Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/774,606

Rotary Hydraulic Valve

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 16, 2024
Examiner
COLLINS, DANIEL S.
Art Unit
3745
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
506 granted / 596 resolved
+14.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
630
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
40.5%
+0.5% vs TC avg
§102
33.8%
-6.2% vs TC avg
§112
20.0%
-20.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 596 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/9/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of claim 1-7 in the reply filed on 11/18/25 is acknowledged. 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. Claim(s) 1,2,6, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kehoe et al., U.S. Patent Publication 20160252112 A1 (hereinafter “Kehoe”) in view of T.J Little, U.S. Patent 1104519 (hereinafter “Little”) In Reference to Claim 1; Kehoe discloses A rotary shear seal valve, comprising: a valve body (34; See Annotated Figure as well);a first tooth (60) extending radially from the valve body in a first angular direction; a second tooth (64) extending radially from the valve body in a second angular direction; and a shear seal disc (not labeled, but shown in annotated figure). PNG media_image1.png 644 642 media_image1.png Greyscale Kehoe fails to disclose wherein the Rotary shear valve has a valve body containing a first and second pair of teeth. However, in the same field of endeavor, Rotary valves, Little discloses a rotary valve wherein the control of the valve is controlled by a pawl 26 engaging a pair of teeth 16. The pair of teeth designated for precise rotational control of the desired open and close positions for said valve acting as a stop for fully open and fully closed. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Kehoe such that it contains a pair of teeth as taught by Little instead of a single tooth because such a modification would allow for more precise rotational control serving as a end of rotation position for the bidirectional valve (as done in Little). In Reference to Claim 2: Kehoe as modified further discloses wherein the first angular direction of the first pare teeth retains a rotational orientation of the valve body in a clockwise direction and the second angular direction of the second pair of teeth retains a rotational orientation of the valve body in a counterclockwise direction. See, Annotated Figure above which illustrates the tooth being angled clockwise and counter clockwise. In Reference to Claim 6: Kehoe as modified further discloses wherein the first pair of teeth extend from the valve body at a first axial position and the second pair of teeth extend from the valve body at a second axial position. See, Kehoe which discloses that the first tooth and the second tooth of the valve body are offset and See, Little which illustrates the concept of such pair being approximately 90 degrees apart see Figure 5 or 6. In Reference to Claim 7: Kehoe as modified further wherein the first pair of teeth are angled from the valve body in an opposite direction of the second pair of teeth. See, Annotated Figure above which shows given the placement and shape of the pawls that said teeth of the valve are angled in opposite directions. Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kehoe et al., U.S. Patent Publication 20160252112 A1 (hereinafter “Kehoe”) in view of T.J Little, U.S. Patent 1104519 (hereinafter “Little”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Morris, U.S. Patent 6161583 (hereinafter “Morris”). In Reference to Claim 3-5: Kehoe as modified discloses all the limitations of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose ,wherein the shear seal disc is one of a plurality of shear seal discs positioned on an axial end of the valve body, wherein the valve body moves between a first position and a second position to provide four fluid passageways through four corresponding ports and wherein hydraulic fluid flows to a fluid reservoir in both the first position and the second position; due to the fact the Kehoe valve is a simple on/off rotary shear valve for the exhaust port of said actuator it is part of. However, in the same field of endeavor, Morris discloses a rotary valve for a double acting piston wherein the valve body moves between a first position and a second position to provide four fluid passageways through four corresponding ports and wherein hydraulic fluid flows to a fluid reservoir in both the first position and the second position. See, Figure 9 and 10 which illustrates the four fluid passageways with four corresponding ports and wherein the hydraulic fluid flows to a fluid reservoir in both the first and second position (inherent in the operation of the double actuating piston as one of the two chambers of the cylinder must be exhausted while the opposing one is filled to create movement). As such, it is known in the fluid handling art that different valves ar adaptable to different fluid conditions for direction flow based on certain requirements being met (on/off valve such as Kehoe for a single acting piston and multi port rotary valve of Morris for a double acting piston). Therefore it would have been obvious to person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Kehoe, such that the valve of Kehoe is a multi port valve as taught by Morris with a shear valve disc for each port for the purpose of applying the valve to other known fluid handling configurations such as making the rotary valve of Kehoe being capable of operating a double acting piston (such as Morris) instead of a single acting piston (Kehoe in its original configuration). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL S. COLLINS whose telephone number is (313)446-6535. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00-5:30. 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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-4648. 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. /DANIEL S COLLINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3745 /NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 16, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 06, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601150
SAFETY SYSTEM FOR MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12577968
Soft Variable Impedance Actuator Using Embedded Jamming Layer
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570393
STABILITY AND CONTROL AUGMENTATION SYSTEM ACTUATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559075
PRODUCTION-OPTIMIZED HOUSING FOR A HYDRAULIC UNIT FOR PRODUCING BRAKE PRESSURE FOR A HYDRAULIC BRAKE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12545224
RESERVOIR TANK FOR BRAKE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+5.4%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 596 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month