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
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9, 21, 22, 33, and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee, Foreign Patent Document, KR1020230067147.
Regarding independent claim 1, Lee discloses a lubricant distribution system (Paragraph [0009], lines 1-3) comprising: a reservoir configured to contain lubricant (Paragraph [0011], lines 1-2); and a pump (300, Fig. 4) having a pump outlet (311, 312, Fig. 4) and configured to pump lubricant from the reservoir through the pump outlet (Paragraph [0026], lines 4-6); a mount (100, Fig. 4) having a mount inlet in fluid communication with the pump outlet (311, 312, Fig. 4) and a mount outlet in fluid communication with the mount inlet so that lubricant pumped by the pump flows out of the mount outlet (331a, 332a, Fig. 4), the mount including a check valve port (331, 332, Fig. 4); and a check valve removably coupled to the check valve port (331 and 332 are threaded (removably coupled), Fig. 4), the check valve being fluidly disposed between the mount inlet and the mount outlet (331 and 332 are disposed between mount inlet and outlet, 311, 312, and 331a, 332a, Fig. 4), the check valve being configured to open due to a sufficient pressure differential of lubricant across the check valve to permit lubricant to flow freely from the mount inlet to the mount outlet and being configured to close due to an insufficient pressure differential of lubricant across the check valve to prevent flow of lubricant from the mount outlet to the mount inlet (Paragraph [0056]).
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 1, and wherein the mount is a single, unitary piece of material (100, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 2, and wherein the mount (100, Fig. 4) is mounted directly to the pump (100 is mounted to 300, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 1, and wherein the check valve is threadably coupled to the check valve port (331, 332 are threadably coupled to the ports, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 1, and wherein the mount includes a vent valve port (361, 362, Fig. 4), and wherein the lubricant distribution system further comprises a vent valve removably coupled to the vent valve port (361, 362 removably coupled via threads, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 6, and further comprising a reservoir inlet for delivering lubricant to the reservoir (open end of G, Fig. 6), wherein the mount includes a mount return outlet in fluid communication with the reservoir inlet (350, Fig. 4), the mount return outlet in fluid communication with the mount outlet (Paragraph [0069]), wherein the vent valve is fluidly disposed between the mount outlet and the mount return outlet and is configured to selectively permit flow of lubricant toward the reservoir via the mount return outlet and the reservoir inlet to relieve lubricant pressure at the mount outlet (Paragraph [0069]).
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 1, and wherein the mount includes a vent valve port (port for valves 361, 362, Fig. 4) configured to interchangeably couple to an electrically operated vent valve and a hydraulically operated vent valve (threaded coupling allows for interchangability, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 21, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 1, and wherein the pump and the mount are supported by the reservoir (100 and P are supported by G, Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 22, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 21, and wherein the pump and the mount are mounted to the reservoir (100 and P are mounted to the reservoir, Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 33, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 1, and wherein the mount inlet and the mount outlet are disposed at different elevations on the mount (311, 312 are at different elevations from 321, 322, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 37, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 1, and wherein the mount (100, Fig. 4) abuts against the pump (P, Fig. 4).
Claim(s) 11, 12, 14, 25, and 27-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ambrose, US20110072888.
Regarding independent claim 11, Ambrose et al. discloses a mount (4, Fig. 1), for a lubricant distribution system (2, Fig. 1; a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art, if the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim; it is noted that hydraulic systems and lubrication systems are interchangeable and a person of ordinary skill in the art would be capable of recognizing that features of a hydraulic system are also features of a lubrication system; “the fluid 16 may be ejected outside of the fluid circuit by the externally connected hydraulic component 32. The fluid 16 not ejected outside of the fluid circuit may be returned” Paragraph [0020], lines 13-16) comprising: the mount (4, Fig. 1) comprising a mount body (4, Fig. 3) having a mount inlet (25, Fig. 5) arranged to receive lubricant (fluid 16, Fig. 1); a mount outlet (39, 45, Fig. 1) in fluid communication with the mount inlet and arranged to supply lubricant (fluid 16 flows through inlet 25 towards outlet 39, 45, Fig. 1); a one-way valve port (27, 18, Fig. 3) configured to removably couple (via spring pins 7, Fig. 5) a one-way valve to the mount (pins 7 attach valve 18 to mount 4), the one-way valve port (27, 18, Fig. 5) being fluidly disposed between the mount inlet (25, Fig. 5) and the mount outlet (39, Fig. 5; fluid flows from 25 through 18, to 39) a mount return outlet (35, Fig. 1) in fluid communication with the mount outlet (39, Fig. 1) and a vent valve port (21, Fig. 3) configured to removably couple a vent valve (10, Fig. 3, removable by threads) to the mount body (2, 4, Fig. 3), the vent valve port being fluidly disposed between the mount return outlet (35, Fig. 1) and the mount outlet (39, Fig. 1) the vent valve port (10, Fig. 1) being downstream of the one-way valve (18, Fig. 1; shows vent valve downstream, in direction of arrows from one-way valve 18) and upstream of the mount outlet (10 is upstream of 35. Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 11, and wherein the mount body (4, Fig. 3) is a single, unitary piece of material (one piece of material, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 11, and vent valve port (21, 10, Fig. 3) configured to interchangeably couple ("the second valve assembly 10 may be attached to the manifold body 4" Paragraph [0050], lines 3-4; threads shown in Figure 3 at valve 10 indicates interchangeable coupling) to an electrically operated vent valve ("An electrohydraulic on/off valve" Paragraph [0050], line 8) and a hydraulically operated vent valve ("a mechanical check valve" Paragraph [0050], line 7; the mechanical check valve operates by hydraulic pressure and is a hydraulic valve).
Regarding claim 25, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 11, and wherein the mount body (2, Fig. 5) has an exterior side (4, Fig. 5; “at least some of the plurality of cavities may be formed in an outer surface of the manifold body 4” Paragraph [0022], lines 3-5), the one-way valve port (port surrounding valve 27, Fig. 5) having a one-way valve port opening sized and shaped to permit the one-way valve to be inserted into and removed from the one-way valve port (valve 18, 27 can be inserted and removed from the port surrounding 18, 27, Fig. 5 via pins 7, Fig. 5), the vent valve port having a vent valve port opening sized and shaped to permit the vent valve to be inserted into and removed from the vent valve port ("the second valve assembly 10 may be attached to the manifold body 4" Paragraph [0050], lines 3-4; threads shown in Figure 3 at valve 10 indicates interchangeable coupling), the one-way valve port opening (opening surrounding valve 27, 18, Fig. 5) and the vent valve port opening (opening surrounding 10, Fig. 5) being on the exterior side (openings are on exterior 4 of mount 2, Figs. 3 and 5).
Regarding claim 27, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 11, and the mount inlet is a first mount inlet (25, Fig. 1), wherein the mount body (4, Fig. 1) includes a second mount inlet (19, Fig. 1) in uninterrupted fluid communication with the mount return outlet (via 17, 82, to 39, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 28, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 11, and wherein the mount body (4, Fig. 3) has a mount supply passage downstream of and configured to carry lubricant away from the one-way valve port (34, Fig. 1, 3), the mount outlet (39, Fig. 1) and the mount return outlet (35, Fig. 1) being downstream of the mount supply passage (35, 39, downstream of 18, Fig. 1), the vent valve port being fluidly disposed between the mount return outlet and the mount supply passage (vent valve 10 port, 21, fluidly disposed between 39 and 34, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 29, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 28, and wherein the mount body (4, Fig. 3) defines a flow path between the mount supply passage (34, Fig. 1) and the mount return outlet (35, Fig. 1) that stays entirely within the mount body (passage 34 is within mount body 4, Fig. 1, 3).
Regarding claim 30, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 11, and wherein the mount return outlet (35, Fig. 1) is in fluid communication with the mount outlet (39, Fig. 1) through the vent valve port (21, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 31, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 11, and wherein the vent valve port (21, Fig. 1) and the mount outlet (39, Fig. 1) are in uninterrupted fluid communication with one another (82, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 32, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 11, and wherein the vent valve port (21, 10, Fig. 1) and the mount return outlet (35, Fig. 1) are in uninterrupted fluid communication with one another (35 to 32 to 17 to valve 110, Fig. 1; Paragraph [0019]).
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.
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) 5, 8, 10, and 34-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, Foreign Patent Document, KR1020230067147.
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses limitations of claim 1, and the check valve (331, 332, Fig. 4). However, Lee does not disclose the check valve is a dual check valve. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have a check valve comprised of a dual check valve, because a type of check valve is one of a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 6, and the vent valve (361, 362, Fig. 4). However, Lee does not disclose the vent valve comprises an electrically operated vent valve or a hydraulically operated vent valve. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have a vent valve that is electrically operated or hydraulically operated, because a type of vent valve is one of a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 6, and wherein the mount includes a pressure relief valve port (port for valve 120, Fig. 3), and wherein the lubricant distribution system further comprises a pressure relief valve (120, Fig. 6), the pressure relief valve being in fluid communication with the mount outlet and configured to relieve lubricant pressure at the mount outlet when the lubricant pressure exceeds a threshold pressure (Paragraph[0086]).
However, Lee does not disclose the pressure relief valve is removably coupled to the pressure relief valve port. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have a valve removably coupled to the port, since it has been held that constructing formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. One would have been motivated to make such a modification to allow for easier maintenance of the pressure relief valve.
Regarding claim 34, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 6, and a vent valve (361, 362, Fig. 4) upstream of the check valve and mount outlet (Fig. 4). However, Lee does not disclose the vent valve is downstream of the check valve. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to rearrange the vent valve to be downstream of the check valve, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. One would have been motivated to make such a modification to optimize venting of air trapped in the lubricant distribution system.
Regarding claim 35, Lee discloses the limitations of claim 10, and wherein the pressure relief valve (120, Fig. 1) is downstream of the check valve and upstream of the mount outlet (120 is downstream of 331, and upstream of outlet, Paragraph [0085]).
Regarding claim 36, modified Lee discloses the limitations of claim 10, and wherein the pressure relief valve is arranged to vent lubricant (Paragraph [0086]). However, Lee does not disclose the lubricant is vented to ambient environment surrounding the lubricant distribution system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the lubricant vented to ambient environment, because location of venting (internal or ambient environment relative to the system) is one of a number of finite, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ambrose, US20110072888.
Regarding claim 15, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 11, wherein the mount outlet is a first mount outlet (39, Fig. 1). Ambrose does not disclose the mount having a second mount outlet in fluid communication with the mount inlet and arranged to supply lubricant, the one-way valve port being fluidly disposed between the mount inlet and the second mount outlet, the mount return outlet being in fluid communication with the second mount outlet, the vent valve port being fluidly disposed between the mount return outlet and the second mount outlet, the vent valve port being upstream of the second mount outlet.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add a second mount outlet, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. One would have been motivated to add a second mount outlet to supply lubricant to additional locations/components.
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ambrose, US20110072888 in view of Grach, US6286627.
Regarding claim 26, Ambrose discloses the limitations of claim 11, and the mount (2, Fig. 5) includes a pressure relief port (8, 29 Fig. 1, 5), configured to removably couple a pressure relief valve (8, Fig. 5) to the mount (threads on pressure relief valve 8, shown in Figure 5 to removably couple to mount 2).
Ambrose does not disclose the pressure relief valve being downstream of the one-way valve port and upstream of the mount outlet.
Grach teaches a lubricant distribution system wherein the pressure relief valve (81, Fig. 1, 7) being downstream of the one-way valve port (“one-way valve”; See annotated Figure 7 of Grach, below) and upstream of the mount outlet (117, Fig. 1, 7; See annotated Figure 7 of Grach, below).
PNG
media_image1.png
728
1058
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 7 of Grach
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the valve mount of Ambrose to add a pressure relief valve between the one-way valve and the mount outlet as taught by Grach in order to minimize over-pressure in the lines attached to the mount outlet. One would have been motivated to make this modification to limit over pressure in distribution device lines attached to the valve mount outlet.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent 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.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claim(s) 11 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. Upon further review, it appears the Ambrose discloses all the features of independent claim 11, and therefore claim 11 has been rejected under U.S.C 102(a)(1). Examiner no longer relies on Holman to teach any features with respect to independent claim 11 or any of the dependent claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATELYNNE BURRELL whose telephone number is (703)756-1344. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00am - 6:00pm 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, Victoria Augustine can be reached at (313) 446-4858. 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.
/K.R.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 3654
/ANNA M MOMPER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3619