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 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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weiss Johann (EP 2256389).
Regarding claim 1, Johann discloses an Electromagnet comprising:
an armature space (2),
an armature (3) which is arranged longitudinally movably in the armature space (2), the armature (3) having a penetration opening (30),
at least one closure element (43), and
at least one nozzle (71), wherein the armature (3) supports the at least one closure element (43) which is mounted movably in the penetration opening (30),
wherein the at least one closure element (43) is configured to open or to close the at least one nozzle (71),
wherein the at least one closure element (43) comprises:
a guiding element (41), which configured to guide the at least one closure element (43) in the penetration opening (30), and
a sealing element (40) which is supported by the guiding element (41).
Johann teaches the claimed subject as disclosed above, however, fails to explicitly disclose the sealing element and the guiding element are not integrally formed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the sealing element (40) and the guiding element (41) as taught by Johann are not integrally formed for the purpose of having manufacturing precision, and functional independence, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 2, Johann discloses:
the at least one closure element (43) further comprises a supporting spring (33), wherein the supporting spring (33) is provided in the penetration opening (30), the sealing element (4) being supported by the supporting spring (33).
Regarding claim 3, Johann discloses:
an end winding of the supporting spring (33) which bears against the sealing element (4) is added and/or ground down.
Regarding claim 4, Johann does not disclose: the guiding element (43) is configured from a thermoplastic material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the guiding element (43) is configured from a thermoplastic material for the purpose of suitability of the intended use. 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. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 5, Johann does not disclose:
wherein on an outer circumferential side of the sealing element (4), the sealing element (4) has a supporting step (34) which is supported against an inner circumferential-side supporting step (34) of the guiding element (43).
Regarding claim 6, Johann discloses:
wherein the supporting step (34) of the sealing element (4) is arranged in a tenth or half, facing the at least one nozzle (71), of a longitudinal extent of the sealing element (4).
Regarding claim 7, Johann discloses:
the guiding element (43) has a hollow cylindrical portion (see the drawing below), in which the sealing element (4) is arranged.
[AltContent: textbox (Not Conical surface)][AltContent: textbox (bounding collar)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Guiding ribs)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Hollow sleeve)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Hollow cylindrical portion)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
240
163
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Johann discloses:
the guiding element (43) is configured as a hollow sleeve (see the drawing above) and/or has guiding ribs (see the drawing above) which run longitudinally on an outer circumferential side of the guiding element (43).
Regarding claim 9, Johann does not disclose:
wherein on the outer circumferential side, the guiding element (43) has at least one conical surface (see the drawing above) or curved surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the outer circumferential side, the guiding element (43) change the NOT conical surface (see the drawing above) or curved surface, as taught by Johann, to the conical surface for the purpose of suitability of the intended use. Since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Regarding claim 10, Johann discloses:
the guiding element (43) has a bounding collar (see the drawing above) which bears against the sealing element (4) on an outer circumferential side of the guiding element (43).
Regarding claims 11-13, Johann does not explicitly disclose: the sealing element (4) is formed from a vulcanization-free material or from an elastic plastic (claim 11), or an elastomer (claim 12), or a fluoro-rubber (FKM) material (claim 13)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the sealing element (4) as taught by Johann is formed from a vulcanization-free material or from an elastic plastic (claim 11), or an elastomer (claim 12), or a fluoro-rubber (FKM) material (claim 13) for the purpose of suitability of the intended use. 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. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/30/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the REMARKS:
Page 10, applicant argued that:
“Weiss Johann fails to disclose "a sealing element which is supported by the guiding element, wherein sealing element and the guiding element are not integrally formed."
This argument is not found to be persuasive, because it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the sealing element (40) and the guiding element (41) as taught by Johann are not integrally formed for the purpose of suitability of the design choice, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to Lisa Homza whose telephone number is (571) 272-3592.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Shawki Ismail can be reached on (571) 272-3985. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Lisa Nhung Homza/
Patent Examiner - Art Unit 2837
June 19, 2026
/SHAWKI S ISMAIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights