DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to application number 18/622,508 -FLUSHING ASSEMBLY, WATER SUPPLY ASSEMBLY, LOWER POSITION WATER SUCTION ASSEMBLY, WATER TANK, CHECK VALVE FOR USE IN A TOILET, AND METHOD, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR CONTROLLING TOILET WATER CONSUMPTION, filed on 3/29/24. Claims 1-19 and 21 are pending. Claim 20 has been canceled.
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
Election of Group I was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/17/26. Claims 1-19 and 21 remain for examination.
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 ‘toilet, comprising: a vacuum breaker; a check valve configured to be mounted downstream from the vacuum breaker of claim 11, “wherein the vacuum breaker comprises a valve element configured to move horizontally” of claim 18, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. Examiners note: The check valve with regard to how it fits and acts within the toilet system has not been shown in detail (what is upstream and what is downstream). The valve and how it attaches within water flow pipes has not been shown. The clean water pipe and the contaminated water pipe of claim 12 has not been shown.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rosseel (US 6,283,147).
Regarding Claim 1 Rosseel shows a check valve (1), comprising: a lower sealing element (5); an upper sealing element (2) comprising a flexible part (12) configured to seal the lower sealing element (Fig. 1); and a supporting element (4) comprising a plurality of hollow parts (11), and the supporting element configured to be mounted in the lower sealing element and mounted at a side where clean water (Fluid clean fuel; capable of clean water flow) flows into the lower sealing element (Figs. 1-2).
Regarding Claim 2 Rosseel shows the check valve according to claim 1, wherein when the clean water flows (clean fuel; capable of clean water flowage) in a first direction (arrows showing flow Fig. 2), the clean water passes through the plurality of hollow parts and deforms the flexible part to unseal the lower sealing element (Fig. 2), and wherein when contaminated water flows (non-return valve, note, col. 1, lines 7-12) in a second direction opposite to the first direction, the contaminated water presses the flexible part towards the lower sealing element, and the supporting element supports the flexible part to prevent the flexible part from being deformed (note, col. 1, lines 7-12).
Regarding Claim 3 Rosseel shows the check valve according to claim 2, wherein when the flexible part is deformed, the flexible part is separated from the lower sealing element to expose the plurality of hollow parts (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 4 Rosseel shows the check valve according to claim 3, wherein when the clean water is stopped to flow in the first direction, the flexible part is restored to an original form to seal the lower sealing element due to a self-elasticity of the flexible part (Fig. 1, membrane = elastic; note, col. 2, lines 4-6; note, col. 1, lines 28-30).
Regarding Claim 6 Rosseel shows the check valve according to claim 1, wherein the upper sealing element further comprises a connecting pin (3) configured to be inserted into a pin hole (8) of the supporting element.
Regarding Claim 7 Rosseel shows the check valve according to claim 1, wherein the lower sealing element is annular (at 5), wherein the lower sealing element comprises a blocking ring (shown near 6; Fig. 2), wherein the upper sealing element seals an outer surface of the blocking ring, and wherein the supporting element is disposed on an inner surface of the blocking ring (Figs. 1-2).
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosseel (US 6,283,147) in view of Osawa et al. (US 5,027,784).
Regarding Claim 5 Rosseel shows the check valve according to claim 1, wherein the flexible part is a circular modify Rosseel to include the flexible part being of rubber as rubber is another elastic material that is well-known and readily available as shown by Osawa.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosseel (US 6,283,147) in view of Lee (US 9,618,131).
Regarding Claim 8 Rosseel shows the check valve according to claim 1, wherein the supporting element is circular (disk; note, col. 1, lines 52-54), but fails to show wherein the supporting element further comprises a plurality of rib strips distributed radially, and wherein hollow parts are formed between each two adjacent rib strips of the plurality of rib strips. However, Lee shows a check valve (60) with a plurality of rib strips (53; Fig. 4) distributed radially (Fig. 4), and wherein hollow parts (54) are formed between each two adjacent rib strips of the plurality of rib strips (54). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rosseel to include the supporting element having a plurality of rib strips distributed radially, and wherein hollow parts are formed between each two adjacent rib strips of the plurality of rib strips for the purpose of providing a supporting element with hollow parts that maximizes the area of the hollow parts for maximum flow as shown by Lee.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosseel (US 6,283,147) in view of Okubo et. al. (US Pub. 2009/0313750).
Regarding claim 9 Rosseel shows the check valve according to claim 1, wherein the check valve is configured to be mounted downstream from a vacuum breaker of a toilet (aka configured as capable of). Turning to Okubo. Okubo shows a toilet (1; Fig. 13) with a check valve (143; ¶ [0176-0177]) configured to be mounted downstream from a vacuum breaker (142; 142 is also a check valve; ¶ [0175]) of a toilet. Because Rosseel shows a check valve usable for controlling return flow of fluid and in a tube (pipe), and Okubo shows using check valves in a toilet, Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include using the check valve of Rosseel that is configured for controlling one way fluid flow, downstream of a vacuum breaker of a toilet as shown by Okubo.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosseel (US 6,283,147) in view of Okubo et. al. (US Pub. 2009/0313750) in view of Schless (US Pub. 2017/0226726).
Regarding Claim 10 Rosseel shows the check valve according to claim 9, but fails to show wherein the check valve is configured to be mounted at a position between a main water input pipe of the toilet and a main filter screen of the toilet. However, Okubo shows using a check valve (142) at a position in a main water input pipe of a toilet (1). Turning attention to Schless. Schless shows a check valve (10; ¶ [0046; 0083] is configured to be mounted at a position between a main water input pipe (6) of the toilet (Fig. 2) and a main filter screen of the toilet (14;¶ [0046; 0083]). Because Rosseel shows a check valve usable for controlling return flow of fluid and in a tube (pipe), and Okubo shows using check valves in a toilet, and Schless shown using a check valve mounted at a position between a main water input pipe of a toilet and a main filter screen, it therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Rosseel to include being used for a check valve between a main water input pipe of a toilet and a main filter screen of the toilet for controlling one way fluid flow, that is filtered for debris as shown by Schless.
Claim(s) 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo et. al. (US Pub. 2009/0313750) in view of Rosseel (US 6,283,147).
Regarding Claim 11 Okubo shows a toilet (1; Fig. 13), comprising: a vacuum breaker; a check valve (143; ¶ [0176-0177]) configured to be mounted downstream from the vacuum breaker (142; 142 is also a check valve; ¶ [0175]), but fails to show the check valve comprising: a lower sealing element; an upper sealing element comprising a flexible part configured to seal the lower sealing element; and a supporting element comprising a plurality of hollow parts, and the supporting element configured to be mounted in the lower sealing element and mounted at a side where clean water flows into the lower sealing element.
However, Rosseel shows a check valve (1), comprising: a lower sealing element (5); an upper sealing element (2) comprising a flexible part (12) configured to seal the lower sealing element (Fig. 1); and a supporting element (4) comprising a plurality of hollow parts (11), and the supporting element configured to be mounted in the lower sealing element and mounted at a side where clean water (Fluid clean fuel; capable of clean water flow) flows into the lower sealing element (Figs. 1-2). Because Rosseel shows check valve for use with fluid and in a tube/pipe it, therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Okubo to include the check valve of Rosseel for the purpose of using another known efficient and effective check valve for limiting fluid return flow.
Regarding Claim 12 Okubo as combined shows the toilet according to claim 11, wherein when the clean water flows (clean fuel; capable of clean water flowage) in a first direction (arrows showing flow Fig. 2), the clean water passes through the plurality of hollow parts and deforms the flexible part to unseal the lower sealing element (Fig. 2), and wherein when contaminated water flows (non-return valve, note, col. 1, lines 7-12) in a second direction opposite to the first direction, the contaminated water presses the flexible part towards the lower sealing element, and the supporting element supports the flexible part to prevent the flexible part from being deformed (note, col. 1, lines 7-12).
Regarding Claim 13 Okubo as combined shows the toilet according to claim 12, wherein when the flexible part is deformed, the flexible part is separated from the lower sealing element to expose the plurality of hollow parts (Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 14 Okubo as combined shows the toilet according to claim 13, wherein when the clean water is stopped to flow in the first direction, the flexible part is restored to an original form to seal the lower sealing element due to a self-elasticity of the flexible part (Fig. 1, membrane = elastic; note, col. 2, lines 4-6; note, col. 1, lines 28-30).
Regarding Claim 15 Okubo as combined shows the toilet according to claim 11, wherein the upper sealing element further comprises a connecting pin (3) configured to be inserted into a pin hole (8) of the supporting element.
Regarding Claim 16 Okubo as combined shows the toilet according to claim 11, wherein the lower sealing element is annular (at 5), wherein the lower sealing element comprises a blocking ring (shown near 6; Fig. 2), wherein the upper sealing element seals an outer surface of the blocking ring, and wherein the supporting element is disposed on an inner surface of the blocking ring (Figs. 1-2).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo et. al. (US Pub. 2009/0313750) in view of Rosseel (US 6,283,147) in view of Lee (US 9,618,131).
Regarding Claim 17 Okubo as combined shows the toilet according to claim 11, wherein the supporting element is circular (disk; note, col. 1, lines 52-54), but fails to show wherein the supporting element further comprises a plurality of rib strips distributed radially, and wherein hollow parts are formed between each two adjacent rib strips of the plurality of rib strips. However, Lee shows a check valve (60) with a plurality of rib strips (53; Fig. 4) distributed radially (Fig. 4), and wherein hollow parts (54) are formed between each two adjacent rib strips of the plurality of rib strips (54). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Okubo as combined to include the supporting element having a plurality of rib strips distributed radially, and wherein hollow parts are formed between each two adjacent rib strips of the plurality of rib strips for the purpose of providing a supporting element with hollow parts that maximizes the area of the hollow parts for maximum flow as shown by Lee.
Claim(s) 18is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo et. al. (US Pub. 2009/0313750) in view of Rosseel (US 6,283,147) in view of in view of Bulan et al. (US 6,779,549).
Regarding Claim 18 Okubo as combined shows the toilet according to claim 11, wherein the vacuum breaker is disposed at a top of the toilet (Fig. 13) , but fails to show wherein the vacuum breaker comprises a valve element configured to move horizontally. However, Bulan shows an in-line vacuum breaker (Fig. 1) in which the valve element (61, 65, 69) would move horizontally (when mounted inline horizontally). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Okubo as combined to include an inline vacuum breaker in which the valve element is configured to move horizontally as shown by Bulan for the purpose of saving space in the toilet for aesthetics.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo et. al. (US Pub. 2009/0313750) in view of Rosseel (US 6,283,147) in view of in view of Schless (US Pub. 2017/0226726).
Regarding Claim 19 Okubo as combined shows the toilet according to claim 11, further comprising: a water tank (120); a main water input pipe (124) configured to be connected to the water tank and configured to supply clean water to the water tank; but fails to show and a main filter screen; wherein the check valve is configured to be mounted at a position between the main water input pipe and the main filter screen. Schless shows a check valve (10; ¶ [0046; 0083] is configured to be mounted at a position between a main water input pipe (6) of the toilet (Fig. 2) and a main filter screen of the toilet (14;¶ [0046; 0083]). Because Rosseel shows a check valve usable for controlling return flow of fluid and in a tube (pipe), and Okubo shows using check valves in a toilet, and Schless shown using a check valve mounted at a position between a main water input pipe of a toilet and a main filter screen, it therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Okubo as combined by including a check valve between a main water input pipe of a toilet and a main filter screen of the toilet for controlling one way fluid flow, that is filtered for debris as shown by Schless.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okubo et. al. (US Pub. 2009/0313750) in view of Rosseel (US 6,283,147) in view of Osawa et al. (US 5,027,784).
Regarding Claim 21 Okubo as combined shows the toilet according to claim 11, wherein the flexible part is a circular .
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jensen (US Pub. 2021/0355667) shows the general state of the art; Price et al. (US Pub. 2009/0219353) shows a similar check valve; Onishi (US Pub. 2005/0126649) shows a similar check valve.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE J SKUBINNA whose telephone number is (571)270-5163. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, 9:30 AM to 6PM 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 supervisor, DAVID ANGWIN can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
/CHRISTINE J SKUBINNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754 8/4/2026
