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 .
It is noted that applicant should review rejection in parent applicant 17890818 which reject much narrower claims (see non-final office action mailed 1/17/2025).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted in the application are given cursory review. Applicant has provided many references and examiner request on the applicant to define best 10 references that apply to the elected invention. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-12 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, “to be positioned within a bore”, when applicant is claiming only a packing assembly with intended use to the bore, how seal and/or sleeve and/or packing components are related to the bore is intended?
It is noted that applicant is positively claiming the bore in claim 1 (“a sleeve to compress a seal against at least a portion of the bore to block fluid flow from the bore…sleeve”, this only occurs when the packing assembly is positively placed in the bore).
Claim 3, “a ring to be positioned within the bore, the ring to at least partially compress the seal” unclear how this is possible with limitation directed to intended use to the bore? For examination purpose the bore is positively claimed in claim 1 and this applies to claim 3. In conclusion “a ring positioned with in the bore, the ring to at least partially compress the seal” is what is claimed.
Claim 6, “to be positioned within a bore”, when applicant is claiming only a packing assembly with intended use to the bore, how seal and/or sleeve and/or packing components are related to the bore is intended?
It is noted that applicant is positively claiming the bore in claim 1 (“a sleeve to compress a seal against at least a portion of the bore to block fluid flow from the bore…sleeve”, this only occurs when the packing assembly is positively placed in the bore).
Claim 9, “to be positioned within a bore”, when applicant is claiming only a packing assembly with intended use to the bore, how seal and/or sleeve and/or packing components are related to the bore is intended?
It is noted that applicant is positively claiming the bore in claim 1 (“a sleeve to compress a seal against at least a portion of the bore to block fluid flow from the bore…shelf”, this only occurs when the packing assembly is positively placed in the bore).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claim(s) 1-12 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stanton et al (US.20070273105A).
Stanton discloses a packing assembly (e.g. figure below) to be positioned in a bore (e.g. see figures), comprising a sleeve (PS, figure below) to compress a seal (e.g. 458 or S in figure below) against at least a portion of the bore to block fluid flow from the bore (e.g. see figure below), the sleeve positioned to extend along a sleeve length (e.g. see length of sleeve between 1st End and 2nd End, see figure below), at least a first portion (e.g. 1st portion having part of 410 and 1st End) of the sleeve length positioned within the bore and at least a second portion of the sleeve length positioned to extend axially beyond the bore (e.g. the second portion having 1st End), the second portion of the sleeve including a coupling component (e.g. the coupling component which would not be in the bore of 12 as shown by way example in figure 14a-14b having threads 1219) and packing components (e.g. PC, figure below) positioned radially inward of at least a portion of the sleeve.
Regarding claim 2: Wherein the coupling component is positioned on a radially outward facing portion of the sleeve (e.g. the coupling component having the 1st End which is radially outward facing portion of the sleeve).
Regarding claim 3: The packing assembly further comprising a ring (e.g. R, figure below) to be positioned within the bore, the ring to at least partially compress the seal (e.g. see figure below).
Regarding claim 4: Wherein the packing components are positioned on a ring shelf (e.g. RS, figure below).
Regarding claim 5: Wherein the coupling component is not engaged with the bore (e.g. as shown by way of example the coupling component is not engaged in the bore of 12 in figure 14a).
Regarding claim 6: Wherein the second portion of the sleeve having the coupling component positioned on a radially outward facing portion of the sleeve (e.g. see the coupling component having threads 1219). Wherein the packing components positioned radially inward of at least a portion of the sleeve (see figure below and rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 7: Wherein the packing components are positioned on a ring shelf (see rejection of claims above).
Regarding claim 8: Wherein the coupling component is not engaged with the bore (see rejection of claims above).
Regarding claims 9-12: See rejection of claims above.
PNG
media_image1.png
450
665
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. It is noted that many references on IDS read on the current claims (applicant should review all references and office actions of previous applications).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL A PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-7060. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am to 4:00pm.
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, Christine Mills can be reached on 571-272-8322. 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.
/VISHAL A PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675