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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-2, 14 and 15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 of U.S. Patent No. 11,592,127. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they claim the same subject matter.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,879,570. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they claim the same subject matter.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 11,592,127. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they claim the same subject matter.
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) 1-8 and 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 9401578, Cumant.
In regards to claim 1, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses a fitting comprising: a fitting body (2) defining a hole (5); and an indicator assembly comprising a fastener (9) extending through the hole, a first indicator (8) mounted on the fastener, and a second indicator (7) mounted on the fastener, the fastener defining a fastener axis; wherein the second indicator is axially in between the first indicator and the fitting body upon the fastener being oriented in a first position, and wherein the second indicator is radially inwardly or radially outwardly of the first indicator upon the fastener being oriented in a second position.
In regards to claim 2, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses the fitting body defines a cavity (col. 4, lines 9-11), the cavity defines a cavity axis and the hole defines a hole axis, and wherein the hole axis of the hole is perpendicular to the cavity axis of the cavity.
In regards to claim 3, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses each of the first indicator and the second indicator are formed as rings and are concentric to the hole axis.
In regards to claim 4, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses the fastener defines a head and a shaft, the shaft extends through the hole in the fitting body, each of the first indicator and the second indicator are mounted on the shaft.
In regards to claim 5, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses a height of the first indicator is different than a height of the second indicator.
In regards to claim 6, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses a color of the first indicator is different than a color the second indicator (because they are different materials).
In regards to claim 7, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses a hardness of the first indicator is different than a hardness of the second indicator (col. 4, lines 49-52).
In regards to claim 8, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses an elasticity of the first indicator is different than an elasticity of the second indicator.
In regards to claim 13, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses an upper surface of the first indicator at the first end of the first indicator is substantially planar, and wherein a lower surface of the second indicator at the second end of the second indicator is substantially planar.
In regards to claim 14, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses a fitting comprising: a fitting body defining a hole; and an indicator assembly comprising a fastener extending through the hole, a first indicator mounted on the fastener external to the hole, and a second indicator mounted on the fastener external to the hole, the fastener defining a fastener axis; wherein the second indicator is axially adjacent to the first indicator upon the fastener being oriented in a first position, and wherein the second indicator is pushed radially inward or radially outward of the first indicator by the fitting body upon the fastener being oriented in a second position.
In regards to claim 15, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses the fitting body defines a cavity, the cavity defines a cavity axis and the hole defines a hole axis, and wherein the hole axis of the hole is perpendicular to the cavity axis of the cavity.
In regards to claim 16, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses each of the first indicator and the second indicator are formed as rings and are concentric to the hole axis.
In regards to claim 17, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses a height of the first indicator is different than a height of the second indicator.
In regards to claim 18, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses a color of the first indicator is different than a color the second indicator.
In regards to claim 19, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses a hardness of the first indicator is different than a hardness of the second indicator.
In regards to claim 20, in Figures 1-2B and paragraphs detailing said figures, Cumant discloses an elasticity of the first indicator is different than an elasticity of the second indicator.
Claim(s) 1, 5-14 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20150030385, Bucknell.
In regards to claim 1, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses a fitting comprising: a fitting body (101, 102) defining a hole (71, 72); and an indicator assembly comprising a fastener (10) extending through the hole, a first indicator (3) mounted on the fastener, and a second indicator (2) mounted on the fastener, the fastener defining a fastener axis; wherein the second indicator is axially in between the first indicator and the fitting body upon the fastener being oriented in a first position, and wherein the second indicator is radially inwardly or radially outwardly of the first indicator upon the fastener being oriented in a second position.
In regards to claim 5, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses a height of the first indicator is different than a height of the second indicator.
In regards to claim 6, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses a color of the first indicator is different than a color the second indicator (because they are different materials).
In regards to claim 7, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses a hardness of the first indicator is different than a hardness of the second indicator ([0076]-[0077]).
In regards to claim 8, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses an elasticity of the first indicator is different than an elasticity of the second indicator.
In regards to claim 9, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses the first indicator defines a first end, a second end opposite the first end, and an inner surface; the inner surface defining a conical, hollow bore extending from the first end to the second end; a diameter of the conical, hollow bore at the first end is less than a diameter of the conical, hollow bore at the second end; and the second indicator is configured to engage the conical, hollow bore of the first indicator in the second position.
In regards to claim 10, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses the second indicator defines a first end, a second end opposite the first end, and an outer surface; the outer surface of the second indicator defines a conical shape; and a diameter of the outer surface at the first end of the second indicator is less than a diameter of the outer surface at the second end of the second indicator.
In regards to claim 11, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses an angle of the outer surface of the second indicator is substantially the same as an angle of the inner surface of the first indicator.
In regards to claim 12, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses the first indicator comprises an elastic material configured to expand to receive the second indicator within the conical hollow, bore.
In regards to claim 13, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses an upper surface of the first indicator at the first end of the first indicator is substantially planar, and wherein a lower surface of the second indicator at the second end of the second indicator is substantially planar.
In regards to claim 14, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses a fitting comprising: a fitting body defining a hole; and an indicator assembly comprising a fastener extending through the hole, a first indicator mounted on the fastener external to the hole, and a second indicator mounted on the fastener external to the hole, the fastener defining a fastener axis; wherein the second indicator is axially adjacent to the first indicator upon the fastener being oriented in a first position, and wherein the second indicator is pushed radially inward or radially outward of the first indicator by the fitting body upon the fastener being oriented in a second position.
In regards to claim 17, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses a height of the first indicator is different than a height of the second indicator.
In regards to claim 18, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses a color of the first indicator is different than a color the second indicator.
In regards to claim 19, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses a hardness of the first indicator is different than a hardness of the second indicator.
In regards to claim 20, in Figures 2-3 and paragraphs detailing said figures, Bucknell discloses an elasticity of the first indicator is different than an elasticity of the second indicator.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON M DUNWOODY whose telephone number is (571)272-7080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Matthew Troutman can be reached at 571-270-3654. 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.
/AARON M DUNWOODY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679