DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1,2,4-13,21-27 are pending, and claims 14-20 have been cancelled.
This is in response to the amendment filed 7/15/2026.
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants argument that the prior art to Lee et al. does not provide a single cavity is not persuasive, since the opening 270 connects the two inner bores of housing 260, surrounding the valve 255a,b, making a single cavity. Lee et al. disclose that each of the plurality of cartridges (255a,b) comprises a body portion (the outer circumference of 255a,b) comprising a cylinder body (the body of 255a,b) that defines a hollow cavity (the inherent inner cavity of 255a,b, and 270, see Fig. 2 and col.6,lns. 5-13) having an open end (at the left ends of 255a,b), the body portion defining one or more exit holes (250a,250b) in a sidewall of the cylinder body; wherein each of the plurality of cartridges further defines a self-contained flow channel (the channels from the left ends to either of the exit holes) through which the fluid received via the open end of the hollow cavity flows through the hollow cavity and out of the cartridge via the one or more exit holes of that cartridge to a corresponding one of the one or more outlet housing ports (the housing ports connected to 292,294,296,298 and at 270).
PNG
media_image1.png
371
379
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Since applicants arguments are not persuasive, this action has been made Final
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 2/24/2026 has been acknowledged in the prior action.
Claims 14-20 are now cancelled, and additionally new claim 26, is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 2/24/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of the election of subspecies I in the reply filed on 2/24/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the requirement did not clarify the specific embodiments in the specification or the drawings. This is found persuasive, although the linking species (MPEP 809) do require a different search query, such as the term seal, bearing or manifold, for the purposes of this action, claims 1-13 will be examined.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 7/15/2026. These drawings are accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1,2,4-7,12 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 9988966).
Regarding claim 1, Lee et al. disclose a rotating valve system (110) comprising:
a housing (260) defining a valve cavity (the openings surrounding 225a,b and 270), wherein the housing includes one or more inlet ports (at 130,140) and one or more outlet housing ports (the housing ports connected to 292,294,296,298 and at 270);
a valve assembly (255a,255b,265,210,215) positioned within the valve cavity and configured to receive fluid via the one or more inlet ports at a first rate and to output the fluid via the one or more outlet housing ports at a second rate (inherently the rate of fluid will change from the inlet to the outlet due to pressures losses in the internal passageways), wherein the valve assembly comprises a plurality of cartridges (255a,b with mating stem) mechanically engaged with one another and each of the plurality of cartridges being configured to rotate about an axis of rotation between a first position and a second position; and
wherein each of the plurality of cartridges (255a,b) comprises a body portion (the outer circumference of 255a,b) comprising a cylinder body (the body of 255a,b) that defines a hollow cavity (the inherent inner cavity of 255a,b, see Fig. 2 and col.6,lns. 5-13) having an open end (at the left ends of 255a,b), the body portion defining one or more exit holes (250a,250b) in a sidewall of the cylinder body; wherein each of the plurality of cartridges further defines a self-contained flow channel (the channels from the left ends to either of the exit holes) through which the fluid received via the open end of the hollow cavity flows through the hollow cavity and out of the cartridge via the one or more exit holes of that cartridge to a corresponding one of the one or more outlet housing ports (the housing ports connected to 292,294,296,298 and at 270); and
a drive assembly (200,205,210,215) configured to rotate the plurality of cartridges between the first position and the second position.
PNG
media_image2.png
455
474
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Lee et al. disclose each of the plurality of cartridges comprises a gear portion (at 210,215).
Regarding claim 4, Lee et al. disclose when in the first position, the at least one exit hole is configured to not align with any of the one or more outlet housing ports to prevent fluid flow therethrough (col. 5, lns. 54- Col. 6, lns 4, “the sealing member 265 may inhibit or prevent coolant”).
Regarding claim 5, Lee et al. disclose when in the second position, the at least one exit hole is configured to fully align with one of the one or more outlet housing ports to enable fluid flow therethrough (col. 5, lns. 54-56).
Regarding claim 6, Lee et al. disclose each of the plurality of cartridges is configured to rotate between the first position and the second position via an intermediate position and, when in the intermediate position (as the cartridges rotate they are configured to have the intermediate position, first and second positions), the at least one exit hole is configured to partially align with one of the one or more outlet housing ports to enable partial fluid flow therethrough (as shown, 255a having the different spaced holes (250a exit hole) is configured to operate in the claimed manner).
Regarding claim 7, Lee et al. disclose a seal (265) positioned at a flow interface between the housing and the cartridge.
PNG
media_image1.png
371
379
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Lee et al. disclose the drive assembly comprises an actuator (M,200), a driveshaft (the shaft connected from M to 205), and a drive gear (205), wherein the drive gear is configured to interface with the valve assembly via a gear portion (one of the gear teeth at 210) formed in or on one of the plurality of cartridges.
Regarding claim 25, Lee et al. discloses, a rotating valve system (See Fig. 2) for an internal combustion engine cooling system (col.1,lns. 14-55), the rotating valve system comprising: a housing (260) defining a valve cavity (the openings surrounding 225a,b and 270), a plurality of inlet ports (at 130,140) in fluid communication with the valve cavity, and a plurality of outlet housing ports (the housing ports connected to 292,294,296,298 and at 270) in fluid communication with the valve cavity; a plurality of cartridges (255a,b with stems) disposed within the valve cavity, each of the plurality of cartridges comprising a cylinder body (at 255a,b) defining a hollow cavity (the inherent inner cavity of 255a,b, see Fig. 2 and col.6,lns. 5-13) having an open end fluidically coupled to one of the plurality of inlet ports and a closed end (the end nearest the stem) opposite the open end, the cylinder body defining one or more exit holes (250a,b) in a sidewall thereof, and a gear portion (210,215) adjacent the closed end, wherein the gear portion of each of the plurality of cartridges is meshed with the gear portion of an adjacent one (210 or 215) of the plurality of cartridges to form a gear train; and an actuator (205,200) comprising a drive gear (205) meshed with the gear train and configured to rotate the plurality of cartridges about respective axes of rotation.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. ‘966 in view of Jang et al. (US 10352460).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Lee et al. disclose a seal, although are silent that this seal comprises a PTFE ring and an annular ring, and, wherein the annular ring is configured to provide a spring force that biases the PTFE ring to maintain contact with a surface of the cartridge during rotation thereof.
Jang et al. teach the use of a seal comprises a PTFE ring (220) and an annular ring (230), and, wherein the annular ring is configured to provide a spring force (due to the rubber material within 230) that biases the PTFE ring to maintain contact with a surface of the cartridge during rotation thereof.
PNG
media_image3.png
550
771
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a sealing assembly having the PTFE ring and annular ring as taught by Jang et al. for the oring in Lee et al. to have the seal comprises a PTFE ring and an annular ring, and, wherein the annular ring is configured to provide a spring force that biases the PTFE ring to maintain contact with a surface of the cartridge during rotation thereof, since it has been held, that an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component (one sealing means for another seal means) or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious. Additionally, the well-known expected outcome of providing a seal for the valve, would result from the combination. Additionally, the seal modification being made in order to provide for a sealing structure to be more stable (Jang et al., col. 2, lns. 1-4).
Claim(s) 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. ‘966 in view of Gill et al. (US 20230235832).
Regarding claim 10, Lee et al. disclose a housing, although are silent to having a manifold coupled to the housing and configured to receive the fluid via the one or more outlet housing ports.
Gill et al. teach the use of a manifold (14c or 14d) coupled to the housing (12) and configured to receive the fluid via the one or more outlet housing ports.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a manifold as taught by Gill et al. into the device of Lee et al. to have a manifold coupled to the housing and configured to receive the fluid via the one or more outlet housing ports, in order to provide for connection locations that can be flexible for different various locations of the multiple fluid conduits (Gill, et al., para.0003).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. ‘966 in view of Britton (US 2399460).
Regarding claim 11, Lee et al. disclose that each cartridge includes a first bearing (the opening through housing 260 that each valve stem from the gear connects to the valve), although are silent to having a second bearing to support the cartridge during rotation thereof.
Britton teaches the use of a second bearing (42, page 2, left col., lns 25-31) to support the cartridge during rotation thereof.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a bearing as taught by Britton into the device of Lee et al. to have a second bearing to support the cartridge during rotation thereof, in order to provide a proper alignment of the flow openings through the device and to have the spaced relation to the walls of the chamber (Britton, page 2, left col., lns 30-34).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. ‘966 in view of Paralkar et al. (US 20250129855).
Regarding claim 13, Lee et al. disclose all of the features of the claimed invention, although are silent to having a bearing and a seal surrounding at least a portion of the driveshaft. Paralkar et al. teach the use of a bearing (80) and a seal (82) surrounding at least a portion of the driveshaft (41).
PNG
media_image4.png
1165
1050
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a bearing and seal as taught by Paralkar et al. into the device of Lee et al. to have a bearing and a seal surrounding at least a portion of the driveshaft, in order to provide smooth rotation of the shaft and a sealing mechanism to ensure the fluid stays within the main valve housing.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-24 are allowed. None of the prior art of record discloses or renders as obvious, “the valve assembly comprising a plurality of cartridges mechanically engaged with one another and each defining its own self-contained flow channel, each of the plurality of cartridges comprising a body portion and a gear portion formed as a unitary structure”, in combination with the rest of the limitations in claim 21.
Claim 27 is 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 Craig Price, whose telephone number is (571)272-2712 or via facsimile (571)273-2712. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:00AM-4:30PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3607, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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.
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) Form at Form at;
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
/CRAIG J PRICE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights