Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/543,333

CONNECTION MODULE FOR A FLUID

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Dec 18, 2023
Examiner
ARUNDALE, ROBERT K
Art Unit
3753
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
VALEO SYSTEMES THERMIQUES
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
579 granted / 771 resolved
+5.1% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
802
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
40.4%
+0.4% vs TC avg
§102
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
§112
25.1%
-14.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 771 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/12/2025, has been entered. Drawings The drawings were received on 12/12/2025. These drawings are not entered. Applicant remarks that drawing changes to Figs. 2 and 4 were provided. However, the office cannot find any difference between the drawings submitted on 12/12/2025 and the drawings submitted on 11/21/2025. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. The drawings are objected to because they do not comply with MPEP § 608.02(V)(h)(3) which necessitates that sectional views include hatching to indicate section portions of an object (see Figs. 2 and 4). More specifically, the office notes that valve (6) does not include cross-hatching. Cross-hatching is especially critical in the instant case because the claims necessitate direct contact between the fixing element and the valve. However, the contact between these two elements is difficult to ascertain without cross-hatching. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. 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) 1-5, 7-8, 10-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fuller (U.S. Publication 2009/0293970). In regards to claims 1, 12, 16, 17, 20, 21 and 22, Fuller discloses a connection module for a fluid, comprising: a body (72) with a first opening (90) and a second opening (138) connected to each other by a channel (C) so that the fluid can flow between the first opening (90) and the second opening (138) through the channel (C); a first valve (160) placed inside the channel (C) to control the flow of the fluid, the first opening (90) being configured to receive the first valve (160); wherein the channel (C) has a first arm (FA) and a second arm (SA), the second arm (SA) arranged at an angle to the first arm (FA), the first valve (160) located between the first arm (FA) and the second arm (SA), wherein the connection module further comprises a fixing element (162) at the first opening (90) configured to be introduced through the first opening (90) and immobilize (i.e. retain) the first valve (160), wherein the fixing element (162) is configured to enable flow of the fluid there through and is configured to connect an external fluid line to the body; wherein the fixing element (162) includes a collar portion (BC) that projects axially and is inserted through the first opening (90) into the channel (C), and wherein the collar portion (BC) includes an end face that directly abuts and retains the first valve (160) within the channel (C). The office notes that the fluid flows through the fixing element (162) to plate (40) which includes fluid line (100). Accordingly, it is the office’s position that the fixing element (162) is, “configured to connect an external fluid line to the body”. Further, 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. In the instant case, fixing element (162) includes a flow path extending therethrough. Accordingly, it is the office’s position the fixing element (162) is capable (i.e. configured to) connect to an external fluid line. The office notes that the above reasoning is also applicable to claim 21, which recites, “the inner fluid passage being configured to convey the fluid to the first valve.” PNG media_image1.png 984 536 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 214 475 media_image2.png Greyscale In regards to claim 2, the channel includes a first section with a first diameter and a second section with a second diameter, the first diameter being larger than the second diameter, the channel including a step in-between the first section and the second section arranged so that the first valve (160) rests at an end of the first section adjacent to the step and an end of the second section. See Fig. 4 which illustrates valve 160 seated at a step between an upstream portion having a smaller diameter than a downstream section. Regarding "brazed" as recited in claims 3 and 14, the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product in the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process (see MPEP 2113). In the instant case, outside of the method of manufacture, claim 3 merely necessitates that the fixing element be coupled to the body. As discussed in claim 1, fixing element (162) is coupled to body (72) In regards to claims 4 and 15, the first valve (160) is a check valve. In regards to claim 5, the fixing element (162) is a connection block configured to receive an air conditioning line. The office notes that applicant does not define characteristics of the connection block. The office further notes that the fixing element has a passageway therethrough which is capable of receiving an air conditioning line. In regards to claim 7, the fixing element (162) is a tube (i.e. a hollow cylindrical shape) attached at the first opening (90) so that the fluid can flow between the tube and the second opening. In regards to claim 8, the tube includes a tube collar (BC) adjacent to the body. The office notes that applicant does not define any physical characteristics of the tube collar. In regards to claims 10 and 18, the angle is between 15 and 165 degrees. In regards to claims 11 and 19, the angle is 90 degrees. In regards to claims 13 and 21, the connection block (162) includes an inner fluid passage extending axially therethrough, the inner fluid passage defining a fluid path from an inlet of the connection block (162) directly to the first valve (160). The office notes that connection block (162) includes a flow path therethrough and that independent of fluid flow direction the fluid within the connection block flow path is directly fluidly communicated with the first valve. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As discussed above, it is the office’s position that Fuller discloses applicant’s newly added claim language. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to R.K. Arundale whose telephone number is 571-270-3453. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (9:30AM-6:00PM EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881, and Craig 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 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. /ROBERT K ARUNDALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 18, 2023
Application Filed
May 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Aug 18, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 19, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Nov 03, 2025
Interview Requested
Nov 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 12, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 10, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583271
PNEUMATIC PRESSURE CONTROLLER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578027
Bicycle Tire Inner Tube with Pneumatic Valve
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576676
Automatic Tire Inflation System Hose With Integrated TPMS Sensor
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571484
VALVE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12572163
PRESSURE REDUCER ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+24.5%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 771 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