DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1,3,4 and 7-9 are pending and claims 2,5,6 and 10-20 are withdrawn.
This action is in response to the amendment dated 2/2/2026.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages filed 2/2/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claim(s) 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.
Since applicant’s arguments and amendments necessitated the new grounds for rejection the action is made Final.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Species II in the reply filed on 7/14/2025 was previously acknowledged. Claims 2,5,6 and 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/14/2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: “an uphole” should be - -the uphole - -. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loh et al. (US 10662737) in view of Jones (US 4049017).
Regarding claim 1, Loh et al. disclose an adjustable check valve (see Fig. 2), the adjustable check valve comprising:
a first open end (near 56) and a second open end (near 57) to permit fluid to flow through the adjustable check valve;
a housing (54,61) with an inlet (the left opening at 100) and an outlet (the right opening 57,72);
a sleeve (115) slidably disposed in the housing, the sleeve having a ball holder portion (at the left end section of 120 ) with a first ball (109/107) disposed therein;
the ball holder portion having a first axial end opposite a ball seat (the surface of 115 that abuts the ball) disposed in a second axial end and a sidewall the wall at 120) extending therebetween; a radial directed port (at 122) disposed in the sidewall of the ball holder portion between the ball seat in the second axial end and the first axial end of the ball holder portion; a second spring (134) disposed in a lower spring chamber (the chamber of 54 surrounding the spring 134) that engages the sleeve to force the first ball into a first seat (104) to prevent fluid from flowing in an uphole direction (upward through 50) in the adjustable check valve; and
a set screw (the un-numbered part between 72 and spring 134) disposed entirely within the housing to apply a desired amount of tension to the second spring.
PNG
media_image1.png
961
810
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Loh et al. are silent to having the set screw threadably disposed in the housing, and engaged with the housing.
Jones discloses a valve that teaches a set screw (34) threadably (45) disposed entirely within the housing (16) and engaged (at 45 and 32) with the housing to apply a desired amount of tension to the second spring (35).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ threads as taught by Jones into the device of Loh et al. to have the set screw threadably disposed in the housing, and engaged with the housing, in order to have a means to set the tension on the spring (Jones, col.4,lns 16-26).
Claim(s) 1,3,4,8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harmon (US 1512597) in view of Loh et al. (US 10662737).
Regarding claim 1, Harmon discloses an adjustable check valve (30-33, see Fig. 1), the adjustable check valve comprising:
a first open end (the bottom end of 20) and a second open end (the right end of 20 near 35) to permit fluid to flow through the adjustable check valve;
a housing (20) with an inlet (the bottom opening of 20) and an outlet (the right opening of 20);
a first ball (30) disposed therein;
a second spring (32) disposed in a lower spring chamber (the chamber of 20 surrounding 32) to force the first ball into a first seat (31) to prevent fluid from flowing in an uphole direction (upward through 20 at 31) in the adjustable check valve; and
a set screw (33) threadably disposed entirely in the housing and engaged (as shown in Figure 1) with the housing to apply a desired amount of tension to the second spring.
PNG
media_image2.png
898
756
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Harmon discloses all of the features of the claimed invention although is silent to having a sleeve slidably disposed in the housing, the sleeve having a ball holder portion with a first ball disposed therein; the ball holder portion having a first axial end opposite a ball seat disposed in a second axial end and a sidewall extending therebetween; a radial directed port disposed in the sidewall of the ball holder portion between the ball seat in the second axial end and the first axial end of the ball holder portion.
Loh et al. teach the use of a sleeve (115) slidably disposed in the housing, the sleeve having a ball holder portion (at the left end section of 120 ) with a first ball (109/107) disposed therein; the ball holder portion having a first axial end opposite a ball seat (the surface of 115 that abuts the ball) disposed in a second axial end and a sidewall the wall at 120) extending therebetween; a radial directed port (at 122) disposed in the sidewall of the ball holder portion between the ball seat in the second axial end and the first axial end of the ball holder portion.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute an inner valve assembly as taught by Loh et al. for the inner valve assembly of Harmon, to have an inner valve assembly having, a sleeve slidably disposed in the housing, the sleeve having a ball holder portion with a first ball disposed therein; the ball holder portion having a first axial end opposite a ball seat disposed in a second axial end and a sidewall extending therebetween; a radial directed port disposed in the sidewall of the ball holder portion between the ball seat in the second axial end and the first axial end of the ball holder portion, since it has been held that an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982).
Regarding claim 3, Harmon discloses a first spring (27) disposed in an upper spring chamber (within 20 surrounding 27) wherein the first spring forcing a second ball (26) into a second seat (the seat at 24 abutted by ball 26) in the upper spring chamber.
Regarding claim 4, Harmon discloses a passageway (the opening within 20 between 31 and 25) that fluidically connects the upper spring chamber and lower spring chamber.
Regarding claim 8, Harmon discloses the first ball (26) prevents fluid from flowing in an uphole direction through the passageway (as shown in Figure 1 above).
Regarding claim 9, Harmon discloses the first spring and the second ball prevents fluid from flowing in an uphole direction and out of the adjustable check valve (the second ball and first spring prevent fluid from flowing upward and exiting the outlet, see fig.1 above).
Claim(s) 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harmon ‘597 and Loh et al. ‘737 and further in view of Gute (US 5107890).
Regarding claim 7, the combined device of Harmon and Loh et al. disclose all of the features of the claimed invention, including a second spring, although are silent that the second spring has a conical shape.
Gute teaches the use of a spring that has a conical shape (24).
PNG
media_image3.png
596
661
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a conical spring as taught by Gute for the second spring in the combined device of Harmon and Loh et al. to have the second spring being conical shaped, since it has been held, that an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component (one spring for another) or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. Additionally, the well-known expected outcome of applying a force to the ball valve in order to keep the ball closed against a certain pressure, would result from the combination.
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 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