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 .
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Return system in claims 1, 9 and 16
Transmission part in claim 9
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Estachy US 2019/0209950.
Claim 1, Estachy teaches a filter comprising a casing (110) and a plurality of filtering elements (10) stacked between a first cover (60) and a second cover (50), the first cover rests against the casing in a stacking direction of the filtering elements, the filter further comprises a cover backing (52) coupled to the second cover by a return system configured to return the second cover towards the first cover, wherein the cover backing rests against the casing in the stacking direction and the second cover separates a zone of the casing adapted to receive filtered fluid from a zone of the casing adapted to receive fluid to filter (fig. 1-12).
Claims 2-8, Estachy further teaches the cover backing is openwork (fig. 3); the first and second covers include a gasket (fig. 4, 12); the return system comprises at least one return assembly, the at least one return assembly comprising a spring (56) and a stressing member (56a) for applying stress on the spring (fig. 3-6); a sleeve (34a) extending from the first cover to the second cover (fig. 4); the sleeve has a keyed connection (threads) with the first cover (fig. 4); the sleeve has a circumferential groove (on which bolts fit) at a side of the second cover opposite the filtering elements (fig. 4); and the first cover comprises a key (34a) for mounting one of the plurality of filtering elements in a given position with respect to the first cover (fig. 1-4).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/26/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the cover backing of Estachy does not rest against the casing in the stacking direction, as seen in figure 12 below.
Applicant argues that second cover does not separate the clean zone from the dirty zone. In figure 4 of Estachy, the second cover (50) at (57) forms a seal with the cover backing (52) to separate a zone that receives fluid to be filtered (within 98) from a zone to receive filtered fluid (the zone between the stack and the casing).
PNG
media_image1.png
550
627
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-15 and 16-21 allowed.
Claim 15 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 9, Estachy teaches a method for assembling a filter comprising: stacking a plurality of filtering elements (10) between a first cover (60) and a second cover (50), connecting a transmission part (34a) to the first cover, coupling a cover backing (52) to the second cover via a return system, wherein the return system is configured to return the second cover towards the first cover, prestressing the return system and fastening the cover backing to the transmission part, mounting the plurality of filtering element in a casing such that the first cover rests against the casing in a stacking direction of the filtering elements, where the second cover separates a zone of the casing adapted to receive filtered fluid from a zone of the casing adapted to receive fluid to filter (at 57) (fig. 1-12). Estachy does not teach at least partially detaching the cover backing from the transmission part, such that the cover backing rests against the casing in the stacking direction nor would it have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Estachy to arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim 16, Estachy teaches a filter comprising a casing having a shoulder (at 60), a first cover (60) and a second cover (50) that are spaced apart from one another in a stacking direction, a plurality of filtering elements (10) stacked between the first and second covers in the stacking direction, the first cover resting against the casing in the stacking direction, a cover backing (52) coupled to the second cover by a return system configured to return the second cover towards the first cover, the second cover that is coupled to the cover backing by the return system separating a zone of the casing configured to receive filtered fluid from a zone of the casing configured to receive fluid to filter (at 57) (fig. 1-12). Estachy does not teach the cover backing resting against the shoulder of the casing the stacking direction to form a stop against movement of the cover backing in the stacking direction nor would it have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Estachy to arrive at the claimed invention.
Claim 15, Estachy teaches the cover backing rests against an inwardly projecting shoulder of the casing (fig. 12) but does not teach forming a stop against movement of the cover backing in the stacking direction nor would it have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Estachy to arrive at the claimed invention.
The additional claims are allowable as depending from one of the above claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN M KURTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8211. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at 571-270-3240. 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.
/BENJAMIN M KURTZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights