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 with respect to claim(s) 1 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 and 18-20 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.
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) 1 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmidt (US Patent No. 3,540,631), and further in view of Fuqua (US 2013/0221026 A1).
Re: Claim 1, Schmidt discloses the claimed invention including a pour spout for a bottle, the pour spout comprising:
a housing (26, 42) comprising an upper housing portion (42), a lower housing portion (26), and a liquid channel (40, 42) extending from the lower housing portion to the upper housing portion (Fig. 3 depicts the channel);
a valve system (10) disposed in the lower housing portion and configured to open or close the liquid channel, the valve system comprising:
a valve (50) disposed within the lower housing portion and fluidically coupled to the liquid channel, the valve being configured to open or close the liquid channel, wherein the valve comprises a rotatable cylindrical rod (52) having a substantially cylindrical shape and a transverse flow passage (96) (Depicted in Figs 2, Col. 4, lines 8-10, cylindrical transversing channel), the rotatable cylindrical rod being rotatable between (i) an open position in which the transverse flow passage is aligned with the liquid channel to permit liquid flow (Depicted in Fig. 2,Col. 4, lines 23-26, permitting free flow), and (ii) a closed position in which the transverse flow passage is misaligned with the liquid channel to block liquid flow (Fig. 2, Col. 3, lines 20-23, closes liquid channel); and
and two O-rings (80, 44) positioned in the lower housing portion to establish a seal against the housing to prevent liquid leakage except for expressly stating made of silicone. However, Fuqua discloses O-rings made of silicone (Para. 93). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include o rings of silicone as taught by Fuqua, since such a modification is known in the art to provide greater sealing due to its elasticity and durability and further, 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.
Schmidt discloses the claimed invention except for a motor and gear train. However, Fuqua discloses a motor (475) and a gear train (475) drivably coupled to the motor and configured to move the valve between an open position and a close position to open or close the liquid channel (Fig. 9 & 12, Para. 84, motor and gear train to open and close a valve);
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include motor and gear train as taught by Fuqua, since Fuqua states in para. 21 that such a modification provide automatic operation without the physical exertion of the user thus improving efficiency and consistency of the device and further it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art. In re Venner, 120 USPQ 192.
Re: Claim 10, Schmidt discloses the claimed invention including the valve system comprises: a hollow shaft (30, 34, 36) comprising a flow channel, a first end portion (30) and a second end portion (34) opposite to the first end portion, the first end portion is couplable to the bottle (14) and the second end portion is couplable to the liquid channel of the housing (Fig. 3); and a mounting base (28) located between the first end and the second end of the hollow shaft (Fig. 3, a portion of the mounting base lies between).
Re: Claim 11, Schmidt as modified by Fuqua above discloses the claimed invention including the mounting base (140, of Fuqua) comprises a mounting surface to mount the motor and the gear train of the valve system (Fuqua: Depicted in Fig. 3, motor and gear trained mounted to base).
Re: Claim 12, Schmidt discloses the claimed invention including the valve is seated within the flow channel (36) of the hollow shaft to control liquid flow from the flow channel to the liquid channel of the housing (Fig. 3).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmidt (US Patent No. 5,540,631) and Fuqua (US 2013/0221026 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chan et al (US 2011/0101023 A1).
Re: Claim 2, Schmidt discloses the claimed invention except for a cap. However, Chan teaches a cap (40) movably coupled to the upper housing portion (55) to open or close a liquid dispensing end of the liquid channel, the cap being configured to open before the valve opens the liquid channel (Depicted in Fig. 5C, cap is open before valve is opened) and closes after the valve is closed (Depicted in Fig. 6, valve is closed before cap).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to include a cap as taught by Chan, since Chan states in para. 36 that such a modification creates a trough to capture residual fluent material, and further inhibits incidental spillage of the fluent material, as well as form a relatively tight fit to inhibit the introduction of moisture into the device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. References cited on the PTO-892 provide additional examples of rotatable valves.
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