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 .
Preliminary Amendment
Acknowledgement is hereby made to the Preliminary Amendment filed 16 April 2024. Claims 1-11 are pending in the application. Claims 1-11 have been amended.
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.
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 1-11 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.
In claim 1, lines 9 and 10, (two occurrences), “the piston” is indefinite for lacking sufficient antecedent basis in the claims because two pistons have been previously recited, a piston of the pump and a piston of the motor, rendering it unclear which piston this refers to. This renders the scope of the claim subject to uncertainty. For examination, it is assumed to be the piston of the motor. Correction is required.
Note that additional occurrences of “the piston” in dependent claims 7, 9, 10 and 11 are similarly indefinite for the same reasons set forth above.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brevini et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0379489) in view of Thierry et al. (U. S. Patent No. 7,207,260).
As to claim 1, Brevini et al. discloses a proportional volumetric dosing unit (FIG.’s 1-8, Abstract) comprising:
a pump 30 (FIG. 2, para. 0047) provided with a piston 62 (para. 0077) adapted to supply an auxiliary fluid to a motor 20 Id., of the proportional volumetric dosing unit itself (para. 0075),
wherein the motor 20 moves the piston 62 the pump 30 (para. 0077) and is fluidly connected to an inlet conduit 85 (para. 0075) of a main fluid and an outlet conduit 26 of a mixed fluid, said motor 20 comprising a piston 22 (para. 0048) slidably housed in a cylinder 20b of the motor along a sliding axis (shown) and connected to the piston 62 of the pump 30 to move the piston 22.
Brevini is silent as to the piston comprises an annular sealing lip protruding from a top of the piston, and an end portion thereof distal from the top of the piston is applied in contact to the cylinder making a fluid seal, wherein said proportional volumetric dosing unit comprises an elastic element which pushes the annular sealing lip against the cylinder. To this point, Thierry teaches a reciprocating machine hydraulic motor (FIG. 2, col. 3, ll. 27-30) with a piston 9 having a sealing lip 12a protruding from the top of the piston 9 in contact with the cylinder and an elastic element 12b which pushes the sealing lip against the cylinder (FIG. 8, ll. 1-6, inter alia). With this in mind, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Brevini with a piston sealing lip arrangement configured as claimed in order to bias and seal the piston against the cylinder housing as taught by Thierry, Id.
As to claim 2, once modified, Thierry further teaches the annular sealing lip 12a comprises a free end portion (shown) and an opposite end portion proximal to the top of the piston 9, and wherein the elastic element 12b is in contact with the end portion (FIG. 8, as shown).
As to claim 3, once modified, Thierry further teaches the elastic element 12b is a body made of elastomeric material (col. 4, ln. 3).
As to claim 4, once modified, Thierry further teaches the annular sealing lip 12a is made of a non- elastomeric polymeric material (col. 3, ln. 3, “PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene),” a non-elastomeric polymeric material).
As to claim 5, once modified, Thierry further teaches the elastic element 12b is annular in shape (col. 4, ln. 5, “inner ring section 12b” is annular in shape).
As to claim 11, the applied art is silent as to the annular sealing lip is made in a monolithic body with the rest of the piston. However, forming components integrally has is common-place in order to simplify construction and installation for example. With this in mind, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to form the sealing lip as a monolithic body of the piston in order to simplify construction and/or installation of the components since it has been commonly held that forming components integrally requires only routine skill in the art. Refer to MPEP § 2144.04(II) B.
Claims 6, 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brevini et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0379489) in view of Thierry et al. (U. S. Patent No. 7,207,260) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Thurner (WIPO International Patent Publication No. WO 2004/011804).1
As to claim 6, the applied art is discussed above but is silent as to the elastic element is held in a predetermined position where it is applied onto the lip by a locking device integral with the piston. To this point, Thurner teaches a piston sealing lip arrangement 17 having an elastomeric element 18 held in position by a locking device 16, 28 integral with the piston 20 (FIG. 3, Mach. Trans ‘MT” p. 3, last para., inter alia). With this in mind, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the applied art by providing a locking device configured in the manner claimed in order to securely locate the elastomeric element in place against the sealing lip as demonstrated by Thurner.
As to claim 7, once modified, Thurner further teaches the locking device 16, 28 is removably associated with the piston 20 (as shown, under broadest reasonable interpretation of the term removable).
As to claim 9, once modified, Thurner further teaches the locking device 16, 28 comprises a locking body 28 provided with a first annular wall (refer to an Annotated copy of Thurner FIG. 3 attached below, as shown and indicated)), which rises from a portion of the piston 20 top closer to the sliding axis than a portion of the piston top from which the annular sealing lip 17 rises (shown), and a second annular wall (shown) which extends contiguously from the first annular wall in a direction away from the sliding axis of the piston 20 (as shown, laterally or radially), and wherein the elastic element 18 is interposed directly in contact between the annular sealing lip 17, the first annular wall (shown) and the second annular wall (shown).
PNG
media_image1.png
672
515
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Thurner FIG. 3
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record either alone or in combination does not teach or fairly suggest the volumetric dosing unit of claim 1 including, inter alia, limitations in the intervening claims further wherein the locking device configured in the manner claimed with a body wall comprising a through hole as recited in claim 8, or a flange screwed to the top of the piston as recited in claim 10.
It is the Examiner’s opinion that modification of the applied art is neither contemplated nor reasonably foreseeable without benefit of the disclosure of the instant invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH J HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6780. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM (MT).
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, Mark Laurenzi can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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.
/KENNETH J HANSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
1 Cited in the IDS filed 16 April 2026 with a copy provided.
Prosecution Insights