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
In the amendment dated December 12, 2025, claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 20 were amended, claims 8, 13, 16-19, and 21-24 were canceled, and new claims 25-34 were presented. Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 11, 12, 14, 15, 20, and 25-34 are pending.
Applicant contends that “neither Novak nor Rasche discloses a sealing edge that projects axially and presses into the annular end face of the mouth” and thus “independent claim 1 as currently amended is allowable over the prior art references of record” (Remarks at p. 8). First, claim 1 does not require the sealing edge “projects axially” as Applicant contends. Second, claim 1 as amended is now significantly broader than previously presented. Thus, the amendments to the claims necessitate new grounds of rejection, as presented below.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
At claim 2, line 3: “the ring” should read “the sealing ring”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, 14, 15, 20, 25-30, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pub. 2011/0210515 to Sharp et al. (hereinafter, “Sharp”).
Regarding claim 1, Sharp discloses a pressure vessel (cylinder 2, Fig. 1A) for gaseous media (para. [0037]), comprising: a liner (liner 5, Fig. 1A); and an end boss (boss 3, Fig. 1A) arranged in a region of an opening of the pressure vessel (see Fig. 1A), the end boss (boss 3) having a through hole (see annotated Fig. 3 below) and being designed for connection of a valve (paras. [0004]-[0005], [0055]), wherein the liner (liner 5) includes a tubular neck portion (annotated Fig. 3) having a mouth at an axial end thereof (annotated Fig. 3) and extending adjacent the end boss (boss 3) in a direction of an axis of the pressure vessel (see annotated Fig. 3), and wherein the end boss (boss 3) has a sealing edge (edge of shoulder 20, Fig. 3) that presses axially into the liner (para. [0053]) at an annular end face (distal end 14, Fig. 3) of the mouth (annotated Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
660
625
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Sharp Annotated Figure 3
Regarding claim 4, Sharp further discloses a wall thickness of the neck portion (annotated Fig. 3) of the liner (liner 5) is constant in a thread-free region (see annotated Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14, Sharp further discloses the sealing edge (edge of shoulder 20) penetrates axially (sealing edge provides compression in the axial direction, see para. [0060]) into the annular end face (distal end 14) of the mouth (annotated Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 15, Sharp further discloses the end boss (boss 3) is disposed external to the liner (liner 5, see Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 20, Sharp further discloses the end boss (boss 3) is configured as a single-piece end boss (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 25, Sharp further discloses the liner (liner 5) is made of plastic (paras. [0013], [0041], [0051]-[0052]).
Regarding claim 26, Sharp further discloses a layer of fiber composite material (fiber layer 7, Fig. 1A) disposed outside the liner (liner 5, see Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 27, Sharp further discloses the tubular neck portion (annotated Fig. 3) of the liner (liner 5) comprises an external thread (thread 5b, Fig. 1B; para. [0041]).
Regarding claim 28, Sharp further discloses the through hole (annotated Fig. 3) of the end boss (boss 3) comprises an internal thread (threaded portion 3c, Fig. 1B) configured for screwing to the external thread (thread 5b, para. [0041]).
Regarding claim 29, Sharp further discloses the tubular neck portion (annotated Fig. 3) of the liner (liner 5) comprises a thread-free region (annotated Fig. 3) adjoining the external thread (thread 5b, see Figs. 1B, 3).
Regarding claim 30, Sharp further discloses the end boss (boss 3) comprises an inner wall (annotated Fig. 3) in contact with the thread-free region (annotated Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 34, Sharp further discloses the sealing edge (edge of shoulder 20) is annular (see Fig. 3).
Claims 1, 4, 5, 15, 20, 25-29, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP 0753700 to Lange et al. (hereinafter, “Lange”).
Regarding claim 1, Lange discloses a pressure vessel (pressure vessel 1, Fig. 1) for gaseous media (para. [0001] of attached translation), comprising: a liner (liner 2, Fig. 1); and an end boss (neck piece 5, Fig. 3) arranged in a region of an opening of the pressure vessel (see Figs. 1, 3), the end boss (neck piece 5) having a through hole (annotated Fig. 3 below) and being designed for connection of a valve (para. [0011]), wherein the liner (liner 2) includes a tubular neck portion (neck 8, Fig. 3) having a mouth (annotated Fig. 3) at an axial end thereof (see Fig. 3) and extending adjacent the end boss (neck piece 5) in a direction of an axis of the pressure vessel (annotated Fig. 3), and wherein the end boss (neck piece 5) has a sealing edge (annotated Fig. 3) that presses axially into the liner (liner 2) at an annular end face of the mouth (end face 15, see Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image2.png
580
748
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Lange Annotated Figure 3
Regarding claim 4, Lange further discloses a wall thickness of the neck portion (neck piece 5) of the liner (liner 2) is constant in a thread-free region (annotated Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, Lange further discloses the end boss (neck piece 5) has a shoulder face (annotated Fig. 3) projecting radially inwardly (see Fig. 3) and facing the annular end face (end face 15, see Fig. 3) of the mouth (annotated Fig. 3) of the liner (liner 2), wherein the sealing edge (annotated Fig. 3) projects axially from the shoulder face (annotated Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 15, Lange further discloses the end boss (neck piece 5) is disposed external to the liner (liner 2, see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 20, Lange further discloses the end boss (neck piece 5) is configured as a single-piece end boss (see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 25, Lange further discloses the liner (liner 2) is made of plastic (para. [0012]).
Regarding claim 26, Lange further discloses a layer of fiber composite material (winding 3, Fig. 1; para. [0012]) disposed outside the liner (liner 2, see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 27, Lange further discloses the tubular neck portion (neck 8) of the liner (liner 2) comprises an external thread (threaded section 10, Fig. 2; para. [0014]).
Regarding claim 28, Lange further discloses the through hole (annotated Fig. 3) of the end boss (neck piece 5) comprises an internal thread (threaded section 20, Fig. 4) configured for screwing to the external thread (threaded section 10, para. [0014]).
Regarding claim 29, Lange further discloses the tubular neck portion (neck 8) of the liner (liner 2) comprises a thread-free region (annotated Fig. 3) adjoining the external thread (threaded section 10, see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 34, Lange further discloses the sealing edge (annotated Fig. 3) is annular (see Fig. 3).
Claims 1, 5, 14, 15, 25-30, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 108119748 to Lin et al. (hereinafter, “Lin”).
Regarding claim 1, Lin discloses a pressure vessel for gaseous media (pressure vessel 1, Fig. 1), comprising: a liner (liner 2, Fig. 4); and an end boss (member 4 and gasket 6, Fig. 4) arranged in a region of an opening of the pressure vessel (see Figs. 2, 4), the end boss (member 4) having a through hole (annotated Fig. 4 below) and being designed for connection of a valve (valve 5, Fig. 4), wherein the liner (liner 2) includes a tubular neck portion (annotated Fig. 4) having a mouth (annotated Fig. 4) at an axial end thereof (see Fig. 4) and extending adjacent the end boss (member 4 and gasket 6) in a direction of an axis of the pressure vessel (annotated Fig. 4), and wherein the end boss (member 4 and gasket 6) has a sealing edge (convex structure 10, Fig. 4) that presses axially into the liner (liner 2) at an annular end face (annotated Fig. 4) of the mouth (annotated Fig. 4).
PNG
media_image3.png
541
634
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Lin Annotated Figure 4
Regarding claim 5, Lin further discloses the end boss (member 4 and gasket 6) has a shoulder face (annotated Fig. 4) projecting radially inwardly (see Fig. 4) and facing the annular end face (annotated Fig. 4) of the mouth of the liner (annotated Fig. 4), wherein the sealing edge (convex structure 10) projects axially from the shoulder face (see annotated Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 14, Lin further discloses the sealing edge (convex structure 10) penetrates axially into the annular end face of the mouth (p. 4, ll. 43-47 of attached translation).
Regarding claim 15, Lin further discloses the end boss (member 4 and gasket 6) is disposed external to the liner (liner 2, see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 25, Lin further discloses the liner (liner 2) is made of plastic (p. 4, ll. 1-2 of attached translation).
Regarding claim 26, Lin further discloses a layer of fiber composite material (fiber support cover 3, Figs. 2, 4) disposed outside the liner (liner 2, see Figs. 2, 4).
Regarding claim 27, Lin further discloses the tubular neck portion (annotated Fig. 4) of the liner (liner 2) comprises an external thread (thread 8, Fig. 3; p. 4, ll. 29-35).
Regarding claim 28, Lin further discloses the through hole (annotated Fig. 4) of the end boss (member 4 and gasket 6) comprises an internal thread (thread 8, Fig. 3; p. 4, ll. 29-35) configured for screwing to the external thread (p. 4, ll. 29-35).
Regarding claim 29, Lin further discloses the tubular neck portion (annotated Fig. 4) of the liner (liner 2) comprises a thread-free region (annotated Fig. 4) adjoining the external thread (thread 8, see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 30, Lin further discloses the end boss (member 4 and gasket 6) comprises an inner wall in contact with the thread-free region (portion of member 4 in contact with thread-free region shown in annotated Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 34, Lin further discloses the sealing edge (convex structure 10) is annular (p. 4, ll. 43-47).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 2, 11, and 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharp as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of DE-112006000286 to Otsubo et al. (hereinafter, “Otsubo”). Note – a copy of Otsubo is attached to the Office Action dated December 27, 2024.
Regarding claim 2, Sharp does not expressly disclose a sealing ring disposed between the liner and the end boss, wherein the ring comprises an ethylene-propylene-diene rubber.
Otsubo teaches a similar pressure vessel (tank 1, Fig. 1) having a liner (liner 20, Fig. 1), an end boss (insert 3, Fig. 1), and a composite outer layer (shell 22, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches that the liner has a neck portion (portion 71, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches that a sealing ring disposed between the liner and the end boss (sealing elements 81, 82, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches one of the sealing rings is made of a first material which seals at low temperatures (see p. 10, ll. 18-40; p. 11, ll. 8-16). Otsubo teaches that the first material is an ethylene-propylene-diene rubber (sealing ring is EPDM, see p. 3, ll. 26-32; p. 10, ll. 32-40). Ethylene-propylene-diene rubber is a material that seals at temperatures below -30°C (see Applicant’s specification at p. 2, ll. 24-29; p. 7, ll. 3-6; see also MPEP 2145(II)). Otsubo teaches that this sealing ring arrangement provides a reliable seal construction over a wide range of temperatures (p. 2, ll. 22-35; p. 3, ll. 14-19).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the pressure vessel of Sharp to add an ethylene-propylene-diene rubber sealing ring between the liner and the end boss as taught by Otsubo for the purpose of providing a reliable seal construction, as recognized by Otsubo (see p. 2, ll. 22-35).
Regarding claim 11, Sharp does not expressly disclose a first sealing ring disposed between the liner and the end boss, wherein the first sealing ring is made of a first material which seals at temperatures below -30 °C.
Otsubo teaches a similar pressure vessel (tank 1, Fig. 1) having a liner (liner 20, Fig. 1), an end boss (insert 3, Fig. 1), and a composite outer layer (shell 22, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches that the liner has a neck portion (portion 71, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches that a sealing ring disposed between the liner and the end boss (sealing elements 81, 82, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches one of the sealing rings is made of a first material which seals at low temperatures (see p. 10, ll. 18-40; p. 11, ll. 8-16). Otsubo teaches that the first material is an ethylene-propylene-diene rubber (sealing ring is EPDM, see p. 3, ll. 26-32; p. 10, ll. 32-40). Ethylene-propylene-diene rubber is a material that seals at temperatures below -30°C (see Applicant’s specification at p. 2, ll. 24-29; p. 7, ll. 3-6; see also MPEP 2145(II)). Otsubo teaches that this sealing ring arrangement provides a reliable seal construction over a wide range of temperatures (p. 2, ll. 22-35; p. 3, ll. 14-19).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the pressure vessel of Sharp to add a sealing ring that is capable of sealing at temperatures below -30 °C between the liner and the end boss as taught by Otsubo for the purpose of providing a reliable seal construction across a wide range of temperatures, as recognized by Otsubo (see p. 2, ll. 22-35).
Regarding claim 31, Sharp does not expressly disclose the inner wall comprises first and second annular grooves spaced apart along the axis.
Otsubo teaches a similar pressure vessel (tank 1, Fig. 1) having a liner (liner 20, Fig. 1), an end boss (insert 3, Fig. 1), and a composite outer layer (shell 22, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches that the liner has a neck portion (portion 71, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches that the boss has an inner wall with two annular grooves (grooves that receive sealing elements 81, 82, see Fig. 1) arranged at an axial distance from one another (see Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches that the grooves each have a sealing ring (sealing elements 81, 82, Fig. 1) arranged therein so that the portion of the neck is pressed against the sealing rings (see Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches one of the sealing rings is made of a first material which seals at low temperatures (see p. 10, ll. 18-40; p. 11, ll. 8-16). Otsubo teaches the other of the sealing rings is made of a second material which has low gas permeability (see p. 10, ll. 18-40; p. 11, ll. 8-16). Otsubo teaches that having two sealing rings arranged at an axial distance from one another and having different materials provides a reliable seal construction over a wide range of temperatures (p. 2, ll. 22-35; p. 3, ll. 14-19).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the pressure vessel of Sharp to add first and second annular grooves to the boss and first and second sealing rings in the grooves having different materials from one another as taught by Otsubo for the purpose of providing a reliable seal construction over a wide range of temperatures, as recognized by Otsubo (see p. 2, ll. 22-35).
Regarding claim 32, Sharp as modified by Otsubo already includes a first sealing ring disposed in the first annular groove (Otsubo, sealing element 81, Fig. 1); and a second sealing ring disposed in the second annular groove (Otsubo, sealing element 82, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 33, Sharp as modified by Otsubo already includes the first sealing ring (Otsubo, sealing element 81) and the second sealing ring (Otsubo, sealing element 82) are made of different materials from each other (Otsubo, p. 10, ll. 18-40; p. 11, ll. 8-16).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharp as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Otsubo and U.S. Pub. 2014/0070494 to Winkelmann et al. (hereinafter, “Winkelmann”).
Regarding claim 12, Sharp does not expressly disclose a first sealing ring disposed between the liner and the end boss, wherein the first sealing ring is made of polyurethane.
Otsubo teaches a similar pressure vessel (tank 1, Fig. 1) having a liner (liner 20, Fig. 1), an end boss (insert 3, Fig. 1), and a composite outer layer (shell 22, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches that the liner has a neck portion (portion 71, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches sealing rings disposed between the liner and the end boss (sealing elements 81, 82, Fig. 1). Otsubo teaches one of the sealing rings is made of a first material which seals at low temperatures (see p. 10, ll. 18-40; p. 11, ll. 8-16). Otsubo teaches another of the sealing rings is made of a second material which has low gas permeability (see p. 10, ll. 18-40; p. 11, ll. 8-16). Otsubo teaches that this sealing ring arrangement provides a reliable seal construction over a wide range of temperatures (p. 2, ll. 22-35; p. 3, ll. 14-19).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the pressure vessel of Sharp to add a sealing ring between the liner and the end boss as taught by Otsubo for the purpose of providing a reliable seal construction, as recognized by Otsubo (see p. 2, ll. 22-35).
Winkelmann teaches a sealing arrangement for high-pressure hydrogen (Abstract). Winkelmann teaches a sealing ring arranged in a groove to form a sealing connection (Fig. 2). Winkelmann teaches the sealing ring may be polyurethane (paras. [0021], [0025]). Winkelmann further teaches that the material of the sealing ring is selected based upon the particular application (paras. [0021], [0025]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the pressure vessel of Sharp/Otsubo to form the sealing ring of polyurethane as taught by Winkelmann because the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07).
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 LAURA E. PARKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6014. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 4:30 pm 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, Nathan Jenness can be reached at 571-270-5055. 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.
/LAURA E. PARKER/Examiner, Art Unit 3733