opening”. It is unclear and indefinite if the latter recitation of this limitation is the same as the previous recitation or if they are distinct. Based on at least Fig. 10, the Office will assume that they are the same limitation.
If so, the Office suggests that claim 17 is amended as follows:
17. The gas distribution system of claim 16, wherein the at least one bayonet slot includes a transverse locking portion extending circumferentially around a portion of the port opening, and a serif portion extending longitudinally along [[a]] the portion of the port opening, wherein the serif portion is configured to permit partial retraction of the fitting while the bayonet pin is aligned therewith, and wherein the fitting is rotatably fixed within the port when partially retracted within the serif portion.
---Claims 3-4 and 17-20 being dependent on any of the preceding claim(s) above, inherit the same deficiencies as the parent/intervening claim(s) and as such is/are rejected in the same manner, see the rejection(s) above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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(s) 1-2, 5-10 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518.
Regarding claims 1-2, 5-10 and 13-14,
Steininger US-7600536 teaches in Fig. 1 of a gas distributing manifold 30 used for distributing propane gas to various gas consuming appliances in a recreational vehicle (RV) with similar function as applicant’s main invention. Notice that while Steininger does teaches various ports for receiving fittings/connectors 32/36/50, Steininger fails to explicitly disclose the use of a bayonet slot and bayonet pin to make the connection between the manifold and the fitting. It is noted that at least C3 L23-38 does mention the use of other types connectors other than threaded connections such as “twist-lock” which is considered a type of bayonet connector but fails to teach the specifics required by the claim. However, bayonet connectors as claimed are well-known in the art.
Romanek FR-2742518 teaches in Fig. 1 of a bayonet connection between a female fitting portion 16 and a male fitting portion 10, wherein the female fitting portion comprises two diametrically opposed bayonet slots 34 and the male fitting portion comprises an annular seal 26 and two diametrically opposed bayonet pins 36 such that when the fittings are coupled, the bayonet pins enters the bayonet slots rotating the fitting as it follows the helical bayonet slot until they are locked by engagement with a serif/ridge/locking-portion 41 of the slot. Such a coupling connection allows for the quick and easy coupling between the two fitting components while maintain a fluid tight connection when coupled.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was effectively filed to modify they type of connection between the manifold and the fittings/connectors 32/36/50 of the device of Steininger to be bayonet connections similar to those as taught by Romanek wherein the manifold (acting as the female fitting portions) would include two diametrically opposed bayonet slots 34 on an inner surface and the fittings/connectors (acting as the male fitting portions) would include an annular seal 26 and two diametrically opposed bayonet pins 36 on an outer surface such that when they are coupled, the bayonet pins enters the bayonet slots rotating the fitting as it follows the helical bayonet slot until they are locked by engagement with the serif/ridge/locking-portion 41 of the slot, such a modification is an alternative coupling method between two fluidic structures that allows for the quick and easy coupling between the two fitting components while maintain a fluid tight connection when coupled.
As such, the device of the combination of Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518 teaches the limitations of:
---Claim 1. A manifold (manifold 30 of Steininger as modified by Romanek) for a gas distribution system (see the gas distribution system 10 of Steininger) comprising:
a manifold body (see the body of the manifold 30 of Steininger) defining a manifold passage (passage 26 of Steininger); and
a plurality of ports (see the various ports where fitting/connectors 32/36/50 are attached to the manifold of Steininger as modified by Romanek) on the manifold body, wherein each of the plurality of ports defines i) a port opening (the opening of the port for receiving the fitting/connectors 32/36/50 of Steininger, see also the frontal opening of female fitting 16 of Romanek which receives the male fitting 10) extending through a front of the port to and in communication with the manifold passage, and ii) at least one bayonet slot (see the two diametrically opposed bayonet slots 34 of female fitting 16 as taught by Romanek which are included to the inner portion of the port of the manifold of Steininger) extending from and in registration with the port opening;
wherein the port opening is configured to axially receive a fitting (fitting/connectors 32/36/50 of Steininger as modified to include an annular seal 26 and two diametrically opposed bayonet pins 36 on an outer surface in a similar manner as taught by the male fitting 10 of Romanek);
wherein the at least one bayonet slot is configured to receive at least one bayonet pin (see the two diametrically opposed bayonet pins 36 as taught by Romanek and which are provided an outer surface of fitting/connectors 32/36/50 of Steininger to allow a bayonet connection between the manifold and the fitting/connectors) from a manifold connector (the portion of fitting/connectors that include the bayonet pins 36) of the fitting and enable rotational movement of the at least one pin in the bayonet slot to connect the fitting to the port (see at least Fig. 1 of Romanek in order to lock the bayonet connection, the bayonet pins enters the bayonet slot, the fitting is rotated as it follows the helical path of the slots and the pins are locked by engagement with the serif/ridge/locking-portion 41 of the slot).
---Claim 2. The manifold of claim 1, wherein the at least one bayonet slot comprises a transverse locking portion (see the slot portion of the bayonet slot 34 as taught by Romanek) extending circumferentially around a portion of the port opening and a serif portion (the serif/ridge/locking-portion 41 of the slot as taught by Romanek) extending longitudinally along a portion of the port opening.
---Claim 5. The manifold of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of ports includes a substantially cylindrical internal surface (see the interior of the manifold of Steininger and the interior surface of the fitting 16 of Romanek) configured to sealingly interface with an annular seal (annular seal 26 as taught by Romanek which are provided an outer surface of fitting/connectors 32/36/50 of Steininger to seal against manifold when coupled) of the fitting.
---Claim 6. The manifold of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of ports defines two diametrically opposed bayonet slots (see at least Fig. 1 of Romanek).
---Claim 7. The manifold of claim 1, wherein the plurality of ports includes two coaxial end ports on opposing ends of the manifold and two parallel ports on a shared side of the manifold (see Fig. 1 of Steininger).
---Claim 8. The manifold of claim 1, in combination with the fitting, wherein the fitting is received in the port opening, and wherein the at least one bayonet pin from the manifold connector of the fitting is received in the at least one bayonet slot (see Fig. 1 of Steininger and Fig. 1 of Romanek).
---Claim 9. A fitting (see either one of fitting/connectors 32/36/50 of Steininger as modified to include an annular seal 26 and two diametrically opposed bayonet pins 36 on an outer surface in a similar manner as taught by the male fitting 10 of Romanek) for a port (see the corresponding port where fitting/connectors 32/36/50 are attached to the manifold of Steininger as modified by Romanek) of a manifold (manifold 30 of Steininger as modified by Romanek) of a gas distribution system (see the gas distribution system 10 of Steininger), the fitting comprising:
opposite proximal and distal end portions (the rearward end and the opposite forward end which couples to the manifold); and
a manifold connector (the portion of fitting/connectors that include the bayonet pins 36) at the distal end portion of the fitting, the manifold connector including:
a generally cylindrical connector body (see at least Fig. 1 of Romanek) configured to be received in a port opening (the opening of the port for receiving the fitting/connectors 32/36/50 of Steininger, see also the frontal opening of female fitting 16 of Romanek which receives the male fitting 10) of the port of the manifold;
at least one bayonet pin (see the two diametrically opposed bayonet pins 36 as taught by Romanek and which are provided an outer surface of fitting/connectors 32/36/50 of Steininger to allow a bayonet connection between the manifold and the fitting/connectors) extending radially outward from the connector body configured to be received in at least one bayonet slot (see the two diametrically opposed bayonet slots 34 of female fitting 16 as taught by Romanek which are included to the inner portion of the port of the manifold of Steininger) extending from and in registration with the port opening; and
at least one annular seal (see the annular seal 26 as taught by Romanek) on the connector body disposed distal of the at least one bayonet pin (see at least Fig. 1 of Romanek).
---Claim 10. The fitting of claim 9, wherein the at least one annular seal is configured to form a sealed connection with an interior surface of the port when the fitting is retained therein (see at least Fig. 1 of Romanek).
---Claim 13. The fitting of claim 10, further comprising a plug body at the proximal end portion of the fitting (see Fig. 1 of Steininger where the fitting/connectors is a plug with a plug body 36).
---Claim 14. The fitting of claim 10, further comprising, at the proximal end portion of the fitting: a gas coupler connector for connecting the fitting to a gas tank; and a valve for selectively controlling a flow of gas through the fitting (see Fig. 1 of Steininger where the manifold has a fitting 50 that is fluidly connected to valve 22 and gas coupler connector 12 and 14 for fluidly coupling a propane tank 20 to the manifold 30 via the valve 22).
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518 as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Smith US-1851992.
Regarding claims 11-12, the device of the combination of Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518 fails to disclose that the fitting includes annular ribs (a barbed connection) for coupling to a gas hose as claimed. It is noted that Fig. 1 of Steininger does show gas hose 42 fluidly coupled to the fitting/connector 32 but fails to show the barbed connection. However, barbed connections are well known in the art.
Smith US-1851992 teaches in Figs. 1-5 (see at least Fig. 2) of another example of a bayonet coupling wherein the rearward portions of the fittings integrally include a barbed connector 2 with annular ribs that allow for the quick and secure connection to a flexible hose 1.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was effectively filed to modify the proximal/rearwards end of the connector/fitting 32/50 of Steininger in view of Romanek to include a barbed connector 2 in a similar manner as taught by Smith since barbed connectors are a well-known alternative means for fluidly connecting a flexible hose in a manner that is quick, fluid-tight and secure.
As such the device of the combination of Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518 and Smith US-1851992 teaches the limitations of:
---Claim 11. The fitting of claim 10, further comprising a plurality of annular ribs (see the corrugations in the barbed connector 2 as taught by Smith) spaced apart longitudinally from one another at the proximal end portion of the fitting, wherein the plurality of annular ribs are configured to be received in a gas hose (see the gas hose 42 in Steininger and/or flexible hose 1 of Smith).
---Claim 12. The fitting of claim 11, wherein the fitting defines a substantially cylindrical fluid passage (see the inside of the fittings of Steininger, Romanek and Smith) for forming a fluid connection between the gas hose and a manifold passage (passage 26 of Steininger) of the manifold (see at least Fig. 1 of Steininger, Fig. 1 of Romanek and Fig. 2 of Smith).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518 as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Schwabe DE-202010002870.
Regarding claim 15, the device of the combination of Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518 fails to disclose the use of a circumferential channel and a clip for locking the connection between the fitting and the manifold as claimed. However, bayonet connections with such a locking feature are known in the art.
Schwabe DE-202010002870 teaches in Figs. 1-4 (see at least Fig. 4) of bayonet fittings wherein the male portion includes a bayonet pin/lug 15 and the female portion includes a bayonet slot for receiving the bayonet pin. Schwabe teaches of the use of a locking ring 1 which is inserted into a circumferential groove (the groove formed by shoulder 17) after the fitting is fully engaged by the bayonet connection in order to axially lock the fittings. This further secures the connection by preventing loosening of the connection and/or inadvertent disconnection of fitting since in order to remove the connection, the clip must be removed first.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was effectively filed to modify the bayonet connection of the fittings of the device of the combination of Steininger in view Romanek to include a circumferential groove (the groove formed by shoulder 17) and a locking clip/ring 1 in a similar manner as taught by Schwabe since such a modification further aids in securing the bayonet connection by preventing loosening of the connection and/or inadvertent disconnection of fitting since in order to remove the connection, the clip must be removed first.
As such the device of the combination of Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518 and Schwabe DE-202010002870 teaches the limitations of:
---Claim 15. The fitting of claim 10, wherein the fitting defines a circumferential channel (the groove formed by shoulder 17 as taught by Schwabe which is provided on an outer surface of the male fitting rearwards of the bayonet pins) configured to releasably retain a clip (locking ring 1 as taught by Schwabe) for locking the fitting within the port, wherein the circumferential channel is proximal of the at least one bayonet pin (see at least Fig. 4 of Schwabe).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518 and Lee US-20080035219.
Regarding claim 16, as it was noted in the rejection of claim 1 above, the device of the combination of Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518 teaches many of the limitations of claim 16 with Steininger teaching of a gas distribution system including a manifold with ports, hose connections and fittings; and with Romanek teaching of the details of the bayonet connection of the fittings as claimed. However, the device of the combination fails to disclose a plurality of said manifolds as claimed. However, interconnectable manifolds to create more complex fluidic systems are known in the art.
Lee US-20080035219 teaches in Figs. 2, 2A-5 (see at least Figs. 2A-3) of a recreational vehicle 20 having a gas delivery system 22 for delivering gas to various gas appliances 32. The system includes at least two manifolds 28 that are fluidly interconnected via hoses 26/30. Such an arrangement allows for an expandable and customizable gas distribution system capable of suppling various appliances using a single gas supply 24.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was effectively filed to modify the gas distribution system
of the device of the combination of Steininger in view of Romanek to include plural manifolds and to fluidly interconnect the manifolds in a similar manner as the manifold 28 of the gas distribution system 22 as taught by Lee since such a modification provides an expandable and customizable gas distribution system capable of suppling various gas appliances using a single gas supply.
As such, the device of the combination of Steininger US-7600536 in view of Romanek FR-2742518 and Lee US-20080035219 teaches the limitations of:
---Claim 16. A gas distribution system (see the gas distribution system 10 of Steininger as modified by Romanek and Lee) comprising:
a plurality of manifolds (manifold 30 of Steininger as modified by Romanek and Lee with Lee teaching of interconnecting manifolds 28 to expand the gas distribution system), each manifold including:
a manifold body (see the body of the manifold 30 of Steininger) defining a manifold passage (passage 26 of Steininger);
a plurality of ports (see the various ports where fitting/connectors 32/36/50 are attached to the manifold of Steininger as modified by Romanek) on the manifold body, wherein each of the plurality of ports defines i) a port opening (the opening of the port for receiving the fitting/connectors 32/36/50 of Steininger, see also the frontal opening of female fitting 16 of Romanek which receives the male fitting 10) extending through a front of the port to and in communication with the manifold passage, and ii) at least one bayonet slot (see the two diametrically opposed bayonet slots 34 of female fitting 16 as taught by Romanek which are included to the inner portion of the port of the manifold of Steininger) extending from and in registration with the port opening; and
a plurality of hoses (see at least hoses 42 in Steininger, see also hoses 26 and 30 of Lee) connected to the plurality of manifolds, wherein each hose includes
a hose body (the body of the hose) having opposite longitudinal ends (with one end attached to the manifold and the other attached to another attached to the gas source or an appliance or to another manifold as taught by Lee);
a fitting (see the fitting/connectors 32/36/50 of Steininger as modified to include an annular seal 26 and two diametrically opposed bayonet pins 36 on an outer surface in a similar manner as taught by the male fitting 10 of Romanek) having opposite proximal and distal end portions (the rearward end and the opposite forward end which couples to the manifold), the fitting including a hose connector (the connection to the hose at the rearward end) at the proximal end portion of the fitting and connected to one of the longitudinal ends of the hose body (see at least Fig. 1 of Steininger and Figs. 2A-3 of Lee), and a manifold connector (the portion of fitting/connectors that include the bayonet pins 36) at the distal end portion of the fitting, wherein the manifold connector includes a generally cylindrical connector body (see at least Fig. 1 of Romanek) received in the port opening of one of the ports of the manifold, at least one bayonet pin (see the two diametrically opposed bayonet pins 36 as taught by Romanek and which are provided an outer surface of fitting/connectors 32/36/50 of Steininger to allow a bayonet connection between the manifold and the fitting/connectors) extending radially outward from the connector body and received in at least one bayonet slot extending from and in registration with the port opening, and at least one annular seal (see the annular seal 26 as taught by Romanek) on the connector body sealingly engaging an interior of the port defining the port opening (see at least Fig. 1 of Romanek).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4 and 17-20 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art are:
---References A (RV gas systems):
Jaeger US-10352564, Frantz US-7806138, Steininger US-7600536, Perry US-4223692 and
Lee US-20080035219.
---References B (Manifolds):
Lang US-12656032, Kluss US-12553555, Qin US-12535169, Hestetun US-12529440, Espinoza US-12442474, Hagen US-12429261, Hagen US-12410876, Whipkey US-12385584, Guo US-12228232, Rodriguez US-12129942, Zarins US-12078277, Braathen US-11802394, O’Connor US-11566741, Weragoda-Vidanelage US-11137094, Kawasaki US-10995894, Dusky US-10712014, York US-10184604, Skavicus US-10160149, Choi US-9371947, Breyer US-9353897, Ellis US-8336573, Itou US-8240715, Rehder US-6929032, Fukano US-6832788, Klampfer US-6196256, Poillucci US-6196255, LaMantia US-5927337, Lopez US-5474102, Konno US-5050631, Legris US-4782852, Miller US-4726399, Alferes US-4088436, Legris US-3934605, Graham US-3560027, Demler US-3506029, Lagreid US-3140740,
Nasu US-20160319975, Larsson US-20130009396, McKenzie US-20120286506, Rossall US-20090065076, Boyher US-20080276998, Ferrero US-20080111376, Bulter US-20080105311, Higgins US-20060065317, Fulcher US-20050199293, Marzorati US-20030102039, Giacomini US-20010027817,
Billig DE-102007041990, Erb FR-2632189 and De Greef WO-02061325.
---References C (Bayonet Fittings):
Kumashiro US-12560266, Tamaoka US-12474004, Donnet US-11959574, Gibson US-11713840, Harmon US-11589499, Hughes US-11337561, Vermillion US-4758023, Parsons US-3603621, Dieckmann US-3596936, Porterners US-3538950, Davidson US-3162470, Maiman US-2613089, Homand US-1589469, Hart US-1339620, Nelson US-1303367, DeWitt US-1195433, Gill US-0808446, Exley US-0796306, Moyle US-0692795, Brown US-0007318, Smith US-1851992, Gribben US-1002264,
Stach US-20260160368, Currey US-20250020395, Sparks US-20080093846,
Brethes DE-102016218191, Schwabe DE-202010002870, Grabens WO-2007025494 and Romanek FR-2742518.
As best understood by the Office, References A shows various examples of prior art gas distribution systems used in recreational vehicles similar to applicant’s general invention. References B teaches of examples of prior art manifolds for various fluid systems with many of them including both axial and radial ports similar to a feature of the claimed invention. References C teaches of various examples of prior art bayonet connectors which are a type of quick connector wherein one connector comprises at least one bayonet slot and the other connector includes at least one bayonet pin such that when the connectors are coupled the bayonet pin is inserted into the bayonet slot where it is locked by some form of locking surface similar to a feature of the claimed invention. As it was mentioned in the rejections above, from References A, Steininger US-7600536 teaches of a manifold for a gas distribution system and Lee US-20080035219 teaches of interconnection various manifolds to create an expandable and customizable gas distribution system similar to key features of the claimed invention. Notice that these references fail to show the specifics of the bayonet connectors as claimed. From References C, Romanek FR-2742518 teaches many of the features of the bayonet connector as claimed. However, the closest prior art fails to disclose or render obvious the specific structure of bayonet connection having the bayonet slot 28 with the transverse locking portion 36 and the serif portion 36A, wherein the serif portion is configured to permit partial retraction of the fitting while the bayonet pin is aligned therewith, and wherein the fitting is rotatably fixed within the port when partially retracted into the serif portion in combination with all the limitations as claimed in claims 3-4 and 17-20 and as shown in at least Figs. 1 and 12 of the application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID COLON-MORALES, whose telephone number is 571-270-1741 and fax number is 571-270-2741. If the applicant has authorized internet communications via the filling of form PTO/SB/439, the examiner can be reached via email at david.colon-morales@uspto.gov , email communication is not permitted if the applicant has not filed an authorization for internet communication (see MPEP 502.03 for more details on internet communications). The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (7:30AM-3:30PM EST).
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 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 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.
/DAVID COLON-MORALES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights