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/Arguments
This office action is in response to applicant’s reply filed 2/19/26. Amended Claims 11, 15, 16, 18-20 are pending, with Claims 15-16, 18-20 withdrawn.
Regarding the previous drawing objections, these have been remedied by the replacement drawings.
Regarding the previous 112(b) rejection, this has been remedied by the claim amendments.
Regarding the previous prior art rejection, applicant argues (begin excerpt/):
PNG
media_image1.png
466
644
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(/end excerpt)
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. As previously presented and repeated here, in applicant’s disclosure (10/13/23 specification titled “Substitute Specification For National Phase Submission Clean Version”) on p. 11, lines 7-10 recite (begin excerpt/):
PNG
media_image2.png
114
694
media_image2.png
Greyscale
(/end excerpt)
The screw-in part 34 is shown in the Figure:
PNG
media_image3.png
310
460
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In CN966 (Mao in applicant’s arguments), annotated “A” is the equivalent interface and appears to show threads, equivalent to applicant’s depiction in the figure of threads, for screwing in. “B” is a threaded connection (ex. [0043]) while “A” is less clear as the description at [0047] references “bolts” which is less clear but the drawing appears to show threads.
PNG
media_image4.png
770
492
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Applicant argues (begin excerpt/):
PNG
media_image5.png
120
644
media_image5.png
Greyscale
(/end excerpt)
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Applicant has not provided a special definition of “closure part” (MPEP 2173.01, 2173.05(a) III, and 2111.01 IV). Volz teaches a “closure part” 14, in example Fig. 1:
PNG
media_image6.png
452
484
media_image6.png
Greyscale
and described for example as (begin excerpt/):
PNG
media_image7.png
636
964
media_image7.png
Greyscale
(/end excerpt)
Applicant argues (begin excerpt/)
PNG
media_image8.png
382
630
media_image8.png
Greyscale
(/end excerpt)
Examiner agrees the prior combination of references has been overcome by the amended claim language. Please see the following action for treatment of the amended claim language.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
Claim 11 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over CN 108252966 (on applicant’s IDS), hereinafter CN966, in view of Piquerez et al. (US 3683615) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over CN966 in view of Piquerez and Kleinen (WO 2015155290, machine translation previously attached).
Examiner note: CN966 is a foreign document. The drawings and translation are both less clear for certain elements. In an effort to expedite examination and promote compact prosecution, the separate 103 rejections are made below.
Regarding Claim 11, CN966 teaches
A piston accumulator, having a separating element (piston, annotated) which is movably arranged in an accumulator housing (annotated) and which separates two media chambers (gas and liquid) from each other, and having a displacement measuring device (annotated) for monitoring the position of the separating element; wherein
the displacement measuring device (annotated) is configured as a radar unit having a transmitter which transmits a primary signal which, at least partially reflected by the separating element, generates a secondary signal which, when received by a receiver, enables to determine a position for the separating element in the accumulator housing;
the accumulator housing forms a round hollow cylinder in the form of a cylinder tube, which is closed at two opposite ends by two screwed-in housing covers (annotated);
the radar unit is arranged at one of the housing covers (as shown);
a separating piston (annotated) is guided between the two housing covers within the accumulator housing as the separating element, which separating piston has an annular seal (as annotated) on an outer circumference and which is provided with a cavity;
the cavity helps to volumetrically enlarge a media chamber on a gas side of the piston accumulator compared to an other media chamber on the liquid side;
the transmitter and the receiver of the radar unit are combined in a structural unit, which structural unit is screwed into the one housing cover using a screw-in part (as annotated);
the one housing cover having a hollow duct (as annotated) which optically or signal-conductingly connects the radar unit to the media chamber on the gas side;
a closure part (as annotated) is arranged in the hollow duct of the one housing cover, which closure part which is permeable to the signals of the radar unit, the closure part being arranged between the structural unit and an adjacent media chamber; and
wherein the closure part is formed from a glass or ceramic window, which is inserted as a cylindrical insert into a corresponding recess in the one housing cover and is sealed to the outside via a sealing ring (as annotated) against the inside of the screwed-in housing cover.
PNG
media_image9.png
682
1470
media_image9.png
Greyscale
CN966 does not teach
wherein the annular sealing ring is housed in a circumferential groove of the closure part.
Piquerez teaches
For a closure part, wherein the closure part is formed from a glass or ceramic window (2), which is inserted as a cylindrical insert into a corresponding recess in a housing cover (1) and is sealed to the outside via a sealing ring (3) against the inside of the screwed-in housing cover,
wherein the annular sealing ring (3) is housed in a circumferential groove (5) of the closure part.
“...a glass 2 by means of an O-ring 3 engaging a pair of facing grooves 4, 5 formed in the bezel-frame 1 and glass 2 so as to interlock these members while sealing the joint therebetween and, on the other hand, an inner ring 1a.” (Col. 1, lines 65-Col. 2, line 2).
Since both references are directed to closure parts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the closure part of CN966 to also include an annular sealing ring housed in a circumferential groove of the closure part as taught by Piquerez in order to provide interlocking between the grooves while sealing the joint therebetween. Piquerez teaches using this in conjunction with another seal (1a), like the seal in CN966. The seal (3) taught by Piquerez provides the added benefit of positively locating the closure part within the housing cover through interlocking; through the presence of two seals redundancy in sealing is provided as well.
Alternatively:
Examiner note: The drawing of CN966 is not of optimal quality such that the material of the closure part and the threaded nature of the radar unit/structural unit are somewhat difficult to discern; likewise the sealing ring is somewhat difficult to discern.
CN966 does not teach (please see examiner notes above)
which structural unit is screwed into the one housing cover using a screw-in part
wherein the closure part is formed from a glass or ceramic window, which is inserted as a cylindrical insert into a corresponding recess in the one housing cover and is sealed to the outside via a sealing ring against the inside of the screwed-in housing cover, wherein the annular sealing ring is housed in a circumferential groove of the closure part.
Kleinen teaches
For a piston accumulator (ex. p. 1 of translation),
screwed into the one housing cover using a screw-in part (28 for 29, Figs. 4-6),
wherein the closure part is formed from a glass or ceramic window (26), which is inserted as a cylindrical insert into a corresponding recess in the one housing cover.
Piquerez teaches
For a closure part, wherein the closure part is formed from a glass or ceramic window (2), which is inserted as a cylindrical insert into a corresponding recess in a housing cover (1) and is sealed to the outside via a sealing ring (3) against the inside of the screwed-in housing cover,
wherein the annular sealing ring (3) is housed in a circumferential groove (5) of the closure part.
“...a glass 2 by means of an O-ring 3 engaging a pair of facing grooves 4, 5 formed in the bezel-frame 1 and glass 2 so as to interlock these members while sealing the joint therebetween and, on the other hand, an inner ring 1a.” (Col. 1, lines 65-Col. 2, line 2).
Since both CN966 and Kleinen references are directed to sensors and accumulators, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structural unit of CN966 to be threaded and formed from glass or ceramic as taught by Kleinen in order to provide an appropriate type of manner of securing the structural unit in the cover that would perform with predictable results and appropriate material that would perform with predictable results. Since both references are directed to closure parts, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the closure part of CN966 to also include an annular sealing ring housed in a circumferential groove of the closure part as taught by Piquerez in order to provide interlocking between the grooves while sealing the joint therebetween. Piquerez teaches using this in conjunction with another seal (1a). The seal (3) taught by Piquerez provides the added benefit of positively locating the closure part within the housing cover through interlocking; through the presence of two seals redundancy in sealing is provided as well.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Van Ham teaches elements of the instant invention related to a sealing ring.
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 MICHAEL QUANDT whose telephone number is (571)272-1247. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday-Thursday 9-3pm (part-time).
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, NATHANIEL WIEHE can be reached at (571)272-8648. 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.
MICHAEL QUANDT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3745
/MICHAEL QUANDT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745