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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 18 Sept 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims, the Specification and the Drawings overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 18 June 2025.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al (CN112682541A provided by the Applicant on the IDS dated 12 Dec 2023 with references taken from the Examiner provided English Machine Translation) in view of Scaramucci (US 3705707).
Regarding Claim 1, Zhang et al disclose a control valve (Figure 1). The control valve comprising:
a valve body (11 generally) and valve cores (Figure 1; 15 and 16), wherein
the valve cores (15 and 16) comprise a first valve core (15) and a second valve core (16), the control valve (Figure 1) has a first chamber (12 of the "two valve cavities" of page 5, line 14) and a second chamber (12 of the "two valve cavities" of page 5, line 14) in communication with each other (via 47 shown in Figure 3), the first chamber and the second chamber (each 12 shown in Figure 3) are arranged along a direction intersecting with a height direction of the control valve (see Annotated Figure A where the first and second chamber are arranged next to each other in a direction that intersects the height direction) at least part of the first valve core (15) is arranged in the first chamber and is rotatable (12 to the right as seen in Figure 2 and rotatable via 40 and 45), and at least part of the second valve core (16) is arranged in the second chamber and is rotatable (to the left as seen in Figure 2 and rotatable via 40);
the valve body (11 generally) comprises a bottom wall portion (see Annotated Figure A), a first position-limiting portion (see Annotated Figure A), and a second position-limiting portion (see Annotated Figure A), the bottom wall portion is located at a side of the valve cores in an axial direction of the valve cores (at the bottom of the valve cores as seen in the Annotated Figure A which is axially downward of the valve cores as shown in the orientation of the Annotated Figure A), the first position-limiting portion is fixedly connected to the bottom wall portion (see Annotated Figure A where the first position-limiting portion is integral with and therefore limiting portion is fixedly connected to the bottom wall portion), the second position-limiting portion is fixedly connected to the bottom wall portion (see Annotated Figure A where the first position-limiting portion is integral with and therefore limiting portion is fixedly connected to the bottom wall portion), the first valve core (15) comprises a first matching portion (40) that is in position-limiting fit with the first position-limiting portion (by being inserted within the first position-limiting portion as shown in Annotated Figure A), and the second valve core (16) comprises a second matching portion (40) that is in position-limiting fit with the second position-limiting portion (portion (by being inserted within the first position-limiting portion as shown in Annotated Figure A);
and wherein a main body of the first valve core (16) is of a spherical structure (Figure 1; page 5, line 41), the first valve core (15) is configured to be deflected relative to the first position-limiting portion (by rotation of the valve about 40 and therefore about the first position-limiting portion shown in Annotated Figure A), and there is an angle between an axis of the first valve core and an axis of a chamber wall of the first chamber (Figure 2 shows the axis of the first valve core 15 to be generally up and down and Figure 3 shows a chamber wall that transitions from the bottom to the side wall, thereby creating an angle between the axis of the first valve core and the chamber wall; see Annotated Figure A);
and wherein a main body of the second valve core (15) is of a spherical structure (Figure 1; page 5, line 41), the second valve core (16) is configured to be deflected relative to the second position-limiting portion (by rotation of the valve about 40 and therefore about the second position-limiting portion shown in Annotated Figure A), and there is an angle between an axis of the second valve core and an axis of a chamber wall of the second chamber (Figure 2 shows the axis of the second valve core 16 to be generally up and down and Figure 3 shows a chamber wall that transitions from the bottom to the side wall, thereby creating an angle between the axis of the second valve core and the chamber wall; see Annotated Figure A),
but fails to expressly disclose the first valve core is configured to be deflected relative to the first position-limiting portion in a plane where the height direction of the control valve is located, so that there is an angle between an axis of the first valve core and an axis of a chamber wall of the first chamber and/or the second valve core is configured to be deflected relative to the second position-limiting portion in the plane where the height direction of the control valve is located, so that there is an angle between an axis of the second valve core and an axis of a chamber wall of the second chamber.
Scaramucci teaches a spherical valve structure (Figure 6) with a positioning limiting portion (214) provided on the bottom wall of the valve housing (Figure 6) and a matching portion (216) providing on the valve core (112) where the valve core (112) is configured to be deflected relative to the first position-limiting portion in a plane where the height direction of the control valve is located (Col 8, lines 13-20; where the height direction is disclosed as the longitudinal direction), so that there is an angle between an axis of the first valve core and an axis of a chamber wall of the first chamber (a chamber wall that transitions from the bottom to the side wall, thereby creating an angle between the axis of the second valve core and the chamber wall; also Figure 6 discloses an angle of approximately 90 degrees).
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 valve of Zhang et al with the positioning limiting portion and matching portion as taught by Scaramucci for the advantage of allowing longitudinal movement of the valve within the bore (Col 8, lines 13-20) to provide for self-alignment of the valve during assembly (Col 2, lines 21-24).
PNG
media_image1.png
508
1107
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure A
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-20 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment has overcome the rejection of record. However, a new ground of rejection is applied to the amended claims.
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 NICOLE GARDNER whose telephone number is (571)270-0144. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM-4PM 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 supervisors, KENNETH RINEHART (571-272-4881) or CRAIG SCHNEIDER (571-272-3607) can be reached by telephone. 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.
/NICOLE GARDNER/
Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/REINALDO SANCHEZ-MEDINA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753