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 Status
Claim 1 is rejected.
Claims 2-3 and 5-7 are objected.
Claim 4 is allowed.
Claims 8-10 are withdrawn.
Claims 11-20 have been cancelled.
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.
Claim(s) 1 is finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Merritt et al. (US 2005/0247615) [hereinafter Merritt].
With respect to claim 1, Merritt discloses a filter 10, as shown in Fig. 1, having: a mounting adaptor (filter head) (see paragraph 0016); and a filter cartridge removably coupled to the filter head, the filter cartridge comprising: a canister 12 (shell housing) defining an end 16 (first housing end), an end 14 (second housing end), and a housing sidewall extending between the first housing end 16 and the second housing end 14, as shown in Fig. 1; and a housing 30 (filter element) received within the shell housing 12 and removably coupled to the shell housing 12, the filter element 30 comprising: a media pack 54, 72, configured to filter matter from a fluid flowing therethrough, as shown in Fig. 1; and a lid 34 (endplate) coupled to an end of the media pack 54, 72, the endplate 34 comprising a pocket 90 (sealing member) extending axially away from the endplate 34 in a direction opposite to the media pack 54, 72, and having a spring 86 (compliant portion), as shown in Fig. 1, wherein an end portion of the compliant portion 86 is engaged with the second housing end 14 such that the compliant portion 86 is axially compressed by the end portion and radially expands, as shown in Fig. 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is allowed.
Claims 2-3 and 5-7 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: Claim 2 would be allowed because the prior art of record does not show or suggest: wherein the shell housing comprises a first groove wall and a second groove wall extending axially away from the second housing end in a direction toward the first housing end, the first groove wall and the second groove wall extending to a first height, the first groove wall and the second groove wall cooperating to define a housing groove therebetween, the housing groove receiving the sealing member, wherein the compliant portion expands radially into engagement with the first and second groove walls, in combination with any remaining limitations in the claim. Merritt lacks these limitations and it would have not been obvious to modify because there is no reason or suggestion to do so and the filter would not operate as intended.
Claim 3 and 5-7 would be allowed due to their dependency on claim 2.
Claim 4 is allowed because the prior art of record does not show or suggest: the second housing end comprises a housing groove opening towards the first housing end; and an endplate coupled to an end of the media pack, the endplate comprising a sealing member extending axially away from the endplate in a direction opposite to the media pack and having a compliant portion received in the housing groove, wherein the compliant portion includes a bellows member configured to permit radial expansion of the sealing member when the sealing member extends into the housing groove, in combination with any remaining limitations in the claim. Merritt lacks these limitations and it would have not been obvious to modify because there is no reason or suggestion to do so and the filter would not operate as intended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In response to applicant’s argument that Wieczorek, Brown and Vogt lack the new limitations of amended claim 1: Merritt teaches the new limitations of claim 1, as stated in the rejection above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Elayed et al. (US 2012/0312733) discloses a filter having a compressible element.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADELINE GONZALEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-5502. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5:30.
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.
/MADELINE GONZALEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
