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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of group III comprising claims 13, 14 and 16, and including new dependent claims 50 – 63, in the reply filed on 3/16/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 36, 37, 41, 43 and 47 have been rejoined.
Note Regarding Prior Art
Examiner cites particular sections, columns, line numbers, paragraphs and figures, in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the Applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 13, 36, 41, 47, 58 – 60 and 62 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xie et al. (CN110762283; hereinafter “Xie”).
Regarding claim 13, Xie teaches throughout the publication a control valve (smart air valve 100; figures 1 and 2) for a process fluid flow, comprising:
a control valve housing (e.g., valve flap 12); and
an actuator (e.g., valve stem assembly 14) configured to be displaceable relative to the control valve housing,
wherein the actuator and the control valve housing are adapted to each other such that the actuator, in at least one operating position, assumes an analysis position, in which the actuator together with the control valve delimits an analysis chamber (the interior volume occupied by sensors 50, 51, 52, 53 and 54; figure 1) for receiving process fluid, on which an analyzer (e.g., water quality sensor 50; figure 1) is arranged and configured to interact with the process fluid.
PNG
media_image1.png
406
440
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
411
374
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 36, Xie teaches a method for monitoring a process fluid flow with respect to a chemical and/or biological property, the method comprising:
separating a test volume from remaining process fluid flow in a control valve (smart air valve 100; figures 1 and 2) according to claim 13, for adjusting the process fluid flow of up to at least 1 L/h; and
analyzing the chemical and/or biological property of the test volume (e.g., the interior volume occupied by sensors 50, 51, 52, 53 and 54; figure 1).
Regarding claim 41, Xie teaches the method according to claim 36, further comprising: enhancing the monitoring of the chemical and/or biological property of the process fluid flow in the test volume within an analysis chamber (e.g., the data processor can analyze the data information transmitted by the data recorder, so that the monitoring system can reflect the working state of the smart valve in real time, thereby facilitating real-time monitoring; page 3).
Regarding claim 47, Xie teaches the method according to claim 36, wherein: the test volume of the process fluid is analyzed within an analysis chamber (e.g., the interior volume occupied by sensors 50, 51, 52, 53 and 54; figure 1).
Regarding claim 58, Xie teaches the control valve according to claim 13, wherein: the analyzer comprises at least one sensor configured to detect a chemical and/or biological property of the process fluid (e.g., transient pressure sensor 41, displacement sensor 42, frequency sensor 44, first water leakage sensor 46, second water leakage sensor 47, hearing-leakage sensor 48, water quality sensor 50, turbidity sensor 51, residual chlorine sensor 52, pH sensor 53 and conductivity sensor 54; figure 1).
Regarding claim 59, Xie teaches the control valve according to claim 13, further comprising: at least one ambient sensor configured to detect a flow property of the process fluid (e.g., transient pressure sensor 41, displacement sensor 42, frequency sensor 44, first water leakage sensor 46, second water leakage sensor 47, hearing-leakage sensor 48, water quality sensor 50, turbidity sensor 51, residual chlorine sensor 52, pH sensor 53 and conductivity sensor 54; figure 1).
Regarding claim 60, Xie teaches the control valve according to claim 13, wherein the actuator (e.g., valve stem assembly 14; figure 2) in the control valve is configured to assume, as operating positions, a closed position and at least one flow position, the closed position or the flow position corresponding to the analysis position.
Regarding claim 62, Xie teaches the control valve according to claim 13, wherein the analyzer (e.g., transient pressure sensor 41, displacement sensor 42, frequency sensor 44, first water leakage sensor 46, second water leakage sensor 47, hearing-leakage sensor 48, water quality sensor 50, turbidity sensor 51, residual chlorine sensor 52, pH sensor 53 and conductivity sensor 54; figure 1) is arranged on a wall delimiting the analysis chamber.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14, 16, 37, 43, 50 – 54, 55, 57, 61 and 63 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 14, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the control valve according to claim 13, further comprising: at least one analysis channel with a check valve and configured to communicate process fluid from the at least one analysis chamber to the analyzer that is positioned outside the control valve housing; and
a pump configured to convey, using the at least one analysis channel, the process fluid out of the one analysis chamber and out of the control valve housing to the analyzer.
Regarding claim 16, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the control valve according to claim 13, wherein:
the actuator in the control valve is configured to assume, as operating positions, a closed position and at least one flow position, the closed position or the flow position corresponding to the analysis position;
the actuator and the control valve are matched to one another such that the actuator, in at least one operating position, assumes a receiving position that is different from the analysis position, in which the actuator together with the control valve forms a fluidic connection between a region of the control valve through which fluid flows and a receiving space in the
actuator and/or the control valve housing, wherein the receiving position corresponds to the closed position and/or the flow position of the control valve;
the analyzer is arranged on a wall delimiting the analysis chamber;
the control valve housing comprises a valve cage configured to guide the actuator, the analysis chamber being cooperatively delimited by the actuator and the valve cage;
the analysis chamber is delimited by the actuator and a housing channel wall at an inlet or outlet of the control valve;
the actuator is configured to force, as a displacement piston, the process fluid out of the analysis chamber; and/or
the control valve comprises a flush configured to controllably remove fluid from the analysis chamber without contamination of the process fluid outside the analysis chamber.
Regarding claim 37, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the method according to claim 36, further comprising wherein:
the test volume is led, for separation, into an analysis chamber of the control valve, the analysis chamber being kept separate from the process fluid-carrying interior of the control valve housing in at least one operating position of the control valve in a process fluid-tight manner;
the analysis chamber is formed by a movable actuator together with the control valve housing;
the analysis chamber is kept separate from the process fluid-carrying interior of the control valve housing in at least one closed position and/or at least one flow position of the control valve in a process fluid-tight manner; and/or
the analysis chamber is fluidically connected to the process fluid-carrying interior of the control valve in at least one operating position in order to lead the test volume into the analysis chamber.
Regarding claim 43, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the method according to claim 36, further comprising: guiding the process fluid through a filter configured to retain particles larger than a maximum size defined by the filter to isolate particles in the test volume, the process fluid being discharged from the test volume or being supplied to the test volume;
comparing the property analyzed on the test volume with a permissible value range determined based on a flow property of the process fluid; and/or
in response to a deviation of the analyzed chemical and/or biological property from the permissible value range, causing the control valve to assume an emergency operating position including an emergency open position or an emergency closed position.
Regarding claim 50, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the control valve according to claim 13, wherein the control valve housing comprises a valve cage configured to guide the actuator, the analysis chamber being cooperatively delimited by the actuator and the valve cage.
Regarding claim 55, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the control valve according to claim 13, wherein the actuator is a stroke piston that comprises: a counter sealing surface adapted to a sealing surface of the control valve; and a body configured to at least partially delimit the analysis chamber.
Regarding claim 57, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the control valve according to claim 13, wherein the analyzer comprises:
a filter configured to isolate particles in the process fluid and/or retain particles larger than a maximum size defined by the filter;
an injector configured to supply a reagent into the process fluid for amplifying a property of the process fluid, the reagent including a staining agent; and/or
a temperature controller configured to heat and/or cool the process fluid in the analysis chamber to induce a phase transition of at least part of the process fluid.
Regarding claim 61, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the control valve according to claim 13, wherein the actuator and the control valve are matched to one another such that the actuator, in at least one operating position, assumes a receiving position that is different from the analysis position, in which the actuator together with the control valve forms a fluidic connection between a region of the control valve through which fluid flows and a receiving space in the actuator and/or the control valve housing, wherein the receiving position corresponds to a closed position and/or at least one flow position of the control valve.
Regarding claim 63, the cited prior art neither teaches nor fairly suggests the the control valve according to claim 13, wherein the analysis chamber is delimited by the actuator and a housing channel wall at an inlet or outlet of the control valve.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN J. SINES whose telephone number is (571)272-1263. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM-5 PM EST M-F.
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, Lyle Alexander can be reached at (571) 272-1254. 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.
BRIAN J. SINES
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1796
/BRIAN J. SINES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1796
Prosecution Insights