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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6, 9-10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Guilliams (US PN 3,560,267).
Regarding claim 1, Guilliams discloses a method of using a gas-filled resilient hollow body (item 2, figure 1, column 2, lines 60-63, elastic compressible body is hollow with gas being trapped within its cells), comprising: using the gas-filled resilient hollow body as a valve member or a spring (column 3, lines 47-75: column 4, lines 1-11).
Regarding claim 2, Guilliams discloses that the gas-filled resilient hollow body is part of a normally closed valve (item 1, figure 1) which opens upon deformation of the gas-filled hollow resilient body (column 3, lines 47-75: column 4, lines 1-11) .
Regarding claim 3, Guilliams discloses that the gas-filled resilient hollow body is fittingly arranged in a valve housing (item 1, figure 1) and deformation of the gas-filled resilient hollow body unblocks a flow path between an inflow opening (item 4, figure 1) and an outflow opening (item 5, figure 1) of the valve housing.
Regarding claim 4, Guilliams discloses that the gas-filled resilient hollow body is deformed by an increase in pressure of a fluid to be dispensed through the valve (column 3, lines 47-75: column 4, lines 1-11).
Regarding claim 6, Guilliams discloses that the gas-filled resilient hollow body is configured to have a predetermined spring characteristic (column 3, lines 47-75).
Regarding claim 9, Guilliams discloses a valve (item 1, figure 1), comprising: a valve housing (figure 1), and a gas-filled resilient hollow body (item 2, figure 1, column 2, lines 60-63, elastic compressible body is hollow with gas being trapped within its cells) fittingly arranged in said valve housing.
Regarding claim 10, Guilliams discloses that the valve housing has an inflow opening (item 4, figure 1) and an outflow opening (item 5, figure 1), and the gas-filled resilient hollow body is arranged to close off a flow path between the inflow and outflow openings (column 3, lines 47-75: column 4, lines 1-11).
Regarding claim 12, Guilliams discloses that the valve housing has an internal volume that is variable so as to apply a predetermined pressure on the gas-filled resilient hollow body (column 3, lines 47-75: column 4, lines 1-11).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mueller (US PN 3,319,837).
Regarding claim 13, Mueller discloses a spring, comprising:
a gas-filled resilient hollow body (item 16, figure 1); and
a two-part spring housing (item 15, figure 1), the spring housing includes a fixed part (opening 17 is fixed, figures 1-3) and a movable part (resilient walls 20 of housing 15, figures 1-3) and the gas-filed resilient hollow body is arranged in said spring housing to allow the housing to expand or retract (column 3, lines 23-69) by moving the movable part with respect to the fixed part (the bladder 16 expands and contracts in response to internal pressure in the housing 15 and thus moves the resilient wall of the housing 20 when bladder 16 is filled with outside air from bottom check-valve 25).
Regarding claim 14, Mueller discloses the gas-filled resilient hollow body is configured to have a predetermined spring characteristic (container 16 is made of resilient material with expansion and retraction qualities, column 2, lines 52-72).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7-8, 11, and 15-19 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/17/2026 regarding the rejections of claim(s) 1-4, 6, 9-10, and 12 under Guilliams and rejections of claim(s) 13 and 14 under Mueller have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First, applicant argued, in light of amended independent claims 1 and 9, that Guilliams does not teach a gas-filled resilient hollow body as a valve member or a spring because the compressible body 2 is not a gas-filled resilient hollow body.
Examiner respectfully disagrees and would like to first point out that the amendment regarding the gas-filled resilient body being hollow is only supported by paragraph [0002] on page 1 of the specification. This disclosure merely mentions that the gas-filled resilient body is partially filled with gas to establish an internal gas pressure within the hollow body. The specification or the drawings do not further provide any additional support for the “hollow” gas-filled resilient body. Thus, the claims will be examined by giving them their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the limited support provided by the specification. Applicants relies on the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of “hollow” to mean “having an unfilled or hollowed-out space within”. However, as discussed above, the claims will be read based on the support provided by the specification and their broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding prior art Guilliams, examiner would like to point out that the prior art indeed teaches a gas-filled resilient body that is hollow. Column 2, lines 60-63 of Guilliams clearly recites “In accord with the invention, the elastic compressible body is a hollow cellular or alveolate or porous body whose internal cells are sealed off and imprison gas such as air therein.” As seen here, Guilliams explicitly discloses that body 2 is an elastic compressible body that is made of hollow cellular material with gas filled in the hollow cells and then sealing off these internal cells. By all shape and form, this is a gas-filled resilient hollow body. Whether relying on the specification, Merriam-Webster, and/or the broadest reasonable interpretation of claims 1 and 9, Guilliams definitely teaches a gas-filled resilient hollow body as recited in the amended claims.
Therefore, applicant’s arguments do not overcome the rejections of independent claims 1 and 9 along with dependent claims 2-4, 6, 10, and 12 as discussed in detail above.
Applicant further argued, in light of amended independent claim 13, that Mueller does not anticipate the claim because it does not teach a gas-filled resilient hollow body and a spring housing as part of the spring where the gas-filled resilient hollow body is arranged in said housing to expand and retract the housing.
Once again, examiner disagrees and asserts that applicant’s interpretation of Mueller and arguments may be flawed. First, Mueller teaches a spring housing 15 (housing expands and contracts like a spring) with a stationary mouth opening 17 and a resilient and movable wall portion 20 with a gas-filled resilient bladder 16 enclosed within the housing body closed off by a bottom 22 and a check-valve 25. Contrary to applicant’s assertions, bladder 16 does indeed satisfy the gas-filled resilient body being hollow. Mueller clearly states that bladder 16 is made of a stretchable material, is fluid-impervious and expansible, which can be filled by a gas or air via check-valve 25 (column 2, lines 40-68 and column 3, lines 28-62).
It is not clear how the applicant views the bladder 16 as not gas-filled even though Mueller clearly teaches that it fills with air when expanding under internal pressure of housing 15. Bladder 16 is capable being partially empty when air leaves or enters its interior space and thus satisfies all of the definitions of “hollow” as contemplated by the applicant in their arguments. Air is clearly a gas and thus bladder 16 is a gas-filed resilient hollow body. As a result, the housing is allowed to retract by applying compression to the flexible wall 20 and expand due to the bladder 16 expanding using fluid pressure from check valve 25. Thus, Mueller satisfies the claimed limitations of a spring housing, a gas-filled resilient hollow body and the housing being able to expand and retract.
For all of these reasons, claim 13 remains rejected as being anticipated by Mueller along with dependent claim 14.
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 VISHAL J PANCHOLI whose telephone number is (571)272-9324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday (9 am - 7 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.
/Vishal Pancholi/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754