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 .
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 combination of Species A and Species B into one single structure must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Primarily, the claims state at least 2 different species that are combined into one device. However, the drawings do not illustrate a combination of the species. Species A pertains to drawings 1-4 while Species B pertains to drawings 5-7.
Claim 1 states the combination of (1) a first adapter (Species A) and a second adapter (Species B); (2) a first insertion head (species A) and a second insertion head (Species B); (3) a first adapter comprises a first protrusion (Species A) and a second adapter comprises a second protrusion (Species B).
Claim 1 compares first protrusion is smaller than a height of a second protrusion. However, this is not illustrated in the drawings and the drawings do not illustrate the height of the first and second protrusion.
The combination of Species A and Species B are continued throughout the remainder of the claims. It is unclear how species A is combined with species B because the drawings do not illustrate the combination.
Species A and Species B are not supported in the same structure, however they are claimed as if they can be combined into one structure.
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 1-14 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.
The claims contain multiple 112(b) or 112 second paragraph rejections.
Primarily, the claims state at least 2 different species that are combined into one device. However, the drawings do not illustrate a combination of the species. Species A pertains to drawings 1-4 while Species B pertains to drawings 5-7.
Claim 1 states the combination of (1) a first adapter (Species A) and a second adapter (Species B); (2) a first insertion head (species A) and a second insertion head (Species B); (3) a first adapter comprises a first protrusion (Species A) and a second adapter comprises a second protrusion (Species B).
Claim 1 compares first protrusion is smaller than a height of a second protrusion. However, this is not illustrated in the drawings and the drawings do not illustrate the height of the first and second protrusion.
The combination of Species A and Species B are continued throughout the remainder of the claims. It is unclear how species A is combined with species B because the drawings do not illustrate the combination.
Species A and Species B are not supported in the same structure, however they are claimed as if they can be combined into one structure.
Claims 2-14 are rejected based on their dependency on Claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-14, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Moore et al. US PG PUB 20120018020 (“Moore”).
Regarding Claim 1, Moore discloses an installation structure of a valve seat of a faucet (ann. fig. 15), comprising: the valve seat (1060),
PNG
media_image1.png
614
521
media_image1.png
Greyscale
MOORE – ANNOTATED FIGURE 15
Regarding Claim 2, Moore discloses the valve seat (1060) is selectively connected to the
Regarding Claim 3, Moore discloses
Regarding Claim 4, Moore discloses
Regarding Claim 5, Moore discloses
Regarding Claim 6, Moore discloses
Regarding Claim 7, Moore discloses a second water nozzle assembly is configured to be sleeved on the second three- way pipe (1020), and a second water outlet pipe (1016) is configured to pass through the second water nozzle assembly (1011a) and be inserted into the second protrusion.
Regarding Claims 8-14, Moore discloses the installation structure of the valve seat of the faucet according to the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daphne Barry whose telephone number is (571)272-9966 and fax number is (571) 273-9966. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 9 AM-6 PM (eastern).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor either 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/DAPHNE M BARRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights