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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
Amendments to the claims, filed on 03/03/2026, are accepted and do not introduce new matter.
Claims 1-7 and 21-23 are pending; claims 8-20 were cancelled; claims 21-23 are new.
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)(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 1-4, 6-7 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Williams et al (U.S. 2004/0227014).
Regarding claim 1, Williams teaches a fluid control valve assembly (seen in detail in Figs 16-18) configured to be coupled to a fluid inlet (defined by inlet 28 which sends water to first path 30, see Fig 3) and a fluid outlet assembly (defined by head 16, seen in Fig 2), the fluid control valve assembly comprising:
a first module (module 202), a second module (module 204), and a third module (module 206), each of the modules including a substantially flat surface (shown below) on opposing ends, wherein an end of the first module abuts an end of the second module (as shown below and seen in Fig 3), and an end of the third module abuts the other end of the second module (as shown below and seen in Fig 3), the modules being assembled by welding the first module to the second module and the second module to the third module (regarding the modules being assembled by a welding process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself - the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production - if the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process (MPEP 2113) - therefore, the process of making the modules together does not have any patentable weight, since Williams teaches all the structure of the modules) to define a first chamber (defined at path 32, shown below), a second chamber (defined at path 36, shown below), a third chamber (defined at path 40, shown below), and a fourth chamber (defined at path 42, shown below), wherein each of the first, second, third, and fourth chambers is defined by a combination of at least two of the first, second, and third modules (as shown below, when the three modules are put together, their combination defines each of the four chambers 32, 36, 40 and 42, as claimed);
a first diverter (first valve 34) movable within the fluid control valve assembly between a first position (118, shown in Figs 16-17) and a second position (116, shown in Figs 18); and
a second diverter (second valve 38) movable within the fluid control value assembly between a first position (140, shown in Fig 16) and a second position (142, shown in Fig 17),
wherein, to selectively control flow of fluid through the fluid inlet, at least one chamber, and the fluid outlet assembly, the fluid control valve assembly is configured such that:
when the first diverter (34) is in the first position (118, shown in Fig 16), the fluid inlet is fluidly coupled with the second chamber (as seen by the flow arrows in Fig 16, the fluid flows from the inlet to the second chamber 36),
when the first diverter (34) is in the second position (116, shown in Figs 18), the fluid inlet is fluidly coupled with the first chamber (as seen by the flow arrows in Fig 18, the fluid flows from the inlet to the first chamber 32),
when the second diverter (38) is in the first position (140, shown in Fig 16), the second chamber is fluidly connected with the third chamber (as seen by the flow arrows in Fig 16, the second chamber 36 is fluidly connected to the third chamber 40) and,
when the second diverter (38) is in the second position (142, shown in Fig 17), the second chamber is fluidly connected to the fourth chamber (as seen by the flow arrows in Fig 17, the second chamber 36 is fluidly connected to the fourth chamber 42).
PNG
media_image1.png
428
763
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
477
731
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Williams teaches the fluid control valve of claim 1, wherein the first chamber (32) is fluidly connectable with a first outlet member (defined by outlet assembly 44) of the fluid outlet assembly (as seen in Fig 3, the first chamber 32 communicates to outlet assembly 44 via passage 212).
Regarding claim 3, Williams teaches the fluid control valve of claim 2, wherein the first outlet member (44) includes at least one nozzle for providing a fluid stream output (outlet member 44 is disclosed as a stream outlet, see Par 0032 - wherein 44 defines a central nozzle).
Regarding claim 4, Williams teaches the fluid control valve of claim 1, wherein the third chamber (40) is fluidly connectable with a second outlet member (outlet assembly 46) of the fluid outlet assembly (the third chamber 40 is connected to channel 168, which leads water to the second outlet member 46, as seen in Fig 3 and disclosed in Par 0069).
Regarding claim 6, Williams teaches the fluid control valve of claim 1, wherein the fourth chamber (42) is fluidly connected with a third outlet member (annular outlet member 48) of the fluid outlet assembly (the fourth chamber 42 connects to the third outlet member 48, as disclosed in Par 0071).
Regarding claim 7, Williams teaches the fluid control valve of claim 6, wherein the third outlet member (48) includes a plurality of nozzles (174, seen in Fig 15 and disclosed in Par 0071) for providing a spray fluid output (spray fluid output disclosed in Par 0072).
Regarding claim 21, Williams teaches the fluid control valve of claim 1, wherein each of the first diverter and the second diverter are movable in a direction transverse to a longitudinal axis of the fluid control valve assembly (as seen in Fig 3, the first and second diverters 34 and 38, move in a direction that is transverse to the longitudinal axis of their respective modules 202 and 204; thus reading on claim language).
Regarding claim 22, Williams teaches the fluid control valve of claim 1, wherein the first module (202) includes a first diverter housing (shown below), the first diverter arranged in the first diverter housing (first diverter 34 is arranged in the first diverter housing, as seen in Figs 3 and 8).
Regarding claim 23, Williams teaches the fluid control valve of claim 1, wherein the second module (204) includes a second diverter housing (shown below), the second diverter arranged in the second diverter housing (second diverter 38 is arranged in the second diverter housing, as seen in Figs 3 and 8).
PNG
media_image3.png
520
526
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams et al (U.S. 2004/0227014).
Regarding claim 5, Williams teaches the fluid control valve of claim 4. However, Williams does not teach the second outlet member (46) being configured to provide an aerated fluid output.
Nonetheless, Williams does teach that the first outlet member (44) provides an aerated fluid output (as disclosed in Par 0066). As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to rearrange the first and third chambers such that the third chamber 40 is in the one in charge of feeding water to the aerated outlet member 44 and so that the first chamber 32 feeds water to the outlet member 46, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. As it was determined in In re Japikse, where the court found that rearrangement of parts is unpatentable if the modification would not have modified the operation of the device (see MPEP 2144.04 VI C). In the present case, rearranging the placement of the chambers would not change how the device operates. Furthermore, Applicant fails to teach any criticality to having the claimed arrangement. Examiner notes that this modification would require a simple rearrangement of the water channels that feed outlets 46 and 44, which would be considered an obvious design choice.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-7 and 21-23 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply in view of new grounds of rejection. Applicant's amendments filed on 03/03/2026 have resulted in the new grounds of rejection found above.
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 JUAN C BARRERA whose telephone number is (571)272-6284. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F Generally 10am-4pm and 6-8pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ARTHUR O. HALL can be reached on 571-270-1814. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
If there are any inquiries that are not being addressed by first contacting the Examiner or the Supervisor, you may send an email inquiry to TC3700_Workgroup_D_Inquiries@uspto.gov.
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.
/JUAN C BARRERA/
Examiner, Art Unit 3752
/ARTHUR O. HALL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights