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 .
This is a response to Applicant's amendment filed on March 28, 2026.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 4, 5, 13-15 and 18 have been amended. Claims 6-8 have been cancelled. New claims 19-21 have been added. Claims 1-5 and 9-21 are pending. Claims 1-5 and 9-21 are examined herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's Remarks/Arguments and Amendments to Claims both filed 03/28/2026 have been fully considered.
It is noted that claim 1, an independent claim from which all of the claims ultimately depend, has been amended to recite “a plurality of first spacers, apt to be arranged concentrically around said central duct close to its external wall, each one of said first spacers having a wall provided with first holes according to a radial direction (R) with respect to the longitudinal axis (L) wherein said first holes have a perforated surf ace comprised between 2 and 4 mm2; a plurality of second spacers, apt to be arranged concentrically around said central duct in remote position with respect to its external wall, each one of said second spacers having a wall provided with second holes according to a radial direction (R) with respect to the longitudinal axis (L) wherein said second holes have a perforated surface comprised between 2 and 4 mm2 and wherein said second spacers are implemented in form of rings, with a section profile having a bent central portion and substantially rectilinear extremal portions, one of said extremal portions having a developing terminal region so that, during use, it is arranged parallelly to the longitudinal axis (L), said bent central portion having said second holes;” in the context of a cartridge for a filtering device for liquids as claimed.
Applicant argues that: the claim 1 and its dependent claims are not anticipated nor prima facie obvious over cited prior art(s), Cutore (EP 0 966 999 A1), this is because the cited prior art does not teach or suggest the amended features of “a plurality of first spacers, apt to be arranged concentrically around said central duct close to its external wall, each one of said first spacers having a wall provided with first holes according to a radial direction (R) with respect to the longitudinal axis (L) wherein said first holes have a perforated surf ace comprised between 2 and 4 mm2; a plurality of second spacers, apt to be arranged concentrically around said central duct in remote position with respect to its external wall, each one of said second spacers having a wall provided with second holes according to a radial direction (R) with respect to the longitudinal axis (L) wherein said second holes have a perforated surface comprised between 2 and 4 mm2 and wherein said second spacers are implemented in form of rings, with a section profile having a bent central portion and substantially rectilinear extremal portions, one of said extremal portions having a developing terminal region so that, during use, it is arranged parallelly to the longitudinal axis (L), said bent central portion having said second holes;” in the context of a cartridge for a filtering device for liquids as claimed. See Remarks, pages 7-9.
In response, the applicants’ arguments direct a newly amended claim limitation which is a new issue. Therefore, the arguments are considered moot. Applicant's amendment necessitated a modified/new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
Upon further consideration and search, a modified/new ground of rejections to claims 1-5 and 9-21 are presented in the instant Office action.
MODIFIED REJECTIONS
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claims 1-5 and 9-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cutore (EP 0 966 999 A1).
In regard to claim 1, Cutore discloses a cartridge for a filtering device for liquids, in particular for filtering fuels for aeronautical use (paragraph [0001]), comprising (Fig. 9 and Fig. 10; paragraphs [0034]-[0044], Note: Figs. 2-8 are detailed representations of sub-components of filter cartridge shown in Fig. 9 and the cited numerals from Figs. 2-9):
(i) a central duct (an internal space inside the tube 5) having a longitudinal axis (L) (an axis along the center of the internal space inside the tube 5), an internal wall and an external wall of the tube 5, said central duct further having a plurality of through-holes (6) (paragraph [0031]) between said external wall and said internal wall;
(ii) a plurality of first filtering elements (7) arranged around said central duct, superimposed on each other according to a direction (S) (note the same direction of stacking the filtering elements 7) parallel to the longitudinal axis (L);
(iii) a plurality of first spacers (8, Fig. 6), apt to be arranged concentrically around said central duct close to its external wall, each one of said first spacers having a wall provided with the first holes (2, Fig. 6; paragraph [0024]) according to a radial direction (R) with respect to the longitudinal axis (L); and
(iv) a plurality of second spacers (9, Fig. 7), apt to be arranged concentrically around said central duct in remote position with respect to its external wall, each one of said second spacers having a wall provided with second holes (2, Fig. 7) according to a radial direction (R) with respect to the longitudinal axis (L), wherein said second spacers are implemented in form of rings (Fig. 7 shows a ring formation of the second spacer), with a section profile having a bent central portion (Fig. 7 shows a bent central portion) and substantially rectilinear extremal portions (the lugs (4, Fig. 7) part has a shape of a substantially rectilinear configuration), one of said extremal portions having a developing terminal region (Figs. 2-5 and 7) so that, during use, it is arranged parallelly to the axis (L) (the lugs (4, Fig. 7) is arranged parallel to the axis (L) during usage as shown in Figs. 9 and 10), said bent portion having said second holes (Figs. 7 and 9-10);
wherein, along the direction (S), said first filtering elements (7) result to be alternatively interspaced with one of said first spacers and one of said second spacers (see the configuration in Fig. 8), so that said first and second spacers result to be interspaced with pairs of said first filtering elements in contact with each other in proximity to said first spacers and said second spacers, respectively (paragraphs [0029]-[0033]),
the arrangement being so that said first and second spacers with portions of said filtering elements form chambers for inletting and outletting the fluid to be filtered, through said first and second holes (Fig. 8 and Fig. 10; paragraphs [0038]-[0043]).
Cutore discloses first spacers (8, Fig. 6) comprising first holes have a perforated surface (Fig. 6), second spacers (9, Fig. 7) comprising second holes have a perforated surface (Fig. 7), and said central duct comprises through-holes (6) have a perforated surface (Fig. 9).
But Cutore does not disclose the specific numerical dimensions of said first and second holes have a perforated surface comprised between 2 and 4 mm2.
However, Cutore discloses the cartridge for a filtering device for liquids is for removing ice particles or impurities and water from fuels, especially aircraft fuels (paragraphs [0001]-[0006]). Consequently, though Cutore does not discloses disclose the first and second holes have a perforated surface comprised between 2 and 4 mm2, in light of teachings from Cutore, in its entirety, claimed numerical dimensions of the first and second holes have a perforated surface comprised between 2 and 4 mm2 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art through routine experimentation in an effort to optimize filtering device activity and utility taking into consideration the operational parameters of the filtering operation (ice or impurity particle sizes, residence time, temperature, pressure, throughput, and/or viscosity of fuels), the geometry of the cartridge for a filtering device bodies, the physical and chemical make-up of the fuels to be filtered as well as the nature of the filtered fuel products.
In regard to claim 2, Cutore discloses said central duct has substantially cylindrical shape (Fig. 9).
In regard to claim 3, Cutore discloses said first filtering elements (7, Fig. 8) are implemented in form of flat circular crowns (Fig. 9), with an internal diameter (d) substantially equal to the external diameter (D) of said central duct (see Fig. 9; paragraphs [0035]-[0036]).
In regard to claim 4, Cutore discloses said first filtering elements (7) are made of cellulose (paragraphs [0011]).
In regard to claim 5, Cutore discloses said first spacers (8, Fig. 6) are implemented in form of rings, with a section profile having a bent central portion and substantially rectilinear extremal portions, said bent portion having said first holes (Figs. 2-6).
In regard to claims 9-12, Cutore discloses first spacers (8, Fig. 6) comprising first holes have a perforated surface (Fig. 6), second spacers (9, Fig. 7) comprising second holes have a perforated surface (Fig. 7), and said central duct comprises through-holes (6) have a perforated surface (Fig. 9).
But Cutore does not disclose the specific numerical dimensions of the cartridge subcomponents as recited in claims 9-12 of claimed invention.
However, Cutore discloses the cartridge for a filtering device for liquids is for removing ice particles or impurities and water from fuels, especially aircraft fuels (paragraphs [0001]-[0006]). Consequently, the claimed numerical dimensions of the cartridge subcomponents would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art through routine experimentation in an effort to optimize filtering device activity and utility taking into consideration the operational parameters of the filtering operation (impurity particle size, residence time, temperature, pressure, throughput and/or viscosity of fuels), the geometry of the cartridge for a filtering device bodies, the physical and chemical make-up of the fuels to be filtered as well as the nature of the filtered fuel products.
In regard to claim 13, Cutore discloses each one of said first and second spacers are made of metal, preferably stainless steel (paragraph [0024]).
In regard to claim 14, Cutore discloses each one of said first and second spacers are made of metal, preferably stainless steel (paragraph [0024]). Since the central duct (an internal space inside the tube 5) needs comparable mechanical strength during operation (Fig. 9 and Fig. 10; paragraphs [0034]-[0044]), one skilled in the art would have reasonably expected that the central duct (an internal space inside the tube 5) is made of similar material as the first and second spacers. This renders the recitation of claim 14 prima facie obvious.
In regard to claim 15, Cutore discloses clamping means (13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26) apt to exert a pressure on the set of said first and second spacers and said first filtering elements, in contrast with the elastic force exerted by said first and second spacers (Fig. 9).
In regard to claim 16, Cutore discloses said clamping means (13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26) implements a sealing against the external wall of said central duct (5) (Figs. 9-10).
In regard to claim 17, Cutore discloses at least a second filtering element, arranged externally to the cartridge itself (Fig. 10 shows multiple cartridges having a second filtering element in the second cartridge, arranged externally to the first cartridge).
In regard to claim 18, Cutore discloses a filtering device for liquids, in particular for filtering fuels for aeronautical use, comprising a cartridge for a filtering device for liquids, in particular for filtering fuels for aeronautical use (paragraph [0001]; Fig. 10).
In regard to claim 19, Cutore discloses the filtering device is for filtering fuels for aeronautical use (paragraph [0001]).
In regard to claim 20, Cutore discloses the metal is stainless steel (paragraph [0024]).
In regard to claim 21, Cutore discloses the metal is stainless steel (paragraph [0024]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 YOUNGSUL JEONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1494. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9AM-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, In Suk Bullock can be reached on 571-272-5954. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/YOUNGSUL JEONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772
Prosecution Insights