DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the amendment dated 3/24/2026. Claims 1 and 19 are currently amended. Claim 17 has been canceled. No claims are newly added. Presently, claims 1-16 and 18-20 are pending.
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, see the Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) section on page 7 of the response filed 3/24/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as provided in the Office action dated 2/27/2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as provided in the Office action dated 2/27/2026 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see the Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 102 section on pages 7-8 of the response filed 3/24/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-6 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US 20180010696) have been fully considered and are persuasive. It is considered that the newly added inner seat ring being “separate from” and fixed relative to the outer plug features overcome the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated under Wang et al. as provided in the Office action dated 2/27/2026. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the newly applied reference to Banks (US 3318577).
It is considered that the Banks reference addresses applicant’s concerns and claim language relating to an outer plug (250) having an inner seat ring (274) separate from and fixed (via the cap 282) to the outer plug (250) and wherein an inner plug (276) interacts with the inner seat ring (274) in order to maintain the inner seat ring in the desired position (see at least col. 2, lines 7-10 and col. 2, lines 33-44).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 20180010696) in view of Banks (US 3318577).
Regarding claim 1, the Wang et al. reference discloses a flow control assembly (100) for a valve (10) having a valve inlet (22), the flow control assembly comprising:
a cage (120);
an outer seat ring (110) fixed relative to the cage;
an outer plug (considered the combination of 210 and 230) in fluid communication with the valve inlet, the outer plug defining a flow cavity (it is considered that the cavity defined between the radial outer end of the radial passageways 202 and the inner wall of the cage 120 defines a flow cavity), and the outer plug being movable in an axial direction relative to the cage to sealingly engage the outer seat ring (the outer plug seals against the outer seat ring 110 as depicted in figure 2A and the outer plug is disengaged with the outer seat ring 110 as depicted in figure 3D), the outer plug further including a plurality of radially extending passageways (202; it is considered that the passageways 202 extend between the flow cavity and the valve outlet 24) that fluidically couple the flow cavity with a valve outlet (24);
an inner seat ring (it is considered that the outer surface of the needle 314 contacts the inner seat ring as depicted in figure 3A) fixed relative to the outer plug (it is considered that the inner sear ring is fixed to the outer plug since the inner seat ring is part of the outer plug; see figure 2A); and
an inner plug (310) in fluid communication with the valve inlet (through the passages 122 and 202), the inner plug being movable in the axial direction relative to the outer plug to sealingly engage the inner seat ring (see figure 3A for the inner plug engaging the inner seat ring and see figures 3B-3D for the inner plug being spaced from the inner seat ring),
the inner plug and the outer plug:
in a first configuration providing a first flow path (see figure 2A for the flow path through the orifice 214 of the outer plug for a first flow path) through the outer plug, from the valve inlet to the valve outlet (24), to control flow over a first range of flow rates (it is considered that a first range of flow rates are the rates of flow that are able to pass the orifice 214 of the outer plug), with the inner plug being disengaged from the inner seat ring and the outer plug being sealingly engaged with the outer seat ring (see figure 2A), and
in a second configuration providing a second flow path (considered the flow path from the inlet 22 to the outlet 24 when the outer plug 210, 230 is shifted axially as depicted in figure 3C and figure 3D) from the valve inlet to the valve outlet, to control flow over a second range of flow rates (it is considered that a second range of flow rates are the rates of flow that are able to pass from the valve inlet to the valve outlet when the outer plug 210, 230 is axially spaced from the outer seat ring 110 as depicted in figure 3C and figure 3D), the inner plug being disengaged from the inner seat ring and the outer plug being disengaged from the outer seat ring (see figure3C and figure 3D).
The Wang et al. reference does not disclose wherein the inner seat ring is separate from the outer plug.
The Banks reference teaches a valve assembly (see the embodiment in figure 5) having an outer plug (250) having an inner seat ring (274, 272) separate from and fixed (via the cap 282) to the outer plug (250) and wherein an inner plug (276) interacts with the inner seat ring (274) in order to maintain the inner seat ring in the desired position (see at least col. 2, lines 7-10 and col. 2, lines 33-44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to design the inner seat ring of the Wang et al. reference as the inner seat ring that is separate from and fixed to the outer plug as taught by the Banks reference in order to maintain the inner seat ring in the desired position during operation at a variety of pressures so that sealing is maintained between the inner plug and the outer plug.
In regards to claim 2, the Wang et al. reference of the combination of the Wang et al. reference and the Banks reference discloses wherein the outer plug (Wang et al.: 210, 230) defines an inner cavity (Wang et al.: it is considered that the sidewall 212 at least partially defines the inner cavity) and the inner plug (Wang et al.: 310) is moveable in the axial direction within the inner cavity (Wang et al.: see movement of the inner plug in the axial direction in figures 3A-3B) to control the flow over the first range of flow rates.
In regards to claim 3, the Wang et al. reference of the combination of the Wang et al. reference and the Banks reference discloses wherein the inner cavity is in fluid communication with the valve inlet (Wang et al.: 22) via one or more balancing holes (Wang et al.: 312) that extend through the inner plug (Wang et al.: it is considered that the upper portion of the inner cavity that is located between the upper surface of the inner plug 310 and the radially extending inward projections of the element 230 of the outer plug is in communication with the valve inlet 22 through the passages 122 in the cage and through the ports 202 of the outer plug and the balancing holes 312 as depicted in figure 1).
In regards to claim 4, the Wang et al. reference of the combination of the Wang et al. reference and the Banks reference discloses wherein a spring (Wang et al.: 240) is disposed within the inner cavity (Wang et al.: see figure 2A), between the outer plug and the inner plug relative to the axial direction (Wang et al.: see figure 2A).
In regards to claim 5, the Wang et al. reference of the combination of the Wang et al. reference and the Banks reference discloses wherein the outer plug (Wang et al.: 210, 230) frictionally engages the cage (Wang et al.: it is considered that friction would occur between the outer surfaces of the outer plug 210, 230 and the inner surface of the cage 124) so that:
over the first range of flow rates, the outer plug (Wang et al.: 210, 230) is maintained in sealing engagement with the outer seat ring (Wang et al.: 110) (Wang et al.: see figure 2A), and
over the second range of flow rates, the inner plug (Wang et al.: 310) applies axial force to the outer plug (Wang et al.: 210, 230) to overcome the frictional engagement between the outer plug and the cage, so that the outer plug is disengaged from the outer seat ring (Wang et al.: see figure 3C and figure 3D; see also paragraph [0056]).
In regards to claim 6, the Wang et al. reference of the combination of the Wang et al. reference and the Banks reference discloses wherein the inner plug (Wang et al.: 310) is fixed to a stem (Wang et al.: 360) of the valve and the outer plug is not fixed to the stem of the valve, relative to axial movement along the stem (Wang et al.: see figures 3A-3D for the stem 360 and the inner plug 310 being moveable in the axial direction relative to the outer plug).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-16 and 18-20 are allowed.
Claim 7 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regards to claim 7, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest wherein the inner seat ring is fixed to the outer plug via one or more tack welds in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Regarding claim 8, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest “A flow control assembly” comprising:
“a first flow control member” defining “a flow cavity”, the first flow control member being “movable relative to the first valve seat in an axial direction to sealing engage the first valve seat”, and the first flow control member including “a plurality of radially extending passageways that fluidically couple the flow cavity with the valve outlet”;
“a second flow control member disposed within the flow cavity, downstream from the second valve” wherein the second flow control member is “movable in the axial direction relative to the valve body and the first flow control member to sealingly engage the second valve seat”; and
in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Claims 9-16 and 18 depend from claim 8, either directly or indirectly, and, therefore, claims 9-16 and 18 are allowable for containing the indicated allowable subject matter of claim 8.
Regarding claim 19, the prior art of record does not disclose or suggest “A method of assembling a flow control assembly for a valve having a valve stem” comprising:
“disposing the inner plug within a flow cavity of an outer plug” with “the outer plug including a plurality of radially extending passageways that fluidically couple the flow cavity with a valve outlet”; and
in combination with the other limitations of the claim.
Claim 20 depends from claim 19, and, therefore, claim 20 is allowable for containing the indicated allowable subject matter of claim 19.
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 Andrew J. Rost whose telephone number is (571) 272-2711. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607 or Kenneth 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.
/ANDREW J ROST/Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/CRAIG M SCHNEIDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights