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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to the amendment dated 11/11/2025. Claims 1 and 3-15 remain pending. Any new ground(s) of rejection below have been made due to applicant’s amendment. This action is Final.
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 and 3-9 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.
In claim 1 there is an inconsistency in the language of the preamble and that of body of the claim thus making their scope unclear. The preamble recites “a ball for a valve assembly including a valve housing having a first valve port and a second valve port” with the valve assembly only functionally recited, e.g. for a valve assembly, thus indicating that the claims are directed to the subcombination of a ball. However numerous lines positively recite the components of the valve assembly, as an element of the invention, e.g. “the bore valve opens and permits fluid to flow, via the first bore, between the first valve port and second valve port of the valve housing” (lines 19-20), “the second bore is aligned with the first and second valve ports of the valve housing” (lines 22-23), thus indicating that the claims are directed to the combination of the ball and the valve assembly including a valve housing having a first valve port and a second valve port. As such it is unclear whether applicant intends the claims to be drawn to the combination or the subcombination. Applicant is hereby required to indicate which, the combination (a ball and valve assembly having a valve housing with a first valve port and a second valve port) or subcombination (a ball) the claims are intended to be drawn and make the language consistent with this intent. For examination purposes, the claims will be considered as drawn to the subcombination, the ball.
Claims 3-9 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code 103 not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-9, as far as they are definite, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson in view of Schoeneweis et al. (U.S. 4,072,161).
Johnson discloses a ball (12, in particular the embodiment of fig. 14, with other figures used for explanation purposes with respect to features of the ball) for a valve assembly including a valve housing having a first valve port and a second valve port (intended use that has not been given patentable weight, see 112 rejection above), the ball comprising: an outer surface (the outer, external surface of 12); a stem mount configured for engaging a valve actuation arrangement of the valve assembly (the unlabeled mounting structure that connects the ball to the stem 23 in fig. 1); a first bore (the vertical bore in fig. 14) that opens to the outer surface, the first bore configured to permit fluid to flow along a first path through the ball (fig. 14); a second bore (the horizontal bore in fig. 14) that opens to the outer surface, the second bore configured to permit fluid to flow through the ball in a different path than the first bore (horizontally in fig. 14); the first and second bores intersecting and in fluid communication with one another (fig. 14); blocking surface portions of the outer surface (the solid portions of 14 that define the first and second bores); the ball having a first orientation relative to the valve housing wherein the first bore is aligned with the first and second valve ports of the valve housing (the ball is capable of various orientations, especially as the claim is directed solely to the ball); a bore valve located in the first bore (84), configured such that fluid communication is selectively enabled through the first bore when the ball is in the first orientation and the first bore is aligned with the first and second valve ports (the bore valve is capable of allowing fluid flow through when in an orientation similar to the orientation in fig. 3), the bore valve not extending, or extending only partially across the second bore (fig. 14, not extending across the second bore), the bore valve includes a biasing member (120) that biases the valve into a closed configuration, and the bore valve opens and permits fluid to flow, via the first bore, between the first valve port and the second valve port of the valve housing and into the second bore when a pressure differential across the valve exceeds a threshold (when open and the ball is the position shown in fig .3); wherein the ball has a second orientation wherein the second bore is aligned with the first and second valve ports of the valve housing and permits fluid to flow, via the second bore, between the first valve port and the second valve port of the valve housing (the ball is capable of being in a second orientation when fluid flow goes through the second bore, such as by rotation of 90 degrees from the orientation shown in fig. 14); and wherein the ball has a third orientation wherein the blocking surface portions block the first and second valve ports of the valve housing and prevent fluid from flowing between the first and second valve ports (the ball is capable of various orientations, especially as the claim is directed solely to the ball).
Johnson does not appear to disclose a fluid vent extending from the first and/or second bore to the stem mount.
Schoeneweis teaches it was known in the art to have a ball valve with a fluid vent (15) that extends from the passage going through the ball valve to a stem mount (from the passage at 14 to the stem mount at 16, 58, etc. see fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ball of Johnson such that there is a fluid vent extending from the first and/or second bore to the stem mount as taught by Schoeneweis in order to balance pressure on both sides of the ball when in the open or closed position (see col. 3, ll. 54-57).
Regarding claim 3, Johnson as modified further discloses wherein the first and second bores extend orthogonally to one another (the embodiment shown in fig. 14).
Regarding claim 4, Johnson as modified further discloses wherein the bore valve is a one-way valve (fig. 12).
Regarding claim 5, Johnson as modified further discloses wherein the bore valve comprises a selectively openable bore valve opening (the opening near the lead line for 114 when the fluid pressure compresses the spring and allows fluid flow through 84, see fig. 12) and the valve opening is offset from a center of the ball (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 6, Johnson as modified further discloses wherein the first bore extends between first bore first (the outer port at the top in fig. 14) and second openings (the outer port at the bottom in fig. 14) at the ball outer surface, the second bore extends between second bore first (such as the left bore opening) and second openings (such as the right bore opening) at the ball outer surface and the ball further comprises first, second, third and fourth blocking surface regions (surfaces between the ports) between adjacent openings of the first bore first and second openings and the second bore first and second openings.
Regarding claim 7, Johnson as modified discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the stem mount includes a recess to receive a portion of the valve actuation arrangement of the valve assembly.
Schoeneweis further teaches it was known in the art to have a ball with a stem mount that includes a recess to receive a portion of the valve actuation arrangement of the valve assembly (the recess 62).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stem mount of Johnson such that there is a recess in the ball to receive a portion of the valve actuation arrangement of the valve assembly as taught by Schoeneweis as Johnson is silent as to the details of the stem mount and the recess in the ball allows for a simple, well-known and reliable means of connection of the actuator to the ball.
Regarding claim 8, Johnson as modified further discloses wherein the fluid vent extends orthogonal to the first and second bore (necessarily extending orthogonal so as to not be placed where the first and second bores reside and control fluid flow).
Regarding claim 9, Johnson as modified further discloses wherein the bore valve comprises a bore valve housing (110) mounted in the first bore, the first bore comprises a first bore step (not labeled but best shown in figs. 13 and 14, especially at the lead line for 138 and 142, notice the narrower bore and then a step that 84 abuts up against and prevents 84 from moving any farther toward the radial center of the ball) and the bore valve housing is mounted and abuts against the first bore step (best shown in figs. 13 and 14).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-15 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: claim 10 recites the combination of the ball with the valve assembly, housing, and first and second ports in the housing. The embodiment of figure 14 of Johnson does not disclose the combination and thus does not disclose the various positions as claimed by the applicant. Modifying Johnson to meet claim 10 would require a complete replacement of a ball (with the specific features of the ball as claimed by the applicant, such as the bore valve, etc.) within an already in place system with the ball of Johnson, which is not seen to be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art as this would most likely render such reference unsuitable for its intended purpose. Similarly, modifying an already in place ball in a system including a housing with first and second ports would require substantial modifications to the ball (with the specific features of the ball as claimed by the applicant, including the bore valve) and is also not seen to be obvious absent impermissible hindsight bias. It is noted that Johnson does not disclose a third orientation as claimed by the applicant and the other embodiments of Johnson have additional bores through the ball which would appear to prevent it from having an orientation like the third orientation as claimed by the applicant.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 MICHAEL R REID whose telephone number is (313)446-4859. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-5pm 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 supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607, or Ken 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, 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.
/MICHAEL R REID/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753