DETAILED ACTION
Non Final
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/01/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim does not end in a period. Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Claim 1 line 4, “a valve seat portion”, there is a valve seat carrier piston, but the claimed limitation indicated in not provided in the figures in such a way as to distinguish itself from the element 52, furthermore, it is not distinguishable the difference between the above limitation and in claim 7 line 7 the “valve seat carrier” which appears to be the limitation “valve seat carrier piston” 52 in the written description, please correct;
Claim 1 line 4 “a plug portion”, there is no interlineation of such a limitation in the written description, and it appears that the limitation may be equivalent to the limitation in claim 7 line 5 “valve portion” which also is not interlineated in the written description with the figures, and both limitations appear to be drawn to the “valve core” 50 in the written description, please correct;
Claim 9 line 4 “ valve seat body” there is no numeral associated with this limitation, line 4 “valve plug body” also lacks a numeral, please correct;
Claim 6, the “valved opening” positioned “above the handle” is not shown, please correct;
Claim 14 “a vacuum source” in line 6, is not supported in the figures, please correct;
The numerals 50 and 48 are interchangeable with the term “valve core”, see Ph 0062, please correct.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 6 recites “a valved opening in fluid communication with the valve stem is positioned above the handle.” where it is noted that there is no disclosure of such an arrangement in the figures and written description, appropriate correction is required.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The following Claims recite limitations which have insufficient antecedent basis. The Claims and respective limitations include the following: Claim 1, "the removable stop" in line 11, "the stop" in line 12; Claims 2-8 each recite in the preamble, "A hydrant" in line 1 (where it is noted that the hydrant is introduced in the independent claim, making it unclear if the dependent claims are necessarily dependent or should be categorized as independent, with necessary antecedent corrections to the bodily limitations); Claim 7, "a seal" in line 16 (being reintroduced again), “the associated threaded portion” in line 19; Claim 9 line 11 “the cartridge assembly”; Claim 14, "the valve" in line 2; Claim 14, "the inlet" in line 5;
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites “a valved opening in fluid communication with the valve stem is positioned above the handle” where there is a lack of objective meaningful reference as to how or in what way the opening or stem are positioned above the handle where the written description and figures clearly show otherwise; 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 (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 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 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) 1-6 is/are rejected (as indefinitely understood) under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko (US 9234333) and further in view of Ball (US 9890867);
Claim(s) 9-13 is/are rejected (as indefinitely understood) under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hills (US 0208313);
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected (as indefinitely understood) under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoon (US 3913602);
Ko discloses in claim 1: (see at least partially annotated figures 2 and 3 included below)
PNG
media_image1.png
396
442
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
572
438
media_image2.png
Greyscale
A hydrant (outdoor anti-freeze discharge pipe, valve spouted hydrant or faucet figures 1-6 or alternatively 7-10, where it is noted that Botnick US 4286616 discusses such a terminology in the title) comprising: a conduit (at 10) having a lower end in fluid communication with a liquid source (tank, reservoir etc…Col 3 ln 14-16); a valve assembly (generally at 2) slidably mounted in the conduit (2 is inserted into the conduit and rotatably and axially operably fixed therein), the valve assembly comprising a valve seat portion (at 30/40) and a plug portion (at 50/54) sized and constructed block flow through the valve seat portion (see figure 5), hence through the conduit, and a threaded connector (at 53/63, operably…) connecting the valve seat portion to the plug portion; a valve stem (at 16/60) attached to the valve assembly and extending upward through the conduit, the valve stem being attached to one of the valve seat portion and the plug portion (via the threaded engagement of 53/63 and flange 61 inside of valve seat portion 30/40) and enabling relative rotation between the valve seat portion and the plug portion (there is relative rotation when the stem rotates the threads, which occurs interposed between the seat portion 40 and the plug portion 50, in the interposed axially relative direction); and a removable above-ground stop (at 1002, the hex nut cap below the handle 14 and above the headstock 13, in figure 1 and 2)… disabling the stop enabling sliding the valve assembly upward out of the conduit (the cartridge is removable from the top of the conduit during assembly/disassembly see figures 2-4 as it is appropriately sized to do so, for replacement of parts); Ko does not explicitly disclose, but Ball teaches: the removable stop being sized and shaped to limit upward movement of the valve stem (see figure 9, stop 174 holds the rotatable stem at 166 of the handle to limit axial reciprocation, for the purpose of providing rotational engagement and axial anchoring of the threaded axial/rotational stem portion 178 to open/close the valve);
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide Ko as taught in Ball with an axially fixed removable stop that can be sized and shaped to limit upward movement of the valve stem, as taught in Ball, where the stop can hold the rotatable stem of Ko as taught in Ball and connected to the handle to limit axial reciprocation of the handle of Ko as taught in Ball (and arguably necessarily required in Ko), all for the purpose of providing rotational engagement and axial anchoring of the threaded axial/rotational stem portion to open/close the valve.
If it could be persuasively argued that Ko does not explicitly disclose: the valve as use as a hydrant perse; considering that both Ball and Ko teach: outdoor anti-freeze discharge pipe, valve spouted hydrant or faucet; and considering that one of ordinary skill in the fluid control art would consider: a freeze protection arrangement as applied to a hydrant for outdoor use (as taught in Ball) as equivalent to freeze protection arrangement as applied to a faucet for outdoor use (as taught in Ko),
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to arrange the valve of Ko as taught in Ball, for use as an outdoor hydrant, for the purpose of freeze protection as taught in both.
Ko discloses (as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 2: A hydrant in accordance with claim 1, wherein the valve stem is constrained (as discussed above to provide axial fixation/anchoring but rotational movement), relative to the conduit, in a vertical direction such that the valve stem is limited in movement along an axis (central axis of 16) in the vertical direction and wherein the valve seat is limited in rotational movement (by inward projecting annular step at 1006 figure 3).
Ko discloses (as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 3: A hydrant in accordance with claim 2, wherein the valve stem is retained in the conduit and constrained in an axial direction by a top cap (at 1002), the top cap being releasably (via threaded engagement as discussed above via the hex nut and/or as modified for the reasons discussed above) attachable to the conduit.
Ko discloses (as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 4: A hydrant in accordance with claim 3, wherein the conduit comprises a headstock (at 13), a discharge nozzle (at 15) is coupled to the headstock and in fluid communication with the conduit (via 12) through a channel (inside channel of 15) of the headstock, and the top cap is attached to the headstock (as shown.)
Ko discloses (as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 5: A hydrant in accordance with claim 4, wherein the valve stem extends through the headstock (16 extends through 13), and wherein a handle (at 14) is attached to the valve stem above the headstock to permit rotation of the valve stem (16) and actuation of the valve assembly through the rotation of the valve stem (16/60 rotates threads 63 which rotates and axially reciprocates threaded engagement of 53/50 valve plug.)
Ko discloses (as modified for the reasons discussed above) in claim 6: A hydrant in accordance with claim 5, wherein the valve stem is hollow (16 is hollow) and a valved opening in fluid communication with the valve stem is positioned above the handle (taken from a view point perspective, the valved opening is fluidly upstream of the valve handle, the fluid communication about the stem at 12.)
Hills discloses in claim 9: (see at least annotated figure 2 below)
PNG
media_image3.png
590
644
media_image3.png
Greyscale
A valve assembly (figures 1-2) comprising, a valve body (at 2002) in fluid connection with a conduit (e’,k,i) and a valve cartridge assembly (at A,B,D,e) adapted to be inserted into and removed from the valve body (removing cap headstock C will enable removal of the cartridge) through the conduit, the cartridge assembly comprising a valve seat body (at B), a valve plug body (at 2004), and a threaded connection (at a/b) between the valve plug body and the valve seat body, the valve seat body forming a water-tight sliding fit (at 2006 end via sealing-rings) with the valve body, at least a portion of the valve body (at D) and at least a portion of the valve seat body (at d’) being non-circular (so as to) to limit rotation of the valve seat body relative to the valve body, the valve plug body being freely rotatable (relative to rotationally to provide threaded reciprocation) through at least 360° (the threads providing 360 degree turns) and being limited in axial movement (fixed between C and d), rotation of the valve plug body moving the valve seat body into and out of a closed position blocking flow of liquid through the cartridge assembly (as shown.)
Hills discloses in claim 10: The valve assembly of claim 9 wherein the valve plug body comprises a valve stem (at 2008) extending through (and into) the conduit, the plug body being restrained from axial movement by the valve stem (the end of the stem holds the body of the plug valve that is restrained from axial movement[.])
Hills discloses in claim 11: The valve assembly of claim 10 wherein the conduit comprises a pipe (n is a pipe that is partially comprised in the conduit), the valve body being threaded to a distal end of the pipe, and wherein the valve stem is restrained from movement (axially) away from the distal end of the pipe (via the captured flange b’).
Hills discloses in claim 12: The valve assembly of claim 11 wherein the valve stem is restrained by a head stock assembly (C ) and wherein removal of at least a part of the head stock assembly permits pulling the cartridge by the valve stem from the pipe (as discussed in claim 9.)
Hills discloses in claim 13: The valve assembly of claim 9 wherein a cylindrical portion of the valve seat body comprises at least one [sealing] ring forming a sliding seal with a cylindrical portion of the valve body; but Hills does not disclose an o-ring: although Ko teaches: using an o-ring for sealing purposes;
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide Hills as taught in Ko, with an o-ring in lieu of the sealing ring of Hills, for the purpose of sealing the sliding valve seat body, an improve sealing thereof, where it is noted that the o-ring for sealing ring is a mere exchange of equivalent parts which is obvious to those of ordinary skill in the fluid art.
Yoon discloses in claim 14: A hydrant (figures 1-4) having a standpipe (at 2) with an above-ground operational outlet (the features above 11), a subterranean valve (at 7), and a valve stem (21/23/25) operating the valve, the valve stem extending upward from the valve through the standpipe, wherein the valve stem is hollow (hollow passage 33), the valve stem having a subterranean inlet (at 29) and an above-ground flushing outlet (via top of 21, Col 6 ln 49-66) in fluid connection with the inlet, whereby liquid can be evacuated from the standpipe and the hollow valve stem by attaching at least one of a vacuum source or a pressure source (pump as discussed id) to the above-ground flushing outlet (the pressure is applied to 10 and also via 29 to exit at 21) while the above-ground operational outlet is open (to receive the pumping pressure.)
Yoon discloses in claim 15: The hydrant of claim 14 wherein the subterranean inlet of the valve stem is above the subterranean valve (29 is above 7.)
Yoon discloses in claim 16: The hydrant of claim 14 wherein the above-ground outlet of the valve stem comprises a manually-operable closure (via removably insertable unit 35).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. (Claim 8 depends from claim 7 and would be allowable merely for the reasons of the parent claim.)
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose or render obvious in claim 7 the following: “the valve seat carrier having a threaded portion of the through bore adapted and configured to engage with the threaded portion of the valve stem…rotation of the valve stem and the associate threaded portion causes the valve seat carrier to raise or lower depending on the rotation direction of the valve stem because of the interaction between the threaded portion of the valve stem and the threaded portion of the through bore of the valve seat carrier” in combination with the other limitations set forth above, where it is noted that to modify Ko would require adjustment to the operability of Ko as well as arguable improper hindsight construction of the same, especially considering the lack of teaching in the art of such an claimed arrangement in combination with the other limitations of the dependent, independent and intervening claim limitations.
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.”
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 MATTHEW W JELLETT, whose telephone number is 571-270-7497. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (9:30AM-6:00PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Ken Rinehart can be reached at (571)-272-4881, or Craig Schneider can be reached at (571) 272-3607. 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.
/Matthew W Jellett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights