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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 1/9/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that claim 1 is allowable. This is not found persuasive because: see office action below.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and 103
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.
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) 1-4, 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Knappe et al (US 5,985,146).
PNG
media_image1.png
562
729
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Knappe teaches the bypass control sleeve as claimed. It has steep face and the ratio of protrusion width to valley width is about 1:1, as can be seen in the figure as in claims 1 and 3, and would radially deflect feed flow as in claim 7.
Claim 2: protrusions are wrapped spirally – see fig. 3.
Claim 4: Valleys have the same diameter.
Claim 6: asymmetric protrusions – see claims 18 and 19 – random distribution and size would make them asymmetric.
Claim 10: installed in housing – se the figure 2.
Claim(s) 8, 9, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knappe et al (US 5,985,146).
Claims 8 and 9: depth of valleys and pitch of the peaks ( which Knappe does not teach) provide the fluid flow path, which can be designed and optimized by a POSITA for the required bypass flow, and is not patentable.
Claims 11 and 12 recite the clearance between the protrusions and the housing wall, which Knappe does not teach, but teaches about the space and the close tolerance for easy installation and controlled bypass flow (Summary of invention). This tolerance required to fit the cartridge in the housing and to control the flow requirement can be designed and optimized by a POSITA.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Marchke, (US 8,940,168).
PNG
media_image2.png
675
1101
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Marchke teaches (fig. 4, col. 6, lines 33-57)) the axial bypass seal sleeve with concave protrusions as claimed. They are also asymmetric because of the slant. About the concave shape, see col. 6 lies 4-9, curvilinear shape to avoid corners and creases. Avoiding creases in the angular protrusions would make the leading and lagging corners “concave curved.” Wrapped circumferentially as claimed, and would radially deflect the flow. Module with housing/pressure vessel and the sleeve around the module is see in the figure 4. Valleys (210) between protrusions have constant diameter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISHNAN S MENON whose telephone number is (571)272-1143. The examiner can normally be reached Flexible, but generally Monday-Friday: 8:00AM-4:30PM.
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, Prem C Singh can be reached at 571-272-6381. 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.
/KRISHNAN S MENON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777
Prosecution Insights