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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim(s) 2-4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Korean Patent No. 20-2015-0004021 (“KR ‘021”).
With regard to claim 2, and as shown in Figure 2, KR ‘201 discloses an adaptor device, comprising:
a conduit structure (at 120) defining an adaptor conduit extending between an adaptor inlet (see below) and an adaptor outlet (at 124a), the adaptor conduit including an elbow conduit (at 122) extending to the adaptor outlet, the conduit structure configured to at least partially extend through an access point opening (see below) into a conduit section interior (see below) of a conduit section of a conduit (at 130) such that the adaptor outlet is within the conduit section interior and a central axis (see below) of the adaptor outlet extends at least partially parallel to a longitudinal axis (see below) of the conduit section within the conduit section interior (as shown in Fig 2); and
a conduit connector (at 123), the conduit connector configured to engage at least a portion of the conduit section to couple the adaptor device to the conduit section (where 123 engages a portion of 130).
PNG
media_image1.png
362
488
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 3, KR ‘201 discloses wherein
the adaptor device is configured to direct a fluid to flow through the adaptor conduit and through the adaptor outlet as a fluid stream (wherein the adaptor device is capable of being configured to direct a fluid through the adaptor conduit at 120 and through the adaptor outlet at 124a) directed through an upper portion of the conduit section in a particular flow direction (flow direction along the central axis) at least partially parallel to the longitudinal axis of the conduit section, such that the fluid stream is at least partially vertically spaced apart in a vertical direction from a lower portion of the conduit section, the vertical direction opposite to a direction of gravity, wherein
the upper portion (see above) of the conduit section includes a portion of the conduit section interior above the longitudinal axis of the conduit section interior in relation to the direction of gravity, and
the lower portion (see above) of the conduit section interior is a portion of the conduit section interior that is below the longitudinal axis in relation to the direction of gravity.
With regard to claim 4, KR ‘201 discloses wherein
the particular flow direction is parallel to the longitudinal axis of the conduit section (as shown in Fig 2 above).
With regard to claim 7, KR ‘201 discloses further comprising:
an inlet connector (at 110) configured to couple with a fluid supply conduit external to the conduit to cause the adaptor inlet to be in fluid communication with the fluid supply conduit (wherein the inlet connector at 110 can be configured to be coupled to a fluid supply conduit).
With regard to claim 8, KR ‘201 discloses wherein the conduit connector includes a clamp (see above) that is configured to directly engage and clamp an outer sidewall surface (see above) of a conduit section sidewall of the conduit section to couple the adaptor device to the conduit section (as shown in Fig 2).
With regard to claim 11, and as shown in Fig 2, KR ‘201 discloses a method to provide a fluid connection into a conduit section interior of a conduit section of a conduit (at 130) through a sidewall thickness of a conduit section sidewall of the conduit section, the method comprising:
inserting a conduit structure (at 120) of an adaptor device at least partially through an access point opening (see above) through the sidewall thickness and into the conduit section interior (see above), the conduit structure defining an adaptor conduit extending between an adaptor inlet (see above) and an adaptor outlet (at 124a), the adaptor conduit including an elbow conduit (at 122) extending to the adaptor outlet (at 124a), wherein the inserting causes the adaptor outlet to be within the conduit section interior (as shown in Fig 2) and a central axis (see above) of the adaptor outlet to extend at least partially parallel to a longitudinal axis (see above) of the conduit section within the conduit section interior; and
coupling the adaptor device to the conduit section (via connector at 123), based on engaging a conduit connector (at 123) with at least a portion of the conduit section (where 123 engages a portion of 130).
With regard to claim 12, KR ‘201 discloses further comprising:
directing a fluid to flow through the adaptor conduit and through the adaptor outlet as a fluid stream (wherein the adaptor device directs a fluid through the adaptor conduit at 120 and through the adaptor outlet at 124a) directed through an upper portion of the conduit section in a particular flow direction (flow direction along the central axis) at least partially parallel to the longitudinal axis of the conduit section, such that the fluid stream is at least partially vertically spaced apart in a vertical direction from a lower portion of the conduit section, the vertical direction opposite to a direction of gravity, wherein
the upper portion (see above) of the conduit section includes a portion of the conduit section interior above the longitudinal axis of the conduit section interior in relation to the direction of gravity, and
the lower portion (see above) of the conduit section interior is a portion of the conduit section interior that is below the longitudinal axis in relation to the direction of gravity.
With regard to claim 14, KR ‘201 discloses wherein
the central axis (see above) of the adaptor outlet extends parallel to the longitudinal axis (see above) of the conduit section within the conduit section interior (as shown in Fig 2 above).
With regard to claim 16, KR ‘201 discloses wherein the conduit connector includes a clamp (see above), and the engaging of the conduit connector with at least the portion of the conduit section causes the clamp to directly engage and clamp an outer sidewall surface (see above) of the conduit section sidewall to couple the adaptor device to the conduit section (as shown in Fig 2).
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) 6, 9, 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR ‘201.
With regard to claim 6, KR ‘201 discloses the claimed invention but does not disclose that at least a portion of the conduit structure defining the elbow conduit comprises silicone.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the elbow conduit comprise silicone with a reasonable expectation of success to provide flexibility in the elbow conduit and because it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
With regard to claim 9, KR ‘201 discloses the claimed invention but does not disclose further comprising a sealing member configured to seal at least an outer edge of the access point opening based on the conduit connector coupling the conduit structure to the conduit section.
The Examiner takes Official Notice wherein it is old and well known in the art to add a sealing member to prevent leakage and provide a more secure fluid connection.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a sealing member with a reasonable expectation of success to prevent leakage and provide a more secure fluid connection and because it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known element for use on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
With regard to claim 15, KR ‘201 discloses the claimed invention but does not disclose that at least a portion of the conduit structure defining the elbow conduit comprises silicone.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the elbow conduit comprise silicone with a reasonable expectation of success to provide flexibility in the elbow conduit and because it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
With regard to claim 17, KR ‘201 discloses the claimed invention but does not disclose that the coupling of the adaptor device to the conduit section includes causing a sealing member to seal at least an outer edge of the access point opening.
The Examiner takes Official Notice wherein it is old and well known in the art to add a sealing member to prevent leakage and provide a more secure fluid connection.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a sealing member with a reasonable expectation of success to prevent leakage and provide a more secure fluid connection and because it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known element for use on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
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 2, 5-11, 13 and 15-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 7, 8, 10, 13, 15-17, 24, and 26-28 of U.S. Patent No. 12,140,337 (“Patent ‘337”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the broader recitation of an adaptor device with a conduit structure and a conduit connector as presently claimed in the current application along with the independently and dependently claimed limitations of claims 2, 5-11, 13 and 15-18 are merely a broadened form of the limitations as disclosed in claims 1, 2, 7, 8, 10, 13, 15-17, 24, and 26-28 of Patent ‘337.
Claims 2-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7, 9-17, 19 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,379,133 (“Patent ‘133”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the broader recitation of an adaptor device with a conduit structure and a conduit connector as presently claimed in the current application along with the independently and dependently claimed limitations of claims 2-18 are merely a broadened form of the limitations as disclosed in claims 1-7, 9-17, 19 and 20 of Patent ‘133.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FANNIE KEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1820. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm.
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.
/F.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3679
/Matthew Troutman/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3679