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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“flow rate measuring part” in claims 1-5.
“communication interval setting part” in claims 1-7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yakohata (US 2012/0221259), which shows all of the claimed limitations. Yakohata shows:
1. A gas shutoff device comprising: a flow rate measuring part 104 that measures a flow rate of gas flowing through a flow passage; a shutoff valve 122 that shuts off the flow passage; a wireless communicator that periodically performs wireless communication externally (para. 0143); and a communication interval setting part that sets a communication interval in the wireless communication, wherein the communication interval setting part sets the communication interval according to the flow rate of gas measured by the flow rate measuring part (para. 0144).
2. The gas shutoff device according to claim 1, wherein, when the communication interval setting part determines based on the flow rate of gas measured by the flow rate measuring part that gas is not being used, the communication interval setting part sets the communication interval to a possible longest time that is preset, and when the communication interval setting part determines based on the flow rate of gas measured by the flow rate measuring part that the gas is being used, the communication interval setting part sets the communication interval to be shorter than the possible longest time (para. 0084,0093,0109).
3. The gas shutoff device according to claim 1, wherein the flow rates of gas measured by the flow rate measuring part are categorized into a plurality of gas flow rate categories each having a predetermined flow rate band, and the communication interval setting part sets the communication interval according to one of the gas flow rate categories to which the flow rate of gas measured by the flow rate measuring part belongs (fig. 6-18; para. 0084,0117,0119).
4. The gas shutoff device according to claim 2, wherein the flow rates of gas measured by the flow rate measuring part are categorized into a plurality of gas flow rate categories each having a predetermined flow rate band, and the communication interval setting part sets the communication interval according to one of the gas flow rate categories to which the flow rate of gas measured by the flow rate measuring part belongs (fig. 6-18; para. 0084,0117,0119).
5. The gas shutoff device according to claim 1, wherein, when the communication interval setting part determines based on the flow rate of gas measured by the flow rate measuring part that the gas is started to be used, the communication interval setting part sets the communication interval to a possible shortest time for a predetermined time period (fig. 6-18; para. 0084,0117,0119).
6. The gas shutoff device according to claim 1, wherein the communication interval setting part sets the communication interval after the shutoff valve is shut off to a possible shortest time that is preset, for a predetermined time period (fig. 6-18; para. 0084,0117,0119).
7. The gas shutoff device according to claim 5, wherein the communication interval setting part sets the communication interval after the shutoff valve is shut off to a possible shortest time that is preset, for a predetermined time period (fig. 6-18; para. 0084,0117,0119).
Claims 1 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tanabe (JP 2008256535), which shows all of the claimed limitations. Tanabe shows:
1. A gas shutoff device comprising: a flow rate measuring part 17 that measures a flow rate of gas flowing through a flow passage; a shutoff valve 2c that shuts off the flow passage; a wireless communicator that periodically performs wireless communication externally (para. 0143); and a communication interval setting part that sets a communication interval in the wireless communication, wherein the communication interval setting part sets the communication interval according to the flow rate of gas measured by the flow rate measuring part (para. 0144).
8. The gas shutoff device according to claim 1, further comprising a vibration detector 2d configured to: detect vibration; and when the vibration is more than or equal to a predetermined magnitude, either: (i) determine that an earthquake has occurred, and then output an earthquake occurrence signal; or (ii) output a vibration value corresponding to a magnitude of the vibration (para. 0025).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. These references disclose devices with many of the claimed components. Nevertheless, in order to avoid overburdening the applicant with redundant rejections, these references were not applied.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFRED BASICHAS whose telephone number is 571 272 4871. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday during regular business hours.
To contact the examiner’s supervisor please call MICHAEL HOANG whose telephone number is 571 272 6460.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Tech Center telephone number is 571 272 3700.
September 24, 2026
/ALFRED BASICHAS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights