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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action responds to the amendment filed on 09/26/2025. Claims 1-7 and 9-13 are pending in the application. Claims 1, 2, 6-7, and 13 have been amended. Claim 8 is recently cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6-9, filed on 04/10/2013, with respect to the rejection of amended claims 1 and 7 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of new reference as indicated in the below rejection.
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) 1-2, and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rasmussen (US 8,596,296).
With regards to claim 1:
Rasmussen discloses (refer to Fig. 1 below) a pressure independent control valve (1) comprising:
a valve body (2) comprising a fluid inlet (3) having a first pressure (inlet pressure) and a fluid outlet (4) having a third pressure (outlet pressure),
a fluid path (18, 10) between the fluid inlet (3) and the fluid outlet (4), the fluid path having a second pressure (measured by sensor (7));
a pressure differential control (9);
a fluid path pressure sensor (7) configured to measure the second pressure; and
a sleeve (S) inserted within the valve body (2);
whereby the pressure differential control comprises a chamber (10, 18) in fluid communication with the fluid inlet (3) or the fluid outlet (4);
whereby when the chamber (10, 18) is in fluid communication with the fluid outlet (4), the sleeve comprising a first fluid channel (10) extending between the fluid outlet (4) and the chamber (10, 18) to guide fluid to flow from the fluid outlet to the chamber, or whereby when the chamber (10, 18) is in fluid communication with the fluid inlet (3), the sleeve comprising a second fluid channel (18) extending between the fluid inlet (3) and the chamber (10, 18) to guide fluid to flow from the fluid inlet to the chamber.
With regards to claim 2:
Rasmussen discloses the pressure independent control valve according to claim 1,
wherein the sleeve (S) further comprising a third fluid channel (14) extending between the fluid path (10, 18) and the fluid path pressure sensor (7) to guide fluid from the fluid path to the fluid path pressure sensor.
PNG
media_image1.png
1293
1182
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 2
With regards to claim 6:
Rasmussen discloses a fluid system comprising:
the pressure-independent control valve according to claim 1;
a first fluid pipe (not shown) coupled to the fluid inlet of the pressure independent control valve; and
a second fluid pipe (not shown) coupled to the fluid outlet of the pressure independent control valve.
With regards to claim 7:
In making and/or using the device of Rasmussen, one would necessarily perform a method of distributing fluid pressure in a pressure-independent control valve, the method comprising:
when a chamber (10, 18) is in fluid communication with a fluid outlet (4) and a first fluid channel (10) of an inserted sleeve (S) extends between the chamber and the fluid outlet (4):
wherein the fluid outlet has a third pressure (outlet pressure),
guiding fluid to flow from the fluid outlet (4) to the chamber (10, 18) via the first fluid channel (10) of the inserted sleeve; or
when the chamber is in fluid communication with a fluid inlet (3) and a second fluid channel (18) of the inserted sleeve (S) extends between the chamber (10, 18) and the fluid inlet (3), wherein the fluid inlet has a first pressure (inlet pressure),
guiding fluid to flow from the fluid inlet (3) to the chamber (10, 18) via the second fluid channel (18) of the inserted sleeve (S),
guiding fluid to flow from a fluid path (10, 18) to a fluid path pressure sensor (7) via a third fluid channel (14) formed in the inserted sleeve (S),
wherein the fluid path (10, 18) has a second pressure; and
monitoring the fluid pressure of the fluid path using the fluid path pressure sensor (7).
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) 4-5, and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rasmussen.
With regards to claims 4 and 11:
Rasmussen discloses the pressure independent control valve according to claim 1 and 2 (see rejected claims 1 and 2 above), except the sleeve comprises a plastic material. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the sleeve of the pressure independent control valve of Rasmussen from plastic material which is commonly used for valve, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945).
With regards to claims 5 and 12:
Rasmussen, as modified, discloses the pressure independent control valve according to claim 1 and 2 wherein the sleeve comprises a plastic material, except the sleeve is manufactured by an injection moulding technique. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the injection moulding technique to manufacture the sleeve of the pressure independent control valve of Rasmussen, since it was known in the art that injection moulding technique is commonly used to manufacturing plastic parts.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 9-10, and 13 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 Minh Le, whose telephone number is 571-270-3805. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:30AM-5:00PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881 or Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MINH Q LE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753