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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/16/25 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-6, 8-11 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buechel et al. DE 102018129960 A1 in view of Wagner et al. US 2016/0363240.
Regarding claim 1, Buechel discloses a valve (66 and the figures), comprising:
a valve housing (at 10) having a valve opening 14, 24;
a closing member 12, 20 for closing the valve opening;
a valve drive (30, paragraph [0044]) that moves the closing member to and fro between a closed position, in which the closing member closes the valve opening, and an open position, in which the closing member fully or partially opens the valve opening the closing member is connected to the valve drive by a valve rod (at 12), and
the closing member is removably fastened or fastenable to the valve rod by a releasable connecting device 36, 42; and
the releasable connecting device has a fastening magnet (56, [0049]) for removably fastening the closing member to the valve rod via magnetic attraction forces ([0044]-[0051]).
Buechel lacks a seal that seals the valve rod against the closing member. Wagner discloses a seal 35 or 26a that seals the valve rod 11 against the closing member 10. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a seal as disclosed by Wagner to seal the valve rod against the closing member of Buechel as it is beneficial to providing a seal at a connection between two pieces to make it fluid-tight to keep harmful fluid out.
Regarding claim 2, Buechel discloses a) the fastening magnet is arranged on at least one of the valve rod (56 is on 12) and b) the fastening magnet is a permanent magnet or an electromagnet ([0046], 56 are permanent magnets).
Regarding claim 3, Buechel discloses an electrically driven release device that is adapted to release the connection between the closing member and the valve rod ([0046], the electromagnet on 12 provides a counter-magnetic field to cancel the effect of the permanent magnets).
Regarding claim 4, Buechel discloses the release device comprises a counter-magnet for weakening or eliminating the magnetic attraction forces of the fastening magnet ([0046], the counter-magnet ([0046], “the lock actuating element 12 comprises at least one electromagnet for generating a counter magnetic field. The counter magnetic field is intended to at least temporarily cancel an attractive force effect of the permanent magnets of the lock actuating element 12 on the opening elements 20, 22”).
Regarding claim 5, Buechel discloses the counter-magnet is arranged on at least one of the valve rod ([0046].
Regarding claim 6, Buechel discloses the valve is an L-shaped valve (Figs.1-3).
Regarding claim 8, Buechel discloses on a side of the closing member facing away from the valve rod, the valve housing has a closable housing opening for extraction of the closing member from the valve housing (Figs. 1-2, transport chamber 28 allows this).
Regarding claim 9, Buechel discloses for orienting the closing member on the valve rod, respective form-fit elements are formed on the valve rod and on the closing member ([0015], “… a positive connection between the opening element and the lock actuating element is established…”.
Regarding claims 9-10, Buechel lacks the form-fit element on the valve rod extends at least partly into the closing member and cooperates with the form-fit element on the closing member to orient the closing member on the valve rod. Wagner discloses form-fit element (center part of 52, 53 on either side of 55 in Figs. 5a-5b) on the valve rod 52, 53 extends at least partly into the closing member (24 and 58 in Fig. 5a and 23 and 32 in Fig. 5b) and cooperates with the form-fit element (in Fig. 5a, the part that 58 is screwed into and in Fig. 5b, the springs which are 36) on the closing member to orient the closing member on the valve rod. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Buechel to include form-fit elements on the valve rod and closing member as disclosed by Wagner such that the valve rod extends partly into the closing member as a matter of simple substitution of elements to keep the movement of the closing member to the valve rod inline.
Regarding claim 11, Buechel discloses the closing member is a valve disc (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 14, Buechel discloses wherein the counter-magnet is an electromagnet [0046].
Regarding claim 15, Buechel discloses wherein the valve opening has an opening cross-sectional area of at least 6000 mm2.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buechel et al. DE 102018129960 A1 in view of Wagner et al. US 2016/0363240 in view of Shimoda et al. US 2020/0400238.
Regarding claim 7, Buechel lacks the closing member has an adapter for at least one of manual removal of the closing member from the valve rod or manual fastening of the closing member to the valve rod. Shimoda discloses the closing member has an adapter for at least one of manual removal of the closing member from the valve rod or manual fastening of the closing member to the valve rod (Fig. 13, gripping tool 25b, [0076]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Buechel to have an adapter to allow manual removal/fastening of the closing member to the valve rod as disclosed by Shimoda as a matter of simple substitution of removal/fastening features and/or to provide a way to manually remove/fasten in case of need or failure of the magnets or counter magnets of Buechel.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buechel et al. DE 102018129960 A1 in view of Wagner et al. US 2016/0363240 in view of Wagner US 6,427,973.
Regarding claims 9-10, Buechel lacks the form-fit element on the valve rod extends at least partly into the closing member and cooperates with the form-fit element on the closing member to orient the closing member on the valve rod. Wagner ‘973 discloses form-fit element 10 on the valve rod 1 extends at least partly into the closing member 7 and 11 and cooperates with the form-fit element 9 on the closing member to orient the closing member on the valve rod. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Buechel to include form-fit elements on the valve rod and closing member as disclosed by Wagner ‘973 as well as a bellows to the closing member of Buechel such that the valve rod extends partly into the closing member as a matter of simple substitution of elements to keep the movement of the closing member to the valve rod inline and the bellows protects the valve rod.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buechel et al. DE 102018129960 A1 in view of Wagner et al. US 2016/0363240 in view of Duelli US 6,899,316.
Regarding claims 9-10, Buechel lacks the form-fit element on the valve rod extends at least partly into the closing member and cooperates with the form-fit element on the closing member to orient the closing member on the valve rod. Duelli discloses form-fit element 14 on the valve rod 29 extends at least partly into the closing member 3 and cooperates with the form-fit element (thread in 3 that attaches to 14) on the closing member to orient the closing member on the valve rod. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Buechel to include form-fit elements on the valve rod and closing member as disclosed by Duelli such that the valve rod extends partly into the closing member as a matter of simple substitution of elements to keep the movement of the closing member to the valve rod inline.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buechel et al. DE 102018129960 A1 in view of Wagner et al. US 2016/0363240 in view of Sawa et al. US 5,087,017.
Regarding claims 9-10, Buechel lacks the form-fit element on the valve rod extends at least partly into the closing member and cooperates with the form-fit element on the closing member to orient the closing member on the valve rod. Sawa discloses form-fit element 322 on the valve rod (inner 2) extends at least partly into the closing member 301 and cooperates with the form-fit element (indent on 301 at 322) on the closing member to orient the closing member on the valve rod. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Buechel to include form-fit elements on the valve rod and closing member as disclosed by Sawa such that the valve rod extends partly into the closing member as a matter of simple substitution of elements to keep the movement of the closing member to the valve rod inline.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buechel et al. DE 102018129960 A1 in view of Wagner et al. US 2016/0363240.
Regarding claim 15, Buechel lacks the valve opening has an opening cross-sectional area of at least 6000 mm2. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the valve opening of Buechel have an opening cross-sectional area of at least 6000 mm2 as “obvious to try” this size with a reasonable expectation of success and/or to make this size as an obvious design choice.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 16 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The primary reason for the allowance of claim 16 is a combination of a valve and a separate extraction tool having the combination of the separate extraction tool having a counter magnet that weakens the magnetic attraction forces of the releasable connecting device so the closing member is removable from the valve rod in combination with the rest of the claim as cited in claim 16.
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.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 12/16/25 regarding the 102 rejection to Buechel are persuasive as claim 16 has been amended to be allowable.
Applicant’s arguments, see the 103 rejections of Buechel in view of Contin, filed 12/16/25, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-11 and 14-15 under Buechel in view of Contin and others have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Buechel in view of Wagner et al. US 2016/0363240 and in view of others for some claims. The previous arguments were to Buechel of view of Contin such that the examiner cannot respond to the arguments filed as they are based on Contin modifying Buechel. The examiner would like to point out that using a seal between two connected pieces is rather obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Grandage discloses a seal that seals the valve rod against the closing member.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN BASTIANELLI whose telephone number is (571)272-4921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-4921 or Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/John Bastianelli/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
571-272-4921