Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/205,134

VENT WITH INVERSION PROTECTION

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 02, 2023
Examiner
CLEMENTE, ROBERT ARTHUR
Art Unit
1773
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Donaldson Company Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
1064 granted / 1314 resolved
+16.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1349
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
§102
31.0%
-9.0% vs TC avg
§112
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1314 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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. (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. Claims 1, 2, 6, 11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 202019004792 to Heinrichs (hereinafter referred to as Heinrichs). In regard to claim 1, as shown in the figure, Heinrichs can be considered to disclose a vent assembly having a vent housing (2). The vent housing (2) has a first axial end at the bottom, a second axial end at the top, and an airflow pathway extending between the first axial end and the second axial end. The opening toward the top second axial end can be considered an environmental opening configured for fluid communication between an outside environment and the airflow pathway. The bottom opening can be considered an enclosure opening configured to selectively define a fluid flow pathway between an interior of an enclosure and the airflow pathway. The valve body (4) forms an obstruction having a first relative position (as shown in the figure) and a second relative position with the valve body moved upward and the spring (11) compressed. The obstruction (4) is configured to obstruct thew fluid flow pathway in the first relative position and unobstruct the fluid flow pathway in the second relative position. A filter media (16) is disposed in the vent housing (2) laterally across the airflow pathway. In regard to claim 2, the middle part (17) can be considered to form an inner housing surrounded by an outer housing (2). The inner housing (17) is capable of being translated relative to the outer housing (2) when the vent assembly is disassembled. In regard to claim 6, the upper part (3) forms a translation limiter disengageably engaging the inner housing (17) and the outer housing (2), wherein the translation limiter is configured to obstruct translation of the inner housing relative to the outer housing until manual disengagement. In regard to claim 11, as shown in the figure, the barrier (15) at the bottom defines enclosure openings that face the lateral direction. In regard to claim 13, the filter media (16) can be considered to comprise coalescing filter media. Claims 14 and 17 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent No. 6,644,515 to Campbell (hereinafter referred to as Campbell). In regard to claim 14, as shown in figure 3, Campbell discloses a vent assembly (20). The vent assembly (20) includes a vent housing (40, 67, 70) configured to extend through an enclosure (18’) having a wall thickness. The vent housing has a bottom first axial end, a top second axial end, and an airflow pathway extending between the first and the second axial ends. An environmental opening (78) is arranged towards the second axial end and is configured for fluid communication between an outside environment and the airflow pathway. An enclosure opening (30) is configured to selectively define a fluid pathway between an interior of the enclosure and the airflow pathway. The threads (60) form a first coupling structure configured to sealably engage the enclosure in an intermediate installation position. The bottom surface of the first-stage-filter housing (67) engages the mounting-valve-unit housing (40) and can be considered to form a translation limiter configured to obstruct translation of the vent housing relative to the enclosure in the intermediate installation position. The threads (60) can be manually unscrewed. Thus, the translation limiter is configured to be manually disengaged. A filter media (68) is disposed in the housing laterally across the airflow pathway. In regard to claim 17, the translation limiter, as discussed above, is configured to obstruct translation of the vent housing in the axial direction. In regard to claim 18, the outside of the bore (36) can be considered to form an enclosure sealing surface disposed around the vent housing. This enclosure sealing surface is positioned axially between the second axial end and the enclosure opening (30). The enclosure sealing surface is configured to form a seal with the enclosure (18’) in the intermediate installation position, as shown in figure 3. In regard to claim 19, the calve poppet (42) can be considered to form a second coupling structure. The arrangement in figure 3 can be considered to form the “intermediate” installation position. As shown, in this position, the second coupling structure is disengaged form the enclosure. A position with the threads (60) at least partially disengaged can be considered a “complete” installation position. In this case, the valve poppet (42) is closed to searingly engage the enclosure. 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. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heinrichs in view of CA 2919074 to Basham et al. (hereinafter referred to as Basham). Heinrichs is discussed above in section 3. Heinrichs does not further include a membrane coupled to the vent housing. As discussed in the abstract and shown in figure 1, Basham is also directed to a vent assembly (10). Basham includes a membrane (20) in the vent assembly. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Heinrichs to further include a membrane extending laterally across the airflow pathway between the filter media and the second axial end as suggested by Basham as it is known to use a membrane in a vent assembly and the membrane predictably can remove further contaminants from the airflow. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell. Campbell is discussed above in section 4. As discussed above, the bottom surface of the first-stage-filter housing (67) can be considered to form the translation limiter. Campbell does not disclose this surface to have a visually distinctive color relative to the visible portions of the non-translation limiter components of the vent assembly. As discussed in MPEP 2144.04(I), matters relating to ornamentation only which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention form the prior art. The color of the translation limiter and/or the rest of the vent assembly is considered to be ornamentation that does not affect how the vent assembly functions. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Campbell to form the translation limiter with a visually distinctive color relative to the visible portions of the non-translation limiter components of the vent assembly as this represent mere ornamentation and does not affect the mechanical function of the vent assembly. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3 – 5, 7 – 10, 15, and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert Clemente whose telephone number is (571)272-1476. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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, Benjamin Lebron can be reached at 571-272-0475. 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. /ROBERT CLEMENTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 02, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597617
FUEL CELL MEMBRANE HUMIDIFIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589333
DEGASSER WITH TWO WEAKLY COUPLED SPACES AND/OR WITH A RESTRICTION ADJUSTMENT DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589178
AIR STERILISATION APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12582942
GAS PROCESSING APPARATUS AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582932
Air Purifier
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+6.8%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1314 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month