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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/30/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1, 2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-–3 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12331867 B1. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The amendment to claim 7 overcomes the 112 rejection.
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) 1–3, 6 and 8–20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King et al. (USPN 9599268 B2) in view of Fischer et al. (USPN 4993894).
Regarding Claim 1, King discloses a system, comprising: an installation guide device (122) configured to form an access point opening (where the access point opening is the bore created in the conduit after installation guide has penetrated the conduit) through a sidewall thickness of a conduit section (101) of a conduit to provide a fluid connection into a conduit section interior of the conduit section through the sidewall thickness of the conduit section, a guide conduit (158) having at least a lower guide opening (Fig. 7), the installation guide device configured to enable longitudinal movement of the drill bit device at least partially through the guide conduit and at least partially through the lower guide opening (Col. 8, Lines 18–25, where the movement is explained as pressed down which implies a longitudinal movement), and an adaptor device (100) configured to establish a fluid connection between a fluid supply source and the conduit section interior of the conduit section of the conduit through the access point opening based (Col. 3, Lines 32–42) on being coupled to the conduit section at the access point opening subsequently to the installation guide device being decoupled from the conduit section to expose the access point opening (Col. 6, Line 57 through Col. 7, Line 31), the adaptor device including an adaptor conduit structure (152) at least partially defining an adaptor conduit extending between an adaptor inlet and an adaptor outlet (Fig. 6), an inlet connector (148) configured to couple with the fluid supply source externally to the conduit section to cause the adaptor inlet to be in fluid communication with the fluid supply source (Col. 5, Lines 8–29), and a conduit connector (102) configured to engage the conduit section to couple the adaptor device to the conduit section to at least partially align the adaptor outlet with the access point opening to establish fluid communication from the adaptor inlet to the conduit section interior through at least the adaptor conduit (Fig. 1). King discloses utilizing a tool to actuate the spike into the conduit but does not disclose the tool as being a drill bit device configured to drill through the sidewall thickness of the conduit section.
Fischer teaches a drill bit device (Fig. 2) including a drill bit body (1) and a sheath structure (10) surrounding at least a portion of the drill bit body (Fig. 2) in order to prevent the drill bit from advancing past the prescribed location (Pg. 5, Lines 24–26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tool of King with a drill bit as taught by Fischer in order to ensure that the tool does not advance. Thus, preventing a hole to be larger than designed.
Per the King–Fischer combination, Fischer’s drill bit (Fig. 2) replaces King’s element 160.
The King–Fischer combination teaches a drill bit device (King 122/ Fischer Fig. 2) configured to drill through the sidewall thickness (King Col. 4, Lines 11–16) of the conduit section (King 101), and a protrusion stop structure (Fischer 22) configured to limit longitudinal protrusion of the drill bit device from the lower guide opening to a particular protrusion distance (Fischer Pg. 5, Lines 24–26), the particular protrusion distance equal to an axial length of an exposed portion of the drill bit body that extends from at least one of the sheath structure or the protrusion stop structure to a point of the drill bit body (Fischer 2).
Regarding Claim 2, the King–Fischer combination teaches the protrusion stop structure is fixed in relation to the drill bit device such that the protrusion stop structure is configured to move with the drill bit device in relation to the guide conduit (Fischer Fig. 2, where the protrusion stop and the drill bit device are a singular element), and inhibit protrusion of the drill bit device beyond the particular protrusion distance from the lower guide opening while the installation guide device is coupled to the conduit section based on a lower surface of the protrusion stop structure contacting an outer sidewall surface of the conduit section (Fischer Fig. 2, where the protrusion stop structure prevents longitudinal advancement past element 12).
Regarding Claim 3, the King–Fischer combination teaches the installation guide device includes a guide connector (King 164/166) that is configured to couple the installation guide device to the conduit section (King 101). King Col. 6, Lines 15–56.
Regarding Claim 6, the King–Fischer combination teaches the installation guide device further includes a distal stop structure (Fischer 27) that is configured to inhibit longitudinal movement of the drill bit device away from the lower guide opening and at least partially through the guide conduit.
Regarding Claim 8, the King–Fischer combination teaches the adaptor device includes an inlet nozzle (King where the inlet nozzle is the structure that connects to element 152) extending to a distal end from an upper end of the adaptor conduit structure (King Fig. 6), the inlet nozzle defining the adaptor inlet (King Fig. 1, where the adaptor inlet is the entryway of the channel 152) at the distal end of the inlet nozzle and further defining at least a portion of the adaptor conduit (King 152) extending to the adaptor inlet, such that the adaptor conduit at least partially extends through the inlet nozzle to the adaptor inlet.
Regarding Claim 9, the King–Fischer combination teaches the inlet connector (King 148) includes a fitting configured to engage an inner surface of a fluid supply conduit based on being inserted into the fluid supply conduit (King Col. 5, Lines 25–29).
Regarding Claim 10, the King–Fischer combination teaches the adaptor conduit structure has an upper end and a lower end (King Fig. 6, where this is inherent for a conduit), and the conduit connector (King 102) is configured to couple the adaptor device to the conduit section such that the lower end of the adaptor conduit structure is held in place proximate to an outer sidewall surface of the conduit section (King Fig. 1) to at least partially align the adaptor outlet with the access point opening (King Col. 5, Lines 25–29).
Regarding Claims 11 and 17, the King–Fischer combination teaches the conduit connector includes a clamp (King 108) that is configured to directly engage and clamp the outer sidewall surface to couple the adaptor device to the conduit section opening (King Col. 4, Lines 17–44).
Regarding Claim 12, the King–Fischer combination teaches the adaptor device includes a sealing member (King 154/156) at the lower end of the adaptor conduit structure (King Fig. 6), the sealing member configured to seal at least an outer edge of the access point opening (King where the access point opening is the bore created in the conduit after installation guide has penetrated the conduit) based on the conduit connector coupling the adaptor device to the conduit section (King Col. 5, Line 53 through Col. 6, Line 15 which defines the manner in which the adaptor device is connected and sealed to the conduit).
Regarding Claim 13, the King–Fischer combination teaches the adaptor device further includes an outlet nozzle (King 150) extending to a distal end from the lower end of the adaptor conduit structure, the outlet nozzle defining the adaptor outlet at the distal end of the outlet nozzle and further defining at least a portion of the adaptor conduit extending to the adaptor outlet, such that the adaptor conduit at least partially extends through the outlet nozzle to the adaptor outlet, and the outlet nozzle is configured to at least partially extend through the access point opening from the outer sidewall surface of the conduit section based on the conduit connector coupling the adaptor device to the conduit section (King Col. 5, Lines 8–29).
Regarding Claims 14 and 18, the King–Fischer combination teaches the adaptor device includes a sealing member at the lower end of the adaptor conduit structure, the sealing member at least partially surrounding a proximate end of the outlet nozzle in a plan view (King Fig. 6), the sealing member configured to seal at least an outer edge of the access point opening based on the conduit connector coupling the adaptor device to the conduit section such that the outlet nozzle at least partially extends through the access point opening from the outer sidewall surface of the conduit section (King Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 15, the King–Fischer combination teaches the outlet nozzle is configured to extend through an entirety of the access point opening from the outer sidewall surface such that the distal end of the outlet nozzle is within the conduit section interior based on the conduit connector coupling the adaptor device to the conduit section (King Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 16, the King–Fischer combination teaches the outlet nozzle defines an opening having at least a side opening through a sidewall of the outlet nozzle (King Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 19, the King–Fischer combination teaches the adaptor conduit structure has an upper end and a lower end, the conduit connector is configured to couple the adaptor device to the conduit section such that the lower end of the adaptor conduit structure is held in place proximate to the access point opening to at least partially align the adaptor outlet with the access point opening (see the claim 10 rejection which includes the same language), the conduit connector (King 148) includes a stepped connector structure (King 154/156), the stepped connector structure defining at least two axially separated connection positions (King Fig. 3) associated with different conduit diameters and each configured to receive and engage access point openings having different diameters, such that the stepped connector structure is configured to couple the adaptor device with the access point opening at a particular one of the at least two axially separated connection positions based on a diameter associated with the access point opening (King Col. 5, Line 53 through Col. 6, Line 15, where element 154 has a size that correlates to a preliminary hold tap and element 156 has a size that correlates to complete connection).
Regarding Claim 20, the King–Fischer combination teaches the stepped connector structure defines the at least two axially separated connection positions as being associated with different conduit outer diameters, such that the stepped connector structure is configured to couple the adaptor device with the access point opening at the particular one of the at least two axially separated connection positions based on a conduit outer diameter associated with the access point opening, or the stepped connector structure defines the at least two axially separated connection positions as being associated with different conduit inner diameters, such that the stepped connector structure is configured to couple the adaptor device with the access point opening at the particular one of the at least two axially separated connection positions based on a conduit inner diameter associated with the access point opening (King Col. 5, Line 53 through Col. 6, Line 15, where element 154 has a size that correlates to a preliminary hold tap and element 156 has a size that correlates to complete connection).
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over King et al. (USPN 9599268 B2) in view of Fischer et al. (USPN 4993894) in further view Varney (USPN 6892907 B2).
Regarding Claim 7, the King–Fischer combination teaches the conduit but does not teach an air conditioning system.
Varney teaches the conduit includes a condensate drain line (41) of an air conditioning system (Col. 2, Lines 53–60).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the utility of installation guide device and adapter to be a tapping means to incorporate additional piping when another pipe is need to connect another system for an air conditioning system of Varney so that the adapter of the King–Fischer combination performs the tapping means to incorporate additional piping when another pipe is need to connect another system in the air conditioning system of Varney.
Per the King–Fischer–Varney combination, King’s adaptor 100 is located on Varney’s pipe 45 so as to connect the cleaner apparatus system on Varney’s pipe 39.
The King–Fischer–Varney combination teaches the condensate drain line (Varney 41) configured to direct condensate from a drip pan (Varney 11) of an air handler of the air conditioning system to a condensate drain outlet (Varney 45) through at least the conduit section interior (Varney Fig. 1); the fluid supply source includes a cleaner dispensing system (Varney 10) configured to dispense a cleaning composition (Varney Col. 2, Lines 53–67); and the adaptor device (King 100) is configured to, based on being coupled to both the conduit section and the fluid supply source (Varney Fig. 1), receive cleaning composition at the adaptor inlet from the cleaner dispensing system based on the cleaner dispensing system dispensing the cleaning composition through an outlet thereof (Varney Fig. 1), and direct the received cleaning composition through the adaptor conduit and into the conduit section interior to be supplied into the condensate drain line to cause at least some biological substances to be removed from at least a portion of the condensate drain line.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4–5 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.
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 Angelisa L. Hicks whose telephone number is 571-272-9552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:30AM-5:00PM 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 supervisor, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607 or Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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.
/Angelisa L. Hicks/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights