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 .
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, 5, 7-10, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grumstrup (6895351) in view of Zhuang et al (20080308157).
Regarding claim(s) 1, in making and/or using the device of Grumstrup for determining a correction value (Step 224) for a regulating device 10 for a regulating valve 12, wherein the regulating valve regulates a fluid flow through a chamber 20-58, one would perform the steps of placing a shut-off element 32 of the regulating valve in mutually different positions relative to a throughflow opening 22 for a fluid by an actuator 14 of the regulating valve using the regulating device; b) providing an encoder 50-55, wherein each position of the shut-off element corresponds to an encoder value (command position of valve) of the encoder; determining the correction value (step 224) from the encoder value.
Grumstrup discloses valve position measuring by position sensor 44,104 but fails to disclose measuring a pressure value with a pressure sensor in mutually different positions of the shut-off element; d) identifying a position of the shut-off element at which a maximum of the pressure values is measured as a minimum throughflow position of the shut-off element. Zhuang teaches valve position sensing by means of measuring a pressure value (Para 19) with a pressure sensor 104,109 in mutually different positions (Para 20) of the shut-off element; d) identifying a position of the shut-off element at which a maximum of the pressure values is measured (step 212) as a minimum throughflow (closed) position of the shut-off element (step 214).
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 system disclosed by Grumstrup with valve position sensing by means of measuring pressure as taught by Zhuang in order to enable cost savings on position sensors by using pressure sensor to measure both pressure and valve position.
The correction valve determined by Grumstrup would read on the valve movement as such would also be applicable to valve moving to closed (minimum flow of zero) position.
As to claim 2, in Grumstrup as modified (as shown by Zhuang) the pressure value (upstream and downstream pressure values of valve) is representative of the fluid in the chamber.
As to claim 4, Grumstrup discloses the system used in a gas distribution system, which inherently uses gas pumps (col 1 line 35, compression of gas).
As to claim 5, Grumstrup discloses arranging the regulating valve between upstream section (which would have pressurized source, compressor pump) and the chamber 20-58.
As to claims 7, 8, Grumstrup fails to disclose the valve as a pivotable butterfly valve or pivotably sliding disk valve. However, Official Notice is taken that using a pivotable butterfly valve or pivotably sliding disk valve, for the purpose of adjustable valve control 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 pivotable butterfly valve or pivotably sliding disk valve in the device of Grumstrup for the purpose of adjustable valve control as is widely known and notoriously old in the art.
As to claim 9, the shut-off element 32 is mounted for displacement by the actuator.
As to claim 10, the regulating valve has a starting position (at step 214) and the shut-off element is placed, starting from the starting position of the shut-off element, in mutually different positions relative to the throughflow opening for the fluid flow for performing the method (up to step 226).
As to claim 12, Grom discloses method for regulating the position of a shut-off element 32 of a regulating valve by a regulating device 10, the method comprising determining a position of the shut-off element which is to be activated in each case by the regulating device (desired percentage opening during normal operation), taking into account the correction value (correction factor 224 would necessarily be used in normal conditions to get desired flow) determined with the method as claimed in claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 3, 6, 11 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.
Conclusion
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