DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending and claims 11-20 have been withdrawn.
This action is in response to the reply filed 11/24/2025.
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
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I in the reply filed on 11/24/2025 is acknowledged. Additionally, via a telephone call, Applicant’s representative Attorney Lightfoot, called to confirm the election of species I, figure 2, claims 1-5, 7 and 8, on 4 December 2025. Therefore, claims 6 and 9-20 are hereby withdrawn.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/13/2025 was filed prior to the mailing date of the mailing of this action. The third-party submission complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.290. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 2/27/2024. These drawings are accepted.
Specification
The disclosure (claims and specification) utilizes the English system of measurements throughout, this should be changed to the metric system, see MPEP 608.01 IV.
(In order to minimize the necessity in the future for converting dimensions given in the English system of measurements to the metric system of measurements when using printed patents as research and prior art search documents, all patent applicants should use the metric (S.I.) units followed by the equivalent English units when describing their inventions in the specifications of patent applications.)
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
the limitations in claim 7, “about 10 psi to about 80 psi”, lack antecedent basis in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-5,7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation " the outlet ".
There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Nelle (US 20240084765 A1, as supplied by applicant).
Regarding claim 1, Nelle discloses a system, comprising:
a gas actuated device (actuators/control valves 40, para.0010), the gas actuated device configured to receive and release gas associated with actuating the gas actuated device; and
an actuation gas return path (the path within 50,60, para.0020,0021,0024) is associated with the outlet, wherein the actuation gas return path is configured to not vent to atmosphere or the environment.
Regarding claim 2, Nelle discloses the system further comprises: a driver (18) configured to operate by combusting the gas, wherein actuation gas is provided from the actuation gas return path to the driver (from 60 to 62 to 50 to 21,19 and 18 drive, see Fig. 5, Fig. 1,4A, para.0022).
Regarding claim 3, Nelle discloses a collection tank (70, Fig. 4B, para.0024) disposed in fluid communication with the actuation gas return path and between the gas actuated device and the driver (fig. 1,4B,5).
Regarding claim 4, Nelle discloses a regulator (28 is situated in a manner to meet the limitations as recited, see Fig. 1,4A) disposed in fluid communication with the actuation gas return path and between the gas actuated device (40) and the driver (18).
Regarding claim 5, Nelle discloses a collection tank (15) disposed in fluid communication with the actuation gas return path and between the gas actuated device and the regulator (see Fig. 1,4A).
Regarding claim 7, Nelle discloses a gas supply of about 10 psi to about 80 psi (the device of Nelle is a conventional system, and therefore as disclosed in the instant specification (para.0003) such systems fall within this range).
Regarding claim 8, Nelle discloses at least one of a discharge having a pressure of about 100 psi to about 4000psi and a suction having a pressure of about 0 psi to about 1000 psi (the device of Nelle ‘765 is a conventional system, and therefore, the pressure ranges are met for the discharge and suction values, as evidenced in Nelle US 11193483, col. 1,lns. 46,47, col.2, lns. 7-10; col.9, lns. 19-34).
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.
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) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelle ‘765 in view of Nelle (US 11193483). Claim 8 being rejected in an alternative manner in the event that the above rejection is not persuasive.
Regarding claim 8, Nelle ‘765 is silent to having at least one of a discharge having a pressure of about 100 psi to about 4000psi and a suction having a pressure of about 0 psi to about 1000 psi.
Nelle ‘483 teach the use of system having at least one of a discharge having a pressure of about 100 psi to about 4000psi and a suction having a pressure of about 0 psi to about 1000 psi (the pressure ranges are met for the discharge and suction values, col. 1,lns. 46,47, col.2, lns. 7-10; col.9, lns. 19-34).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the systems in Nelle ‘765 with the systems in Nelle ‘483 to have at least one of a discharge having a pressure of about 100 psi to about 4000psi and a suction having a pressure of about 0 psi to about 1000 psi, since it has been held, that an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component (systems in the gas compressors) or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. Additionally, the well-known expected outcome of being able to utilize “off the shelf” systems, would result from the combination.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Craig Price, whose telephone number is (571)272-2712 or via facsimile (571)273-2712. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:00AM-4:30PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3607, 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 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.
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 Form at;
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
/CRAIG J PRICE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753