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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/05/2025 has been entered.
Status of the claims
Claim 1 19, 20 is amended. Currently claims 1, 5-20 are pending in this application.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wolgast (20180082870) in view of Gerhard (3367199) further in view of Wohlfarth et al (20120001419 ).
Regarding claim(s) 1, Wolgast Fig 1B,1C discloses a flow substrate mounting structure 102 comprising: a first fastener aperture (for bolts for coupling 108 to surface of the flow substrate mounting structure; a second fastener aperture (for bolts for coupling of 110) defined in the flow substrate mounting structure, wherein the first surface is disposed on an opposite side of the flow mounting structure from the second surface.
Wolgast fails to disclose each fastener aperture extending through the flow substrate mounting structure to the opposite surface and having an enlarged part of counterbore on the opposite surface, Gerhard teaches a coupling mechanism for coupling a plate (right disc 10) to a mounting structure (left disc 10) comprising a fastener 20 in a fastener aperture 19 such that fastener aperture extends through the mounting structure (left disc 10) and having an enlarged part 23 of counterbore on the opposite surface for accommodating a nut 24.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device disclosed by Wolgast with a fastener aperture each extending through the flow substrate mounting structure to the opposite surface and having an enlarged part of counterbore on the opposite surface as taught by Gerhard in order to provide a conveniently removable coupling mechanism. With fastener apertures as through holes with enlarged ends on ends opposite to boltheads, Wolgast as modified would have first fastener aperture (for bolts for coupling 108) defined in a first (top surface in Fig 1C) surface of the flow substrate mounting structure, wherein the first fastener aperture extends through the flow substrate mounting structure from the first surface to a second surface, wherein a diameter of the first fastener aperture defined in the first (top) surface (for accommodating a nut) is larger than a diameter of the first fastener aperture defined in the second surface and second fastener aperture (for bolts for coupling 110) defined in second surface (bottom surface in Fig 1C) of the flow substrate mounting structure, wherein the first surface is disposed on an opposite side of the flow mounting structure from the second surface and wherein the second fastener aperture extends through the flow substrate mounting structure from the second surface to the first surface, wherein a diameter of the second fastener aperture defined in the second (bottom) surface (for accommodating a nut) is larger than a diameter of the second fastener aperture defined in the first surface.
Wolgast discloses first and second surfaces coupled to fluid devices 108,110 but fails to disclose locking pin apertures on first and second surfaces for receiving locking pins. Wohlfarth, Fig 2,3 teaches coupling mechanism for two fluidic bodies comprising alignment locking pin apertures 17 on mating surfaces of each fluidic body for receiving alignment locking pins 16.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device disclosed by Wolgast with alignment locking pin apertures on surfaces the flow substrate mounting structure and other device mating surface for receiving alignment locking pins as taught by Wohlfarth in order to provide additional alignment/positioning support.
As to claim 5, Wolgast fails to disclose substrate mounting structure material.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made substrate mounting structure material in the device disclosed by Wolgast using aluminum alloy or a polymer since it has been held that selecting a particular known material is within the general skill of a worker in the art on the basis of its suitability for the intended as a material of obvious design choice use based upon particular application requirements.
As to claim 6, the flow substrate mounting structure is configured to couple with a flow substrate of any thickness (no limits on thickness of 110 with matching length bolts).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 7-20 is/are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment has overcome the rejection of record. However, a new ground of rejection is applied to the amended claims. Wohlfarth is cited to show prior art teaching of alignment locking pins and apertures.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Atif Chaudry at phone number 571-270-3768. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (9:30AM-6:00PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881, or Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. 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.
/ATIF H CHAUDRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753