DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
PNG
media_image1.png
527
476
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 1 now recites that “the first portion extends radially away from the body relative to the third portion”. This is not described in the specification or shown in the drawings. Referring to the annotated fig. 3 of the instant specification above, it can be seen that the 2nd portion must be where has been labeled as it comprises the securing member (152). Since the third portion is claimed as being between the first and 3rd member it must also be where has been labeled. Therefore, the 1st potion does not extend radially away from the body relative to the third portion as claimed, but rather extends radially toward the body relative to the third portion. In other words, the radial extent of the first portion is never greater than the third portion. Therefore, this limitation lacks proper support. For examination purposes only, claim 1 will be interpreted as requiring that the first portion extends radially away from the body, but not relative to the third portion to be consistent with the disclosed invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 1, 2, and 4-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wine et al. (US 2023/0139756 hereinafter "Wine"). For portions of the rejection, refer to the annotated fig. of Wine below:
PNG
media_image2.png
418
527
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 1, Wine discloses a locking connector coupling assembly comprising a first connector (410) configured to decouple from a second connector (510) in response to a pullout force exceeding a predetermined threshold force, wherein:
the first connector comprises an inlet, an opening, and at least one engaging member
(460/groove at "544" in fig. 10) disposed therebetween,
the second connector comprises a body, an outlet portion, and at least one arm (550), each arm comprising:
a first portion (see annotated fig.);
a second portion (see annotated fig.) that extends comprises a securing member (544/recess at "460" in fig. 10); and
a third portion (see annotated fig.) disposed between the first portion and the
second portion, such that the first portion extends radially away from the body “relative to the third portion” (see 112 rejection above), and the second portion extends radially inward relative to the third portion (see annotated fig. at “544”).
In regards to claim 2, Wine further discloses the first connector includes a coupling portion (at 450) disposed between the inlet and the engaging member)
In regards to claim 4, Wine further discloses the securing member is a protrusion (544)
extending from a distal end of the at least one arm.
In regards to claims 5, 8, and 19, Wine further discloses the engaging member is a groove (see groove at "544" in fig. 10) circumferentially disposed on the first connector, the groove sized and shaped to receive and secure the protrusion of the at least one arm when the second connector is coupled to first connector (shown in fig. 10).
In regards to claims 6 and 20, Wine further discloses the securing member is a recess (recess at "460" in fig. 10) configured to engage with the at least one engaging member.
In regards to claims 7 and 9, Wine further discloses the engaging member comprises an
edge (460) circumferentially disposed on the first connector and sized and shaped to receive and secure the edge when the second connector is coupled to first connector (shown in fig. 10).
In regards to claim 10, Wine further discloses the second connector further comprises an additional opening, and the body is disposed between the additional opening and the outlet portion (see openings on both ends of connector).
In regards to claim 11, Wine further discloses the outlet portion includes an outlet that is fluidly connected to the additional opening via a channel (central bore) that extends through the body.
In regards to claim 12, Wine further discloses the additional opening is fluidly connected to the inlet when the first connector is coupled to the second connector (see central bore).
In regards to claim 13, Wine further discloses the at least one arm is biased radially inward and is configured to deflect radially outward (shown in figs. 9-10).
In regards to claim 14, Wine further discloses the securing member disengages from the
engaging member in response to the pullout force exceeding the predetermined threshold force. (see paragraphs [0031] - [0032]).
In regards to claim 15, Wine further discloses the first connector is configured to remain
coupled to the second connector when the pullout force does not exceed the predetermined threshold force (shown in fig. 10).
In regards to claims 16 and 18, Wine further discloses each arm further comprises a first inflection point between the first portion and the second portion and a second inflection point between the second portion and the third portion (any point can be arbitrarily called an inflection point, it is noted that there is no structure to define what constitutes an inflection point).
In regards to claim 17, Wine discloses a locking connector coupling assembly comprising:
a first connector (410) comprising a coupling portion with an inlet, an opening, and at least one engaging member (460/groove at "544" in fig. 10) disposed on the first connector body; and
a second connector (510) comprising a body and an outlet portion comprising an outlet and at least one arm (550), each arm comprising:
a first portion (see annotated fig.) that extends radially away from the body;
a second portion (see annotated fig.) that extends radially inward and comprises a
securing member (544/recess at "460" in fig. 10); and
a third portion (see annotated fig.) disposed between the first portion and the second portion and extending along part of the body at a different angle than the first portion and the second portion (shown in annotated fig.),
wherein the body is configured to be at least partially inserted into the opening to couple
the second connector to the first connector (shown in fig. 10),
wherein when the second connector is coupled to the first connector, the outlet portion is exposed and a fluid pathway is formed between the inlet and the outlet (shown in fig. 10),
wherein the first connector is configured to decouple from the second connector in response to a pullout force exceeding a predetermined threshold force (see paragraphs [0031] - [0032]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wine as applied to claim 2 above.
In regards to claim 3, Wine discloses the coupling assembly of claim 2 but does not disclose the coupling portion comprises a threaded portion.
The examiner is taking Official Notice that threaded bores are well-known in the art of fluid couplings and that threaded connections are used interchangeably with press-fit connections as shown in Wine.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the coupling portion of Wine as a threaded portion in order to prevent unwanted disconnection, producing no new or unexpected results.
Double Patenting
Claims 1 and 2-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,485,262 (reference patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1 and 2-16 are generic to all that is recited in claims 1-19 of the reference patent. In other words, claims 1-19 of the reference patent fully encompasses the subject matter of claims 1 and 2-16. Thus, the invention of claims 1-19 of the reference patent is in effect a "species" of the "generic" invention of claims 1 and 2-16. It has been held that the generic invention is anticipated by the species, see In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Since claims 1 and 2-16 are anticipated by claims 1-19 of the reference patent, claims 1 and 2-16 are not patentably distinct from claims 1-19, regardless of any additional subject matter presented in claims 1-19.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 26 June 2026 regarding claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments regarding the amended language of claim 1, see above how this language raises new matter issues.
Applicant argues that Wine does not disclose all limitations of amended claim 17. The examiner disagrees. It can be seen in the annotated fig. that the first portion extends outwardly at some nonzero angle relative to the body, the third portion extends at 0 degrees relative to the body, and the second portion extends at some non-zero angle inwardly at the securing member. Therefore, the limitation has been met.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ZACHARY T DRAGICEVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-0505. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 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, Matthew D. 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.
/ZACHARY T DRAGICEVICH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3679
07/22/2026
Prosecution Insights