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 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) 1-2, 4-6, 14 and 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. US 2004/0045893 in view of Burns et al. US 2013/0062273 and Pastori US 2017/0030384.
Claim 1, Watanabe teaches a filter assembly comprising: a housing assembly having a common inlet on a high pressure side and a common outlet on a low pressure side, a filter element housing plate (6) positioned within the housing assembly and between the high and low pressure side and the filter element housing plate having female cavities (6a), wherein each female cavity includes a radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface and a ledge (6b) adjacent a distal end of the peripheral side surface extending radially inward of the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface, replaceable filter elements (4) within the filter assembly, each filter element positioned within one of the female cavities and having a proximal endcap (12) with filter media (3a) extending distally from the proximal endcap, wherein the proximal end cap includes an external sealing surface (at 15) engaging the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of an associated female cavity of the filter element housing plate and sealing against the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of the female cavity of the filter element housing plate, wherein the ledge adjacent a distal end of the peripheral side surface of the female cavity provides a stop for the movement of the filter element, wherein each external sealing surface of each end cap includes an outer O-ring seal (15) radially sealing against a side of the female cavity and wherein the O-ring seal is removable with the removal of the filter element (par 79 teaches the O-ring may be located on the end cap) (fig. 1, paragraph 74-80). Watanabe does not teach the housing plate being vertical and the filter elements extending horizontally or a rounded rectangular polygon shape.
Burns teaches a filter assembly comprising: a housing assembly having an inlet (14) on a high pressure side and an outlet (16) on a low pressure side, a filter element housing plate (52) positioned vertically within the housing assembly and between the high pressure side and the low pressure side of the housing assembly and the filter element housing plate having a plurality of female cavities (54), wherein each female cavity includes a radially inwardly facing peripheral surface, a plurality of replaceable filter elements (110) extending horizontally within the housing assembly, each filter element positioned within one of the female cavities and having a proximal endcap with filter media extending distally from the proximal endcap, wherein the proximal endcap includes an external sealing surface (at 30) engaging the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of the female cavity of the filter element housing plate and sealing against the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of the female cavity (fig. 1-1a). The recitation of the housing plate being vertical and the filter elements extending horizontally is a recitation of the relative orientation of the plate and the filter elements. Arranging a housing plate vertically with horizontally extending filter elements is a known orientation in the art and would have been well within the normal capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art. The configuration of the apparatus is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant, In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (1966). The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Pastori teaches a filter assembly comprising: a filter element housing plate (2) having a cavity and a replaceable filter element within the filter assembly, the filter element having an endcap with an integral rounded rectangular polygon shaped sealing surface (11) engaging a peripheral surface of the cavity of the filter element housing plate and sealing against the peripheral surface, wherein each rounded rectangular polygon shaped sealing surface includes an O-ring (11) seal radially sealing against another seal surface (fig. 1-15, par 18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the rounded rectangular polygon shape of Pastori because the shape prevents relative displacement between the container (housing plate) and cartridge which could damage the sealing element (paragraph 8).
Claim 14, Watanabe teaches a filter assembly comprising: a cylindrical filter housing, a common inlet and a common outlet within the filter housing, a filter element housing plate (6) positioned between a high pressure and a low pressure side of the filter housing, the filter element housing plate having female cavities (6a), each female cavity includes a radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface and a ledge (6b) adjacent a distal end of the peripheral side surface extending radially inward of the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface, replaceable filter elements extending within the housing, each filter element is positioned within one of the female cavities and has a proximal end cap (12) with filter media (3a) extending distally from the proximal endcap, wherein the proximal end cap includes an external sealing surface (at 15) engaging the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of an associated female cavity of the filter element housing plate and sealing against the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of the female cavity of the filter element housing plate, wherein the ledge adjacent a distal end of the peripheral side surface of the female cavity provides a stop for the movement of the filter element, wherein each external sealing surface of each end cap includes an outer O-ring seal (15) radially sealing against a side of the female cavity and wherein the O-ring seal is removable with the removal of the filter element (par 79 teaches the O-ring may be located on the end cap) (fig. 1, paragraph 74-80). Watanabe does not teach the housing plate being vertical and the filter elements extending horizontally or a rounded rectangular polygon shape.
Burns teaches a filter assembly comprising: a cylindrical filter housing, a common inlet and a common outlet within the cylindrical filter housing, a filter element housing plate (52) positioned vertically between a high and low pressure side of the filter housing, the filter element housing plate having female cavities, each female cavity (54) includes a radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface, replaceable filter elements (110) extending horizontally within the housing assembly, each filter element positioned within one of the female cavities and having a proximal endcap with filter media extending distally from the proximal endcap, wherein the proximal endcap includes an external sealing surface (at 30) engaging the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of the female cavity of the filter element housing plate and sealing against the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of the female cavity (fig. 1-1a). The recitation of the housing plate being vertical and the filter elements extending horizontally is a recitation of the relative orientation of the plate and the filter elements. Arranging a housing plate vertically with horizontally extending filter elements is a known orientation in the art and would have been well within the normal capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art. The configuration of the apparatus is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant, In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (1966). The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Pastori teaches a filter assembly comprising: a filter element housing plate (2) having a cavity and a replaceable filter element within the filter assembly, the filter element having an endcap with an integral rounded rectangular polygon shaped sealing surface (11) engaging a peripheral surface of the cavity of the filter element housing plate and sealing against the peripheral surface, wherein each rounded rectangular polygon shaped sealing surface includes an O-ring (11) seal radially sealing against another seal surface (fig. 1-15, par 18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the rounded rectangular polygon shape of Pastori because the shape prevents relative displacement between the container (housing plate) and cartridge which could damage the sealing element (paragraph 8).
Claims 2 and 16, Burns further teaches the housing assembly is cylindrical with vertical supports (fig. 1). The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claims 4-6 and 17-18, Watanabe further teaches each endcap has a distal end that would be adjacent the ledge of the female cavity (fig. 1); the housing plate includes at least one latch (16) for each filter element that engages with and secures onto the endcap of the filter element to secure the replaceable filter element in position and each endcap includes a mating element (the upper surface) configured to engage with and secure the latch in an operative position (fig. 1).
Claim(s) 8-9 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. US 2004/0045893 in view of Burns et al. US 2013/0062273, Pastori US 2017/0030384 and Barnwell US 2016/0038862.
Claim 8, Watanabe teaches a filter assembly comprising: a housing assembly having a common inlet on a high pressure side and a common outlet on a low pressure side, a filter element housing plate (6) positioned between the high and low pressure side and the filter element housing plate having female cavities (6a), wherein each female cavity includes a radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface and a ledge (6b) adjacent a distal end of the peripheral side surface extending radially inward of the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface, replaceable filter elements (4) within the filter assembly, each filter element having a proximal endcap (12) with filter media (3a) extending distally from the upper endcap, wherein the upper end cap includes a sealing surface (at 15) engaging the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of an associated female cavity of the filter element housing plate and sealing against the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of the female cavity of the filter element housing plate, and wherein a bottom of the end cap rests against the ledge adjacent a lower end of the peripheral side surface of the female cavity of the filter element housing plate (fig. 1, paragraph 74-80). Watanabe does not teach the housing plate being vertical and the filter elements extending horizontally, a rounded rectangular polygon shape or a circular array of female cavities.
Burns teaches a filter assembly comprising: a housing assembly having an inlet (14) on a high pressure side and an outlet (16) on a low pressure side, a filter element housing plate (52) positioned vertically within the housing assembly and between the high pressure side and the low pressure side of the housing assembly and the filter element housing plate having a plurality of female cavities (54), wherein each female cavity includes a radially inwardly facing peripheral surface, a plurality of replaceable filter elements (110) extending horizontally within the housing assembly, each filter element positioned within one of the female cavities and having a proximal endcap with filter media extending distally from the proximal endcap, wherein the proximal endcap includes an external sealing surface (at 30) engaging the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of the female cavity of the filter element housing plate and sealing against the radially inwardly facing peripheral side surface of the female cavity (fig. 1-1a). The recitation of the housing plate being vertical and the filter elements extending horizontally is a recitation of the relative orientation of the plate and the filter elements. Arranging a housing plate vertically with horizontally extending filter elements is a known orientation in the art and would have been well within the normal capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art. The configuration of the apparatus is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant, In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (1966). The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Pastori teaches a filter assembly comprising: a filter element housing plate (2) having a cavity and a replaceable filter element within the filter assembly, the filter element having an endcap with an integral rounded rectangular polygon shaped sealing surface (11) engaging a peripheral surface of the cavity of the filter element housing plate and sealing against the peripheral surface, wherein each rounded rectangular polygon shaped sealing surface includes an O-ring (11) seal radially sealing against another seal surface (fig. 1-15, par 18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the rounded rectangular polygon shape of Pastori because the shape prevents relative displacement between the container (housing plate) and cartridge which could damage the sealing element (paragraph 8).
Barnwell teaches a filter assembly comprising: a filter element housing plate (20) comprising an inner and outer circular array of female cavities (74) configured to receive a replaceable filter element therein (fig. 1-16). The use of circular arrays of cavities is well-known in the art as demonstrated by Barnwell and would have been well within the normal capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim 9, Barnwell further teaches an inner array of four female cavities and outer array of female cavities (fig. 16).
Claims 11-12, Watanabe further teaches the housing plate includes at least one latch (16) for each filter element that engages with and secures onto the endcap of the filter element to secure the replaceable filter element in position and each endcap includes a mating element (the upper surface) configured to engage with and secure the latch in an operative position (fig. 1).
Claim(s) 7 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. US 2004/0045893 in view of Burns et al. US 2013/0062273 and Pastori US 2017/0030384 as applied to claims 6 and 14 above, and further in view of Burns et al. US 2013/0025246.
Claims 7 and 19, Watanbe does not teach each endcap includes a handle.
Burns ‘246 teaches a endcap (12) including a handle (fig. 1, 3). The use of handles is well-known in the art as demonstrated by Burns ‘246 and would have been well within the normal capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Claim 20, Burns ‘273 further teaches the filter element housing plate includes an inner and outer array of female cavities (fig. 1).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. US 2004/0045893 in view of Burns et al. US 2013/0062273, Pastori US 2017/0030384 and Barnwell US 2016/0038862 as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Burns et al. US 2013/0025246.
Watanabe does not teach each endcap includes a handle.
Burns ‘246 teaches a endcap (12) including a handle (fig. 1, 3). The use of handles is well-known in the art as demonstrated by Burns ‘246 and would have been well within the normal capabilities of one of ordinary skill in the art. The claim would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8 and 14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant argued that the primary reference to Burns taught away from the use of an O-ring as well as a ledge at a distal end of the peripheral side surface. The new ground of rejection relies of Watanabe as the primary reference and Watanabe does not teach away from the use of O-rings nor a ledge at a distal end of the peripheral side surface.
Applicant's arguments filed 2/2/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Pastori teaches a polygon sealing surface with a lower end cap not the upper endcap and that the sealing surface extends radially inwardly. Pastori is cited as teaching the recited rectangular rounded polygon shape sealing surface between an endcap of a filter element and a housing plate. The advantages taught by Pastori are derived from the particular shape of the sealing surfaces of the housing plate and the endcap. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated, for the reasons stated in Pastori, to use the claimed shape of the sealing surfaces as the motivation springs form the shape apart from any orientation of the element or in which radial direction the endcap seal against the housing plate. Applicant states the difference with this alternative approach, of Pastori, is significant as the misalignment of the filter elements with the sealing arrangement of the applied prior art can damage the seals. This is the very problem which Pastori is concerned with (par 8, 194) and Pastori sets forth the same solution claimed by applicant. Therefore, Pastori does not put forth an alternative approach and one of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize the advantage of using the sealing surface shape as taught by Pastori.
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 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