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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/20/2026 has been entered following the request for continued examination filed 3/20/2026. Therefore, claims 1, 5-11, 14, 15, and 18-20 as filed 2/20/2026 are pending for consideration.
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 7-9 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.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "a longitudinally-extending trough" as well as a bottom wall, side walls and a flow-through passage. However, claim 1 recites all of these features and therefore it is unclear whether the limitations in claim 7 are intended to refer to the previously recited elements or if these limitations are intended to require additional elements.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "a disc" as well as a first material, a first portion, a flexible hinge member, a second portion, and a closed position. However, claim 1 recites all of these features and therefore it is unclear whether the limitations in claim 8 are intended to refer to the previously recited elements or if these limitations are intended to require additional elements.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "a bill" as well as a first end, a longitudinal axis, a flexible material, an opening, and a seal. However, claim 1 recites all of these features and therefore it is unclear whether the limitations in claim 9 are intended to refer to the previously recited elements or if these limitations are intended to require additional elements.
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 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, 5-10, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Duer et al. (US Patent 10,550,954) in view of Collins et al. (US Patent 11,079,033).
Regarding Claim 1, Duer discloses a check valve (abstract) comprising: (a) a tubular valve body 17 (e.g. Figure 22a) comprising a downstream end 19 (Figure 22c) and an upstream end 23 (Figure 22c); and (b) a tubular sleeve 14 positioned within the tubular valve body 17, the tubular sleeve 14 bounding a longitudinally-extending flow-through passage for fluids (col. 6, line 66 – col. 7, line 3), said sleeve 14 having an upstream fluid inlet region (near 23) and a downstream fluid outlet region (near 19), wherein the downstream end or upstream end of the tubular valve body 17 comprises an enlarged integral annular wall thickness (17, at the downstream region 19, may include a flange which corresponds to a mating flange on the conduit 12 as described in col. 12, lines 48-58; this flange is seen to necessarily provide an enlarged integral annular wall thickness to be a flange relative to the remaining structure of 17) having an outside diameter that is greater than an outside diameter of remaining portions of the tubular valve body 17 (this is seen to be necessarily achieved by a “flange”), and the remaining portions of the tubular valve body extending from the enlarged integral annular wall thickness (the remaining portions of 17 extending from the disclosed “flange”) comprise an outside diameter (e.g. outside diameter of 17 as shown in Figure 22C) that is sized to form an annular gap between the tubular valve body 17 and the receiving conduit (the limitation of the remaining portions “sized to form an annular gap between the tubular valve body and the receiving conduit” is a functional limitation and the structure of Duer is capable of meeting this limitation; i.e. the receiving conduit is not positively recited as part of the check valve and instead is recited as part of the intended use of the claimed check valve; therefore, because the remaining portions of the tubular conduit of Duer are capable of being used with a particularly sized receiving conduit such that an annular gap is formed, Duer is seen to disclose these limitations), wherein the downstream fluid outlet region (near 19) of said sleeve 14 is integrally formed with a longitudinally-extending trough 20 (best shown in Figure 2b), said trough having a bottom wall 22 and a pair of side walls 24, 26 integral with said bottom wall 22, said trough formed with said downstream fluid outlet region of said sleeve so as to provide a flow-through passage (as best shown in Figures 2a-2d), wherein the check valve further comprises a disc 30 comprising a first material (elastomeric material) affixed along a first portion of its periphery to a flexible hinge member 32, said flexible hinge member 32 affixed to and interposed between said disc 30 and said downstream fluid outlet region of said sleeve (best shown in Figure 2d), and wherein a second portion of the periphery of said disc 30 opposite said first portion rests within said trough (best shown in Figure 2b) on said bottom wall 22 of said trough when said valve is in a closed position, wherein said disc 30 opens said valve in response to positive differential pressure within said valve (col. 8, lines 3-11), and a bill 36 affixed at a first end to one or more of the group consisting of the sleeve, the flexible hinge member, and the disc (affixed at least to the sleeve as shown in Figure 22d), said bill 36 extending longitudinally downstream along a longitudinal axis of said trough (axis A’ as shown in Figure 22d in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device), said bill 36 being integrally formed with said side walls of said trough (as shown in Figure 22d), said bill 36 being formed of a flexible material and forming an opening for discharge of fluid in response to a positive differential pressure within said valve from said fluid (in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device), and said bill 36 forming a seal to prevent backflow of said fluid through said valve when no differential pressure or negative differential pressure is present (as shown in the closed position in Figure 22d).
Duer does not disclose the enlarged integral annular wall thickness has an inclined or angled shape to compress against and form a leak tight seal with a first or second end of a receiving conduit.
Collins teaches a check valve assembly and further teaches a downstream end of housing 60 includes a flange 64 having an enlarged integral annular wall thickness (as shown in Figure 6, 64 is radially thicker than portion 60), the enlarged integral annular wall thickness has an inclined or angled shape (the transition from flat surface 72 to groove 86 includes an inclined shape as shown in Figure 6’) to compress against and form a leak tight seal with a first or second end of a receiving conduit 62 (at flange 66; leak tight seal via gasket 78). The enlarged integral annular wall thickness accommodates a clamped connection (at 68).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Duer such that the tubular valve body includes a clamped flange with a sealing gasket as taught by Collins for the purpose of utilizing an attachment arrangement which is old and well-known in the art.
Regarding Claim 5, Duer in view of Collins further discloses a clamping apparatus (including clamp 68 as taught by Collins) that secures the check valve to a separate component or area (separate component including flange 66 as taught by Collins).
Regarding Claim 6, Duer in view of Collins further discloses the clamping apparatus (68 as taught by Collins as described above) comprises one or more brackets (clamp 68 is readable as a “bracket” at least because it surrounds or “brackets” both sides of flanges 64 and 66) having a first end (lower end as shown in Figure 6 of Collins) that attaches to the tubular valve body (at flange 64 as taught by Collins) and a second end (upper end as shown in Figure 6 of Collins) that is secured to the separate component or area (flange 66 as taught by Collins as described above).
Regarding Claim 7, as best understood (the limitations of claim 7 are all recited in claim 1 and are described again with respect to claim 7) Duer further discloses the downstream fluid outlet region (near 19) of said sleeve 14 is integrally formed with a longitudinally-extending trough 20 (best shown in Figure 2b), said trough having a bottom wall 22 and a pair of side walls 24, 26 integral with said bottom wall 22, said trough formed with said downstream fluid outlet region of said sleeve so as to provide a flow-through passage (as best shown in Figures 2a-2d).
Regarding Claim 8, as best understood (the limitations of claim 8 are all recited in claim 1 and are described again with respect to claim 8) Duer further discloses a disc 30 comprising a first material (elastomeric material) affixed along a first portion of its periphery to a flexible hinge member 32, said flexible hinge member 32 affixed to and interposed between said disc 30 and said downstream fluid outlet region of said sleeve (best shown in Figure 2d), and wherein a second portion of the periphery of said disc 30 opposite said first portion rests within said trough (best shown in Figure 2b) on said bottom wall 22 of said trough when said valve is in a closed position, wherein said disc 30 opens said valve in response to positive differential pressure within said valve (col. 8, lines 3-11).
Regarding Claim 9, as best understood (the limitations of claim 9 are all recited in claim 1 and are described again with respect to claim 9) Duer further discloses a bill 36 affixed at a first end to one or more of the group consisting of the sleeve, the flexible hinge member, and the disc (affixed at least to the sleeve as shown in Figure 22d), said bill 36 extending longitudinally downstream along a longitudinal axis of said trough (axis A’ as shown in Figure 22d in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device), said bill 36 being integrally formed with said side walls of said trough (as shown in Figure 22d), said bill 36 being formed of a flexible material and forming an opening for discharge of fluid in response to a positive differential pressure within said valve from said fluid (in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device), and said bill 36 forming a seal to prevent backflow of said fluid through said valve when no differential pressure or negative differential pressure is present (as shown in the closed position in Figure 22d).
Regarding Claim 10, Duer in view of Collins further discloses the downstream end of the tubular valve body (downstream end of 17 of Duer) comprises the enlarged integral annular wall thickness (enlarged integral annular wall thickness defined by the flange as taught by Collins at 64).
Regarding Claim 18, Duer in view of Collins discloses a check valve assembly comprising: (i) the check valve according to claim 1 (as described above); and (ii) a clamping apparatus (including clamp 68 as taught by Collins) that secures the check valve to a separate component or area (separate component including flange 66 as taught by Collins).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 14, 15, 19, and 20 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/20/2026 with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, applicant argues that the amendments to claim 1 have incorporated the allowable subject matter of claims 16 and 17. These arguments are not persuasive because claim 1 does not require all of the limitations of previously presented claim 17, including at least the receiving conduit. Therefore, the combination of Duer in view of Collins is seen to disclose all of the limitations of claim 1 as described above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN MURPHY whose telephone number is (571)270-5243. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached on (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 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.
/KEVIN F MURPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights