DETAILED ACTION
Elections/Restrictions
1. This office action is a response to Applicant's election filed on 12/29/2025 without traverse of Group I, species I-1A & I-1A-1, claims 1-9, 12 & 15-17 for further examination. Claims 10-11, 13-14 & 18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/21/2022, 07/23/2024 & 12/12/2025 are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “valve driving device” in claims 1, 9 & 16-17; “an adjustment device” in claims 1-2; “movable member” in claims 1-3, 12 & 15; “a concentration adjusting unit” in claims 4 and 7; “a substrate holding unit” in claim 5; “a recycling unit that regenerates a gas” in claim 6; “a cooling unit” in claim 10; “fixed angle adjustment mechanism” in claims 3-4; “biasing member” of claim 18.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner' s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. 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.
7. Claims 6, 9 & 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
As regards to claim 6, line 3 recites “large-diameter” which is a relative term and renders the claim indefinite. The term “large-diameter” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examination purposes, examiner is interpreting “large-diameter” as any diameter. To correct this problem, amend claim 6 to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
As regards to claim 9, line 2 recites the limitation “the adjuster”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, examiner is interpreting “the adjuster” as “the inclination adjuster” recited in claim 1. To correct this problem, amend line 2 to recite “the inclination adjuster”.
Claim 12 is rejected at least based on dependency from claim 9.
Claim Rejections
8. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
10. Claims 1-9, 12 & 15-17 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hentschel (WO 2018118686 A1 – cited in 07/23/2024 IDS; translation provided by Applicant ) hereinafter Hentschel (the terminology of the claims in the application is used, but the references of Hentschel are included between parentheses).
As regards to claim 1, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), comprising:
a base member (2) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 8, ln 24; fig 1);
a valve device (4) mounted on the base member (2) and including a valve element (18) and a valve seat (10) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1); and
a valve driving device (60) configured to move the valve element (18) forward to and backward from the valve seat (10) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1);
wherein the liquid material discharge device further comprises an adjustment device (32+34+42) configured to adjust relative alignment of the valve element (18) with respect to the valve seat (10) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1), and
wherein the adjustment device (32+34+42) includes a movable member (34) on which the valve driving device (60) is disposed, and an inclination adjuster (32) configured to adjust and mechanically fix an inclination of the movable member (34) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 2, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the adjustment device (32+34+42) includes an elastic portion (44) that couples the movable member (34) to the base member (2) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 3, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the inclination adjuster (32) includes a protruded portion (33+38) formed on the movable member (34), a contact member (40) that is in contact with the protruded portion (33+38), and a fixed angle adjustment mechanism (66) that fixes the contact member (40) to the protruded portion (33+38), wherein the fixed angle adjustment mechanism (66) is able to adjust an angle at which the contact member (40) is in contact with the protruded portion (33+38) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 4, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the fixed angle adjustment mechanism (66) includes a receiving member (68) disposed in contact with the protruded portion (33+38) and a pulling member (72) inserted through the contact member (40) and screwed into the receiving member (68) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 5, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the receiving member (68) is rotatably disposed in contact with the protruded portion (33+38) and includes a thread groove into which the pulling member (72) is screwed (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 6, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the contact member (40) is provided with a fitting hole (see fig 1, hole accommodating 72) having a stepped portion (see fig 1, step from top of 72 to top of 40), and the pulling member (72) includes a large-diameter portion (see fig 1, portion extending beyond top of 40) that is in contact with the stepped portion (see fig 1, step from top of 72 to top of 40) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 7, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the protruded portion (33+38) has a surface (see fig 1, lined side of 38) that is in contact (see fig 1, lined side) with the contact member (40), the surface (see fig 1, lined side of 38) being rounded (see fig 1, top of 38), and the protruded portion (33+38) and the contact member (40) are in line contact (see fig 1, lined side of 38) with each other (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 8, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the contact member (40) has a surface (see fig 1, side surface of 40 in contact with lined side of 38) that is in contact with the protruded portion (33+38), the surface (see fig 1, side surface of 40 in contact with lined side of 38) being obliquely (angled/slanted) disposed (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 9, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the valve driving device (60) is disposed between (see fig 1) the elastic portion (44) and the inclination adjuster (32) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 12, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the inclination adjuster (32) and the elastic portion (44) are provided on a bottom-face side (see fig 1, top face side of 34) of the movable member (34) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 15, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the base member (2), the movable member (34), and the elastic portion (44) are integrally (see fig 1) formed (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 16, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the valve driving device (60) includes an actuator (30) that moves the valve element (18) forward and backward (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
As regards to claim 17, Hentschel discloses a liquid material discharge device (abs; fig 1-5), wherein the valve device (4) includes: a valve stem (see fig 1, stem of 18) provided with the valve element (18); a liquid chamber (6) in which the valve element (18) moves forward and backward; a liquid inlet (8) that communicates with the liquid chamber (6) and through which a liquid material is supplied; a nozzle (12) that communicates with the liquid chamber (6) and has a discharge port (9) through which the liquid material is ejected; the valve seat (10) having a through-hole (see fig 1) communicating with the discharge port (9) of the nozzle (12); and a biasing member (44) that biases the valve stem (see fig 1, stem of 18); wherein the valve driving device (60) includes an arm (see fig 1, portion extending horizontally) that is coupled to the actuator (30) and is in separable contact with the valve stem (see fig 1, stem of 18) (pg 7, ln 30-pg 10, ln 3; fig 1).
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: all references cited on the attached PTO-892 Notice of References Cited excluding the above relied upon references.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jethro M Pence whose telephone number is (571)270-7423. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00 A.M. - 6:30 P.M..
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, Dah-Wei D. Yuan can be reached on 571-272-1295. 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.
/Jethro M. Pence/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717