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 .
Examiner’s Comment
This is a second Non-Final Rejection because it includes a rejection on prior art not of record of any claim amended to include limitations which should reasonably have been expected to be claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 1–15 is 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.
Claim 1 is indefinite because the limitation of “the housing head has a through-opening and a functional element connected to the preparation element extends into the through opening…” could have different interpretations. It could be interpreted as the functional element extends into the through-opening or the preparation element extends into the through openings. For the purpose of examination, this limitation is interpreted as the functional element extends into the through openings, which is consistent with the instant Spec. (hereinafter “Spec.”), Spec. Fig. 3, [0045]. Additionally, the wording in lines 2-3 is indefinite “wherein in an interior of the housing of a preparation element is arranged, whereby…” It is unclear what is arranged in the interior of the preparation element?
Claims 2–14 are indefinite because they depend on claim 1.
Claim 15 is indefinite because it is directed to “a preparation element.” However, all the recited structures are directed to a housing structure that accommodates the “preparation element.” It is therefore unclear what is the structure of the claimed “preparation element.”
Claim 15 is also indefinite because the limitation of “wherein in an interior of the housing of the preparation element is arranged” does not make sense. It is unclear what the applicant want to claim. For the purpose of examination, the limitation is interpreted as “wherein in an interior of the housing
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
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.
Claims 1–2, 6–7, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pearson et al., US 2007/0186525 A1 (“Pearson”).
Regarding claim 1:
It is noted here that the instant disclosure does not have a specific definition for the term “connect.” The term “connect” is therefore interpreted according to its dictionary definition, which is “bring together or into contact so that a real or notional link is established.” In other words, the examiner is interpreting the term “connect” broader than requiring two items “physically touching.”
It is also noted that the limitation of “the preparation elements extends into the through-opening when the preparation element is in use” is interpreted as a status, where the preparation element has at least a portion located inside the through-opening when the preparation element is in use.
Pearson discloses that a compressed gas filter (Pearson’s filter element as shown in Fig. 1, which is for a compressed gas system) having a housing (Pearson’s body 54) and a housing head (Pearson’s housing head 52) having an inlet (Pearson’s inlet port 56) and an outlet (Pearson’s outlet port 58, Pearson Fig. 1, [0152] and [0156]),
wherein in an interior of the housing 54 of a preparation element (Pearson’s filter element with wall section 2, Pearson Fig. 1, [0117]) is arranged,
whereby inflowing compressed gas flows through the inlet into the preparation element (Pearson’s gas in a compressed gas system flow through the inlet 56 into the preparation element 2, Pearson Fig. 1, [0117] and [0003]) and prepared filter air flows out through the outlet (Pearson’s outlet 58, Pearson Fig. 1, [0156]),
wherein the housing head 52 has a through-opening (Pearson’s area defined by surface 244 and wall 256 and vent 246) and a functional element (Pearson’s device 258 and its surrounding housing for measuring differential pressure) connected to the preparation element (Pearson’s device 258 has to be “connected” to Pearson’s filter 2 to measure the differential pressure across the filter element, Pearson Fig. 1, [0118] and [0163]) extends into the through-opening when the preparation element is in use (Pearson’s device 258 extends into the through opening because it is accommodated in the through opening when Pearson’s filter 2 is used to measure the differential pressure, Pearson Fig. 1, [0163]).
PNG
media_image1.png
799
578
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2:
Pearson discloses that the compressed gas filter according to Claim 1, wherein between the functional element (258 and its surrounding housing) and the through-opening (Pearson’s area defined by surface 244 and wall 256 and vent 246) a seal element (Pearson’s O-ring 260) is arranged. Pearson Fig. 1, [0163]. Pearson discloses that through which (Pearson’s O-ring 260) the through-opening is pressure-tightly closed (Pearson discloses as a fluid tight seal) in state in which the preparation element is used. Pearson [0163].
Regarding claim 6:
Pearson discloses that the compressed gas filter according to claim 1, wherein within the functional element (258 and its surrounding housing) at least one fluid channel (Pearson’s vent 246) is embodied, which connects the interior 8 of the housing of the preparation element 2 to the environment (vent 246 is also connected to flow conduit 34, which comprise port 80 to connect to a gauge for measuring pressure differential pressure, it is therefore concluded that the pressure gauge is connected to an environment defined by flow conduit 34, which is also in communication with external environment). Pearson [0118].
Regarding claim 7:
Pearson discloses that the compressed gas filter according to Claim 1, wherein within the functional element (258 and its surrounding housing) at least one fluid channel (Person’s vent 246 and vent 250) is embodied, which connects the interior of the housing to an environment. Pearson Fig. 1, [0163].
Regarding claim 15:
Pearson discloses that a preparation element (Pearson’s filter element with wall section 2) for a compressed gas filter (Pearson’s filter element as shown in Fig. 1, which is for a compressed gas system) having a housing (Pearson’s body 54, Pearson Fig. 1, [0152]) and a housing head (52, Pearson Fig. 1, [0152]) having an inlet and an outlet (Pearson’s inlet 56 and outlet 58, Pearson Fig. 1, [0156]),
wherein in an interior of the housing of the preparation element is arranged (Pearson’s filter 2 is the claimed “preparation element” and it is arranged in an interior of housing of Pearson’s body 54, Pearson Fig. 1, [0162]),
whereby inflowing compressed gas flows in through the inlet and prepared filtered air flows out through the outlet into the preparation element (Pearson’s gas in a compressed gas system flow through the inlet 56 into the preparation element 2, Pearson Fig. 1, [0117] and [0003]; Pearson’s outlet 58, Pearson Fig. 1, [0156]),
wherein the housing head has a through-opening (Pearson’s area defined by surface 244 and wall 256 and vent 246) and a functional element (Pearson’s device 258 and its surrounding housing for measuring differential pressure) connected to the preparation element extends into the through-opening when the preparation element is in use (Pearson’s device 258 extends into the through opening because it is accommodated in the through opening when Pearson’s filter 2 is used to measure the differential pressure, Pearson Fig. 1, [0163]).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The claims are rejected as follows:
Claims 3–4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Pearson in view of Wiest et al., US 5,044,203 A (“Wiest”).
Regarding claim 3:
Pearson does not disclose that the compressed gas filter according to Claim 1, the compressed gas filter according to Claim 1, wherein the functional element 258 has an externally visible information surface in the state in which the preparation element is used.
Similar to Pearson, Wiest discloses a pressure measurement device for filter. Wiest col. 1, ll. 37–40. Wiest discloses pressure measurement device comprises a evaluating electronic unit that could display pressure related information, such as when the pump fails, it can display an error. Wiest col. 1, ll. 37–40. It would have been obvious for Pearson’s functional element 258 to comprise such a display unit for the convenience of accessing pressure information and error information. A person of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate a display screen to access pressure information.
Regarding claim 4:
Modified Pearson discloses that the compressed gas filter according to Claim 3, wherein an information symbol (Wiest display as error or pressure information) is shown on the information surface. Wiest col. 1, ll. 37–40.
Regarding claim 13:
Pearson does not disclose that the compressed gas filter according to Claims 1, wherein a readable information carrier is arranged within the functional element.
As discussed in claim 3, it would have been obvious for Pearson’s functional element 258 to comprise such a display unit for the convenience of accessing pressure information and error information. A person of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate a display screen to access pressure information.
With such modification, modified Pearson’s functional element 258 would comprise a readable information carrier (Wiest’s display unit).
Claims 9–11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Pearson in view of Ootsuka et al., US 2007/0103500 A1 (“Ootsuka”).
Regarding claim 9:
Pearson does not disclose that the compressed gas filter according to Claim 1, wherein the functional element (258 and its surrounding housing) is made of an electrically insulating material.
Similar to Pearson, Ootsuka discloses that a pressure sensor 59 associated with a system comprising air filter 62. Ootsuka Figs. 4 and 6, [0085] and [0093]. Additionally, Ootsuka discloses its pressure sensor 59 comprises a piezoelectric actuator 58, which is subjected to insulation treatment. Ootsuka [0085]. It would therefore have been obvious for Pearson’s pressure sensor to comprise a piezoelectric actuator 58 as disclosed by Ootsuka because a piezoelectric actuator 58 is known to be suitable for pressure sensors, and such element are known to be treated with insulating treatment. With such modification, modified Pearson’s functional element would comprise electrically insulating material. A person of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate such modification, because piezoelectric sensors detect small pressure changes, and electrically insulating material could ensure such function is not interfered by unrelated electrical activities.
Regarding claim 10:
Pearson does not disclose that the compressed gas filter according to Claims 1, wherein the functional element is made of a material which enables the transmission of signals from group electrical signals, electromagnetic signals, or radio signals.
However, as discussed in claim 9, it would therefore have been obvious for Pearson’s pressure sensor to comprise a piezoelectric actuator 58 as disclosed by Ootsuka because a piezoelectric actuator 58 is known to be suitable for pressure sensors and a person of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate using piezoelectric sensor, because piezoelectric sensors detect small pressure changes, and electrically insulating material could ensure such function is not interfered by unrelated electrical activities.
Wish such modification, modified Pearson’s function element would be made of a material (piezoelectric) which enables the transmission of signals from the group electrical signals.
Regarding claim 11:
Pearson does not disclose that the compressed gas filter according to Claims 1, wherein the functional element comprises at least one electrical conductor which connects the interior of the preparation element and/or the interior of the housing to an environment.
However, as discussed in claim 9, it would therefore have been obvious for Pearson’s pressure sensor to comprise a piezoelectric actuator 58 as disclosed by Ootsuka because a piezoelectric actuator 58 is known to be suitable for pressure sensors and a person of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate using piezoelectric sensor, because piezoelectric sensors detect small pressure changes, and electrically insulating material could ensure such function is not interfered by unrelated electrical activities.
With such modification, modified Pearson’s functional element comprises at least one electrical conductor (piezoelectric pressure sensor comprise electrical conductor) which connects the interior of the preparation element and/or the interior of the housing to the environment (because Pearson’s functional element is configured to measure pressure of Pearson’s preparation element 2).
Regarding claim 14:
Pearson does not disclose that the compressed gas filter according to Claim 1, wherein an actuator is arranged within the functional element.
However, as discussed in claim 9, it would therefore have been obvious for Pearson’s pressure sensor to comprise a piezoelectric actuator 58 as disclosed by Ootsuka because a piezoelectric actuator 58 is known to be suitable for pressure sensors and a person of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate using piezoelectric sensor, because piezoelectric sensors detect small pressure changes, and electrically insulating material could ensure such function is not interfered by unrelated electrical activities.
With such modification, modified Pearson would have an actuator (Ootsuka’s piezoelectric actuator 58) arranged within the function element 258.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Pearson in view of Albert et al., US 3,019,657 A (“Albert”).
Regarding claim 12:
Pearson does not explicitly disclose that the compressed gas filter according to Claims 1, wherein the functional element (258 and its surrounding housing) and the preparation element 2 are configured whereby the functional element 258 in the through-opening (Pearson’s area defined by surface 244 and wall 256 and vent 246) is movable in an axial direction, so that the functional element takes different positions in the through-opening depending on pressure ratios in the compressed gas filter.
However, Pearson shows its functional element 258 is disposed in a chamber that is much larger than the functional element 258, and a person of ordinary skill in the art could vision the element 258 move in the radial direction depends on the pressure.
Additionally, similar to Pearson, Albert discloses an air pressure gauge. Albert Fig. 2, col. 1, ll. 38–40. Albert’s air pressure gauge comprising a function element 20 disposed in a through opening (Albert’s barrel 13), Albert Fig. 2, col. 1, ll. 51–64. Albert’s functional element 20 is movable in the through-opening depending on the pressure ratios. Albert Fig. 2, col. 2, ll. 19–27. It would have been obvious for Pearson’s functional element 258 to function the same way as disclosed by Albert, because such design is known in the art of pressure gauges.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
This set of rejection addresses claims 5 and 8.
The claims are rejected as follows:
Claims 1, 3, 5–6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Billiet et al., US 2016/0288042 A1 (“Billiet”).
Regarding claim 1:
Billiet discloses that a compressed gas filter (Billiet’s assembly 12, Billiet Fig. 1, [0089]) having a housing (Billiet’s filter bowl 16, Id.) and a housing head (Billiet’s end cap 10, Id.) having an inlet (Billiet’s inlet 46, Billiet Fig. 1, [0092]) and an outlet (Billiet’s outlet 48 Id.),
wherein in an interior of the housing of a preparation element is arranged (Billiet’s filter 14 is the claimed “preparation element” and in arranged in an interior of Billiet’s bowl 16, Billiet Fig. 1, [0089]),
whereby inflowing compressed gas flows through the inlet (46 of Billiet) into the preparation element (14 of Billiet) and prepared filtered air flows out through the outlet (48 of Billiet, Billiet Fig. 1, [0089]),
wherein the housing head (10 of Billiet) has a through-opening (interior of end cap 10, Billiet Fig. 1, [0089]) and a functional element (Billiet’s sealing plate 40, Billiet Fig. 1, [0091] or Billiet’s insert 50, Billiet Fig. 1, [0095]) connected to the preparation element (14 of Billiet) extends into the through-opening (interior of end cap 10) when the preparation element is in used (Billiet’s sealing plate 40 extends into the through-opening and connects to Billiet’s filter 14 via insert structure 50, Billiet Fig. 1, [0093]).
Regarding claim 3:
Billiet discloses that the compressed gas filter according to claim 1, wherein the functional element (40 of Billiet) has an externally visible information surface (where label 40 points in Fig. 1, Billiet Fig. 1, [0089]) in the state in which the preparation element is used.
Regarding claim 5:
Billiet discloses that the compressed gas filter according to claim 3, on the information surface, a haptically tactile information symbol is arranged, which has been designed with elevations and recesses (as clearly shown in Fig. 1, Billiet’s surface pointed by label 40 has recess and elevations, which is interpreted as the “haptically tactile information symbol”, Billiet Fig. 1, [0095].
Regarding claim 6:
Billiet discloses that the compressed gas filter according to claim 1, wherein within the functional element (50 of Billiet ) at least one fluid channel (Billiet’s first conduit portion 52 and second conduit 58, Billiet Fig. 1, [0097]) is embodied, which connects the interior of the housing of the preparation element (14 of Billiet) to an environment (external environment near outlet 48, Billiet Fig. 1, [0097]).
Regarding claim 8:
Billiet discloses that the compressed gas filter according to claim 6, wherein within the fluid channel (52, 58) connecting the interior of the housing of the preparation element (14 of Billiet) to the environment, an additional filter (Screen structure beneath label “F” in Fig. 1) is arranged.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The examiner drops the current rejection because the applicant has amended the claims to overcome the current rejection. However, the amendment triggers new ground of rejections. Please see details above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
The applicant argues that the claimed invention explicitly requires the functional element to be connected to the preparation element and protrudes to the outside through a separate through-opening in the housing head. Applicant Rem. dated Sep. 15, 2025 (hereinafter “Applicant Rem.”) p. 6. The applicant also argues that Pearson’s filter element is connected to the housing head via a connection, which is different from applicant’s above-cited claim limitations. The applicant argues that Pearson does not disclose a comparable or corresponding functional element that protrudes to the outside via a separate through-opening in the housing head. Id. The applicant argues that the connections in Pearson are use for gas flow and if necessary, pressure measurement, but they are not functional elements within the meaning of applicant’s claim 1. Id.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. As stated in the claim rejection section, the term “connect” could include an abstract connection or a physical connection. The instant disclosure does not explicitly exclude notion connection. Additionally, what the applicant claimed is different from what the applicant think is claimed, for example, in the argument, the applicant repeatedly argues that its preparation element “protrudes to the outside through a separate through-opening in the housing head.” Such limitation is not included in the current claim set. Furthermore, Pearson’s device 258 is mapped to the claimed “functional element.” Applicant argues that the its functional element has a specific meaning in claim 1 without actually claiming it, the argument is therefore not commensurate with the scope of the invention.
The applicant argues that there is no indication that Pearson’s component 258 is connected to the preparation element protrudes into the hosing head through this opening when the component 2 is in use. Applicant Rem. 7.
The examiner disagrees. Pearson’s component 258 is accommodated in the through opening and therefore, Pearson’s components remain in an “extended into” status and read on the claimed limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant’s arguments regarding the obviousness rejection depends on the allowability of its independent claims. Applicant’s argument is therefore not persuasive.
Allowable Subject Matter
The examiner withdraws allowable subject matter in view of new reference. Details are provided in the rejection section above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIANPING HE whose telephone number is (571)272-8385. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30-5:00 M-F.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached on (571) 270-7872. 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.
/Qianping He/Examiner, Art Unit 1776