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 .
Status of the Application
This action is responsive to the amendment dated 12/12/2025. Claims 1-13 remain pending. Claims 1 and 9 have been amended. Claims 21-25 are new. The applicant’s amendment has necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection below. This action is Final.
Response to Remarks
Applicant's amendment to recite the poppet defining a flow channel configured to fluidly couple a portion of the flow chamber upstream of at least a portion of a valve seat and a portion of the flow chamber downstream of at least a portion of the valve seat, the poppet further defining and a flow metering orifice positioned in the flow channel, the flow metering orifice having a cross-sectional dimension that is less than a cross- sectional dimension of the flow channel upstream and downstream of the flow metering orifice has overcome the rejection of record. However, a new ground(s) of rejection is applied to the claims below. As such, applicant's arguments with respect to the 103 rejection over Blust in view of Wright have not been found persuasive. Blust in view of Liberfarb (US 2004/0206397) as stated below in the 103 rejection teaches each and every limitation including the poppet defining a flow channel configured to fluidly couple a portion of the flow chamber upstream of at least a portion of a valve seat and a portion of the flow chamber downstream of at least a portion of the valve seat, the poppet further defining and a flow metering orifice positioned in the flow channel, the flow metering orifice having a cross-sectional dimension that is less than a cross- sectional dimension of the flow channel upstream and downstream of the flow metering orifice.
Applicant's amendments to the claims have necessitated further search and/or consideration and/or revision of the rejection, and accordingly, this action must be made Final.
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) 1-4 and 7-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blust (US 1,627,312) in view of Liberfarb (US 2004/0206397).
Regarding claim 1, Blust discloses a check valve assembly (Figs. 4-5), comprising: a housing (including 1, 8, 9, 10) comprising an inlet port (the port in which 8 feeds fluid into 1), an outlet port (the outlet port in which 1 feeds fluid into 10), and a flow chamber (the chamber formed within 1) defined by the housing and fluidly coupling the inlet port to the outlet port; a poppet assembly (14, 18, 19) movable between a closed position (as shown in Fig. 4) and an open position (as shown in Fig. 5), the poppet assembly comprising a poppet (14) positioned in the flow chamber and configured to sealingly engage the housing in the closed position to fluidly disconnect the inlet port from the outlet port, the poppet defining a flow channel (15) configured to fluidly couple a portion of the flow chamber upstream of at least a portion of a valve seat (11) and a portion of the flow chamber downstream of at least a portion of the valve seat (Figs. 4 and 5); and a biasing member (18) operably coupled to the poppet, wherein the biasing member is configured to bias the poppet assembly to the closed position (Page 2, lines 6-36), but fails to disclose the poppet defining a flow metering orifice positioned in the flow channel.
Liberfarb teaches a poppet (9) defining a flow metering orifice (10) positioned in a flow channel, the flow metering orifice having a cross-sectional dimension that is less than a cross-sectional dimension of the flow channel upstream and downstream of the flow metering orifice. (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the poppet of Blust to include a metering orifice positioned close to the middle of the flow channel as taught by Liberfarb in order to provide a means to meter the flow through the flow system to ensure the fluid pressure does not reach too high as desired by the user. (para. [0017] – [0018])
Regarding claim 2, Blust in view of Liberfarb further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 1, wherein the inlet port is configured to receive a flow of an operating fluid. (Page 2, lines 6-36)
Regarding claim 3, Blust in view of Liberfarb further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 2, wherein the poppet assembly is configured to move from the closed position to the open position when a pressure of the operating fluid at the inlet port exceeds a threshold value. (Page 2, lines 6-36)
Regarding claim 4, Blust in view of Liberfarb further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 3, wherein the poppet disengages the housing to permit the operating fluid to flow from the inlet port to the outlet port when the poppet assembly is in the open position. (Page 2, lines 6-36; see how 14 disengages from 11 to transition to the open position)
Regarding claim 7, Blust in view of Liberfarb further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 1, wherein the housing includes a central section (the section of 1 that is radially extended and on the left side with reference to Figs. 4 and 5) and outer section (the section of 1 which attaches directly to 19), and wherein the flow chamber is defined between the central section of the housing and the outer section of the housing (at least a portion of the flow chamber is defined between the central section and outer section defined above).
Regarding claim 8, Blust in view of Liberfarb further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 7, wherein the housing further defines a protrusion (the protrusion that extends inwards around 7 that is positioned radially outward of 13 and which 14 abuts against as shown in Exhibit A) radially aligned with at least a portion of the central section of the housing.
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Blust discloses a check valve assembly (Figs. 4-5) comprising: a housing (including 1, 8, 9, 10) comprising an inlet port (the port in which 8 feeds fluid into 1), an outlet port (the outlet port in which 1 feeds fluid into 10), and a flow chamber (the chamber formed within 1) defined by the housing and fluidly coupling the inlet port to the outlet port; a poppet assembly (14, 18, 19) movable between a closed position (as shown in Fig. 4) and an open position (as shown in Fig. 5), the poppet assembly comprising a poppet (14) positioned in the flow chamber and configured to sealingly engage the housing in the closed position to fluidly disconnect the inlet port from the outlet port, the poppet assembly further comprising a flow channel (15); and a biasing member (18) operably coupled to the poppet and configured to bias the poppet assembly to the closed position (Page 2, lines 6-36), but fails to disclose the poppet assembly further comprising a flow metering orifice positioned in a flow channel.
Liberfarb teaches a poppet (94) defining a flow metering orifice (100) positioned in a flow channel, the flow metering orifice having a cross-sectional dimension that is less than across-sectional dimension of the flow channel upstream and downstream of the flow metering orifice, the flow metering orifice configured to reduce a range of inlet pressures that result in chattering of the poppet. (Fig. 1; para. [0017] – [0018])
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the poppet of Blust to include a metering orifice positioned close to the middle of the flow channel as taught by Liberfarb in order to provide a means to meter the flow through the flow system to ensure the fluid pressure does not reach too high as desired by the user. (para. [0017] – [0018])
Regarding claim 10, Blust in view of Liberfarb further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 9, wherein, when the poppet moves between the closed position and the open position, an inlet pressure of the operating fluid is decreased as the operating fluid flows through the flow metering orifice to reduce movement of the poppet. (the valve of Blust is at least capable of performing this limitation)
Regarding claim 11, Blust in view of Liberfarb further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 9, wherein the biasing member is configured to bias the poppet to the closed position. (Figs. 4 and 5; Page 2, lines 6-36)
Regarding claim 12, Blust in view of Liberfarb further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 9, wherein a decrease in an operating fluid pressure regulates the flow of the operating fluid. (the valve of Blust is at least capable of performing this limitation)
Regarding claim 13, Blust in view of Liberfarb further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 9, wherein a reduction of pressure by the flow metering orifice inhibits movement of the poppet. (the valve of Blust is at least capable of performing this limitation)
Claim(s) 5, 21, 22, and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blust in view of Liberfarb and Thompson (US 2007/0000544).
Regarding claim 5, Blust in view of Liberfarb further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 2, but fails to disclose wherein the housing further comprises: a first sealing member between the poppet and the housing configured to fluidly disconnect the flow from the inlet port to the outlet port.
Thompson teaches a valve assembly wherein the housing further comprises: a first sealing member (134) between the valve (120, 126, 128) and the housing (114) configured to fluidly disconnect the flow from the inlet port to the outlet port.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the valve seat portion at 11 of Blust to include a sealing member as taught by Thompson since this is combining prior art elements (seals) according to known methods to yield predictable results (providing a fluid seal). The motivation to do so is to ensure a proper seal is formed between the poppet and valve seat when the poppet is in the closed position.
Regarding claim 21, Blust discloses a check valve assembly (Figs. 4-5) comprising: a housing (including 1, 8, 9, 10) defining an inlet port (the port in which 8 feeds fluid into 1), an outlet port (the outlet port in which 1 feeds fluid into 10), a central section (the section between the inlet port and outlet port around the protrusion) axially aligned with a protrusion (the protrusion that extends inwards around 7 that is positioned radially outward of 13 and which 14 abuts against as shown in Exhibit A) defined by the housing and defining an opening therebetween, and a flow chamber (the chamber formed within 1) defined by the housing, downstream of the central section, and fluidly coupling the inlet port to the outlet port; a poppet assembly (14, 18, 19) movable between a closed position (as shown in Fig. 4) and an open position (as shown in Fig. 5), the poppet assembly comprising a poppet (14) positioned in the flow chamber and configured to sealingly engage the housing in the closed position to fluidly disconnect the inlet port from the outlet port (Figs. 4 and 5); and a biasing member (18) operably coupled to the poppet and configured to bias the poppet assembly to the closed position, wherein the poppet is configured to move counter to a biasing force of the biasing member when an operating fluid force or an operating fluid pressure at the inlet port exceeds a threshold value, and wherein the poppet is configured to engage the first sealing member to inhibit the operating fluid from flowing from the outlet port to the inlet port when the operating fluid force or the operating fluid pressure at the inlet port is less than the threshold value (Page 2, lines 6-36), but fails to disclose the poppet assembly further comprising a flow metering orifice positioned in a flow channel; a first sealing member between the poppet and the central section of the housing, the first sealing member configured to fluidly disconnect the flow from the inlet port to the outlet port, wherein the opening is radially outward of the first sealing member relative to an axis of the housing.
Liberfarb teaches a poppet (9) defining a flow metering orifice (10) positioned in a flow channel. (Fig. 1)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the poppet of Blust to include a metering orifice positioned close to the middle of the flow channel as taught by Liberfarb in order to provide a means to meter the flow through the flow system to ensure the fluid pressure does not reach too high as desired by the user. (para. [0017] – [0018])
Thompson teaches a first sealing member (134) between the valve and the the housing (114), the first sealing member configured to fluidly disconnect the flow from the inlet port to the outlet port (Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the valve seat portion at 11 of Blust to include a sealing member as taught by Thompson to be positioned anywhere along the valve seat including radially inward of the opening since this is combining prior art elements (seals) according to known methods to yield predictable results (providing a fluid seal). The motivation to do so is to ensure a proper seal is formed between the poppet and valve seat when the poppet is in the closed position.
Blust when modified by the teaching of Thompson above necessarily disclose wherein the opening is radially outward of the first sealing member relative to an axis of the housing.
Regarding claim 22, Blust in view of Liberfarb and Thompson further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 21, wherein the inlet port is configured to receive a flow of the operating fluid. (Page 2, lines 6-36)
Regarding claim 25, Blust in view of Liberfarb and Thompson further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 21, wherein the operating fluid is upstream of the flow channel and downstream of the central section of the housing when the operating fluid force or the operating fluid pressure at the inlet port is less than the threshold value. (the invention of Blust is capable of meeting this limitation during operation)
Claim(s) 6, 23, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blust in view of Liberfarb, Thompson, and Jukes et al. (US 2016/0124441, hereafter “Jukes”).
Regarding claim 6, Blust in view of Liberfarb and Thompson further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 5, but fails to disclose wherein the housing further comprises: a second sealing member positioned between the poppet and the housing configured to inhibit the operating fluid from bypassing the flow metering orifice or the first sealing member.
Jukes teaches a valve assembly wherein the housing comprises: a sealing member (133) positioned between the valve (3) and the housing (2) configured to inhibit the operating fluid from bypassing the flow metering orifice or the first sealing member.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the housing at the spot where the poppet moves along of Blust to include a sealing member as taught by Jukes since this is combining prior art elements (seals) according to known methods to yield predictable results (providing a fluid seal). The motivation to do so is to ensure a proper seal is formed between the poppet and housing throughout operation of the valve.
Regarding claim 23, Blust in view of Liberfarb and Thompson further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 21, but fails to disclose wherein the housing further comprises: a second sealing member positioned between the poppet and the housing configured to inhibit the operating fluid from bypassing the flow metering orifice or the first sealing member.
Jukes teaches a valve assembly wherein the housing further comprises: a sealing member (133) positioned between the valve (3) and the housing (2) configured to inhibit the operating fluid from bypassing the flow metering orifice or the first sealing member.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the housing at the spot where the poppet moves along of Blust to include a sealing member as taught by Jukes since this is combining prior art elements (seals) according to known methods to yield predictable results (providing a fluid seal). The motivation to do so is to ensure a proper seal is formed between the poppet and housing throughout operation of the valve.
Regarding claim 24, Blust in view of Liberfarb, Thompson, and Jukes further disclose the check valve assembly of claim 23, wherein the second sealing member is positioned downstream of the central section of the housing and upstream of the biasing member. (Figs. 4 and 5)
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 PAUL J GRAY whose telephone number is (571)270-0544. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, 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.
/PAUL J GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753