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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/26/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 5/19/2026 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the first groove axis" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 9,128,028 issued to McBrady et al. (“McBrady”) in view of JP 2019-196934 by Nishida et al. (“Nishida”) as listed in the IDS dated 3/7/2024 and U.S. Patent 6,591,674 issued to Gehman et al. (“Gehman”).
As for claim 1, McBrady discloses a thermal type flowmeter comprising:
a channel member (126) configured to cause a liquid flowing in from an inflow port (252) to flow out of an outflow port (254);
a plate member (112) attached to the channel member and defining, together with the channel member, a measuring channel (114) used for measuring a flow rate of a liquid; and
a sensor unit (122),
wherein the channel member (126) includes
a flat surface (bottom side of 126 in Fig. 1B) in which a first groove (forming 114) having a predetermined width and extending straight along an axis is formed,
an inflow channel (116) having a circular cross section (see Fig. 1A), the inflow channel (116) being connected to a first end in an axis direction along the axis of the first groove (114), the inflow channel being formed inside the channel member (see Fig. 1B) by cutting the channel member (the process of making the inflow channel does not structurally distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art), and a liquid flowing in from the inflow port (252) being guided to the inflow channel (implied by Figs. 1B and 2), the liquid flowing in the inflow channel being in direct contact therewith (see Fig. 1B), and
an outflow channel (118) having a circular cross section (see Fig. 1), the outflow channel (118) being connected to a second end in the axis direction of the first groove (114), the outflow channel being formed inside the channel member (see Fig. 1B) by cutting the channel member (the process of making the inflow channel does not structurally distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art), and configured to guide a liquid to the outflow port (implied by Figs. 1B and 2), the liquid flowing in the outflow channel being in direct contact therewith (see Fig. 1B), and
wherein each of a first inner diameter (width of 116 in Fig. 1B) of a position of the flat surface at which the inflow channel is opened and a second inner diameter (width of 118 in Fig. 1B) of a position of the flat surface at which the outflow channel is opened is larger than a width (vertical dimension of 114 in Fig. 1B) of the first groove (114).
McBrady does not disclose that the channel member is made of resin. Instead, McBrady discloses that the channel member can be made of silicon or other suitable wafer materials.
However, Nishida discloses a channel member (120) that is made of resin (pdms; paragraph [0006]).
Because McBrady and Nishida both disclose materials for making a channel member, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to substitute the resin of Nishida for the material of McBrady to achieve the predictable result of providing a material with which to make a channel member.
McBrady as presently modified by Nishida does not disclose a sensor unit having a heating resistor and a temperature detecting resistor as recited. Instead, McBrady discloses a generic sensor unit (122) that can determine a rate of flow of a fluid (McBrady: col. 4, lines 27-30).
However, Nishida discloses a sensor unit (110a) having a heating resistor and a temperature detecting resistor (paragraph [0044]), the heating resistor being configured to transfer heat to a plate member (paragraphs [0044] and [0006]), and the temperature detecting resistor being configured to determine a temperature of the plate member to which heat of the liquid flowing through the measuring channel is transferred (paragraphs [0044] and [0006]). Nishida discloses that the sensor unit determines a rate of flow of a fluid (paragraph [0044]).
Because McBrady and Nishida both disclose sensor units that determine a rate of flow of a fluid, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to substitute the sensor unit of Nishida for the sensor unit of McBrady to achieve the predictable result of providing a sensor unit that determines a rate of flow of a fluid.
McBrady as modified by Nishida does not disclose a second groove annularly extending so as to surround the first groove is formed in the flat surface,
the thermal type flowmeter further comprising an annular seal member inserted in the second groove and contacted with the plate member to form an annular seal area surrounding the first groove.
However, Gehman discloses a second groove (holding 39; see Figs. 2 and 5) annularly extending so as to surround a first groove is formed in a flat surface,
and an annular seal member (39) inserted in the second groove and contacted with a plate member (32) to form an annular seal area surrounding the first groove.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the thermal type flowmeter of McBrady and Nishida to include the second groove and annular seal member as disclosed by Gehman in order to reduce leakage (Gehman: col. 7, lines 40-49).
As for claim 2, McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman discloses that each of the first inner diameter and the second inner diameter is 1.5 times or greater of the width of the first groove (McBrady: see Fig. 1B, where the widths of 116 and 118 are ~2 times as large as the vertical dimension of 114).
As for claim 11, McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman discloses the thermal type flowmeter according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman does not disclose that a width of the flat surface between the first groove and the second groove is larger than the width of the first groove and smaller than a width of the second groove.
However, it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the widths of the flat surface, the first groove and the second groove of McBrady, Nishida and Gehman to be as recited because recitations of the claimed features are not patentably distinct from the prior art of McBrady, Nishida and Gehman.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 9,128,028 issued to McBrady et al. (“McBrady”) in view of JP 2019-196934 by Nishida et al. (“Nishida”) as listed in the IDS dated 3/7/2024 and U.S. Patent 6,591,674 issued to Gehman et al. (“Gehman”) as applied to claim 1, further in view of U.S. Patent 9,816,846 issued to Islam et al. (“Islam”).
As for claim 3, McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman discloses the thermal type flowmeter according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman does not disclose that the width of the first groove is 0.2 mm or greater and 1 mm or less because Nishida does not disclose the size of the measurement channel of the thermal type flowmeter.
However, Islam discloses a measurement channel of a thermal type flow meter that has a width that is 0.2 mm or greater and 1 mm or less (col. 8, lines 43-45).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the width of the first groove of McBrady, Nishida and Gehman to be 0.2 mm or greater and 1 mm or less as disclosed by Islam in order to allow the thermal type flow meter to be used for steam flow (Islam: col. 1, lines 27-34 and col. 8, lines 39-45).
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 9,128,028 issued to McBrady et al. (“McBrady”) in view of JP 2019-196934 by Nishida et al. (“Nishida”) as listed in the IDS dated 3/7/2024 and U.S. Patent 6,591,674 issued to Gehman et al. (“Gehman”) as applied to claim 1, further in view of U.S. Patent 7,117,736 issued to Kamiunten et al. (“Kamiunten”).
As for claim 4, McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman discloses the thermal type flowmeter according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman does not disclose that the plate member is formed of sapphire or glassy carbon.
However, Kamiunten discloses a plate member (4) that is formed of sapphire (col. 9, line 6-11) or glassy carbon.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the plate member of McBrady, Nishida and Gehman to made of sapphire or glassy carbon as disclosed by Kamiunten in order to provide corrosion resistance (Kamiunten: col. 9, lines 6-11).
As for claim 5, McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman discloses the thermal type flowmeter according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman does not disclose that the sensor unit is deposited on the plate member.
However, Kamiunten discloses a sensor unit that is deposited on a plate member (col. 3, lines 27-40).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the flowmeter of McBrady, Nishida and Gehman by depositing the sensor unit as disclosed by Kamiunten in order to provide a well-known method for making a sensor unit.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 9,128,028 issued to McBrady et al. (“McBrady”) in view of JP 2019-196934 by Nishida et al. (“Nishida”) as listed in the IDS dated 3/7/2024 and U.S. Patent 6,591,674 issued to Gehman et al. (“Gehman”) as applied to claim 1, further in view of U.S. Patent 10,605,641 issued to Badarlis et al. (“Badarlis”).
As for claim 7, McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman discloses the thermal type flowmeter according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman does not disclose that the sensor unit is arranged at a position closer to the outflow channel than to the inflow channel in the axis direction. Instead, McBrady and Nishida disclose a sensor unit that is arranged equidistant from the inflow and outflow channels to measure a flow rate (McBrady: 122, see Fig. 1B; and Nishida: see Fig. 1).
However, Badarlis discloses a sensor unit that (11a-11c) is arranged at a position closer to the outflow channel than to the inflow channel in the axis direction (see Figs. 1-3). Badarlis discloses that the sensor unit measures a flow rate at this position (col. 11, lines 15-48).
Because Badarlis, McBrady and Nishida disclose positions of sensor units, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to substitute the position of Badarlis for the position of McBrady and Nishida to achieve the predictable result of providing a sensor unit at a position at which a fluid flow rate can be measured.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 9,128,028 issued to McBrady et al. (“McBrady”) in view of JP 2019-196934 by Nishida et al. (“Nishida”) as listed in the IDS dated 3/7/2024 2024, U.S. Patent 6,591,674 issued to Gehman et al. (“Gehman”) and U.S. Patent 8,166,814 issued to Ike et al. (“Ike”).
As for claim 8, McBrady discloses a manufacturing method of a thermal type flowmeter, wherein the thermal type flowmeter comprising
a channel member (126) configured to cause a liquid flowing in from an inflow port (252) to flow out of an outflow port (254);
a plate member (112) attached to the channel member and defining, together with the channel member, a measuring channel (114) used for measuring a flow rate of a liquid; and
a sensor unit (122),
the manufacturing method comprising:
shaping a flat surface (bottom surface of 126 in Fig. 1B) of the channel member (126) to form a first groove (114) having a predetermined width and extending straight along an axis;
shaping the channel member (126) to form an inflow channel (116) having a circular cross section (see Fig. 1A) inside the channel member, the inflow channel (116) being connected to a first end in an axis direction along the axis of the first groove (114), and a liquid flowing in from the inflow port (252) being guided to the inflow channel (implied by Figs. 1B and 2), the liquid being in direct contact with the inflow channel (see Fig. 1B);
shaping the channel member (126) to form an outflow channel (118) having a circular cross section (see Fig. 1A) inside the channel member, the outflow channel (118) being connected to a second end in the axis direction of the first groove (114) and configured to guide a liquid to the outflow port (implied by Figs. 1B and 2), the liquid being in direct contact the outflow channel (see Fig. 1B); and
forming the measuring channel by attaching the plate member to the flat surface of the channel member in which the first groove, the inflow channel, and the outflow channel are formed (see Fig. 1B),
wherein each of a first inner diameter (width of 116 in Fig. 1B) of a position of the flat surface at which the inflow channel is opened and a second inner diameter (width of 118 in Fig. 1B) of a position of the flat surface at which the outflow channel is opened is larger than a width (vertical dimension of 114 in Fig. 1B) of the first groove (114).
McBrady does not disclose that the channel member is made of resin. Instead, McBrady discloses that the channel member can be made of silicon or other suitable wafer materials.
However, Nishida discloses a channel member (120) that is made of resin (pdms; paragraph [0006]).
Because McBrady and Nishida both disclose materials for making a channel member, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to substitute the resin of Nishida for the material of McBrady to achieve the predictable result of providing a material with which to make a channel member.
McBrady as presently modified by Nishida does not disclose a sensor unit having a heating resistor and a temperature detecting resistor as recited. Instead, McBrady discloses a generic sensor unit (122) that can determine a rate of flow of a fluid (McBrady: col. 4, lines 27-30).
However, Nishida discloses a sensor unit (110a) having a heating resistor and a temperature detecting resistor (paragraph [0044]), the heating resistor being configured to transfer heat to a plate member (Paragraphs [0044] and [0006], and the temperature detecting resistor being configured to determine a temperature of the plate member to which heat of the liquid flowing through the measuring channel is transferred (paragraphs [0044] and [0006]). Nishida discloses that the sensor unit determines a rate of flow of a fluid (paragraph [0044]).
Because McBrady and Nishida both disclose sensor units that determine a rate of flow of a fluid, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to substitute the sensor unit of Nishida for the sensor unit of McBrady to achieve the predictable result of providing a sensor unit that determines a rate of flow of a fluid.
McBrady as modified by Nishida does not disclose forming a second groove annularly extending so as to surround the first groove; and
inserting an annular seal member inserted in the second groove, the annular seal member being contacted with the plate member to form an annular seal area surrounding the first groove.
However, Gehman discloses forming a second groove (holding 39; see Figs. 2 and 5) annularly extending so as to surround a first groove;
inserting an annular seal member (39) in the second groove (see Figs. 2 and 5), the annular sela member being contacted with a plate member (32) to form an annular seal area surrounding a first groove (see Figs. 2, 5, and 6).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of McBrady and Nishida to include forming the second groove and inserting the annular seal member as disclosed by Gehman in order to reduce leakage (Gehman: col. 7, lines 40-49).
McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman does not explicitly disclose that the shaping of the flat surface to form the first groove, and the shaping of the channel member to form the inflow and outflow channels is performed by cutting. Instead, McBrady implies that photolithography or other generic processes are used (McBrady: col. 3, lines 48-62 and col. 4, lines 9-14).
However, Ike discloses that shaping of a flat surface to form a first groove, and shaping of a channel member to form inflow and outflow channels is performed by cutting (end milling; col. 8, lines 61-64 and col. 9, lines 33-35).
Because McBrady and Ike both disclose methods of forming grooves, inflow channels and outflow channels, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to substitute the cutting of Ike for the shaping of McBrady in order to form grooves, inflow channels and outflow channels.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 9,128,028 issued to McBrady et al. (“McBrady”) in view of JP 2019-196934 by Nishida et al. (“Nishida”) as listed in the IDS dated 3/7/2024 and U.S. Patent 6,591,674 issued to Gehman et al. (“Gehman”) as applied to claim 1, further in view of U.S. Patent 11,965,762 issued to Ali et al. (“Ali”).
As for claim 9, McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman discloses the thermal type flowmeter according to claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above).
McBrady as modified by Nishida and Gehman does not disclose that the channel member further includes an introductory channel and a delivery channel as recited.
However, Ali discloses (Fig. 11) an introduction channel (“introduction channel” in annotated Fig. 11 below) formed inside a channel member (3), the introduction channel extending in a horizontal direction along a second axis (“second axis” in annotated Fig. 11 below) different from a first groove axis (“first groove axis” in annotated Fig., 11 below) and connecting an inflow port (“inflow port” in annotated Fig. 11 below) to an inflow channel (“inflow channel” in annotated Fig. 11 below), and a delivery channel (“delivery channel” in annotated Fig. 11 below) formed inside the channel member (3), the delivery channel extending in the horizontal direction along the second axis and connecting an outflow channel (“outflow channel” in annotated Fig. 11 below) to an outflow port (“outflow port” in annotated Fig. 11 below).
Ali and the McBrady, Nishida and Gehman combination included each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the introduction channel and delivery channel of Ali with the inflow and outflow channels and ports of McBrady, Nishida and Gehman by connecting them as suggested by Fig. 11 of Ali, and that in combination, the introduction channel, delivery channel, and the inflow and outflow channels and ports merely perform the same functions as each does separately. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the thermal type flowmeter of McBrady, Nishida and Gehman to include the introduction channel and delivery channel of Ali to achieve the predictable result of connecting the measuring channel to the inflow port and outflow port.
PNG
media_image1.png
610
1254
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As for claim 10, McBrady as modified by Nishida, Gehman and Ali discloses the thermal type flowmeter according to claim 9 (see the rejection of claim 9 above).
McBrady as modified by Nishida, Gehman and Ali does not disclose that the inflow channel has the first inner diameter that is smaller than an inner diameter of the introduction channel.
However, it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device. See MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to modify the inner diameters of the inflow channel and the introduction channel of McBrady, Nishida, Gehman and Ali to be as recited because recitations of the claimed features are not patentably distinct from the prior art of McBrady, Nishida, Gehman and Ali.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 9-10 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that the sealing structure of Gehman is fundamentally different than the claimed sealing structure. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The sealing structures of Gehman and the claimed invention are both O-ring gaskets. The sealing structures both provide a seal between a plate member and a channel member. Therefore, the sealing structure of Gehman reads on the claimed sealing structure.
On page 10 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that Gehman does not disclose a flat surface in which both a first groove and a second groove are formed. However, the examiner notes that this argues against the references individually. Instead, the combination of McBrady and Gehman discloses the claimed structures. McBrady discloses a flat surface (bottom surface of 126) in which a first groove is formed and at which the channel member 126 contacts (without a seal) the plate member 112. Gehman is used to teach using a sealing member (Gehman: 39) to seal the channel member (Gehman: 31), where the channel member includes a second channel to hold the sealing member (Gehman: see Fig. 5).
On page 10 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that gasket 39 of Gehman contacts a flow tube 31 or base 32, not the claimed plate member. The examiner respectfully disagrees. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the flow tube 31 is analogous to the channel member and base 32 is analogous to the plate member.
On page 10 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that gasket 39 of Gehman does not surround the first groove. The examiner respectfully disagrees. One having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that since gasket 39 of Gehman would be in a groove at the interface between 126 and 112 of McBrady, gasket 39 of Gehman would surround 114 of McBrady, which is the claimed first groove.
On page 13 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that the specification discloses that the features of claim 10 allow suitable connections even when a slight misalignment exists. However, the examiner notes that the quoted section of the specification does not describe the claimed subject matter.
On page 13 of the Remarks, Applicant argues that the specification discloses that the features of claim 11 ensures that the seal reliably seals the measuring channel. However, the examiner notes that the specification does not describe the benefit of the claimed subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN N OLAMIT whose telephone number is (571)270-1969. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am - 5 pm (Pacific).
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/JUSTIN N OLAMIT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights