Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/824,017

Compact and Modular Valve

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Sep 04, 2024
Priority
Nov 14, 2023 — provisional 63/548,421
Examiner
REID, MICHAEL ROBERT
Art Unit
3753
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Illinois Tool Works Inc.
OA Round
3 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
3m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
551 granted / 698 resolved
+8.9% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
729
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
42.4%
+2.4% vs TC avg
§102
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
§112
33.0%
-7.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 698 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Response to Amendment This action is responsive to the amendment dated 8/14/2026. Claims 1-19 and 21 remain pending. Claims 4 and 16 remain withdrawn. Claim 21 is newly presented. Any new ground(s) of rejection below have been made due to applicant’s amendment. This action is Final. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code 102 not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 8, 14, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zuo (U.S. 2022/0384215). Zuo discloses a multi-port valve assembly for adjusting fluid flow, the multi-port valve assembly comprising: a valve body (321) defining a valve seat fluidly coupled to each of a plurality of housing ports (311, 312, 313, 314), wherein the plurality of housing ports comprises a first port (311), a second port (312), a third port (313), and a fourth port (314); and a valve core (323) having a valve plug (323) and a valve stem extending outwardly from the valve plug (not depicted, described in para. 46), wherein the valve plug defines two or more separate flow channels (324, 325, 326) that are fluidly isolated from one another within the valve plug, wherein each of the flow channels comprise at least two channel ports (each of 324, 325, and 326 have two ports) defining a linear flow path connecting two housing ports which are in line with one another (such as the position shown in fig. 4, with 311 connecting to 312 via 325 and 313 connecting to 314 via 326, which are considered in line as each flow path is linear through the core), and wherein the valve plug is configured to rotate within the valve seat about an axis of rotation between a first position and a second position to redirect or throttle a flow rate between two or more of the plurality of housing ports and channel ports via the two or more flow channels (para. 42-44 and 46 and as is known in the art for a multi-way rotary valve). Regarding claim 14, Zuo further discloses wherein each of the two or more flow channels is configured to facilitate fluid flow between three channel ports formed in the valve plug (each of the two or more flow channels are able to facilitate flow through between the four ports depending on the rotational position, see figs. 3-5 and paras. 42-44 and as the claim is not seen to require a specific position where each of the two or more flow channels is in communication with three channel ports at the same time). Regarding claim 21, Zuo further discloses wherein at least two of the channel ports define a linear flow path configured to connect two housing ports which are in line with one another (such as the position shown in fig. 4, with 311 connecting to 312 via 325 and 313 connecting to 314 via 326, which are considered in line as each flow path is linear through the core). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-3, 5-7, and 17-19 are allowed. Claims 9-13 and 15 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 with respect to claim(s) 8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 MICHAEL R REID whose telephone number is (313)446-4859. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-5pm est. 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 supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607, or Ken Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). 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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form. /MICHAEL R REID/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 04, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Apr 22, 2026
Response Filed
May 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Aug 14, 2026
Response Filed
Sep 15, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12736140
HOT WATER AND COLD WATER MIXING APPARATUS
1y 12m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12729769
Ball for a Valve Assembly
4y 1m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12723660
Hydrogen Gas Valve Device and Hydrogen Gas Valve Body Equipped Therewith
1y 11m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12710107
INDEPENDENT DUAL ACTUATION PIEZO VALVE FOR MAGNETIC RESONANCE ENVIRONMENTS
1y 11m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12698622
Composite Flush Valve
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+19.7%)
2y 3m (~3m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 698 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month