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 .
The amendment filed 4/23/26 has been entered.
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) 1-6, 9-15, 17-19, 21, 24, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Denton et al. (US Patent No. 8,820,751).
Regarding claim 1, the Denton et al. (hereinafter Denton) reference discloses a sealing device (Fig. 2), comprising an inner core (e.g. axially extending portion and diagonally extending portion of 39) and at least two elastic components (e.g. 66 and/or 64 and 54 and/or 46) spaced apart on a side wall of the inner core (Fig. 2); the elastic components can be fully or partially elastically deformed in a direction toward the inner core (Fig. 2); an end of the inner core is provided with a sealing component (36/38).
Regarding claim 2, the Denton reference discloses the side wall of the inner core is symmetrically provided with at least one pair of the elastic components (78, e.g. through other components).
Regarding claim 3, the Denton reference discloses the side wall of the inner core is also provided with at least one pair of fixing components (12,14, e.g. through other components).
Regarding claim 4, the Denton reference discloses each pair of the fixing components is arranged coplanarly, and each pair of the elastic components is arranged coplanarly (Fig. 2, e.g. at least partially).
Regarding claim 5, the Denton reference discloses the elastic components each comprise a rigid piece (52) and an elastic strip (e.g. any elastic part of 62);
one side of the rigid piece is connected with the side wall of the inner core (e.g. Fig. 2 through other elements), and the other side is connected to the elastic strip (e.g. Fig. 2 through other elements).
Regarding claim 6, the Denton reference, as best understood, discloses the elastic component at least comprises a connecting piece (e.g. piece immediately radially outward of 39) and a cantilever piece (e.g. base part of the elastic lips that will flex), one end of the connecting piece is provided on the side wall of the inner core (Fig. 2), and the other end is provided with the cantilever piece (Fig. 2), and there is a gap between the cantilever piece and the inner core (e.g. Fig. 2);
wherein the cantilever piece and/or the connecting piece can be elastically deformed in the direction toward the inner core (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 9, the Denton reference discloses in a non-stressed state, the cantilever piece and the inner core are arranged in parallel (e.g. at least parts).
Regarding claim 10, the Denton reference discloses the cantilever piece extends toward a side where the sealing component is located (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, the Denton reference discloses the connecting piece is fixedly connected with the side wall of the inner core (Fig. 2), the cantilever piece and the connecting piece are integrally provided (Fig. 2), and the cantilever piece can be elastically deformed in the direction toward the inner core (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 12, the Denton reference discloses the connecting piece is fixedly connected with the side wall of the inner core (Fig. 2), the cantilever piece and the connecting piece are integrally provided (Fig. 2), and the connecting piece can be elastically deformed in the direction toward the inner core (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13, the Denton reference discloses the connecting piece is fixedly connected with the side wall of the inner core (Fig. 2), the cantilever piece and the connecting piece are integrally provided (Fig. 2), and the connecting piece and the cantilever piece can be elastically deformed in the direction toward the inner core simultaneously (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 14, the Denton reference discloses the cantilever piece is made of elastic material (Fig. 2); and/or the connecting piece is made of elastic material (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 15, the Denton reference discloses the inner core has a cylindrical structure (Fig. 2), and an end of the inner core away from the sealing component is provided with a handle (e.g. portion of 39 extending radially);
wherein the handle and the inner core are coaxially and integrally provided (Fig. 2), and an outer diameter of a circumscribed circle of the handle is larger than an outer diameter of the inner core (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 17, the Denton reference discloses the sealing component is coaxially and integrally provided at an end of the inner core (Fig. 2), and an outer diameter of the sealing component is uniformly reduced in a direction away from the inner core (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, the Denton reference discloses a sealing system comprising the sealing device according to any one of claim 1, further comprising a sealed piece (e.g. 90) and a position limiting device (12 and/or 14) that allows the sealing device to be inserted or pulled out (Fig. 2); a liquid passing port a (e.g. where lips of the seal contact 53) is formed on the sealed piece, the position limiting device is cooperatively provided on an outer side of the sealed piece (Fig. 2);
wherein when the sealing device is inserted into an interior of the position limiting device, the sealing component and the liquid passing port a are sealed with each other (Fig. 2), and cantilever pieces and inner walls of the position limiting device are squeezed against each other (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 19, the Denton reference discloses the position limiting device has a cylindrical structure or a rectangular structure (Fig. 2), and when the sealing device is inserted into the interior of the position limiting device (Fig. 2), fixing components are in close contact with the inner walls of the position limiting device (Fig. 2)
wherein a bottom of the position limiting device is arranged to be in close contact with an outer wall of the sealed piece (Fig. 2), and a through hole (e.g. axial hole) which cooperates and communicates with the liquid passing port a is formed at the bottom of the position limiting device (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 21, the Denton reference discloses a liquid passing port b (e.g. port at end of lead line of 76) is also formed in the sealed piece (Fig. 2), the liquid passing port b and the liquid passing port a are connected inside the sealed piece via a bent liquid channel (Fig. 2);
wherein a pair of position limiting devices (12,14) is provided on the sealed piece, and the pair of position limiting devices is provided in cooperation with the liquid passing port b and the liquid passing port a respectively (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 24, the Denton reference discloses when the sealing component is fitted with the liquid passing port a in a sealed manner, a topmost end (e.g. left end) of a connecting piece (e.g. piece immediately radially outward of 39) is higher than a top rim (e.g. leftmost rim of 14) of the position limiting device (Fig. 2)
and a bottom (e.g. right side of connecting piece) of the connecting piece is lower than the top rim of the position limiting device (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 26, the Denton reference discloses the sealed piece is a microfluidic device (Fig. 4), and a bottom of the position limiting device has a conical cavity structure (Figs. 5,6), and a cone top of the conical cavity structure is in communication with the liquid passing port a of the microfluidic device (Fig. 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) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Denton.
Regarding claim 22, the Denton reference discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 18, including an inner diameter of an inscribed circle of the inner walls of the position limiting device is smaller than an outer diameter of a circumscribed circle of the cantilever piece (Fig. 2).
However, the Denton reference fails to explicitly disclose the that an inner diameter of an inscribed circle of the inner walls of the position limiting device is 5%-10% smaller than an outer diameter of a circumscribed circle of the cantilever piece.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the claimed range, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art and in order to ensure a proper press fit that allows the seal to stay in place after installation. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/23/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regards to the applicant’s argument of the technical solution, the argument is not persuasive. Although the seal of the Denton reference is used in a different environment from the current disclosure, the Denton reference discloses the claimed structure.
With regards to the applicant’s argument of “technical feature A”, the argument is not persuasive. The seal of the Denton reference creates a static seal against axle 40 (Col. 3, Lines 44-56). It is inherent from the “fluid-tight” seal that is disclosed that 36,64, and 66 will have a smaller inner diameter than the outer diameter of axle 40 and therefore, 64 and 66 will elastically deform radially outwardly at least towards the diagonal portion of 39. Likewise, lips 54 and 46 have a larger outer diameter than the inner diameter of 53 and would therefore elastically deform radially inwardly at least towards the diagonal portion of 39. Although the spring 52 does ensure that a seal is created between 46 and 53, the initial fit of the lip will deform radially inwardly. Furthermore, the claims only claim that “the elastic components can be fully or partially elastically deformed in a direction toward the inner core”.
With regards to the argument of the rejection of claim 22, the argument is not persuasive because of the response above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 GILBERT Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5894. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at (571)272-8322. 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.
/GILBERT Y LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
