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
Claims 30, 32, 33, 40 and 41 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species I, II, IV and V, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 07/15/2025.
Applicant’s election without traverse of species III directed towards claims 22-29, 31 and 34-39 in the reply filed on 07/15/2025 is acknowledged.
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: "a control element," "an actuating device" in claim 22; "a movement section" in claim 23; and "a throttling device" in claim 38 .
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.
The “control element” is sufficiently described in the specification as a slide/piston (see paragraphs 67, 20, 40, 9).
The “actuating device” is sufficiently described in the specification as an electromagnetic or fluidic drive (see paragraphs 31-33 and 76-80).
The “movement section” is sufficiently described in the specification as a part of an actuator (see paragraphs 18-19 and 73).
The “throttling device” is sufficiently described in the disclosure as a throttle (see paragraphs 99, 154 and figs. 5-6).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 22-24, 27-29, 31, 34, 35 and 37-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Greenawalt (US 3032312 A).
In regards to claim 22, Greenawalt discloses a directional valve (reversing valve 12, 40, 47, fig. 1), comprising: a base body (12, 13, 34, 35) having at least two fluid connections (36, 37, tube 11 and ports 14, 15, 16); a control element (pistons 31, 32) that is designed to be switched between at least two switching positions (pistons 31, 32 at the end caps 34, 35 or away from end caps 34, 35, see fig. 1), wherein a passage of flow between the fluid connections (flow between tube 11 and port 14, see fig. 1) is enabled in one switching position of the at least two switching positions (see displaced position of piston 31 from end 36, fig. 1) and
wherein the passage of flow between the fluid connections is blocked in another switching position (piston structures 31’ and 32’ blocking ports 36, 37, see col. 2, line 38 – col. 3, lines 9, and fig. 1) of the at least two switching positions (at least one of ports 36. 37 blocked/shut off, see fig. 1);
an actuator structure (armature 46, solenoid 47, closure member 45 and valve 40, see fig. 1) with a jolt property (moving/displacing armature due to high pressure refrigerant and solenoid 47), wherein the actuator structure is designed to switch the control element using the jolt property (pistons 31, 32 moved by solenoid 47 and high pressure fluid flow through tubes 38, 41, see fig. 1 and col. 2, lines 38-65); and
an actuating device (solenoid 47, closure member 45 and valve 40 with tubes 38, 41, see fig. 1) for actuating the actuator structure (energizing or deenergizing solenoid to displace armature 46 and closure member 45, see fig. 1 and col. 2, lines 46-58).
In regards to claim 23, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 22 and further discloses that the actuator structure is arranged to a side of the control element (armature 46 and solenoid 47 coupled to the fluid connections 36, 37 on the sides of the pistons 31, 32, see fig. 1) and has a movement section (armature 46 and valve closure member 45) that can be moved in a direction of movement of the control element (armature 46 and valve closure member 45 move in the same direction as pistons 31, 32) and that executes a movement that switches the control element upon a jolt of the actuator structure (control piston displaced away from the rest positions at ports 36, 37, see fig. 1, due to a jolt of a solenoid).
In regards to claim 24, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 22 and further discloses that the actuator structure comprises or consists of a flexible material (spring within armature 46, see col. 2, lines 49-51) and has an unstable movement behavior (spring of armature 46, which displaces closure member 45 and armature 46 under spring tension, see fig. 1 and col. 2, lines 40-55).
In regards to claim 27, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 22 and further discloses that the actuator structure has a monostable movement behavior (armature 46 with a single spring biased position, see col. 2, lines 46-55) and wherein the actuating device is arranged to exert an actuating force on the actuator structure that triggers a jolt (solenoid 47 in energized or deenergized states displace armature 46 and closure member 45, see fig. 1 and col. 2, lines 46-58; to move pistons 31, 32 by solenoid 47 and high pressure fluid flow through tubes 38, 41, see fig. 1 and col. 2, lines 38-65), wherein the actuating device is further designed to exert a holding force on the actuator structure (ports 42 43 opened by holding force exerted by actuating solenoid 47, see fig. 1), in order to hold the actuator structure in an extended position and/or shape after the jolt (see open positions of ports 42, 43 and displaced position of valve member 31 away from valve port 36, fig. 1).
In regards to claim 28, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 22 and further discloses that the actuator structure has a bistable movement behavior (armature 46 with a single spring biased position, where valve closure member 45 is actuated, and another spring position, under which valve closure member 45 is not actuated, see col. 2, lines 46-55 and fig. 1) and wherein the actuating device is designed to exert an actuating force on the actuator structure (solenoid 47 in energized or deenergized states displace armature 46 and closure member 45, see fig. 1 and col. 2, lines 46-58; to move pistons 31, 32 by solenoid 47 and high pressure fluid flow through tubes 38, 41, see fig. 1 and col. 2, lines 38-65), in order to trigger a jolt (movement/displacement) from a first mechanically stable position and/or shape into a second mechanically stable position and/or shape (solenoid 47 displaces valve closure member 45 and armature 46 to energized position from stable de-energized position, see fig. 1 and col. 2, line 46 – col. 3, line 14), wherein the actuating device (at least solenoid 47) is furthermore designed to generate a further actuating force directed in an opposite direction to the actuating force, in order to trigger a further jolt of the actuator structure from the second mechanically stable position and/or shape back into the first mechanically stable position and/or shape by the further actuating force (solenoid 47 displacing valve closure member 45 and armature 46 to de-energized position, where piston 32 would move opposite to fig. 1, from stable energized position to stable de-energized position, see col. 3, lines 10-14).
In regards to claim 29, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 22 and further discloses that a spring element (armature 46 with spring, see col. 2, lines 46-55 and fig. 1), against a force of which the control element (pistons 31, 32) is moved by the actuator structure (46, 47) upon switching (pistons 31, 32 displaced towards and/or away from valve ports 36, 37 respectively due to energized and/or de-energized solenoid 47 under the force of spring biased armature 46, see fig. 1 and col. 2, lines 39-65).
In regards to claim 31, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 22 and further discloses that the actuating device has an electromagnetic drive (electromagnetic solenoid 47), configured to exert an actuating force on the actuator structure (armature 46, solenoid 47, closure member 45 and valve 40, see fig. 1) that triggers a jolt (triggers movement/displacement of valve closure member 45 and armature 46).
In regards to claim 34, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 22 and further discloses that the directional valve (12) is a 4/2-way valve with four fluid connections (port connected to tube 11 and ports 14, 15, 16, see fig. 1; with two ports as output ports) and the control element (pistons 31, 32) is arranged to be switched between two switching positions (pistons 31, 32 at end caps 34, 35 blocking ports 36, 37 or displaced from the end caps, see fig. 1), of which in one switching position (see fig. 1) the fluid connections (ports 14, 15, 16, and port at tube 11) are flow-connected to one another in pairs (port at tube 11 and chamber 13 connected to port 14, see fig. 1) and in the other switching position a fluid connection of one pair is interchanged with a fluid connection of another pair (port 16 connected with port 14 and port at tube 11 and chamber 13 connected to port 15, see col. 2, lines 16-37).
In regards to claim 35, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 34 and further discloses that the base body has a fluid chamber (chamber 13) and the fluid connections are flow-connected to the fluid chamber (port at tube 11 and ports 14, 15, 16 within chamber 13, see fig. 1), wherein one of the fluid connections is arranged on one side of the base body (port at tube 11) extending in a direction of displacement of the control element (see fig. 1) and the other fluid connections are arranged on an opposite side of the base body (ports 14, 15, 16 opposite to port at tube 11), and wherein the fluid chamber (13 and member 27) is divided by the control element (31, 32) into two sub- chambers (13, 27), via which, depending on the switching position of the control element (displacement of pistons 31, 32), the fluid connections are flow- connected to one another in pairs (ports 14, 15, 16 and port at tube 11, see fig. 1 and col. 2, lines 16-37).
In regards to claim 37, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 22 and further discloses that the control element is a piston slide (pistons 31, 32, see fig. 1).
In regards to claim 38, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 34 and further discloses a heat pump (compressor 10, heat exchangers HX 18, HX 20, see fig. 1) for heating or cooling spaces (HX 18, 20, heating or cooling room, see col. 1, line 66 – col. 2, line 5), comprising: a compressor (compressor 10), a throttling device (flow restricting device 19, see fig. 1)20), a first heat exchanger (heat exchanger 18, see fig. 1), and a second heat exchanger (heat exchanger 20, see fig. 1) arranged in a circuit (see fig. 1); and the directional valve (reversing valve 12, see fig. 1).
In regards to claim 39, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 38 and further discloses that the compressor, the throttling device, the first heat exchanger and the second heat exchanger are arranged in the circuit in the following order: first heat exchanger (heat exchanger 18), compressor (compressor 10), second heat exchanger (heat exchanger 20), throttling device (flow restricting device 19, see fig. 1), wherein, further, the directional valve (reversing valve 12) is integrated into the circuit (see fig. 1) between the compressor (10) and the first heat exchanger (valve 12 between compressor 10 and heat exchanger 18, see fig. 1) via one pair of its fluid connections (via port 14) and into the circuit between the compressor and the second heat exchanger (valve 12 also between compressor 10 and heat exchanger 18, see fig. 1) via the other pair of its fluid connections (via ports 15, 16, see fig. 1).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenawalt as applied to claim 22 and further in view of Skorka (US 4726747 A).
In regards to claim 25, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 22 except that the actuator structure comprises or is formed from a rubber-elastic material.
However, Skorka teaches an actuator structure (piston 18) comprises or is formed from a rubber-elastic material (rubber-elastic sleeve 26, see fig. 2 and col. 5, lines 1-4).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the actuator of Greenawalt by providing a rubber-elastic material sleeve based on the teachings of Skorka in order to allow the piston to adopt a closing position with the pretension of the compression sleeve and curvature (see col. 6, lines 5-11, Skorka).
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenawalt as applied to claim 22 and further in view of Hufenbach (US 2016/0201755 A1).
In regards to claim 26, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 22 except that the actuator has a curvature that changes from a convex shape to a concave shape or vice versa during a jolt.
However, Hufenbach discloses an actuator structure (piston 60) that has a curvature that changes from a convex shape to a concave shape or vice versa (see shape of wall 61 changing to convex and concave shapes, figs. 12-13 and paragraph 164) during a jolt (with movement of the piston walls 61 change shape, see figs. 12-13).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided an actuator structure that has a curvature that changes from a convex shape to a concave shape or vice versa during a jolt as taught by Hufenbach to the directional valve of Greenawalt in order to conserve space by shortening the spring travel distance and compensating the energy absorption capacity of the spring by changing the shape of the actuator structure (see paragraphs 6-8, Hufenbach).
Claim(s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenawalt as applied to claim 35 and further in view of Aoki (US 4,644,760 A).
In regards to claim 36, Greenawalt teaches the limitations of claim 35 and further discloses that the fluid chamber (chamber 13) is formed in an interior chamber (between pistons 31, 32 and above plate 30, see fig. 1) of the base body (see fig. 1), and wherein the part of the interior chamber is delimited from the fluid chamber (13) in a fluid-tight manner by the control element (pistons 31, 32 separate the valve ports from fluid chamber 13, see fig. 1).
However, Greenwalt does not explicitly teach that the actuator is arranged in an interior chamber.
Aoki further teaches an interior chamber (R1, R2) of the base body (1), and wherein the actuator structure (piston 12, spring 13 and member 3) is arranged in a receiving region (spring 13/piston 12 within R2) of the interior chamber (see fig. 1), which is delimited from the fluid chamber (R1 or 21a separate from R2) in a fluid-tight manner by the control element (R1 and R2 separated by piston 22 and piston 12, see fig. 1).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the directional valve of Greenwalt by providing an interior chamber within the base body such that the actuator structure is arranged in a receiving region of the interior chamber, which is delimited from the fluid chamber in a fluid-tight manner by the control element as taught by Aoki to the directional valve of Greenawalt in order to improve efficiency of the directional valve by reducing the number of moving parts connecting the actuator to the control elements and the valve interior chamber and ports.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MERAJ A SHAIKH whose telephone number is (571)272-3027. The examiner can normally be reached on M-R 9:00-1:00 pm.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached on 571-270-7740. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MERAJ A SHAIKH/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JIANYING C ATKISSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763