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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/27/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 22, 26, and 28 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Douglas (US Patent No. 3,057,517) teaching the claim amendment of a pressure regulating device as evidenced in the rejection below.
Applicant argues that Suzuki doesn’t teach the features of claim 39, in particular inducing gas or fluid to container to increase pressure therein. However, para. 101 of Suzuki states such an operation and in further view of the Douglas modification expressly states the structure.
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.
Claim(s) 22, 25-31, 33, 34, 35, and 37-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2018/0065838 A1), and further in view of Douglas (US Patent No. 3,057,517)
Re: Claim 22, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including a dispensing system for dispensing a liquid, the dispensing system comprising:
a sealed container (4) (Para. 101, sealed container);
a flexible bag (30) positioned within the sealed container, the flexible bag comprising an interior configured to contain a liquid therein (Para. 80, 101, bag container within sealed container);
an inlet positioned on a portion of the sealed container, the inlet configured to allow a gas or fluid into the interior of the sealed container (Fig. 3B, Para. 101, an inlet for allowing gas into a sealed container); and
a valve (5) (Para. 92-95, valve),
wherein a portion (32) of the flexible bag extends through the valve and wherein the valve is configured to move between an open position and a closed position at a specific pressure within the sealed container (Figs. 3A-4C),
wherein, in the open position, the valve is configured to allow fluid to flow through the portion of the flexible bag that extends through the valve to dispense the liquid (Fig. 4C depicts open position for dispensing);
Suzuki discloses the claimed invention except for expressly mentioning a pressure regulating device. However, Douglas teaches a pressure regulating device (13, 85, 91) positioned on the sealed container (Depicted in Fig. 1, 3), the pressure regulating device configured to receive a predetermined amount of the gas or the fluid from the interior of the sealed container (2) (Col. 4, lines 35-39, 45-49, regulates pressure to a predetermined amount within the sealed container by receiving fluid therefrom).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a pressure regulating device as taught by Douglas, since Douglas states col. 4, lines 46-49 that such a modification allows for correction and consistency of pressure within the sealed container, allowing for fluid to be dispensed from the container at a controlled rate which avoids violate agitation as it flows therethrough.
Re: Claim 25, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including the portion of the flexible bag that extends through the valve is a flexible tip (Depicted in Fig. 3B).
Re: Claim 26, Suzuki discloses a device capable of performing the claimed method of increasing a pressure within a container in which a bag containing a fluid is positioned therein, wherein increasing the pressure within the container causes a valve to open to allow the fluid to be dispensed from the bag (Para. 103, increasing pressure causes the valve to open); and reducing the pressure within the container to cause the valve to close and stop a flow of the fluid from the bag (Para. 104, 106, pressure modulation causes valve to close and flow to stop) except for expressly stating a pressure regulating device. However, Douglas teaches the step of reducing the pressure within the container by withdrawing a predetermined amount of a gas or a second fluid into a pressure regulating device (13, 85, 91) in fluid communication with the container to prevent leaks through the valve (Col. 4, lines 35-39, 45-49, regulates pressure to a predetermined amount within the sealed container by receiving fluid therefrom).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a pressure regulating device as taught by Douglas, since Douglas states col. 4, lines 46-49 that such a modification allows for correction and consistency of pressure within the sealed container, allowing for fluid to be dispensed from the container at a controlled rate which avoids violate agitation as it flows therethrough.
Re: Claim 27, Suzuki discloses a device capable of performing the claimed method of the valve is a pinch valve. (Para. 92-95, pinch valve).
Re: Claim 28, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including a dispensing system for dispensing a liquid, the dispensing system comprising:
a sealed container (Para. 101, sealed container);
a bag (30) positioned within the sealed container, the bag comprising an interior containing a liquid therein (Para. 80, 101, bag container within sealed container);
an inlet to the sealed container, the inlet configured to allow a gas or fluid into an interior of the sealed container (Fig. 3B, Para. 101, an inlet for allowing gas into a sealed container); and
a valve for controlling a flow of liquid out of the bag, wherein, in an open position, the valve is configured allow the liquid to flow out of the bag to dispense the liquid and wherein the valve is configured to open and close at a specific pressure within the sealed container (Para. 92-95, valve for opening and closing the bag);
Suzuki discloses the claimed invention except for expressly mentioning a pressure regulating device. However, Douglas teaches a pressure regulating device (13, 85, 91) positioned on the sealed container (Depicted in Fig. 1, 3), the pressure regulating device configured to receive a predetermined amount of the gas or the fluid from the interior of the sealed container (2) (Col. 4, lines 35-39, 45-49, regulates pressure to a predetermined amount within the sealed container by receiving fluid therefrom).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a pressure regulating device as taught by Douglas, since Douglas states col. 4, lines 46-49 that such a modification allows for correction and consistency of pressure within the sealed container, allowing for fluid to be dispensed from the container at a controlled rate which avoids violate agitation as it flows therethrough.
Re: Claim 29, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including the bag is flexible, wherein the inlet is positioned on a portion of the sealed container (Fig. 3B, Para. 101, an inlet positioned somewhere on the sealed container), wherein an end (32)of the flexible bag extends through the valve (Figs. 3A-3B), the end of the bag defining a passage in communication with an opening (35) through which the liquid contained in the bag can be dispensed (Fig. 3B).
Re: Claim 30, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including a controller in communication with the inlet to control a flow of the gas or the fluid into the interior of the sealed container (Para. 31, pressurizing control mechanism communicating with the inlet to control flow of gas therein).
Re: Claim 31, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including gas or the fluid comprises air (Para. 101, air is introduced).
Re: Claim 33, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including an amount of the fluid dispensed is based on an amount of the gas or the fluid injected into the interior of the sealed container through the inlet (Para. 107, amount of gas modulated for desired amounts).
Re: Claims 34, 35, 37, Suzuki as modified by Douglas in the rejection of claim 28 above discloses the claimed invention including the pressure regulating device comprises a cylinder (13) positioned on a first portion of the sealed container (2) (Douglas: Depicted in Fig. 3), and the cylinder is configured to inject the predetermined amount of the gas or the fluid into the interior of the sealed container (Douglas: Col. 4, lines 2-5 ,fluid injected via cylinder into interior of the sealed container).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a cylinder as taught by Haas, since Haas states in paragraph 54-55 that such a modification provides a means for connection for the pressurized fluid/gas to be introduced into the sealed container in a controlled way minimizing leaks and malfunction.
Re: Claim 38, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including the sealed container is hermetically sealed (Para. 101, air tight).
Re: Claim 39, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including increasing the pressure within the container comprises introducing a gas or a fluid through an inlet of the container and into an interior of the container (Para. 101, gas is pressure released into space around the bag thus modulated for desired amounts based on pressure applied), and further view of Douglas as modified in the rejection of claim 26 above teaching a pressure regulating device for doing so (Douglas: Col. 4, lines 2-5 ,fluid injected via cylinder into interior of the sealed container).
Re: Claim 40, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including an amount of the fluid dispensed from the bag is based on an amount of the gas or the fluid introduced into the interior of the container through the inlet (Para. 107, amount of gas pressure modulated for desired amounts).
Claim(s) 23-24, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 2018/0065838 A1) and Douglas (US Patent No. 3,057,517) as applied to claim 22 and 28 above, and further in view of Reinstorff (US Patent No. 8,590,558).
Re: Claim 23, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention except for expressly stating the particulars of the valve. However, Reinstorff discloses a lid (13), wherein the lid comprises a valve (17) wherein an end (3) of a flexible bag (1) extends through the valve (Figs. 3A-3B) (Figs. 1a-2a).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a lid with the valve as taught by Reinstorff, since Reinstorff states in column 7 lines 25-26 that such a modification provides framing the relevant parts of the valve system, keeping them protecting from the environment ensuring proper operation.
Re: Claim 24, Suzuki discloses the claimed invention including the valve is a pinch valve. (Para. 92-95, pinch valve).
Re: Claim 32, Suzuki as modified by Reinstorff in the rejection of claim 23 above discloses the claimed invention including the valve is biased to a closed position (Reinstorff: Col. 8, lines 42-44, biased closed).
Conclusion
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 CHARLES P. CHEYNEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9971. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 4:30 pm.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at 571-272-4459. 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.
/CHARLES P. CHEYNEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754