DETAILED ACTION
In view of the appeal brief filed on 6/17/2026, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. New grounds of rejections are set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
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 1-3, 6-10, 12, 14-17 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Romo et al. (US 8,915,140 B2; hereinafter “Romo”) in view of Mimura Shinichi et al. (JP 11351991 A; hereinafter “Shinichi.” The Office action of July 2, 2025 provided a machine translation of Shinichi).
1. Romo teaches a coplanar process pressure transmitter 10 comprising (Refer to figs. 1, 7, reproduced and annotated below):
a pressure sensor body (14/250) containing a pressure sensor (16) having an electrical characteristic that changes in response to applied pressure;
a first isolation diaphragm (46/254) configured to be exposed to process fluid (having a first pressure P1 in a first passageway 24/32);
a first fill fluid (such as oil) fluidically coupling the first isolation diaphragm (46/254) to the pressure sensor 16 (Col. 3, lines 3-11: “Pressure P1 is coupled to the sensor 16 through passageway 32. Pressure P2 is coupled to the sensor 16 through passageway 34. Passageways 32 and 34 are filled with a relatively incompressible fluid such as oil”);
a first weld ring (200) welded to the first isolation diaphragm (46/254) at a first weld 256 (as shown in at least in fig. 7; Col. 6, lines 11-12: “A seam weld 256 is provided that couples to isolation diaphragm 254 to portion 202 [of weld ring 200]”), the first weld ring (200) having an O-ring recess disposed on an opposite side of the first weld ring (200) than the first weld 256 (as is evident from fig. 7 above);
a second isolation diaphragm (50/254) configured to be exposed to process fluid (having a second pressure P2 in a second passageway 26/34);
a second fill fluid (such as oil) fluidically coupling the second isolation diaphragm (50/254) to the pressure sensor 16 (Col. 3, lines 3-11: “Pressure P1 is coupled to the sensor 16 through passageway 32. Pressure P2 is coupled to the sensor 16 through passageway 34. Passageways 32 and 34 are filled with a relatively incompressible fluid such as oil”);
a second weld ring (200) welded to the second isolation diaphragm (50/254) at a third weld 256 (as is evident from at least figs. 1 and 7; Col. 6, lines 11-12: “A seam weld 256 is provided that couples to isolation diaphragm 254 to portion 202 [of weld ring 200]”), the second weld ring (200) having an O-ring recess disposed on an opposite side of the second weld ring (200) than the third weld 256 (as is evident from figs. 1 and 7);
wherein the first weld ring (200) is welded to the pressure sensor body (14/250) at a second weld (258) that
wherein the first isolation diaphragm (46/254) and the second isolation diaphragm (50/254) are coplanar (as is evident from at least in fig. 1).
Note: Aligning with the present invention, Romo teaches that the process pressure transmitter 10 may be used to measure a difference in pressure between a first pressure P1 (in a first passageway 24/32) and a second pressure P2 (in a second passageway 26/34; Col. 3, lines 3-14). The pressure sensor body 14/250 contains the pressure sensor 16 and supports the first isolation diaphragm 46/254 and the second isolation diaphragms 50/254. The first and second weld rings 200 (having the O-ring recesses) help capture or otherwise contain respective first and second seals such as O-rings or polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) gaskets 48, 52, so as to prevent leak of process fluid between the transmitter 10 and the passageways 24/32, 26/34 (Col. 4, lines 55-58; Col. 3, lines 23-32).
Referring to figs. 1 and 7, the respective insolation diaphragms 46/50/254 are first welded to respective weld rings 200 at respective welds 256, which may be laser beam welds for example. Then, the entire respective weld rings 200 with the respective isolation diaphragms 46/50/254 are welded to the sensor body 14/250 at respective welds 258, which may be laser beam welds or other suitable welds (Col. 6, lines 5-27).
PNG
media_image1.png
960
1147
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
509
1190
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Romo is silent about:
a. a barrier metal disposed on at least one surface of the first isolation diaphragm (46/254), the barrier metal extending over the first weld (256);
b. the barrier metal disposed on at least one surface of the second isolation diaphragm (50/254) and extending over the third weld (256);
c. the second weld (258) is spaced from the barrier metal; and
d. the forth weld (258) is spaced from the barrier metal.
Shinichi teaches a coplanar process pressure transmitter comprising (See figs. 1, 2, 6, reproduced and annotated below):
A. a barrier metal (46) disposed on at least one surface of a first isolation diaphragm 43/32 (of a first isolation diaphragm seal unit 3A), the barrier metal (46) extending over a first weld 44 (as shown in figs. 1, 2; Abstract; Pars. 0017, 0025);
B. the barrier metal (46) disposed on at least one surface of the second isolation diaphragm 43/32 (of a second diaphragm seal unit 3B) and extending over a third weld 44 (as is evident from figs. 1, 2; Abstract; Pars. 0017, 0025);
C. a second weld (45) is spaced from the barrier metal 46 (Figs. 1, 2 Abstract; Pars. 0017, 0025); and
D. a forth weld (45) is spaced from the barrier metal 46 (Figs. 1, 2 Abstract; Pars. 0017, 0025).
PNG
media_image3.png
375
1076
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
542
498
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Note: Aligning with the present invention, Shinichi teaches that the barrier metal (46) prevents permeation of hydrogen in a process fluid (FLo) through the isolation diaphragms (43/32). The barrier metal (46) extends over the first/third weld (44) but not over the second/fourth weld (45). Therefore, the second/fourth weld (45), which may be done with an electron beam to weld the weld rings (41) to the pressure sensor’s body (42/31), is strong by excluding a mixed metal weld (See figs. 1, 2, 6; Abstract; Pars. 0020-0025).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to apply Shinichi teaching to Romo pressure transmitter by providing the pressure transmitter with a barrier metal disposed on at least one surface of the first isolation diaphragm (46/254), the barrier metal extending over the first weld (256); the barrier metal disposed on at least one surface of the second isolation diaphragm (50/254) and extending over the third weld (256); wherein the second weld (258) is spaced from the barrier metal; and the forth weld (258) is spaced from the barrier metal. As such, the barrier metal would prevent permeation of hydrogen in a process fluid through the isolation diaphragms (46/50/254). Moreover, since the barrier metal extends over the first/third weld (256) but not over the second/fourth weld (258), the second/fourth weld (258), which may be done with an electron beam, for example, to weld the weld rings (200) to the pressure sensor bodies (14/250), would be strong by excluding a mixed metal weld.
2. Romo as modified teaches the process pressure transmitter of claim 1, wherein the barrier metal (46) is gold (See Shinichi figs. 1, 2 above; Abstract; Pars. 0017, 0025).
3. Romo as modified teaches the process pressure transmitter of claim 1, wherein the barrier metal (46) is plated on the first and second isolation diaphragms (See Shinichi figs. 1, 2 above; Abstract; Pars. 0017, 0025).
6. Romo as modified teaches the process pressure transmitter of claim 1, wherein the second weld 45 (which may be done by an electron beam to weld the weld ring 41 to the pressure sensor body 42/31, both of which may be stainless steel; Shinichi Pars. 0008, 0011, 0020, 0023-0024 ) is formed of a homogenous metal (i.e., stainless steel).
Note: Shinichi teaches “stainless steel is used for each component other than the gold-plated film body” (Pars. 0008, 0021). Understandably, the weld ring (41), the bodies (42/31), the isolation diaphragm (43/32), and some other components, may be made of stainless steel.
7. Romo as modified teaches the process pressure transmitter of claim 6, wherein the homogenous metal (stainless steel) is different than the barrier metal (gold).
8. Romo as modified teaches the process pressure transmitter of claim 6, wherein the homogenous metal (stainless steel) is the same as metal (stainless steel) used for the pressure sensor body (42/31), isolation diaphragm (43/32), and weld ring 41 (See discussion above in claim 6. Shinichi Pars. 0008, 0011, 0020, 0023-0024).
9. Romo as modified teaches the process pressure transmitter of claim 1, wherein the pressure sensor is an absolute pressure sensor (when one of the isolation diaphragms is exposed to a vacuum. Furthermore, Romo fig. 1 appears to be equivalent and/or comparable to applicant’s drawings, and vice versa, illustrating structures/features of applicant’s claimed invention. The same structures/features, as illustrated, are expected to have the same function, including wherein the pressure sensor is an absolute pressure sensor. Otherwise, under 37 CFR 1.83(a), the drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims, or the feature canceled from the claim. If it is important to claim a feature as being new and novel, it is also important to show and describe the feature).
10. Romo as modified teaches the process pressure transmitter of claim 1, wherein the pressure sensor is a gage pressure sensor (when one of the isolation diaphragms is exposed to atmospheric pressure. Furthermore, Romo fig. 1 appears to be equivalent and/or comparable to applicant’s drawings, and vice versa, illustrating structures/features of applicant’s claimed invention. The same structures/features, as illustrated, are expected to have the same function, including wherein the pressure sensor is a gage pressure sensor. Otherwise, under 37 CFR 1.83(a), the drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims, or the feature canceled from the claim. If it is important to claim a feature as being new and novel, it is also important to show and describe the feature).
12. Romo as modified teaches the process pressure transmitter of claim 11, wherein the pressure sensor is a differential pressure sensor (Romo col. 3, lines 3-14; Shinichi Par. 0003).
14. Romo as modified teaches the process pressure transmitter of claim 1, wherein the process fluid pressure transmitter is NACE compliant (See applicant’s disclosure specification paragraph 0013: “NACE compliance generally excludes mixed metal welds.” As understood from the above discussion in claim 1, there is no mixed metal weld in the second and fourth welds 258/45 per Shinichi teaching).
15. Romo as modified teaches the process pressure transmitter of claim 1, wherein the barrier metal (46) is selected based on the process fluid (e.g., hydrogen) to which the isolation diaphragm is configured to be exposed (Shinichi Abstract; Pars. 001, 0016).
16 (essentially equivalent to claim 1).
Romo as modified teaches a process pressure transmitter (10) that necessitates a method of manufacturing a process pressure transmitter for service with a process fluid containing hydrogen, the method comprising:
providing a weld ring (200) having an O-ring recess (Romo figs. 1, 7);
providing an isolator diaphragm (46/50/254 or 43/32) configured to be exposed to the process fluid (Romo figs. 1, 7 or Shinichi figs. 1, 2, 6);
welding the isolator diaphragm (46/50/254 or 43/32) to the weld ring (200 or 41) at a first location (of weld 256 or 44);
coating a barrier metal (46) on the isolator diaphragm (46/50/254 or 43/32), such that the barrier metal (46) extends over the first location (of weld 256 of 44); and
welding the weld ring (200 or 41) to a pressure sensor body (14/250 or 42/31) of the process transmitter at a second location (of weld 258 or 45) that is spaced from the barrier metal 46 (as shown at least in Shinichi figs. 1, 2 and as discussed above in claim 1), wherein the second location (258 or 45) is positioned within the O-ring recess (as shown in at least Romo fig. 7).
Note: Similar to the discussion above in claim 1, Romo as modified aligns with the present invention by teaching that the barrier metal (46) prevents permeation of hydrogen in a process fluid through the isolation diaphragms. The barrier metal (46) extends over the first weld (256 or 44) but not over the second weld (258 or 45). Therefore, the second weld (258 or 45), which may be done with an electron beam to weld the weld rings to the pressure sensor’s body (14/250 or 42), is strong by excluding a mixed metal weld.
17 (essentially equivalent to claims 2 and 3).
Romo as modified teaches the method of claim 16, wherein coating the barrier metal (46) on the isolator diaphragm (43/32) includes plating gold onto the isolator diaphragm (See Shinichi figs. 1, 2 above; Abstract; Pars. 0017, 0025).
20 (essentially equivalent to claim 1).
Romo as modified teaches the method of claim 16, and further comprising:
providing an additional weld ring (200 or 41);
providing an additional isolator diaphragm (46/50/254 or 43/32) configured to be exposed to the process fluid;
welding the additional isolator diaphragm (46/50/254 or 43/32) to the additional weld ring (200 or 41) at a third location (of weld 256 or 44);
coating a barrier metal (46) on the additional isolator diaphragm (46/50/254 or 43/32), such that the barrier metal (46) extends over the third location (of weld 256 or 44); and
welding the additional weld ring (200 or 41) to the pressure sensor body (14/250 or 42) of the process fluid transmitter at a fourth location (of weld 258 or 45) that is spaced from the barrier metal 46 (so that the second weld 258 or 45, which may be done with an electron beam to weld the additional weld ring 200 or 41 to the pressure sensor’s body 14/250 or 42, is strong by excluding a mixed metal weld. See discussion above in claim 1).
21 (essentially equivalent to claim 1).
Romo as modified teaches the method of claim 20, wherein the process transmitter (10) is a coplanar process fluid transmitter (as is evident from at least Romo fig. 1).
22 (essentially equivalent to claim 1).
Romo as modified teaches a pressure transducer (10) comprising:
a pressure sensor (16 shown in Romo fig. 1, or 11 shown in Shinichi fig. 6) having an electrical characteristic that changes in response to applied pressure (P1/P2 in a passageway 24/32//26/34; Romo fig. 1);
an isolation diaphragm (46/50/254 shown in Romo figs. 1 and 7, or 43/32 shown in Shinichi figs. 1 , 2, 6) configured to be exposed to process fluid (having the pressure P1/P2);
a weld ring (200 shown in Romo figs. 1 and 7, or 41 shown in Shinichi fig. 1, 2) welded to the isolation diaphragm at a first weld (256 shown in Romo fig. 7, or 44 shown in Shinichi fig. 1, 2), the weld ring having an O-ring recess (as shown in Romo figs. 1, 7);
a barrier metal 46 (Shinichi figs. 1, 2) disposed on at least one surface of the isolation diaphragm (46/50/254 or 43/32), the barrier metal (46) extending over the first weld (256 or 44; as shown at least in Shinichi figs. 1, 2 and as discussed above in claim 1);
wherein the weld ring (200 or 41) is welded to a pressure sensor body (15/250 or 42) at a second weld (258 shown in Romo fig. 7, or 45 shown in Shinichi fig. 1, 2) that is spaced from the barrier metal (46) and passes through the O-ring recess (so that the second weld 258 or 45, which may be done with an electron beam to weld the weld rings to the pressure sensor’s body 14/250 or 42, is strong by excluding a mixed metal weld.); and
wherein the isolation diaphragm (46/50/254 or 43/32) is operably coupled to the pressure sensor 16/11 (via a fill fluid such as oil. See Romo Col. 3, lines 3-11: “Pressure P1 is coupled to the sensor 16 through passageway 32. Pressure P2 is coupled to the sensor 16 through passageway 34. Passageways 32 and 34 are filled with a relatively incompressible fluid such as oil”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 and 18-19 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 would be a statement for indication of an allowable subject matter:
With respect to claim 4, prior art of record doesn’t teach, suggest, or render obvious the total combination of the recited features, including the following allowable subject matter: “wherein the barrier metal is disposed on both sides of each of the first isolation diaphragm and second diaphragm.”
(Claim 5 is dependent on claim 4.)
With respect to claim 17, prior art of record doesn’t teach, suggest, or render obvious the total combination of the recited features, including the following allowable subject matter (which is essentially equivalent to the allowable subject matter for claim 4): “…plating gold onto both sides of the isolator diaphragm.”
(Claim 18 is dependent on claim 17.)
Note: Shinichi teaches that the barrier metal (46) is disposed on one side of the isolation diaphragm 43 (the one side being the inner surface of the isolation diaphragm 43 facing the fill fluid). The barrier metal (46) would be scraped off by slurry in the process fluid (FLo) if the barrier metal (46) were to be disposed on the outer surface of the isolation diaphragm (43) facing the process fluid FLo (See Shinichi Par. 0012). Therefore, Shinichi appears to teach away from having the barrier metal (46) disposed on both sides of each of the first and second isolation diaphragms (43).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims 1, 16 and 22 have been considered but are moot based on the new grounds of rejections presented above.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to dependent claim 4 is persuasive. The subject matters of claims 4-5 and equivalently of claims 17-18 are thus allowable (as stated above).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nguyen (Wyn) Q. Ha whose telephone number is (571) 272-2863, email: nguyenq.ha@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 4:30 pm (Eastern Time).
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, Stephen Meier can be reached at (571) 272-2149. 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.
/Nguyen Q. Ha/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853 July 19, 2026
/STEPHEN D MEIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853
Prosecution Insights