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 Claims
Claims 1-14 are currently pending
Claims 3, 6-7 and 12-13 are currently amended
Claims 1-14 are currently rejected
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 07/15/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and has been considered. An initialed copy of the Form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Lines 5, 7, 9, 13, 14 and 15 each state “conductivity” and instead should each state “the conductivity” for further clarity. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 1 states “comprising” and instead should include a colon after to further recite “comprising:” for further clarity. FURTHERMORE, line 4 states “supplies current” and instead should state “supplies the current” for further clarity. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 1 states “comprising” and instead should include a colon after to further recite “comprising:” for further clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 2 states “comprising” and instead should include a colon after to further recite “comprising:” for further clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 2 states “comprising” and instead should include a colon after to further recite “comprising:” for further clarity. FURTHERMORE, line 3 states “having conductivity” and instead should state “having the conductivity” for further clarity. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 1 states “comprising” and instead should include a colon after to further recite “comprising:” for further clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 1 states “comprising” and instead should include a colon after to further recite “comprising:” for further clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “the lid configured to cover” on line 2 of claim 1, “a valve disc having conductivity and movably supported by the valve shaft and configured to close the bypass passage” on lines 9-10 of claim 1, and “wherein the valve body includes a bridge portion disposed inside the sleeve portion and configured to support the valve shaft,” on lines 2-3 of claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 1-14 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 1 recites the limitation "a valve disc having conductivity and movably supported by the valve shaft and configured to close the bypass passage” on lines 9-10. It is unclear and confusing what is configured to close the bypass passage, the valve disc or the valve shaft? Claims 2-14 are also rejected since these claims depend on claim 1.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "a lower surface of the lid” on line 4. It is unclear and confusing whether Applicant is referring to the same ‘a lower surface’ as recited on line 2 of claim 3, or a different lower surface of the lid? Claim 5 is also rejected since this claim depends on claim 4.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "an elastic force” on line 5. It is unclear and confusing whether Applicant is referring to the same ‘an elastic force’ as recited on 3 of claim 8, or a different elastic force? Claims 10-12 are also rejected since these claims depend on claim 9.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "wherein the valve body includes a bridge portion disposed inside the sleeve portion and configured to support the valve shaft,” on lines 2-3. It is unclear and confusing what is configured to support the valve shaft, the valve body or the bridge portion or the sleeve portion? Claim 11 is also rejected since this claim depends on claim 10.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-14 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,539,474 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims 1-14 are broad enough and further disclosed by claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,539,474 B2.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama et al. (U.S. 2018/0361283 A1) (hereinafter “Yoko”) in view of Girondi (U.S. 2008/0296288 A1) (hereinafter “Girondi”).
Regarding Claim 1:
Yoko teaches an oil filter device (see FIG. 3) (see paragraphs 1, 10 and 44-53) comprising:
a filter case including a case body and a lid (see FIG. 3, an oil filter 14 including a case body 14A and a lid 14B) (see paragraphs 44-47), the lid configured to cover a case opening provided in the case body (see FIG. 3, an oil filter 14 including a case body 14A and a lid 14B covering a top surface of the case body) (see paragraphs 44-47);
a filter element disposed in a main passage provided in an internal space of the filter case (see FIG. 3, a filter element 15 disposed in a main passage (reference character not provided) in an internal space (no reference character) of the filter case body 14A) (see paragraphs 44-45, 49, 59 and 77);
a valve body disposed in a bypass passage provided in the internal space (see FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see paragraphs 45 and 47-53);
a valve shaft supported by the valve body via a valve insulating member (see FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see paragraphs 45 and 47-53);
a valve disc movably supported by the valve shaft and configured to close the bypass passage by coming into contact with the valve body (see FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see paragraphs 45 and 47-53);
a valve elastic member that generates an elastic force to bring the valve disc into contact with the valve body (see FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see paragraphs 45 and 47-53);
an input member supported by the lid via a case insulating member (see FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see paragraphs 45 and 47-53);
a relay elastic member connected to the input member (see FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see paragraphs 45 and 47-53);
a relay member fixed to the valve shaft and connected to the relay clastic member (see FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see paragraphs 45 and 47-53); and
a controller (see FIGS. 2 and 4, a controller 20) that supplies current to the valve disc via the input member to determine whether the bypass passage is closed based on an energization state across the valve disc and the valve body (see FIGS. 2 and 4, a controller 20) (see FIG. 5 further illustrating a valve closed state and a valve open state) (see FIGS. 8-9 further illustrating method steps of the oil filter device) (see paragraphs 59 and 61-69).
Although Yoko teaches an oil filter device including all of the structural components as claimed, Yoko does not explicitly teach the claim limitation ‘conductivity’, as recited in independent claim 1 (an apparatus).
Girondi further teaches a similar oil filter device (see Girondi FIG. 1) including conductive elements 31, 32 (see Girondi paragraphs 2, 10, 25 and 29-30).
Yoko and Girondi are analogous inventions in the art of teaching an oil filter device. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the oil filter device of Yoko to include conductive elements of Girondi in order to provide conductivity throughout the oil filter device and structural components of Yoko for optimization purposes (see Girondi paragraphs 2, 10, 25 and 29-30).
Regarding Claim 2:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 1, wherein Yoko further comprising:
a lead wire disposed in an external space of the filter case and connected to the input member (see Yoko FIG. 3, a sensor 18 further including a movable portion 18A, a magnet 18B, and a sensor body 18C) (see Yoko paragraphs 54-61),
wherein the controller supplies current to the input member via the lead wire (see Yoko FIGS. 2 and 4, a controller 20) (see Yoko FIG. 5 further illustrating a valve closed state and a valve open state) (see Yoko FIGS. 8-9 further illustrating method steps of the oil filter device) (see Yoko paragraphs 59 and 61-69).
Regarding Claim 3:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 1,
wherein Yoko further teaches the lid includes an upper surface, a lower surface facing the internal space, and a through hole penetrating the upper surface and the lower surface (see Yoko FIG. 3, an oil filter 14 including a case body 14A and a lid 14B covering a top surface of the case body) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a hole 142) (see Yoko paragraphs 44-47),
the input member includes a shaft portion disposed inside the through hole (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53), and
the case insulating member is disposed between an inner surface of the through hole and an outer surface of the shaft portion (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 4:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 3,
wherein Yoko further teaches the input member includes a plate portion connected to a lower end of the shaft portion (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53), and
the case insulating member is disposed between a lower surface of the lid and an upper surface of the plate portion (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 5:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 4, wherein Yoko further comprising
a fixing member coupled to an upper portion of the shaft portion so as to fix the input member to the lid (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53),
wherein the case insulating member is disposed between a lower surface of the fixing member and the upper surface of the lid (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 6:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 3, wherein Yoko further comprising:
a seal member that seals a boundary between the lid and the input member (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 7:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 1, wherein Yoko further comprising:
a case elastic member having conductivity and disposed between the lid and the valve body (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53),
wherein, in a state where the valve disc is in contact with the valve body, the current supplied to the valve disc flows through the lid (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 8:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 7,
wherein Yoko further teaches the valve body is supported by the filter element (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53), and
the case elastic member generates an elastic force so as to allow the valve body to be pressed against the filter element (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 9:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 8,
wherein Yoko further teaches the filter element has a cylindrical shape (see Yoko FIG. 3, a filter element 15 disposed in a main passage (reference character not provided) in an internal space (no reference character) of the filter case body 14A) (see Yoko paragraphs 44-45, 49, 59 and 77),
the valve body includes: a sleeve portion disposed inside the filter element; and a flange portion supported by an upper surface of the filter element (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53), and
the case elastic member generates an elastic force so as to allow the flange portion to be pressed against the upper surface of the filter element (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 10:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 9,
wherein Yoko further teaches the valve body includes a bridge portion disposed inside the sleeve portion and configured to support the valve shaft (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53), and
the valve insulating member is disposed between the bridge portion and the valve shaft (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 11:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 10, wherein Yoko further comprising:
a positioning member disposed above the bridge portion and coupled to the valve shaft so as to allow the valve shaft to be positioned onto the valve body (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53),
wherein the valve insulating member is disposed between a lower surface of the positioning member and an upper surface of the bridge portion (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 12:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 9,
wherein Yoko further teaches the valve disc is disposed below the sleeve portion and closes the bypass passage by coming in contact with a lower end of the sleeve portion (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 13:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 1,
wherein Yoko further teaches the valve disc is disposed below the valve body (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53), and
the valve elastic member is disposed below the valve disc (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Regarding Claim 14:
The combination of Yoko in view of Girondi teaches the oil filter device according to claim 13, wherein Yoko further comprising:
a support member fixed to a lower end of the valve shaft (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53),
wherein an upper end of the valve elastic member is connected to the valve disc (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53), and
a lower end of the valve elastic member is supported by the support member (see Yoko FIG. 2, a control valve 13) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a valve 17 having a valve body 17A, a valve stem (shaft) 17B, a valve body (disc) 17C, a coil spring 17D, and a bypass channel 16) (see Yoko FIG. 3, a coil spring 14C, a plate 14D, and a plate 15B) (see Yoko paragraphs 45 and 47-53).
Other References Considered
MIYATAKE et al. (U.S. 2018/0178210 A1) (hereinafter “Miya”) teaches a cation exchange resin and membrane, and a fuel cell electrolyte membrane.
TAKU et al. (U.S. 2018/0104629 A1) (hereinafter “Taku”) teaches a return filter including a tank, sensor, filter element, wherein a vortex is formed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKASH K. VARMA whose telephone number is (571)272-9627. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 pm.
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, Benjamin L. Lebron can be reached at (571)-272-0475. 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.
/AKASH K VARMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
