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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 17, 2026 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention Group I in the reply filed on April 16, 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 18 and 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 16, 2025.
Species section of the Election/Restrictions in the pervious Office Action is withdrawn in view of Applicant’s persuasive argument in the reply filed on April 16, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2-5 and 8-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jerdee et al. (US 2019/0151871. Jerdee hereafter) in view of Meisel (US 3602245).
With respect to claim 2, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses the spool valve of claim 10, further comprising a third feed line (lines with 126, 136, 138, 141 and 140) within the cylindrical body, wherein the cylindrical outer surface defines a third channel outlet (outlets of 138, 141 and 140), and the cylindrical body has an axis of symmetry (at section-line B-B in Fig, 6D) about which the cylindrical outer surface is equidistant, the third feed line having a first segment (138) that is parallel to the axis of symmetry and the third feed line interconnecting the second feed line with the third channel outlet.
Jerdee fails to disclose the at least one second segment that is orthogonal to the axis of symmetry.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the at least one third feed line having a first segment that is parallel to the axis of symmetry and at least one second segment that is orthogonal to the axis of symmetry (a two sectioned feed line connected at 90 degree), since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure (straight diagonal feed line) in various elements (two sectioned feed line) involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPO 177, 179.
With respect to claim 3, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses wherein each of the plurality of first channel outlets and the third channel outlet within a plane (aligned with 139 to 136) that is orthogonal to the axis of symmetry.
With respect to claim 4, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses the spool valve further comprising an O-ring (Figs. 2A and 2B and “…Channels 125 are located along the body of valve 120 and can receive a plurality of 0-rings… Paragraph [0042]) disposed on the cylindrical outer surface about (close to) the third channel outlet.
With respect to claim 5, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses wherein the cylindrical body has an axis of symmetry (at section-line B-B in Fig, 6D) about which the cylindrical outer surface is equidistant, and first and second (left and right) opposite ends that are each orthogonal to the axis of symmetry.
With respect to claim 8, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses wherein the cylindrical outer surface of the cylindrical body defines a pair of peripheral grooves for receiving a pair of O-rings (in channels 125. [0042]) therein.
With respect to claim 9, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses wherein the cylindrically outer surface defines a pair of peripheral grooves (in channels 125. [0042] and Figs. 6A-6F), each of the pair of peripheral grooves configured to receive a respective O-ring of the at least one pair of O-rings.
With respect to claim 10, Jerdee discloses a spool valve (120, 154) for use in a foam gun (100) and configured to (capable of) be held within a spool valve socket (bore for 120, 154) of a housing (112), comprising:
a cylindrical body (of 120, 154) having a cylindrical outer surface that defines a plurality of first channel inlets (inlets of 128 and 130), a plurality of first channel outlets (outlets of 128, 130, 142 (at 152. Fig. 3A) and 144) spaced circumferentially from the plurality of first channel inlets, a plurality of second channel inlets (inlets of 126 and 136) spaced longitudinally from the plurality first channel inlets, and a plurality of second channel outlets (outlets at 139, 138, 141, 140 and 146 (at 154. Fig. 3A)) spaced circumferentially from the plurality of second channel inlets, the cylindrical body rotatable between an open orientation (Fig. 2A) and a closed orientation (Fig. 2B); a plurality of first (components) feed lines (128-142-152 and 130-144 (“-“ represent “to”)) formed within the cylindrical body, each of the plurality of first feed lines extending between a respective first channel inlet of the plurality of first channel inlets and a respective first channel outlet of the plurality of first channel outlets, the plurality of first feed lines configured to (capable of) channel fluid towards the plurality of first channel outlets when the cylindrical body is in the open orientation; and a second (air) feed line (passages shown in Figs. 6E and 6F except 128 and 130) formed within the cylindrical body, the second feed line extending between the plurality of second channel inlets and the plurality of second channel outlets, the second feed line configured to (capable of) channel fluid (in the direction of) towards the plurality of second channel outlets (139, 156 are open; 138, 140, 141 are closed) when the cylindrical body is in the open orientation and (in the direction of) towards the plurality of first channel outlets (at least to outlets of 142 (at 152. Fig. 3A) and 144) and the plurality of second channel outlets (at least the outlets at 139 (closed), 138, 141, 140 and 146 (at 154. Fig. 3A)) when the cylindrical body is in the closed orientation.
Jerdee fails to disclose wherein the cylindrical body defines a region of decreased diameter including a first depression and a second depression circumferentially spaced apart from the first depression, wherein the first depression is sized and shaped to receive a projection that extends from the spool valve socket when the cylindrical body is in the open orientation to retain the spool valve in the open orientation, and the second depression is sized and shaped to receive the projection when the cylindrical body is in the closed orientation to retain the spool valve in the closed orientation.
However, Meisel teaches a rotational spool valve (408. Figs. 15-18, embodiment in Figs. 17 and 18) comprising a cylindrical body (422), wherein the cylindrical body defines a region of decreased (inner) diameter (surrounding 424A and 424B) including a first depression (424A) and a second depression (424B) circumferentially spaced apart from the first depression, wherein the first depression is sized and shaped to receive a projection (420) that extends from the spool valve socket (annular recess for 420) when the cylindrical body is in the open orientation (Fig. 15) to retain the spool valve in the open orientation, and the second depression is sized and shaped to receive the projection when the cylindrical body is in the closed orientation (after 90°. Col. 7, lines 28-35) to retain the spool valve in the closed orientation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of matching depressions and a projection, as taught by Meisel, to Jerdee’s spool valve, in order to provide releasably locking of the the spool in its valve spool positions and a plurality of angular positions relative to the other (Abstract).
With respect to claim 11, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses wherein the cylindrical body has an axis (longitudinal) of symmetry about which the cylindrical outer surface is equidistant, each of the plurality of first feed lines within a plane that is orthogonal to the axis of symmetry (Fig. 6F) .
With respect to claim 12, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses wherein the cylindrical body has an axis (longitudinal) of symmetry about which the cylindrical outer surface is equidistant, one of the plurality of first channel outlets spaced circumferentially from another of the plurality of first channel inlets by 120 degrees (between openings of 126 and 139) or more about the axis of symmetry.
With respect to claim 13, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses wherein the cylindrical body has an axis (longitudinal) of symmetry about which the cylindrical outer surface is equidistant, the second feed line within a plane (Fig. 6E) that is orthogonal to the axis of symmetry.
With respect to claim 14, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses wherein the cylindrical body has an axis (longitudinal) of symmetry about which the cylindrical outer surface is equidistant, one of the plurality of second channel inlets spaced circumferentially from another of the plurality of second channel inlets by between 5 and 30 degrees about the axis of symmetry (Fig. 6E).
With respect to claim 15, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses wherein the cylindrical body has an axis (longitudinal) of symmetry about which the cylindrical outer surface is equidistant, one of the plurality of second channel outlets spaced circumferentially from another of the plurality of second channel outlets by between 5 and 30 degrees about the axis of symmetry (Fig. 6E).
With respect to claim 16, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner, Jerdee further discloses wherein the cylindrical body has an axis (longitudinal) of symmetry about which the cylindrical outer surface is equidistant, the plurality of second channel outlets spaced circumferentially from the plurality of second channel inlets by 120 degrees or more about the axis of symmetry (Fig. 6E).
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jerdee in view of Meisel and further in view of Adams (US 4,263,166).
With respect to claim 6, Jerdee and Meisel disclose the spool valve of claim 5 except for wherein the first opposite end has a flange that has a diameter that is greater than each of the second opposite end and the cylindrical outer surface, the flange lying in a plane that is orthogonal to the axis of symmetry.
However, Adams teaches a spool valve (18. Figs. 4-9) having first (top) and second (bottom) opposite ends (Fig. 4), a substantially cylindrical outer surface between the first and second ends, and an (longitudinal) axis of symmetry about which the substantially cylindrical outer surface is equidistant, wherein the first opposite end has a flange (above shoulder 132) that has a diameter that is greater than each of the second opposite end and the substantially cylindrical outer surface, the flange lying in a plane that is orthogonal to the axis of symmetry.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of a flange at the first end, as taught by Adams, to Jerdee’s first end, in order to limit inward positioning of the spool valve 18 within the valve housing (Col. 6, lines 31-38).
With respect to claim 7, Jerdee’s spool valve modified by Meisel’s universal detent positioner and further modified by Adams’ flange, Adams further discloses wherein the flange has a radial region (hole for 138) of decreased diameter is located along the flange (Fig. 9).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 10 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the reference and/or the combination of references being used in the current rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHEE-CHONG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1916. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 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, Arthur O. Hall can be reached on (571)270-1814. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
CHEE-CHONG LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 March 18, 2026