DETAILED ACTION
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 § 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by applicant-cited Steffan (EP0684429, translation provided by examiner)
Claim 1: Steffan discloses a tank (tank 2, Figs. 1-2) comprising: a housing defining a cavity; a flexible membrane (separation membrane 8) positioned within the cavity, the flexible membrane separating the cavity into a first chamber (gas space 6) and a second chamber (liquid chamber 10); and an indicator assembly (container 14) coupled to the housing, the indicator assembly comprising: a coupling (connection fitting 24) with a first end and a second end opposite the first end, the first end connected to an exterior of the housing (wall section 4.1) at a coupling angle between a longitudinal axis of the coupling and a vertical axis of the tank, wherein the coupling angle is less than 90 degrees (the coupling angle between the vertical axis of the tank 2 and the container 14 is 0°, see Figs. 1-2); and a sight cap (transparent tube 14) coupled to the second end of the coupling (the transparent tube 22 is connected to the fitting 24) and having a transparent viewing window (the tube 22 is transparent), the sight cap and the coupling defining an internal viewing pocket that is in fluid communication with the first chamber of the cavity (The interior of the container 14 is from Visible from the outside and via a passage 16 with the gas space 6 of the expansion tank connected. In Figure 2 is illustratively indicated how liquid 18 from a possible leak 20 of the separating membrane 8 in the Gas space 6 penetrates and subsequently through passage 16 runs into the container 14 and can be determined there. Pg. 5).
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.
Claim(s) 2-10, 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steffan in view of Henry et al. (US5611241).
Claim 2: Steffan teaches the tank of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the housing has a plurality of openings to provide the fluid communication between the first chamber of the cavity and the internal viewing pocket.
However, Henry teaches a plurality of openings (ports 39, 41) in a housing (vessel wall 5) to communicate with a sight glass 1, Fig. 3.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a plurality of openings in the housing to communicate between the sight glass interior and the vessel for the predictable result of fluidly communicating between the vessel and the sight glass.
Claim 3: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 2. Steffan teaches wherein the first chamber is configured to contain a pressurized gas (gas space 6), and the second chamber is configured to contain a fluid (liquid chamber 10).
Claim 4: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 3. Steffan teaches wherein the indicator assembly is configured to indicate the presence of the fluid within the first chamber (liquid 18 from a leak 20 penetrates the passage 16 into the container 14 where the liquid is visible. Pg. 3, Fig. 3).
Claim 5: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 3. Steffan fails to teach wherein the plurality of openings are configured to produce a turbulent flow of the fluid within the internal viewing pocket when a level of the fluid inside the first chamber exceeds a height of at least one opening of the plurality of openings.
Steffan acknowledges that gas must escape from the sight glass and therefore the position of the container 14 when mounted to the tank 2 can be changed to facilitate the inflow of liquid and outflow of gas (second to last paragraph, pg. 3). The nature of the problem, inflow of liquid and outflow of gas, would have lead a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to look at references relating to possible solutions to that problem. Henry teaches a plurality of openings (ports 39, 41) which allow for liquid flow into the sight glass 1. The sight glass 1 is mounted in a vertical orientation relative to the vessel 5 (top 15 of vessel, Fig. 4-5) and the ports 39 and 41 are also vertically spaced on the vessel 5. The structure of Steffan in view of Henry is capable of performing the recited function: producing a turbulent flow.
The prior art teaches a potential problem regarding the inflow of liquid and outflow of gas from the sight glass interior. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Steffan and Henry in order to mount the sight glass to a vessel and allow the vessel to exchange liquid and gas effectively.
Claim 6: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 3. Steffan teaches a float (float 28) disposed within the internal viewing pocket (The interior of the container 14).
Claim 7: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 6. Steffan teaches wherein the float has a lower density than the fluid (The float 28 floats/is raised in the direction of arrow A, Fig. 3, when liquid penetrates into the container 14. Therefore the float has a lower density than the fluid. )
Claim 8: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 7. Steffan teaches wherein the float is configured to float on the fluid when the fluid enters the internal viewing pocket (The float 28 floats/is raised in the direction of arrow A, Fig. 3, when liquid penetrates into the container 14. Lase paragraph, pg. 3).
Claim 9: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 2. Steffan fails to teach wherein the plurality of openings is two holes.
However, Henry teaches two holes in the vessel wall 5 to communicate with the interior of the sight glass 1.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use two openings in the housing to communicate between the sight glass interior and the vessel for the predictable result of fluidly communicating between the vessel and the sight glass.
Claim 10: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 9. Steffan fails to teach wherein the two holes are arranged parallel with a vertical axis of the tank.
However, Henry teaches a plurality of openings (ports 39, 41) which allow for liquid flow into the sight glass 1. The sight glass 1 is mounted in a vertical orientation relative to the vessel 5 (top 15 of vessel, Fig. 4-5) and the ports 39 and 41 are also vertically spaced on the vessel 5.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use two holes arranged parallel with a vertical axis to communicate between the sight glass interior and the vessel for the predictable result of fluidly communicating between the vessel and the sight glass.
Claim 13: Steffan teaches a tank (tank 2, Figs. 1-2) comprising: a housing defining a cavity; a flexible membrane (separation membrane 8) positioned within the cavity, the flexible membrane separating the cavity into a first chamber (gas space 6) and a second chamber (liquid chamber 10); and an indicator assembly (container 14) coupled to the housing (the container 14 couples to the wall section 4.1 of the tank 2; see Figs. 1-3), the indicator assembly comprising an internal viewing pocket that is in fluid communication with the first chamber of the cavity (The interior of the container 14 is from Visible from the outside and via a passage 16 with the gas space 6 of the expansion tank connected. In Figure 2 is illustratively indicated how liquid 18 from a possible leak 20 of the separating membrane 8 in the Gas space 6 penetrates and subsequently through passage 16 runs into the container 14 and can be determined there. Pg. 5).
Steffan fails to teach wherein the housing has a plurality of openings configured to provide the fluid communication between the first chamber of the cavity and the internal viewing pocket.
However, Henry teaches a plurality of openings (ports 39, 41) in a housing (vessel wall 5) to communicate with a sight glass 1, Fig. 3.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a plurality of openings in the housing to communicate between the sight glass interior and the vessel for the predictable result of fluidly communicating between the vessel and the sight glass.
Claim 14: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 13. Steffan fails to teach wherein the plurality of openings is two holes.
Henry teaches a two openings (ports 39, 41) in a housing (vessel wall 5) to communicate with a sight glass 1, Fig. 3.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a plurality of openings in the housing to communicate between the sight glass interior and the vessel for the predictable result of fluidly communicating between the vessel and the sight glass.
Claim 15: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 14. Steffan fails to teach wherein the two holes are parallel with a vertical axis of the tank.
However, Henry teaches a plurality of openings (ports 39, 41) which allow for liquid flow into the sight glass 1. The sight glass 1 is mounted in a vertical orientation relative to the vessel 5 (top 15 of vessel, Fig. 4-5) and the ports 39 and 41 are also vertically spaced on the vessel 5.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use two holes parallel with a vertical axis to communicate between the sight glass interior and the vessel for the predictable result of fluidly communicating between the vessel and the sight glass.
Claim 16: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 13, wherein the indicator assembly is coupled to an exterior wall of the housing at a coupling angle between a longitudinal axis of the indicator assembly and a vertical axis of the tank, wherein the coupling angle is less than 90 degrees.
Claim 17: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 16. Steffan teaches wherein the coupling angle is in the range of 45 to 75 degrees (longitudinal axis of the container 14 expediently runs vertical. However, it could just as well be oblique to the vertical be aligned, with a certain inclination to the horizontal, preferably at an angle of at least 30 degrees). Therefore, the coupling angle is a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to couple the sight glass at a coupling angle of at least 30° to the vertical axis of the tank in order to facilitate the inflow of liquid and the escape of gas from the sight glass container (Steffan, pg. 3, second to last paragraph).
Claim 18: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 17, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the coupling angle is 75 degrees.
However, Steffan teaches that the container can be oblique to the vertical axis of the tank (longitudinal axis of the container 14 expediently runs vertical. However, it could just as well be oblique to the vertical be aligned, with a certain inclination to the horizontal, preferably at an angle of at least 30 degrees). Therefore, the angle is a result-effective variable and therefore obvious to optimize.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to couple the sight glass at a coupling angle of 75° to the vertical axis of the tank in order to facilitate the inflow of liquid and the escape of gas from the sight glass container (Steffan, pg. 3, second to last paragraph).
Claim 19: Steffan teaches a tank (tank 2, Figs. 1-2) comprising: a housing defining a cavity; a flexible membrane (separation membrane 8) positioned within the cavity, the flexible membrane separating the cavity into a first chamber (gas space 6) configured to contain a pressurized gas and a second chamber (liquid chamber 10) configured to contain fluid; and an indicator assembly (container 14) coupled to an exterior wall of the housing (see Figs. 1-3; wall section 4.1) at a coupling angle between a longitudinal axis of the coupling and a vertical axis of the tank, wherein the coupling angle is less than 90 degrees (the coupling angle between the vertical axis of the tank 2 and the container 14 is 0°, see Figs. 1-2).
Steffan fails to teach wherein the housing has a plurality of openings configured to provide the fluid communication between the first chamber of the cavity and the internal viewing pocket.
However, Henry teaches a plurality of openings (ports 39, 41) in a housing (vessel wall 5) configured to communicate with the interior of a sight glass 1, Fig. 3.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a plurality of openings in the housing to communicate between the sight glass interior and the vessel for the predictable result of fluidly communicating between the vessel and the sight glass.
Steffan in view of Henry fails to explicitly teach the plurality of openings are configured to produce a turbulent flow of the fluid within the internal viewing pocket when a level of the fluid inside the first chamber exceeds a height of at least one opening of the plurality of openings.
However, Steffan acknowledges that gas must escape from the sight glass and therefore the position of the container 14 when mounted to the tank 2 can be changed to facilitate the inflow of liquid and outflow of gas (second to last paragraph, pg. 3). The nature of the problem, inflow of liquid and outflow of gas, would have lead a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to look at references relating to possible solutions to that problem. Henry teaches a plurality of openings (ports 39, 41) which allow for liquid flow into the sight glass 1. The sight glass 1 is mounted in a vertical orientation relative to the vessel 5 (top 15 of vessel, Fig. 4-5) and the ports 39 and 41 are also vertically spaced on the vessel 5. The structure of Steffan in view of Henry is capable of performing the recited function: producing a turbulent flow.
The prior art teaches a potential problem regarding the inflow of liquid and outflow of gas from the sight glass interior. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Steffan and Henry in order to mount the sight glass to a vessel and allow the vessel to exchange liquid and gas effectively.
Claim 20: Steffan in view of Henry teaches the tank of claim 19. Steffan teaches wherein the coupling angle is in the range of 45 to 75 degrees (longitudinal axis of the container 14 expediently runs vertical. However, it could just as well be oblique to the vertical be aligned, with a certain inclination to the horizontal, preferably at an angle of at least 30 degrees). Therefore, the coupling angle is a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to couple the sight glass at a coupling angle of at least 30° to the vertical axis of the tank in order to facilitate the inflow of liquid and the escape of gas from the sight glass container (Steffan, pg. 3, second to last paragraph).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steffan.
Claim 11: Steffan teaches the tank of claim 1. Steffan teaches wherein the coupling angle is in the range of 45 to 75 degrees (longitudinal axis of the container 14 expediently runs vertical. However, it could just as well be oblique to the vertical be aligned, with a certain inclination to the horizontal, preferably at an angle of at least 30 degrees). Therefore, the coupling angle is a result-effective variable.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to couple the sight glass at a coupling angle of at least 30° to the vertical axis of the tank in order to facilitate the inflow of liquid and the escape of gas from the sight glass container (Steffan, pg. 3, second to last paragraph).
Claim 12: Steffan teaches the tank of claim 11, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the coupling angle is 75 degrees.
However, Steffan teaches that the container can be oblique to the vertical axis of the tank (longitudinal axis of the container 14 expediently runs vertical. However, it could just as well be oblique to the vertical be aligned, with a certain inclination to the horizontal, preferably at an angle of at least 30 degrees). Therefore, the angle is a result-effective variable and therefore obvious to optimize.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to couple the sight glass at a coupling angle of 75° to the vertical axis of the tank in order to facilitate the inflow of liquid and the escape of gas from the sight glass container (Steffan, pg. 3, second to last paragraph).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Van Haaren et al. (US8739823) teaches a diverter insert. Birch et al. (US5763776) teaches a sight glass with multiple inflow passages. Berry et al. (US20230304593) teaches a threaded sight glass with a plurality of openings.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN MORELLO whose telephone number is (313)446-6583. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-4.
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/JEAN F MORELLO/Examiner, Art Unit 2855 7/14/26
/DAVID Z HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights