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 Arguments
This action is being made second nonfinal and all previously indicated allowable subject matter is withdrawn. This case has been inherited by a different examiner and upon further search and consideration, prior art has been found that appears to read on the claims. This action is made second nonfinal to provide rejections for the claims.
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 (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 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) 1-5 and 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Meza (US 2010/0089472) in view of Justus Sr. (US 2015/0014252).
Regarding claim 1, Meza teaches a filter housing #46, a filter cartridge #32 that is removable with respect to the housing and a spring valve #112 (inlet communication element) located on the housing that wherein the core, i.e. spring, is movable together with the filter when the filter is inserted into the housing and can allow or block the flow of water that flows into the housing [0023-27]. Meza teaches that the filter assembly is not limited to use in filtering water for consumption, and is equally appropriate for use in all types of fluid handling systems including residential, commercial, scientific, etc. [0021]. The filter is linearly movable, i.e. moves up and down in a line, see fig. 5.
Note the claim is directed to an ion filer, i.e. a device, not a method of using the device. Note that the materials worked upon, i.e. colling water, does not impart structure to the device. "Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation a device is of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim." Exparte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, "[i]nclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Young, 75 F.2d * > 996 , 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458,459 (CCPA 1963)). Therefore, a claim to an ion filter device which includes limitations to the solutions run through the device and the solutions formed within the device do not, without more, make the claim patentable. MPEP 2115.
Meza is silent as to the filter being an ion filter. However, Justus Sr. also teaches a water filter and that it is well known in the art that filtering systems can include filter cartridges connected with the kitchen faucet and filters used with large water pitchers such as the Brita, that can use an ion resin exchange to reduce lead, copper, mercury, cadmium, zinc, and other impurities from drinking water [0004].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective file date of the present invention to utilize a filter capable of removing ions in the device of Meza as taught by Justus Sr. as ion filter are well known in the filtration art to remove impurities.
Regarding claim 2, Meza teaches the filter is vertically movable in the housing (see fig. 5 annotated below [0027]) and that the spring valve (inlet communication element) has a core, i.e. the spring #114, that is movable linearly together with the filter. When the spring moves water flows in and out of the filter.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Valve housing inside filter housing)]
PNG
media_image1.png
700
313
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claims 3, 4 and 16, Meza teaches The filter cartridge 32 can include a neck portion 98, which can be inserted into a recess 100 formed within the filter casing 46. The neck portion 98 can include 0-rings 102 (i.e. elastic members) for creating a substantially sealed fluid flow path from a filter casing fluid inlet 106 to the upstream end 32a of the filter casing 32. A shut-off valve 110 can be positioned adjacent the filter casing fluid inlet 106 for opening/closing the fluid flow passage between the fluid inlet 106 and the filter cartridge 32. The shut-off valve 110 can be substantially automatic in some embodiments to go from a closed position to an open position when the filter cartridge 32 is inserted into the assembled position within the filter casing 46, in which the neck portion 98 of the filter cartridge 32 is inserted into the recess 100 of the filter casing 46. The neck portion 98 can actuate a first plunger element 112a downward against a biasing spring 114 to open the valve 110. A scaling element 116 (e.g., an o-ring) carried on a second plunger element 112b of the valve 110 can be separated from sealing contact with the filter casing 46. When the filter cartridge neck portion 98 is removed from the recess 100, the biasing spring 114 can bias the plunger elements 112a, 112b and the sealing element 116 upward such that the sealing element 116 creates a seal with the filter casing 46 to substantially stop flow of fluid [0027].
Regarding claim 5, Meza teaches the use of a lid #92 [0029] on the housing, i.e. accommodates the filter.
Regarding claims 11-15, Meza teaches an outlet end #72 that has an actuating means #38 (also faucet handle) that can be control the flow path of the fluid and is adjustable. The connection means can be a screw that is detachable [0022-25].
Regarding claim 17, Meza teaches that the filter has a check valve #122 configured to open and close due to pressure of fluid flow [0028].
Meza does not teach this check valve on the housing; however, the mere rearrangement of parts of placing the check valve on the housing vs. the filter is not patentable. Check valves are well-known and utilized to stop and start flow depending on fluid pressures. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); MPEP 2144.04 VI C
Claim(s) 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Meza and Justus Sr., as applied to claim 5 above, in further view of Liney (US 20130220996).
Regarding claims 6-8, Meza does not specifically teach a ball and socket joint for joining the filter to the lid, however, holding and fixing means are well known in all art and any art can be looked too for holding/fixing/connection.
Liney [0050] teaches that connection elements can be flexible or deformable material. Can be a hinge, a ball and socket joint, a screw, or any other method of attaching two pieces together and are selected to improve ease of installation and/or reduce the force or provide a preferred pivot point or bending area.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective file date of the present invention to utilize a ball and socket connection means as taught by Liney in the device of Meza to improve ease of installation of the filter.
Claim(s) 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Meza in further view of Justus Sr. and You (US 20220355228)
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Meza teaches a filter housing #46, a filter cartridge #32 that is removable with respect to the housing and a spring valve #112 (inlet communication element) located on the housing that wherein the core, i.e. spring, is movable together with the filter when the filter is inserted into the housing and can allow or block the flow of water that flows into the housing [0023-27]. Meza teaches that the filter assembly is not limited to use in filtering water for consumption, and is equally appropriate for use in all types of fluid handling systems including residential, commercial, scientific, etc. [0021]. The filter is linearly movable, i.e. moves up and down in a line, see fig. 5.
Note the claim is directed to an ion filer, i.e. a device, not a method of using the device. Note that the materials worked upon, i.e. colling water, does not impart structure to the device. "Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation a device is of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim." Exparte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, "[i]nclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Young, 75 F.2d * > 996 , 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458,459 (CCPA 1963)). Therefore, a claim to an ion filter device which includes limitations to the solutions run through the device and the solutions formed within the device do not, without more, make the claim patentable. MPEP 2115.
Meza is silent as to the filter being an ion filter. However, Justus Sr. also teaches a water filter and that it is well known in the art that filtering systems can include filter cartridges connected with the kitchen faucet and filters used with large water pitchers such as the Brita, that can use an ion resin exchange to reduce lead, copper, mercury, cadmium, zinc, and other impurities from drinking water [0004].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective file date of the present invention to utilize a filter capable of removing ions in the device of Meza as taught by Justus Sr. as ion filter are well known in the filtration art to remove impurities.
Meza also does not specifically recite that the filter is movable by rotation.
However, You also teaches a water filter that can be rotated into position [0008].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective file date of the present invention to utilize a rotation to secure the filter in the device of Meza to ensure no separation.
Regarding claim 10, Meza teaches the filter is cylindrical shape (see fig. 5).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20160169180 teaches a poppet valve [0039]
US 20150017560 teaches a fuel cell ion exchange filter and that self-sealing interfaces, for example in the form of membranes and/or check valves, are provided on the container and/or the pump device so as to prevent the coolant from escaping during installation or disassembly of the container [0035]. See fig. 8
US 20180229163 [0068].
US 201802209557 teaches check valves are well known.
US 20160131273 teaches check valves are well known.
US 20170191567 (same assignee) teaches an ion filter for a fuel cell cooling system and a control valve.
US 20170326482 ion filter
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER M DIETERLE whose telephone number is (571)270-7872. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:30-5:30 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, Patricia Mallari can be reached at 571-272-4729. 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.
/Jennifer Dieterle/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776