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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Reference character “7121” depicted in Figures 1, 2. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: Reference number “6121” page 15 of specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “an outlet of the speed regulating valve” as called for in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The claims are replete with indefiniteness and antecedent basis errors that are too numerous to mention each one specifically. Applicant should review all claims and make appropriate corrections. Some examples are noted below:
Applicant should clarify how each hydraulic support has certain elements such as pedestal, push hydraulic jack, top beam etc.
Claim 8 line 4 calls for “the hydraulic supports”; claim 8 line 3 calls for “N hydraulic supports”; it is unclear if and how they are related.
Claim 8 line 4 is confusing, it is not clear if each hydraulic support has a pedestal and a push hydraulic jack.
Claim 8 line 6+, it is not clear if the push hydraulic jack should be each push hydraulic jack and the speed regulating valve should be a corresponding speed regulating valve.
Claim 9 line 2 it is unclear if “the pedestal” should be –each pedestal--.
Claim 9 line 2 it is not clear if the pedestal and the top beam should be each pedestal and top beam.
Claim 12 line 5 calls for “the hydraulic support”; claim 8 line 3 calls for “N hydraulic supports”; it is unclear if and how they are related.
Claim 13 line 2, “the two sides”; “the lifting hydraulic jacks”, “the first hydraulic support”, “the Nth hydraulic support” lack clear antecedent basis.
Claim 15 line 1, it is not clear if the speed regulating valve should be each of the speed regulating valve.
Claim 16 line 1, it is not clear if the speed regulating valve should be each of the speed regulating valve.
Claim 17 line 1, it is not clear if the speed regulating valve should be each of the speed regulating valve.
Claim 18 line 1, it is not clear if the speed regulating valve should be each of the speed regulating valve.
Claim 19 line 1, it is not clear if the speed regulating valve should be each of the speed regulating valve.
Claim 20 lines 2,3 it is not clear if the pedestal and the top beam should be each pedestal and top beam.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 are allowed.
Claims 8,12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 9-11,13-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art CN ‘376 discloses a speed regulating valve, comprising: a valve core (2), provided with an internal channel and in communication with an inlet of the speed regulating valve, wherein a first speed regulating port is arranged on the valve core (A,B); and a valve base (3), in communication with an outlet of the speed regulating valve, wherein a second speed regulating port (31) is arranged on the valve base; wherein the valve core and the valve base are rotatable relative to each other, and the second speed regulating port is on a trajectory of a rotation of the first speed regulating port; and when the valve core and the valve base rotate relative to each other, the first speed regulating port and the second speed regulating port are gradually aligned to communicate the inlet and the outlet of the speed regulating valve; however, the prior art fail to teach in combination with a fixed differential pressure reducing device is arranged between the inlet of the speed regulating valve and the valve core, the fixed differential pressure reducing device is provided with a sealing part, a first end of the sealing part is in communication with the inlet of the speed regulating valve, and a second end of the sealing part is in communication with the outlet of the speed regulating valve, to balance a pressure difference between the outlet and the inlet of the speed regulating valve.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNIL SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-7051. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-3, F 9-8 and 2nd Sat 11-7.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571 270 5281. 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.
/SUNIL SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
SS
4/18/2026
Prosecution Insights