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 12/08/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that Kawai’s three–way valves do not disclose “the claimed three-way flow dividing valve is a single three-way valve that is configured to divide.” However, Kawai’s three–way valve does divide the flow from inlet to a first and second outlet when the valve is actuated to change positions. As a result, Kawai does read on the amended claim language.
Prior art Goodson is used to Address Applicant’s arguments regarding Kitai.
Please see the rejection for further details.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “multistage throttle orifice is formed by arranging a plurality of ring plates overlapping each other in a thickness direction” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Here, the figures illustrate the ring plates adjacent to one another, as opposed to the “overlapping” that Applicant is claiming. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6–7 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 (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 6 and 7 recite the limitation "tapered throttled orifice" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this of rejection it will be assumed that Applicant intended this element to be the “multistage throttle orifice.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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) 1, 3–7 and 11–12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai et al. (JP 7128023 B2) in view of Goodson et al. (USPN 5325729), in further view of Oh (KR 2014121584 A–Abstract and claims).
PNG
media_image1.png
394
1419
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1 - Kawai Annotated Fig. 1
Regarding Claim 1, Kawai discloses a flow rate control device (30) disposed in a flow path a first flow path from (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1) starting from an inflow port (31a) connected to a water supply pipe (51) to a first outflow port (31b) connected to a backflow pipe (51) and a second flow path (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1) from the inflow port (31a) connected to the water supply pipe to a second flow path to a second outflow port (31c) connected to a mold pipe (53), and configured to control a flow rate of fluid supplied from the water supply pipe to the mold pipe (55, Para. 28), the flow rate control device comprising: a flow rate regulating valve (31) configured to regulate an instantaneous flow rate of the fluid flowing in the flow path (Paras. 27–28);
Goodson teaches a flow meter (9) that is used in order to ensure a precise reading of the flow through the fluid system the preciseness of the fluid flow (Col. 4, Lines 32–37).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flow meter of Kawai with a flowmeter as taught by Goodson in order to ensure the preciseness of the fluid flow which also ensures that the valve is functioning properly.
Per the Kawai–Goodson combination, Goodson’s flow meter is located where Kawai-’s line 65.
The Kawai–Goodson combination teaches a flow meter (Goodson 9) configured to measure the flow rate in the second flow path (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1) and produce continuous measurement results of the flow rate (Goodson Col. 6, Lines 39–41, Goodson discloses the flow meter as being magnetic. Typically, magnetic waves are constant unless there is some intervening factor. Because Goodson does disclose any intervening factor the flow meter will produce continuous measurement results of the flow rate.); and a controller (Kawai 70) configured to receive the continuous measurement results of the flow rate (Goodson Col. 6, Lines 39–41, Goodson discloses the flow meter as being magnetic. Typically, magnetic waves are constant unless there is some intervening factor. Because Goodson does disclose any intervening factor the flow meter will produce continuous measurement results of the flow rate.), and instantaneously control an opening degree of the flow rate regulating valve (Kawai 31) on each of the continuous measurement results of the flow rate produced by the flow meter (Goodson 9), thereby controlling the instantaneous flow rate (Goodson Col. 6, Lines 39–41, Goodson discloses the flow meter as being magnetic. Typically, magnetic waves are constant unless there is some intervening factor. Because Goodson does disclose any intervening factor the flow meter will produce continuous measurement results of the flow rate. The valve according to the sensed flow rate and Kawai Paras. 29–34 which discusses opening the valve at degrees according to a command), wherein the flow rate regulating valve (Kawai 31) is a three-way flow dividing valve configured to: divide the fluid entering through the inflow port (Kawai 31a) connected to the water supply pipe (Kawai 51) into the first flow path (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1) leading to the first outflow port (Kawai 31b) connected to the backflow pipe (Kawai 52), and the second flow path (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1) leading to the second outflow port (Kawai 31c) connected to the mold pipe (Kawai 55), and adjust a flow rate ratio flowing out of the first and second outflow ports (Kawai 31b/c, respectively), wherein the flow rate of the fluid entering through the inflow port (Kawai 31b) remains constant even when the flow rate ratio flowing out of the first and second outflow ports changes (Kawai Paras. 29–34, As the ball valve rotates to the various positions, the incoming fluid flow does not change. Thus, the same amount of flow entering the regulating valve equals the same amount of fluid that exits. Therefore, where the sum of the ratios are always 100%), wherein the flow meter (Goodson 9) is located in the second flow path (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1) proximal to the second outflow port (Kawai 31c), but does not disclose a flow meter or a multistage throttle orifice.
Oh teaches a multistage throttle orifice (21i) in order to prevent cavitation in the exiting fluid e.g. “smoothly discharged.” Oh, “Advantage” section.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first outflow port of Kawai with a multistage throttle orifice as taught by Oh in order to decrease cavitation.
Oh’s elements 30 are located in the first flow path (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1) proximal to the first outflow port (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1) such that the pressure sensor can detect the actual fluid flowing into the end user. Thus, decreasing the wear and tear to the end user.
PNG
media_image2.png
293
1061
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2 - Oh Annotated Fig. 2
The Kawai–Goodson–Oh combination teaches the multistage throttle orifice (Oh 30) is located in the first flow path (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1) proximal to the first outflow port (Kawai 31b), and wherein the multistage throttle orifice (Oh 30) is formed by arranging a plurality of ring plates (Oh Annotated Fig. 2) overlapping each other in a thickness direction (Oh Annotated Fig. 2), each of the plurality of ring plates (Oh Annotated Fig. 2) having a tapered throttle orifice (Oh Annotated Fig. 2) whose apertures gradually narrow from an inlet to an outlet (Oh 10i).
Regarding Claim 3, the Kawai–Goodson–Oh combination teaches wherein the multistage throttle orifice (Oh 30) is built in a valve adapter (Oh 10) of the three-way flow dividing valve (Kawai 32), and wherein a first way of the three-way flow dividing valve (Kawai 32) connects to the inflow port (Kawai 32a), a second way the three-way flow dividing valve (Kawai 32) connects to the first outflow port (Kawai 32b), and a third way of the three-way flow dividing valve (Kawai 32) connects to the second outflow port (Kawai 32c).
Regarding Claim 4, the Kawai–Goodson–Oh combination teaches the flow rate regulating valve (Kawai 30) connects the flow meter (Goodson 9) to the second outflow port (Kawai 31c) but not that they are via a L-shaped elbow, wherein an inner wall of the L-shaped elbow suppresses fluid turbulence in the second flow path.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed apparatus is significant, to change the shape of the apparatus as a matter of design choice. MPEP §2144.04(IV)(B). Here, the determination of the pipe run exiting or entering the valve is dependent upon the intervening elements including.
Regarding Claim 5, the Kawai–Goodson–Oh combination teaches the flow rate regulating valve (Kawai 30) connects the multistage throttle orifice (Oh Annotated Fig. 2) to the first outflow port (Kawai 31b) but does not explicitly teach the flow regulating valve connects the multistage throttle orifice to the first outflow port via a first L-shaped elbow wherein an inner wall of the first L-shaped elbow suppresses fluid turbulence in the first flow path, and the flow rate regulating valve connects the flow meter to the second outflow port via a second L-shaped elbow wherein the inner wall of the second L-shaped elbow suppresses fluid turbulence in the second flow path.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed apparatus is significant, to change the shape of the apparatus as a matter of design choice. MPEP §2144.04(IV)(B). Here, the determination of the pipe run exiting or entering the valve is dependent upon the intervening elements including.
Regarding Claim 6, the Kawai–Goodson–Oh combination teaches each tapered throttled orifice (Oh Annotated Fig. 2) of each ring plate (Oh Annotated Fig. 2) has substantially the same inlet size (Oh Annotated Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 7, the Kawai–Goodson–Oh combination teaches the tapered throttled orifice (Oh Annotated Fig. 2) each ring plate (Oh Annotated Fig. 2) disposed within each of the plurality of ring plates of ring plates has substantially the same outlet size (Oh 10i).
Regarding Claim 11, the Kawai–Goodson–Oh combination teaches the valve adapter (Oh 10) is connected to a valve body of the three-way flow dividing valve (Kawai 31) and is disposed directly adjacent to the first outflow port (Kawai 31b).
Regarding Claim 12, the Kawai–Goodson–Oh combination teaches the flow meter (Goodson 9) is disposed directly adjacent to the second outflow port (Kawai 31c), the flow meter (Goodson 9) including: a screw (Goodson Fig. 9) disposed in the second flow path (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1), and configured to be rotatable (Goodson Fig. 9); a magnetic sensor (Goodson 400) protruding outward from a side of the flow meter (Goodson Fig. 9), and configured to detect a magnetic field (Goodson Col. 7, Lines 3–4) of a magnet (Goodson Col. 2, Lines 4–11) sealed by the screw (Goodson Col. 2, Lines 4–11 and Col. 5, Lines 2–3 where the magnet is internal to element 400) and output an electrical signal (Goodson Col. 4, Lines 45–47 discusses the presence of a signal in the invention) to the controller (Kawai 70); a rectifying plate (Goodson 14) disposed in a distal end of the flow meter (Goodson 9) that is farther from the second outflow port (Kawai 31c), and configured to prevent turbulence of the fluid flowing into the second flow path (Kawai Annotated Fig. 1); and a wave washer (Goodson 17) disposed adjacent to the rectifying plate (Goodson 14), and configured to press the rectifying plate to prevent loosening.
Claim(s) 8–10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawai et al. (JP 7128023 B2) in view of Goodson et al. (USPN 5325729), in further view of Oh (KR 2014121584 A–Abstract and claims), in further view of Bolan et al. (US PGPub 20210039129 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, the Kawai–Goodson–Oh combination teaches the flow rate regulating valve but does not disclose the flow rate regulating valve is an electric rotary valve configured to drive a valve core built in a valve body by electric force of an actuator and adjust the opening degree by the electric force.
Bolan teaches a stepper motor (407).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the actuation device since it has been held that “choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success”. MPEP §2143(I)(E). Here, there are only two means of actuating a valve manual or electric. Therefore, modifying the Kawai–Goodson–Oh combination to include an electrical actuator is obvious.
The Kawai–Goodson–Oh–Bolan combination teaches the flow rate regulating valve (Kawai 31) is an electric rotary valve configured to drive a valve core built in a valve body (Bolan 403) by electric force of an actuator and adjust the opening degree by the electric force (Bolan Para. 17).
Regarding Claim 9, the Kawai–Goodson–Oh–Bolan combination teaches the actuator includes a built-in stepping motor (Bolan 407) and is disposed on the valve body (Bolan 403) by a motor bracket (Bolan Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 10, the Kawai–Goodson–Oh–Bolan combination the controller (Bolan 105) controls the stepping motor (Bolan 407) of the actuator (Bolan 401) based on the continuous measurement results (Goodson Col. 6, Lines 39–41, Goodson discloses the flow meter as being magnetic. Typically, magnetic waves are constant unless there is some intervening factor. Because Goodson does disclose any intervening factor the flow meter will produce continuous measurement results of the flow rate.) of the flow rate and a set flow rate value (Kawai Para. 26) input and performs feedback control (PID control) on the opening degree of the flow rate regulating valve (Kawai 31 and Goodson Col. 6, Lines 39–41, Goodson discloses the flow meter as being magnetic. Typically, magnetic waves are constant unless there is some intervening factor. Because Goodson does disclose any intervening factor the flow meter will produce continuous measurement results of the flow rate and thus can adjusts the valve accordingly and Kawai Paras. 29–34 which discusses opening the valve at degrees according to a command).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Angelisa L. Hicks whose telephone number is 571-272-9552. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9:30AM-5:00PM EST).
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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607 or 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.
/Angelisa L. Hicks/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3753