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 the claims
Claim(s) 19 is/are amended, claim(s) 21 is/are cancelled. Currently claims 1-20, 24 are pending in this application.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Wu et al (CN 207314437 U).
Regarding claim 1, Wu discloses a valve assembly comprising: a seat ring (shown below 10); a valve plate assembly (5,10) moveable between a sealed position wherein the valve plate assembly is sealed against the seat ring, and an open position wherein the valve plate assembly is moved away from the seat ring; a fitting 6 extending through the valve plate assembly 5,10; and a sensor assembly (2 and cable 3 portion inside 6) extending through the fitting 6, a sensor 2 of the sensor assembly mounted in the fitting below the valve plate assembly.
As to claim 3, comprising Wu discloses a cable (cable 3 in 7) and a stem assembly comprising a stem body (top portion of valve stem) and a lower stem fitting (hollow portion of valve stem), wherein the sensor 3 is electronically coupled to the cable routed through (7 inside hollow portion of valve stem) the lower stem fitting attached to the valve plate assembly, and the stem assembly is configured to move the cable with the valve plate assembly between the sealed position and the open position.
Claim(s) 11, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Allen et al (20210372099).
Regarding claim 11, Allen discloses a valve assembly comprising: a seat ring 122; a valve plate assembly configured to seal against the seat ring in a sealed position, the valve plate assembly comprising a sealing disc 136 and a lower valve plate 130; and an air release valve 260,270,220,140 extending through the lower valve plate 130 of the valve plate assembly.
As to claim 13, valve plate assembly is configured to selectively move between the sealed position and an open position, and wherein in the open position, the valve plate assembly is moved away from the seat ring.
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) 1, 2, 4-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kennedy (20200080290) in view of Covey (4866839).
Regarding claim(s) 1, 9, 10, Kennedy discloses a valve assembly comprising: a seat ring 410; a valve plate assembly moveable between a sealed position wherein the valve plate assembly is sealed against the seat ring, and an open position wherein the valve plate assembly is moved away from the seat ring; and a sensor assembly 512 extending through the valve assembly below the valve plate assembly with sensor assembly 512 extending through the lower valve plate. The valve plate assembly comprises a lower valve plate 508 and the fitting comprises a head on a top end and a nut assembly on a bottom end, wherein the fitting extends through the lower valve plate and the head is on an upper side of the lower valve plate and the nut assembly is coupled to a lower side of the lower valve plate, the fitting extending through the lower valve plate the head is larger than a bore extending through the lower valve plate and the head couples to the upper side of the lower valve plate; and the nut assembly comprises a nut threadedly engaged to the fitting, the nut capturing the fitting in the lower valve plate and sealing the fitting in the lower valve plate
Kennedy fails to disclose sensor assembly extending in a fitting which extends in the valve plate. Covey teaches a method of installing a sensor in a plate 34 comprising a sensor assembly (22 and connection to terminals at 14) extending in a fitting 20-28 which extends in the plate 34. The fitting 20-28 comprises a head (20) on a top end (when viewed such that sensor 22 is at bottom) and a nut assembly 52 on a bottom end, wherein the fitting extends through the plate 34 and the head (at 14) is on an upper side of the plate and the nut assembly is coupled to a lower side of the plate, the fitting extending through the plate. The head 20 is larger than a bore 18 extending through the plate 34 and the head couples to the upper side of the plate 34; and the nut assembly comprises a nut 52 threadedly engaged to the fitting, the nut capturing the fitting in the plate and sealing the fitting in the plate.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device disclosed by Kennedy with a sensor in a fitting which removably extends in the plate (lower valve plate in Kennedy) as taught by Covey as described above in order to provide a removable sensor attachment.
As to claim 2, the valve plate assembly comprises: a lower valve plate 508, the sensor assembly 512 extending through the lower valve plate, and the sensor (in view of Covey) mounted below the lower valve plate; a sealing disc 502 mounted above the lower valve plate; an upper valve plate 404 mounted above the sealing disc 502; and a central axis extending through the lower valve plate, the sealing disc, and the upper valve plate, wherein: the sensor assembly 512 is located off-center from the central axis and comprises a cable 418a extending through the lower valve plate and at least partially through the sealing disc.
As to claim 4, Kennedy shows a shoe 450 comprising the seat ring and wherein the valve plate assembly comprises a sealing disc 502, wherein when the sealing disc is in the sealed position, a bottom side of the valve plate assembly is wet (when shoe is filled with water, Para 41), and a top side of the valve plate assembly is dry, and in the open position both the top side and the bottom side of the valve plate assembly are wet.
As to claim 5, Kennedy as modified shows fitting (at sensor 512, in view of Covey) is a first fitting and the sensor is a first sensor, and wherein the valve assembly further comprises a second sensor mounted in a second fitting (at sensor 514 in view of Covey), and a third sensor mounted in a third fitting (Para 41 discloses more than two sensors).
As to claim 6, Kennedy as modified shows the valve plate assembly comprises a lower valve plate 508 and a sealing disc 502, and wherein the first sensor 512 is electrically coupled to a first sensor cable 418a, the second sensor 514 is electrically coupled to a second sensor cable418a, and similarly the third sensor (Para 41) would also be electrically coupled to a third sensor cable, and wherein each cable 418a is captured within the valve plate assembly between the lower valve plate 508 and the sealing disc 502 (Fig. 4B)
As to claim 7, Kennedy as modified shows (Para 41) the first sensor as pressure sensor, the second sensor as temperature sensor, and fails to disclose type of the third sensor as acoustic sensor. However, Official Notice is taken that using acoustic sensor, for the purpose of detecting water flow changes are widely known and notoriously old in the art. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to employ acoustic sensor in the device of Kennedy as modified for the purpose of detecting water flow changes as is widely known and notoriously old in the art.
As to claim 8, valve plate assembly 508 defines a central axis and the first sensor 512, the second sensor 514, and extend off-center through the valve plate assembly in a symmetric (opposite each side of central axis ) pattern that surrounds the central axis. Kennedy as modified discloses a third sensor (Para 41) but fails to depict in the figures. However, when further sensors are added in symmetric pattern in the valve plate, they would form circular pattern around central axis.
Claim(s) 11-13, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kennedy (20200080290) in view of Yamamoto (JP 2003313905 A).
Regarding claim 11, 15 Kennedy discloses a valve assembly comprising: a seat ring 410; a valve plate assembly configured to seal against the seat ring in a sealed position, the valve plate assembly comprising a sealing disc 502 and a lower valve plate 508; and an air release valve extending through the lower valve plate of the valve plate assembly.
Kennedy fails to disclose an air release valve extending through the lower valve plate of the valve plate assembly. Yamamoto teaches an air release valve 9,22 extending through a lower valve plate 12 of the valve plate assembly. The air release valve comprises a float 22 comprising a top side and a bottom side, wherein the bottom side of the float is configured to be submerged in incompressible fluid, and the top side of the float is configured to align at or above a fluid surface level.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device disclosed by Kennedy with air release valve extending through the lower valve plate of the valve plate assembly with a float as taught by Yamamoto in order to release accumulated air above water in the hydrant.
As to claim 12, Kennedy (Para 10), the valve plates are made of metal covered with rubber. The sealing disc (as a middle valve plate) 502 covers top of lower valve plate 508 and is captured between seat ring 410 and lower plate 508.
As to claim 13, Kennedy discloses the valve plate assembly is configured to selectively move between the sealed position and an open position, and wherein in the open position, the valve plate assembly is moved away from the seat ring.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kennedy (20200080290) in view of Yamamoto (JP 2003313905 A) further in view of Covey (4866839).
As to claim 16, Kennedy as modified shows comprising a sensor 512 extending through the valve plate assembly; wherein the air release valve (in view of Yamamoto) is captured within a fluid column 401 and defines a release path through the valve plate assembly, and wherein the air release valve automatically removes air from one side of the valve plate assembly through the release path when the fluid surface level is between the sensor and the lower valve plate (when surface is below the float 22).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 19, 20, 22-24 is/are allowed. Claim(s) 14,17,18 is/are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/10/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments regarding Wu that “failed to show how Wu discloses … valve plate assembly moveable .. against the seat ring” are not persuasive since Wu repeatedly describes the device as a fire hydrant which is well known in the art as a valved water outlet for fire fighting. The Figures of Wu (annotated below) clearly show a fire hydrant and a valve plate 5,10 sealing against a valve seat and an actuation mechanism at top. The court has held “While it is true that drawings may not always be relied upon for anticipation of a later application, it is also true that, if a drawing clearly suggests to one skilled in the art the way in which the result sought is accomplished by whether the prior patentee's showing was accidental or intentional”. PlaSmart, Inc. v. Kappos, 482 Fed. Appx. 568, 573, 2012 BL 125031, 3 (Fed. Cir. 2012)
Examiner, to stress the point, cites prior art documents, (US-0504594-A, US-20030047210-A1, US-20210372099-A1, US-20200080290-A1, US-4866839-A, US-4307746-A, US-1882299-A, CN-205875279-U, CN-207314437-U, CN-208763120-U, JP-2003313905-A, CN-113137482-A). All these documents show similar fire hydrants with valves and actuators on top similar to Wu.
PNG
media_image1.png
771
576
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant’s arguments regarding Allen that “Allen fails to disclose … air release valve extending through the lower valve plate … points to sealing elements and valve fittings and not to an air release valve” are not persuasive since Allen discloses a valve assembly comprising initially opening valve (which will release any air trapped below valve plate 130 and as such can be called an air release valve) valve 260,270,220,140 extending through the lower valve plate 130 of the valve plate assembly.
Applicant’s arguments regarding Allen that “sealing elements disclosed by Allen do not extend through the lower valve plate of the valve assembly” are not persuasive since portion 220 of the air release valve extends through the lower valve plate.
Applicant’s arguments regarding Kennedy that “Kennedy fails to disclose-either distinctly or inherently-the valve plate assembly” are not persuasive since Knenendy shows (Fig 2c for example) a valve plate assembly with lower valve plate 508.
In response to applicant's argument that Covey is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, both Covey and Kennedy as related to fitting a pressure sensor in a valve disk.
Applicant’s arguments regarding that “Yamamoto does not disclose, teach, or suggest anything extending through the alleged lower valve plate 12, much less an air release valve indicated to be at reference numbers 9,22. Thus, because Yamamoto does not disclose, teach, or suggest an air release valve or an air release valve that extends through a lower valve plate” are not persuasive since Yamamoto teaches an air release valve 9,22 (see abstract which teaches quick release of air) extending through a lower valve plate 12 of the valve plate assembly.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Atif Chaudry at phone number 571-270-3768. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (9:30AM-6:00PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881, or Craig Schneider can be reached at 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.
/ATIF H CHAUDRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753