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
The amendment filed 1/30/2026 has been entered. Amendments to claims 1, 7, 10, and 19, and new claims 26-28 are acknowledged. Claims 1-10 and 19-28 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Specification, Drawings, and Claims have overcome each and every 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 09/20/2025.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 26 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Silverwater (US 5220837 A).
Regarding claim 26, Silverwater discloses a pressure transducer (abstract: “differential pressure transducer”) comprising: a housing (col 2 lines 59-60: “the assembly includes a housing”) comprising an inlet port and an outlet port (Fig 2 element 20 to Fig 3 the opening to element 82, wherein per col 6 lines 60-61: “the bore 82 connects the flow control chamber 72 with the inlet 20” and 74, col 6 lines 27-28: “a bore 74 which opens onto the high pressure cavity 14”); a poppet coupled with the housing (Fig 3 element 79); a pressure sensor (col 3 lines 36-37: “contain a piezoelectric element (unillustrated) that senses differential pressure and generates an electrical signal indicative of the pressure differential acting on the element”); wherein a flow restrictor is defined by a valve seat between the inlet port and the outlet port (Fig 3 element 75, col 8-9 lines 69 – 5: “the clearance between the poppet 79 and the wall of the flow control chamber 72 is preferably small enough to constitute a third and at least partial flow restriction between the upstream and downstream seats 75, 83,”, wherein the valve seat is defined as the edge of the flow control chamber 72 labelled element 75); wherein the flow restrictor includes a flow restrictor channel formed in a surface of the valve seat (Fig 3 element 72, col 9 line 23: “flow control chamber”) and wherein the valve seat includes a ramp that extends from the flow restrictor to one of the inlet port and the outlet port (Fig 3 element 73, wherein element 73 forms a ramp to outlet element 74 from valve seat 75).
Regarding claim 27, Silverwater further discloses wherein: the poppet comprises a sealing portion (Fig 3 element 75, base portion); and in an engaged state, an end surface of the sealing portion of the poppet is configured to press against the valve seat to seal off either the inlet port or the outlet port (Fig 3, wherein poppet 75 presses against element 73).
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) 1-6, 8, 19-25, and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silverwater (US 5220837 A) in view of Xiong (US 20220275795 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Silverwater discloses a pressure transducer (abstract: “differential pressure transducer”) comprising: a housing (col 2 lines 59-60: “the assembly includes a housing”) comprising an inlet port and an outlet port (Fig 2 element 20 to Fig 3 the opening to element 82, wherein per col 6 lines 60-61: “the bore 82 connects the flow control chamber 72 with the inlet 20” and 74, col 6 lines 27-28: “a bore 74 which opens onto the high pressure cavity 14”); a poppet coupled with the housing (Fig 3 element 79); a pressure sensor (col 3 lines 36-37: “contain a piezoelectric element (unillustrated) that senses differential pressure and generates an electrical signal indicative of the pressure differential acting on the element”); wherein a flow restrictor is defined by a valve seat between the inlet port and the outlet port (Fig 3 element 75, col 8-9 lines 69 – 5: “the clearance between the poppet 79 and the wall of the flow control chamber 72 is preferably small enough to constitute a third and at least partial flow restriction between the upstream and downstream seats 75, 83,”, wherein the valve seat is defined as the edge of the flow control chamber 72 labelled element 75; and wherein the valve seat includes a ramp that extends from the flow restrictor to one of the inlet port and the outlet port (Fig 3 element 73, wherein element 73 forms a ramp to outlet element 74 from valve seat 75).
While Silverwater discloses the flow restrictor includes a flow restrictor channel extending into the valve seat (Fig 3 element 72), they fail to disclose the flow restrictor channel having two or more turns.
Xiong discloses a flow restrictor channel having two or more turns ([0030]: “the buffer channel 10 is in the shape of a bend line, and the bend line-shaped buffer channel 10 has multiple corners, when the liquid flows in the buffer channel 10, it is blocked by the multiple corners to reduce the flow speed, thus, the flow rate of liquid flowing into the second flow restricting cavity”, Fig 3 element 10).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the pressure transducer disclosed by Silverwater to include the flow restrictor channel having two or more turns as disclosed by Xiong in order to improve the flow rate restriction by increasing the number of corners traversed (Xiong [0030]).
Regarding claim 2, Silverwater discloses a second ramp that extends from the flow restrictor to another of the inlet port and the outlet port (Fig 3 elements 83 into 84, wherein the shape between the opening of chamber 72 and 84 forms a ramp).
Regarding claim 3, Silverwater further discloses wherein the valve seat is integrally formed with the housing (Fig 3 element 75).
Regarding claim 4, Silverwater further discloses wherein the housing further comprises a recess between the inlet port and the ramp and surrounding the inlet port (col 6 lines 46-47: “the safety valve 70 is inserted into the valve cavity 19 of the housing body”).
Regarding claim 5, Silverwater further discloses wherein the poppet is coupled with the valve seat of the housing (Fig 3 elements 79 and 75).
Regarding claim 6, Silverwater further discloses wherein a fluid flows within a first flow path comprising the inlet port, the flow restrictor, and the outlet port (col 7 lines 17 – 26) in response to the poppet being closed against the valve seat of the housing (col 2 lines 36 – 37: “port of the chamber is closed by the poppet”).
Regarding claim 8, Silverwater further discloses comprising a by-pass channel between the poppet and the valve seat of the housing (Fig 3 elements 78).
Regarding claim 9, Silverwater further discloses wherein a fluid flows through a second flow path comprising the inlet port, the by-pass channel, and the outlet port in response to the poppet being decoupled from the valve seat of the housing (col 7 lines 27-36: “When the poppet 79 seats on the downstream seat 83, i.e., is in the downstream position, the low pressure cavity 16 communicates with the upstream side of the filter via the upstream passage 92, the groove 24 in the neck 21, the high pressure conduit 26, the high pressure cavity 15, the bore 74, the upstream port 73, the flow control chamber 72, the radial connecting ports 78, the annular space 19a, and the first and second connecting passages 27 and 28.”).
Regarding claim 19, Silverwater further discloses a cross-section of the flow restrictor channel has a top and a base (Fig 3 element 72); a width of a top of the flow restrictor channel is greater than a width of the base of the flow restrictor channel ( col 9 lines 48-51: “For example, the minimum open flow areas of the upstream port 73 at the upstream seat 75 and the central bore 82 at the downstream seat 83 may each have a smaller cross-sectional area than the flow area between the wall of the chamber 72 and the poppet 79.”); a depth of the flow restrictor channel is greater than the width of the top of the flow restrictor channel (col 9 lines 48 - 51); and the base of the flow restrictor channel is rounded (Fig 3 element 84 and 73, wherein the cross-sections are cylinders as indicated by the dotted lines).
Regarding claim 20, Silverwater further discloses wherein the width of the top of the flow restrictor channel is between 0.0005 inches and 0.0080 inches (col 10 lines 65 – 68: “0.002 inch to about 0.004 inch between the upstream and the downstream seats, and the radial ports have a diameter of about 0.023 inch and are located near the upstream seat.”).
Regarding claim 21, Silverwater further discloses wherein the depth of the flow restrictor channel is between 0.0005 inches and 0.0080 inches (col 10 lines 65 – 68: “0.002 inch to about 0.004 inch between the upstream and the downstream seats, and the radial ports have a diameter of about 0.023 inch and are located near the upstream seat.”).
Regarding claim 22, Silverwater discloses a second ramp that extends from the flow restrictor to another of the inlet port and the outlet port (Fig 3 elements 83 into 84, wherein the shape between the opening of chamber 72 and 84 forms a ramp).
Regarding claim 23, Silverwater further discloses wherein the flow restrictor channel comprises a length that is at least twice a distance between the inlet port and the outlet port (Fig 3 element 78 to Fig 2 element 26).
Regarding claim 24, Silverwater further discloses wherein a fluid flows through a second flow path comprising the inlet port, the by-pass channel, and the outlet port in response to the poppet being decoupled from the valve seat of the housing (col 7 lines 27-36: “When the poppet 79 seats on the downstream seat 83, i.e., is in the downstream position, the low pressure cavity 16 communicates with the upstream side of the filter via the upstream passage 92, the groove 24 in the neck 21, the high pressure conduit 26, the high pressure cavity 15, the bore 74, the upstream port 73, the flow control chamber 72, the radial connecting ports 78, the annular space 19a, and the first and second connecting passages 27 and 28.”).
Regarding claim 25, Silverwater further discloses wherein the flow restrictor channel comprises a length that is at least twice a distance between the inlet port and the outlet port (Fig 3 element 78 to Fig 2 element 26).
Regarding claim 29, Silverwater further discloses wherein: the poppet comprises a sealing portion (Fig 3 element 75, base portion); and in an engaged state, an end surface of the sealing portion of the poppet is configured to press against the valve seat to seal off either the inlet port or the outlet port (Fig 3, wherein poppet 75 presses against element 73).
Claim(s) 7 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silverwater in view of Xiong in view of Mudd (US 20160216713 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Silverwater discloses the pressure transducer of claim 6, but fails to disclose wherein a flow rate of the fluid within the first flow path is between about 1 cc/hr and about 10 cc/hr.
Mudd discloses a flow restrictor (title) comprising an inlet port and an outlet port ([0070]: “The inlet 1203A”); a poppet coupled with the housing ([0068]: “and poppet and valve seat”); wherein a flow restrictor is defined by a valve seat between the inlet port and the outlet port ([0005]: “A characterized restrictor is placed in series and adjacent with the valve seat to provide a primary flow restriction while having a minimized volume between the valve seat and the characterized restrictor.”), and wherein a flow rate of the fluid within the first flow path is between about 1 cc/hr and about 10 cc/hr ([0068]: “flow rates of gas or fluid (e.g., low flow, high flow, 0.1 sccm, or 30,000 sccm) within tight tolerance limits”).
Mudd and Silverwater are considered analogous art as they both pertain to flow restrictors consisting of an inlet, outlet, poppet valve, and valve seat. Silverwater discloses that the valve operates to prevent the pressure differential from exceeding a threshold (col 8 lines 7 – 13: “when the pressure differential across the filter exceeds the first prescribed pressure differential, i.e., the cracking pressure, the poppet 79 moves to the downstream seat 83. The magnitude of the cracking pressure is established by the characteristics of the spring 84 and the cross sectional area of the upstream seat 75”), but does not specify the range at which the fluid flow is restricted to. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the transducer disclosed by Silverwater to include the flow rate range disclosed by Mudd in order to expand the application of the system to a wide range of techniques (Mudd [0068]).
Regarding claim 10, Silverwater discloses the pressure transducer of claim 9, but fails to disclose wherein a flow rate of the fluid within the first flow path is between about 5 cc/hr and about 250 cc/hr.
Mudd discloses a flow restrictor (title) comprising an inlet port and an outlet port ([0070]: “The inlet 1203A”); a poppet coupled with the housing ([0068]: “and poppet and valve seat”); wherein a flow restrictor is defined by a valve seat between the inlet port and the outlet port ([0005]: “A characterized restrictor is placed in series and adjacent with the valve seat to provide a primary flow restriction while having a minimized volume between the valve seat and the characterized restrictor.”), and wherein a flow rate of the fluid within the first flow path is between about 1 cc/hr and about 10 cc/hr ([0068]: “flow rates of gas or fluid (e.g., low flow, high flow, 0.1 sccm, or 30,000 sccm) within tight tolerance limits”).
Mudd and Silverwater are considered analogous art as they both pertain to flow restrictors consisting of an inlet, outlet, poppet valve, and valve seat. Silverwater discloses that the valve operates to prevent the pressure differential from exceeding a threshold (col 8 lines 7 – 13: “when the pressure differential across the filter exceeds the first prescribed pressure differential, i.e., the cracking pressure, the poppet 79 moves to the downstream seat 83. The magnitude of the cracking pressure is established by the characteristics of the spring 84 and the cross sectional area of the upstream seat 75”), but does not specify the range at which the fluid flow is restricted to. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify the transducer disclosed by Silverwater to include the flow rate range disclosed by Mudd in order to expand the application of the system to a wide range of techniques (Mudd [0068]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-9 of applicant’s remarks, filed 01/30/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-6, 8-9, and 19-25 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. § 103 (see above).
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 26 and 27 on pages 9 and 10 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Silverwater does disclose a flow restrictor channel formed in a surface of the valve seat. As the claim limitation specifies “a surface”, the edge of the flow control chamber 72 labelled element 75 constitutes “a surface”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Goka et al. (US 8756989 B2) – discloses a flow restrictor channel with multiple turns.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KAVYA SHOBANA BALAJI whose telephone number is (703)756-5368. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:30 ET.
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, Jaqueline Cheng can be reached at 571-272-5596. 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.
/KAVYA SHOBANA BALAJI/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/DANIEL L CERIONI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights