DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-17 and 33-47 are pending and claims 18-32 have been cancelled.
This action is in response to the amendment filed 3/27/2025.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9/11/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to pending claim(s) 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. Applicant’s arguments, see pages filed 8/22/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-7,9, and 12-15 under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Sammons.
Since applicant’s amendments necessitated the new grounds for rejections, this action has been made Non-Final.
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I, species III, figures 11-17 in the reply filed on 9/24/2024 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/11/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the final action on 5/20/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
It is noted that one citation has been crossed through since all of the pages were not included in the submission for that document.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 8/22/2025. These drawings are accepted.
Specification
The amendment to the specification has been entered.
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.
Claims 8,10 and 17 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, regards as the invention.
Claims 8,10 and 17 recite the limitations “including a sleeve cavity, and being no longer”, which is unclear whether the sleeve itself or the sleeve cavity is no longer than the body.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
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) 1-7,9,12-15, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Sammons (US 1268160).
Regarding claim 1, Sammons discloses a valve (shown in Fig. 1), comprising: a body (21) having an overall body length and including a body cavity (the space within 21);
a sleeve (18) having an overall sleeve length removably disposable within the body cavity, and including a sleeve cavity (space within 18), the overall sleeve length being no longer than the overall body length (as shown in the amended drawing below the sleeve cavity is not longer than the body); and
a rod (12) movably disposable within the sleeve cavity and configured to form a fluid-tight seal between the body cavity and the sleeve cavity while the rod is in a closed position (see Fig. 2) and to allow a fluid to flow from the body cavity to the sleeve cavity while the rod is in an open position (see Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
834
933
media_image1.png
Greyscale
When the reference is a utility patent, it does not matter that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained in the specification. The drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979). See MPEP 2125.
Here, the drawings clearly show the sleeve overall length being shorter than the body overall length.
Regarding claim 2, Sammons discloses the body is configured for attachment to a structure having a fluid supply (p.1,col.1,lns. 43-48).
Regarding claim 3, Sammons discloses the body includes a flange (the bottom rounded horizontal end of 21) configured for attachment to a structure having a fluid supply (p.1,col.1,lns. 43-48).
PNG
media_image2.png
376
608
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Sammons discloses the body includes an inlet (at the flange end, shown above) configured for coupling to a fluid supply and in fluid communication with the body cavity (p.1,col.1,lns. 43-48).
Regarding claim 5, Sammons discloses the body cavity includes an inner cavity wall (the inner wall of 21); and the sleeve includes an outer sleeve wall (the wall at the outer surface of 18) and is configured to form a fluid-tight seal (at the threaded joint between 21 and 18) between the inner cavity wall and the outer sleeve wall.
Regarding claim 6, Sammons discloses the body cavity includes an inner cavity wall (the wall within 21); wherein the sleeve includes an outer sleeve wall (the wall at the outer surface of 18); and at least one sleeve sealing ring (as shown in Fig. 2, the un-numbered thin ring abutting the wall of 22 surrounding the thread for 22) disposable around (interpreted as, in the area/vicinity of) the outer sleeve wall and configured to form a fluid-tight seal between the inner cavity wall and the outer sleeve wall.
PNG
media_image3.png
706
740
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Sammons discloses a spring (19) disposable within the body cavity (the spring is within the body cavity as shown as it is installed within the sleeve, which in this region is within the body cavity within the female thread of the body) and configured to urge the rod toward the sleeve.
Regarding claim 9, Sammons discloses the body cavity includes body-cavity threads (the female threads of 21 that mate with the male threads of sleeve 18); and the sleeve includes sleeve threads that are configured to secure the sleeve within the body cavity by engaging the body-cavity threads (As shown in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Sammons discloses a rod sealing ring (the round tapered surface of 11, that abuts of seat 25) disposable around the rod and configured to form the fluid-tight seal between the body cavity and the sleeve cavity while the rod is in a closed position (see Fig. 2, p.1,col.2, lns. 84-87,100-103).
Regarding claim 13, Sammons discloses the sleeve cavity includes an inner wall (the inner wall of 18); and a rod sealing ring (the round tapered surface of 11, that abuts of seat 25) disposable around the rod and configured to form the fluid-tight seal with the inner wall of the sleeve cavity while the rod is in a closed position (see Fig. 2, p.1,col.2, lns. 84-87,100-103).
Regarding claim 14, Sammons discloses the sleeve has a sleeve end (the left end region 25 of 18); and a rod sealing ring (the round tapered surface of 11, that abuts of seat 25) disposable around the rod and configured to form the fluid-tight seal with the sleeve end while the rod is in a closed position (see Fig. 2, p.1,col.2, lns. 84-87,100-103).
Regarding claim 15, Sammons discloses the rod includes a seat (at 25); and a sealing ring (the round tapered surface of 11, that abuts of seat 25) disposable in the seat (the sealing ring is in the seat as it is within the inner diameter of the seat as shown in Fig. 2) and configured to form the fluid-tight seal between the body cavity and the sleeve cavity while the rod is in a closed position (see Fig. 2, p.1,col.2, lns. 84-87,100-103).
Regarding method claims 33,35-38,40,41,43-45 and 47, the device shown by Sammons will perform the methods as recited in claims 33,35-38,40,41,43-45 and 47, during normal operational use of the device.
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.
Claim(s) 11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sammons ‘160 in view of Walcome (WO 2018136563).
Regarding claim 11, Sammons discloses all of the features of the claimed invention although is silent to having that the at least one of the body, sleeve, or rod are formed from a polymer.
Walcome ‘563 discloses at least one of the body, sleeve, or rod are formed from a polymer (para.00065).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a polymer material in the body, sleeve or rod, as taught by Walcome ‘563, into one of the body, sleeve or rod components of Sammons, to have at least one of the body, sleeve, or rod are formed from a polymer, in order to utilize a polymer material which will permit the use of a molding process to manufacture the components to take advantage of a lower cost saving process when the volumes of sales become much larger, as is old and well known in the art. Additionally, a change of material is obvious, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Regarding claim 16, Sammons discloses all of the features of the claimed invention although is silent to having an anti-siphon assembly in fluid communication with at least one of the body cavity or the sleeve cavity.
Walcome ‘563 discloses an anti-siphon assembly (20) in fluid communication with at least one of the body cavity or the sleeve cavity (see Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ an anti-siphon assembly, as taught by Walcome ‘563, into the device of Sammons, to have an anti-siphon assembly in fluid communication with at least one of the body cavity or the sleeve cavity, in order to prevent water from entering the water supply and distribution system via the water valve and to allow water to drain while the valve is closed (Walcome ‘563, para.00031).
Claim(s) 39 and 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sammons ‘160 in view of Qiu (US 20100096028).
Regarding claims 39 and 46, Sammons discloses all of the features of the claimed invention, including a metal sealing ring surface on the rod, although is silent to having removing at least one seal ring from the rod, and installing at least one valve seal on the rod.
Qiu teaches the use of at least one seal ring (26) on the rod (2, figure 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a seal, as taught by Qiu, for the metal seal ring in Sammons, to have a valve seal on the rod, in order to permit a better sealing effect without using a spring with a large coefficient (Qiu, para.0037).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to substitute an oring seal as taught by Qiu for the metal seal of Sammons, since it has been held that an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982).
Regarding method claims 39 and 46, the device shown by Sammons when combined with Qiu will perform the methods as recited in claims 39 and 46, during normal operational use of the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8,10 and 17 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 34 and 42 are allowed.
None of the prior art of record discloses or renders as obvious, “after detaching the faceplate, removing a valve sleeve from a body cavity of the valve body while the valve body is attached to a structure and is coupled to a fluid supply”, in combination with the rest of the limitations in claim 34, and “attaching a valve faceplate to the valve body after inserting the valve sleeve and valve rod into the body cavity of the valve body”, in combination with the rest of the limitations in 42 claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Craig Price, whose telephone number is (571)272-2712 or via facsimile (571)273-2712. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:00AM-4:30PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3607, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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.
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) Form at Form at;
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
/CRAIG J PRICE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights