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 Amendment
This action is responsive to the amendment dated 12/3/2024. The previous claim objection has been withdrawn due to applicant’s amendment. Claims 1-20 remain pending. Any new ground(s) of rejection below have been made due to applicant’s amendment. This action is Final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a), first paragraph
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 16 has been amended to recite that the method of purging includes removing at least a majority of the purge fluid from the housing the valve. Support for this cannot be found in the originally filed disclosure. Paragraphs 15, 55, and 65 do discuss a drain port to enable the purge fluid to exit the valve housing; however, there is no mention of the quantity of fluid (such as a “majority”) that is to be drained, especially as part of a method or process.
Claim 17 is rejected for reasoning similar to the above.
Claims 18-20 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 16.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b), second paragraph
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 12-14 and 16-20 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.
Claim 12 is rejected as it appears to broaden the scope of the claim beyond that of claim 10. Claim 12 recites at least one of purge ports being configured to provide the first portion of the fluid through a passage in the valve member. “At least one” provides the possibility of only one of the purge ports being configured to provide the first portion of the fluid through the passage in the valve member. However, claim 10 recites the purge ports (i.e. plural) being configured to direct the first portion of purge fluid to the passage in the valve member. It is noted this rejection has not been made for claims 13 and 14 as claims 13 and 14 recite aligning of the flow path.
Claim 12 recites “a passage in the valve member” in line 3. However, claim 10 has been amended to already introduce “a passage in the valve member” (the third to last line of the claim). It is unclear in claim 12 how many passages are intending to be claimed.
Claim 13 recites “a passage in the valve member” in line 3. However, claim 10 has been amended to already introduce “a passage in the valve member” (the third to last line of the claim). It is unclear in claim 13 how many passages are intending to be claimed.
Claim 14 is rejected due to its dependency on claim 13.
Claim 16, it is unclear what a majority of the fluid would be. And where the majority of fluid is being removed from. Is it the majority from the valve member, the majority from between the housing and the valve member, or something else? The specification does not provide any further guidance.
Claim 17 is rejected for reasoning similar to the above.
Claims 18-20 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 16.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code 103 not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balan et al. (U.S. 10,539,242) in view of Oh (KR101866368)(reference and machine translation included herewith and referred to below).
Balan discloses a valve assembly comprising: a valve body (12, 14) comprising at least one fluid inlet (at 32) and at least one fluid outlet (at 38); a valve member (36) positioned within the valve body and configured to enable fluid to pass through an opening (34) in the valve body in an open position (fig. 2) and to at least partially prohibit the fluid from passing through the valve body in a closed position (as is understood in the art); and a purging assembly comprising at least one purge port (50) extending through the valve body in order to supply a purge fluid into the valve body (the port is at least capable of supplying a purge fluid, as the material handled has not been given patentable weight, but see also col. 4, ll. 52-57), an opening of the at least one purge port into the valve body being positioned at a selected location in order to supply a portion of the purge fluid to the opening in the valve member while simultaneously supplying another portion of the purge fluid between the valve body and the valve member while the valve member is in either the open position or the closed position (see the angle of 50 in fig. 3 and also Detail A in the annotated figure below, due to the angle of 50 and the location of the surface of 36, fluid supplied from 50 is able to be directed upward toward 34 and 47 and also toward 70 after colliding with the surface of 36 upon exiting 50), the port positioned about one side of the opening in the valve member such that the purge fluid is configured to travel through the opening in the valve member in a single direction (it is noted that this limitation only requires the single direction fluid flow to be when traveling through the opening in the valve member, once the fluid enters into the opening in the valve member, the fluid is capable of entering in the bore and traveling in a single direction once within the bore and especially as there is no duration or extent to which a single direction is confined).
Balan does not appear to disclose the purging assembly having purge ports (plural) and openings of the purge ports aligned with one side of the opening in the valve member.
PNG
media_image1.png
621
807
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Oh teaches it was known in the art to have a similar fluid injection assembly into a ball valve that has plural ports to inject the fluid into the ball valve assembly at the interface of the ball valve and aligned with one side of the opening of the valve member (see the injector 130 leading to a plurality of circumferentially arranged ports 122 that are at the ball valve interface).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Balan by having a plurality of ports arranged equidistant circumferentially around the valve interface as taught by Oh in order to have a more uniform and even dispersal of the fluid around the circumferential area of the valve which can provide better overall lubrication instead of potentially pooling at a single location.
Regarding claim 2, Balan as modified further discloses wherein each of the purge ports (the plural purge ports taught above by Oh) is positioned on the valve body to directly supply the portion of the purge fluid into the opening within the valve member (as there is no structure between the purge ports and the opening within the valve member, Balan as modified is seen to be positioned to directly supply the fluid to the opening in the valve member) at multiple locations about one side of the opening (the multiple locations being the location of each of the purge port openings as taught above by Oh).
Regarding claim 3, Balan as modified further discloses wherein each of the purge ports (the plural purge ports taught above by Oh) is positioned on the valve body to direct the purge fluid exiting the purge ports through the opening within the valve member (as described above, due to the angle of 50 and the location of the passage 34, fluid supplied from 50 is able to be directed upward toward 34 and 47 and into 34).
Regarding claim 6, Balan as modified further discloses wherein an edge of the valve member is configured to separate the portion of the purge fluid from the another portion of the purge fluid (see Detail A in the annotated figure above, fluid supplied from 50 is able to be directed upward toward 34 and 47 and also toward 70 after colliding with the surface of 36 upon exiting 50).
Regarding claim 7, Balan as modified further discloses wherein each of the purge ports (plural ports taught above by Oh in the rejection of claim 1) is positioned on the valve body to direct the purge fluid toward an obstruction in the valve body in order to separate the portion of the purge fluid from the another portion of the purge fluid (see the angle of 50 in fig. 3 and also Detail A in the annotated figure above, the obstruction being the surface of the valve member and the same as the applicant’s obstruction, due to the angle of 50 and the location of the surface of 36, fluid supplied from 50 is able to be directed upward toward 34 and 47 and also toward 70 after colliding with the surface of 36 upon exiting 50, and especially as the structure depicted in fig. 3 and the annotated figure above is the same as that claimed by the applicant).
Regarding claim 8, Balan as modified further discloses wherein the valve assembly comprises a ball valve and the valve member comprises a rotatable ball positioned in the valve body (fig. 2-3 and ball 36).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balan in view of Oh as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Johnstone et al. (U.S. 3,770,016).
Balan as modified discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to disclose a purge drain valve configured to drain purge fluid supplied to the valve body with the at least one purging assembly.
Johnstone teaches it was known in the art to have a ball valve with a draining valve (32).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the assembly of Balan by having a drain valve at the bottom of the housing as taught by Johnstone in order to drain any fluid from out of the valve assembly if so desired by a user.
Claim(s) 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balan in view of Oh and Stunkard (U.S. 2009/0095931).
Balan discloses a valve system comprising: a valve assembly comprising: a valve body (12, 14); and a valve member (36) in the valve body, the valve member to enable fluid to pass through the valve body (via 34) in an open position (fig. 2) and to at least partially prohibit the fluid from passing through the valve assembly in a closed position (as is understood in the art); and a purging assembly comprising at least one purge port (50) extending through the valve body in order to supply a purge fluid into the valve body (the port is at least capable of supplying a purge fluid, as the material handled has not been given patentable weight, but see also col. 4, ll. 52-57), the at least one purge port positioned and configured on the valve body to direct a first portion of the purge fluid as the purge fluid exits the at least one purge port to a passage (34) in the valve member and to direct a second portion of the purge fluid as the purge fluid exits the at least one purge port to a location between the valve member and the valve body (see the angle of 50 in fig. 3 and also Detail A in the annotated figure above, due to the angle of 50 and the location of the surface of 36, fluid supplied from 50 is able to be directed upward toward 34 and 47 and also toward 70 after colliding with the surface of 36 upon exiting 50, and especially as the structure depicted in fig. 3 and the annotated figure above is the same as that claimed by the applicant).
Balan does not appear to disclose the purging assembly having purge ports (plural) or the ports positioned and configured on the valve body to, in the closed position, direct the fluid to a passage in the valve member.
Oh teaches it was known in the art to have a similar fluid injection assembly into a ball valve that has plural ports to inject the fluid into the ball valve assembly at the interface of the ball valve (see the injector 130 leading to a plurality of circumferentially arranged ports 122 that are at the ball valve interface).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Balan by having a plurality of ports arranged equidistant circumferentially around the valve interface as taught by Oh in order to have a more uniform and even dispersal of the fluid around the circumferential area of the valve which can provide better overall lubrication instead of potentially pooling at a single location.
Stunkard teaches it was known in the art to have a ball valve that has a similar lubrication injection port (the port for lubricant injection fitting 178 and 174), that aligns with the valve in the closed position and can also allow the lubricant into the passage (22) of the ball valve (see fig. 7 and para. 23 describing fig. 7 as being in the closed position, see also para. 51).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Balan by positioning the purge port within the valve housing such that the purge port at least partially aligns the purge fluid exiting the at least one purge port with the passage extending through the valve member in the closed position (rather than the open position of Balan) as taught by Stunkard in order to supply the desired lubricant to the valve head and seat area while the valve is closed and thus not having the handled fluid interfering with lubricant application.
Regarding claim 11, Balan as modified further discloses wherein at least one of the purge ports is configured to provide the first portion of the purge fluid, in a substantially unaltered state, into the passage (34) in the valve member (due to the angle of 50 and the location of the passage 34, fluid supplied from 50 is able to be directed upward toward 34 and 47 and into 34, as especially as the term “substantially unaltered” is broad and subjective).
Regarding claim 12, Balan as modified further discloses wherein at least one of the purge ports is configured to provide the first portion of the purge fluid through a passage (34) in the valve member (as described above, due to the angle of 50 and the location of the passage 34, fluid supplied from 50 is able to be directed upward toward 34 and 47 and into 34).
Regarding claim 13, Balan as modified further discloses wherein at least one of the purge ports is positioned on the valve body to align a flow path of the purge fluid exiting the purge ports (plural purge ports taught above by Oh) with a passage (34) through the valve member (as described above, due to the angle of 50 and the location of the passage 34, fluid supplied from 50 is able to be directed upward toward 34 and 47 and into 34).
Regarding claim 14, Balan as modified further discloses wherein at least one of the purge ports is configured to align the flow path of the purge fluid exiting the purge ports (plural purge ports taught above by Oh) with the passage through the valve member in the closed position of the valve member (due to the angle of 50 and the location of the passage 34, fluid supplied from 50 is able to be directed upward toward 34 and 47 and into 34, further see the teaching above by Stunkard for this positioning in the closed position of the valve).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balan in view of Oh and Stunkard as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Johnstone.
Balan as modified discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to disclose a drain port in the valve body.
Johnstone teaches it was known in the art to have a ball valve with a draining valve (32) that is part of a draining port (the opening for the drain passage 30).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the assembly of Balan by having a drain valve and drain passage with port at the bottom of the housing as taught by Johnstone in order to drain any fluid from out of the valve assembly if so desired by a user.
Claim(s) 16-17 and 20, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balan in view of Johnstone.
Balan discloses a method of purging a valve, the method comprising: during a temporary purging operation that is separate from normal operation use of the valve (col. 4, ll. 46-57, the delivery of lubricating or sealant fluids to the interfaces, which is a temporary operation as it is not permanent and it purges any other fluid that is in the area where the lubricating or sealant fluids are being injected into, and is a separate operation from the normal open/close operation of the valve), directing a purge fluid (lubricating or sealant fluid as described in col. 4, ll. 46-57, which purges/displaces the fluid at the site of injection and especially as applicant describes their purge fluid as being fluids of any type and composition per paragraph 36 of the applicant’s specification) into a housing (12, 14) of a valve through at least one purge port (50) extending through the housing of the valve; as the purge fluid exits the at least one purge port, separating a first portion of the purge fluid from a second portion of the purge fluid (by colliding with the surface of 36 upon exiting 50, at the area of Detail A in the annotated figure above, which will result in some fluid being directed upward toward 34 and some fluid being directed toward 70 in fig. 3); supplying the first portion of the purge fluid from the at least one purge port to a valve member (36, by colliding with the surface of 36 upon exiting 50, at the area of Detail A in the annotated figure above, fluid will be directed upward toward the passage 34 and into the passage), the valve member being received in the housing of the valve; and substantially simultaneously supplying the second portion of the purge fluid between the housing of the valve and the valve member (toward 70 in fig. 3 which is between the valve 36 and housing 14).
Balan does not appear to disclose removing at least a majority of the purge fluid from the housing of the valve.
Johnstone teaches it was known in the art to have a ball valve with a draining valve to drain fluid from the valve (32).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Balan by having a drain valve at the bottom of the housing that drains fluid within the housing as taught by Johnstone in order to drain any fluid from out of the valve assembly if so desired by a user.
Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to drain any amount of the purge fluid from the housing, including a majority, as an engineering expedient within the level of ordinary skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to remove any (including a majority) of the residual purging fluid (the sealant or lubricating fluid) so that it doesn’t mix with the fluid handled through the valve, causing possible contamination with the handled fluid.
Regarding claim 17, Balan as modified further discloses wherein removing the at least a majority of the purge fluid from the housing of the valve comprises draining the at least a majority of the purge fluid through a drain port in the housing (as taught above by Johnstone above, via the drain port 34 that is part of the drain valve 32).
Regarding claim 20, Balan as modified further discloses separating the first portion of the purge fluid from the second portion of the purge fluid with an obstruction positioned within the housing of the valve (see the angle of 50 in fig. 3 and also Detail A in the annotated figure above, the obstruction being the surface of the valve member and the same as the applicant’s obstruction, due to the angle of 50 and the location of the surface of 36, fluid supplied from 50 is able to be directed upward toward 34 and 47 and also toward 70 after colliding with the surface of 36 upon exiting 50).
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balan in view of Johnstone as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Stunkard.
Balan discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to disclose positioning the valve member in the closed position inhibiting fluid flow through the valve before directing the purge fluid into the housing of the valve.
Rather, as shown in fig. 3 of Balan, the alignment of the purge fluid exiting the purge port with the passage extending through the valve member is shown in the open position.
Stunkard teaches it was known in the art to have a ball valve that has a similar lubrication injection port (the port for lubricant injection fitting 178 and 174), that aligns with the valve in the closed position and can also allow the lubricant into the passage (22) of the ball valve (see fig. 7 and para. 23 describing fig. 7 as being in the closed position, see also para. 51).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the assembly of Balan by positioning the purge port within the valve housing such that the purge port aligns the purge fluid exiting the at least one purge port with the passage extending through the valve member in the closed position (rather than the open position of Balan) and thus resulting in the step of closing the valve prior to directing the purge fluid into the housing as taught by Stunkard in order to supply the desired lubricant to the valve head and seat area while the valve is closed and thus not having the handled fluid interfering with lubricant application.
Regarding claim 19, Balan as modified further discloses enabling the first portion of the purge fluid to travel from the at least one purge port substantially unaltered to the valve member (by injecting the lubricating or sealant fluids as described in col. 4, ll. 46-57 and as described above for the direction of the fluid flow “substantially unaltered” to the valve member).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 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 12/3/2024 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s arguments on page 2 of the response and the limitation of the multiple purge ports, this newly added limitation has been taught by Oh above.
On page 3, the applicant first argues that there is no reason to modify Balan with Stunkard as both are directed to the lubrication of the seats. The examiner respectfully disagrees, as Stunkard teaches the lubricant is able to be injected while the valve is closed (fig. 7) and this provides the benefit of performing the lubrication while the valve is closed and the handled fluid is not actively flowing through the valve and thus not having the handled fluid interfering with lubricant application. Having the handled fluid be moving through the valve while attempting to lubricate the seating interface can reduce the efficacy of the desired lubrication.
On page 3, the applicant secondly argues that the combination would still result in the inability to access the bore when the ball is closed. The examiner respectfully disagrees as figure 7 shows the lubricant port (the port for lubricant injection fitting 178 and 174) being accessible to the inner channel (22) of the valve while in the closed position (see fig. 7 and para. 23 describing fig. 7 as being in the closed position, see also para. 51).
Continuing on page 3, the applicant argues that Balan does not disclose a method of purging a valve. The examiner respectfully disagrees as the injection of the fluid within the assembly of Balan purges any fluid from where the injecting fluid is being inserted into.
For at least the above reasons, applicant’s arguments have not been found persuasive.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL R REID whose telephone number is (313)446-4859. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-5pm 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 supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607, or Ken 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/MICHAEL R REID/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
