Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/469,283

VALVE DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Sep 18, 2023
Examiner
BALLMAN, CHRISTOPHER D
Art Unit
3753
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
DENSO CORPORATION
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
359 granted / 468 resolved
+6.7% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
496
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
47.0%
+7.0% vs TC avg
§102
33.8%
-6.2% vs TC avg
§112
18.3%
-21.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 468 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Non-Final Rejection 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS’s) submitted on 18 and 26 September 2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 1-10 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. In Claim 1 at lines 10-11 and Claim 6 lines 10-11 the limitation “a housing central axis which extends along the shaft central axis”, and the limitation at Claim 1 lines 24-25 and Claim 6 lines 25-26 “the housing central axis is eccentric with respect to the shaft central axis” appear to be at odds with each other. It is unclear how the housing central axis can be both eccentric with respect to the shaft central axis while also extending along said axis. The limitation “extends along the shaft central axis” appears to indicate the two axes overlap each other. However, the limitations further down in the claim clearly states the axes are eccentric with respect to each other. For purposes of examination, the two axes will be interpreted as being eccentric with respect to each other, pursuant to the disclosure presented in Figures 4-6. Clarification is required with respect to the above described inconsistencies. Claims 2-5 are rejected based upon their dependence from claim 1. Claims 7-10 are rejected based upon their dependence from claim 6. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. 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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizunuma (WO2021/049542, published 18 March 2021) in view of Weyand (U.S. Patent 5, 219,148). Regarding claim 1, Mizunuma discloses a valve device 10 comprising: a drive device 16 that is configured to output a rotational force; a shaft 20 that is configured to be rotated about a shaft central axis CL1 by the rotational force outputted from the drive device; a stationary disk 14 that has at least one passage hole 141 which is configured to conduct a fluid through the at least one passage hole; a rotor 22 that is configured to be rotated about the shaft central axis in response to rotation of the shaft to adjust a flow rate of the fluid flowing in the at least one passage hole; a housing 12 that is shaped in a bottomed tubular form and has a housing central axis CL2 which extends along the shaft central axis, wherein the housing has a peripheral wall which surrounds the housing central axis and receives the stationary disk and the rotor while an opening 120a is formed at the peripheral wall on one side in an axial direction of the housing central axis; a housing cover 124 that has an opening closure portion, wherein the opening closure portion corresponds to a shape of the opening and closes the opening; and a seal member (surface seal between housing 12 and housing cover 124) that is shaped in a ring form and seals a gap between the peripheral wall and the opening closure portion, wherein: the stationary disk has a stationary outer periphery which is opposed to the peripheral wall, wherein the stationary outer periphery has a rotation stop projection 32 which radially projects toward an inner periphery of the peripheral wall; the housing has a receiving groove 31 which is formed at the inner periphery of the peripheral wall and receives the rotation stop projection, wherein the housing central axis is positioned at a location where the housing central axis is eccentric with respect to the shaft central axis; and the seal member is eccentric with respect to the shaft central axis, and thereby a distance, which is measured between the housing central axis and a center of the seal member along a cross section of the seal member that is perpendicular to the axial direction of the housing central axis, is smaller than an amount of eccentricity between the shaft central axis and the housing central axis (FIG. 16, 20, 21). Mizunuma is silent regarding the seal member being a separate unique element, the seal member shaped in a ring form. However, Weyand teaches inserting a seal member 68 between the housing 10 and the housing cover 20 (FIG. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Mizunuma by adding a seal member between the housing and cover, as taught by Weyand, for the purpose of providing a more robust seal between the components than a surface seal can provide. Regarding claim 2, Mizunuma, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1. Mizunuma further discloses the center of the seal member along the cross-section of the seal member, which is perpendicular to the axial direction of the housing central axis, overlaps with the housing central axis and is eccentric with respect to the shaft central axis (FIG. 16, 20, 22). Regarding claim 3, Mizunuma, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1. Mizunuma/Weyand further teaches the seal member is in a circular ring form (Mizunuma FIG. 16; Weyand FIG. 1). Regarding claim 4, Mizunuma, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1. Mizunuma further discloses a direction (right to left in FIG. 16 and 21 orientations), which is directed from the housing central axis to the receiving groove, is defined as a groove direction; and the amount of eccentricity between the shaft central axis and the housing central axis is equal to or smaller than one half of a size of the rotation stop projection measured in the groove direction (FIG. 16, 21). Regarding claim 5, Mizunuma, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1. Mizunuma further discloses a direction, (right to left in FIG. 16 and 21 orientations) which is directed from the housing central axis to the receiving groove, is defined as a groove direction; and the amount of eccentricity between the shaft central axis and the housing central axis is equal to or smaller than one third of a size of the receiving groove measured in the groove direction (FIG. 16, 20). Regarding claim 6, Mizunuma discloses a valve device 10 comprising: a drive device 16 that is configured to output a rotational force; a shaft 20 that is configured to be rotated about a shaft central axis CL1 by the rotational force outputted from the drive device; a stationary disk 14 that has at least one passage hole 141 which is configured to conduct a fluid through the at least one passage hole; a rotor 22 that is configured to be rotated about the shaft central axis in response to rotation of the shaft to adjust a flow rate of the fluid flowing in the at least one passage hole; a housing 12 that is shaped in a bottomed tubular form and has a housing central axis CL2 which extends along the shaft central axis, wherein the housing has a peripheral wall which surrounds the housing central axis and receives the stationary disk and the rotor while an opening 120a is formed at the peripheral wall on one side in an axial direction of the housing central axis; a drive device case 124 that receives the drive device and has an opening closure portion, wherein the opening closure portion corresponds to a shape of the opening and closes the opening; and a seal member (surface seal between housing 12 and housing cover 124) that is shaped in a ring form and seals a gap between the peripheral wall and the opening closure portion, wherein: the stationary disk has a stationary outer periphery which is opposed to the peripheral wall, wherein the stationary outer periphery has a rotation stop projection 32 which radially projects toward an inner periphery of the peripheral wall; the housing has a receiving groove 31 which is formed at the inner periphery of the peripheral wall and receives the rotation stop projection, wherein the housing central axis is positioned at a location where the housing central axis is eccentric with respect to the shaft central axis; and the seal member is eccentric with respect to the shaft central axis, and thereby a distance, which is measured between the housing central axis and a center of the seal member along a cross section of the seal member that is perpendicular to the axial direction of the housing central axis, is smaller than an amount of eccentricity between the shaft central axis and the housing central axis (FIG. 16, 20, 22). Mizunuma is silent regarding the seal member being a separate unique element, the seal member shaped in a ring form. However, Weyand teaches inserting a seal member 68 between the housing 10 and the housing cover 20 (FIG. 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Mizunuma by adding a seal member between the housing and cover, as taught by Weyand, for the purpose of providing a more robust seal between the components than a surface seal can provide. Regarding claim 7, Mizunuma, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 6. Mizunuma further discloses the center of the seal member along the cross-section of the seal member, which is perpendicular to the axial direction of the housing central axis, overlaps with the housing central axis and is eccentric with respect to the shaft central axis (FIG. 16, 20, 22). Regarding claim 8, Mizunuma, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 6. Mizunuma/Weyand further teaches the seal member is in a circular ring form (Mizunuma FIG. 16; Weyand FIG. 1). Regarding claim 9, Mizunuma, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 6. Mizunuma further discloses a direction (right to left in FIG. 16 and 21 orientations), which is directed from the housing central axis to the receiving groove, is defined as a groove direction; and the amount of eccentricity between the shaft central axis and the housing central axis is equal to or smaller than one half of a size of the rotation stop projection measured in the groove direction (FIG. 16, 21). Regarding claim 10, Mizunuma, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 6. Mizunuma further discloses a direction, (right to left in FIG. 16 and 21 orientations) which is directed from the housing central axis to the receiving groove, is defined as a groove direction; and the amount of eccentricity between the shaft central axis and the housing central axis is equal to or smaller than one third of a size of the receiving groove measured in the groove direction (FIG. 16, 20). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Obrist (U.S. Patent Publication 2017/0370492) discloses a valve device similar to the one of the present application. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER D BALLMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9984. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00-3:00. 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 M Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. 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. /CHRISTOPHER D BALLMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3753 /CRAIG M SCHNEIDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 18, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595864
APPARATUS FOR NOISE REDUCTION IN VALVES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584563
SANITARY VALVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578022
A PNEUMATIC VALVE WITH FLEXI-SEALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12565935
BALL VALVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12565736
STATIC MIXER FOR ELECTRICAL SUBMERSIBLE PUMP (ESP) HIGH GAS/OIL RATIO (GOR) COMPLETIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+20.6%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 468 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month