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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I and Species I in the reply filed on 11/03/2025 is acknowledged. It is noted that while applicant submits that claims 1-13, 15-22, 25, and 26 are readable on Species I, claims 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 25 are not seen to be readable on Species I. Specifically, claim 11 recites a spring-loaded surface in mechanical communication with the first plug portion to form the first seal. However, the elected embodiment does not include these features and instead includes a seal directly connected to the first plug portion. Claim 12 recites at least one port in fluid communication with the first seal and/or the second seal, the at least one port configured to receive a pneumatic impulse configured to move the plug from the sealed position. These features are not found in the elected embodiment of Figures 2A, 3A, and 3B; instead these features are found in the embodiment shown in Figure 6A and there is not sufficient description as to how such features would or could be included in the elected embodiment. Claim 13 recites a pathway for gas between the second plug portion and the second body portion to equalize pressure with gas in the region. These features are not found in or described with respect to the elected embodiment of Figures 2A, 3A, and 3B; instead these features are found in the embodiment shown in Figure 8H which was not elected. Claim 16 recites the plug and body configured to capture and compress some of the pressurized gas to brake movement of the plug. These features were not described with respect to the elected embodiment, instead the features were only described with respect to the embodiments shown in Figures 7A, 7B, and 13. Furthermore, the structure utilized in the alternative embodiments to provide the braking of the plug is not provided in the elected embodiment. Claim 17 recites the piston portion has an outer dimension and the body comprises an inner dimension, the outer dimension and/or the inner dimension varying along the longitudinal axis. These features are not found in or described with respect to the elected embodiment of Figures 2A, 3A, and 3B; instead these features are only described with respect to the embodiment shown in Figures 7A and 7B. Furthermore, the structure utilized to provide the disclosed varying dimension is not provided in the elected embodiment. Claim 18 recites at least one vent port, wherein the plug prevents the pressurized gas from flowing from the inlet to the at least one vent port when the plug is in the sealed position and when the plug is in a first non-sealed position different from the sealed position, and wherein the plug allows the pressurized gas to flow from the outlet through the at least one vent port when the plug is in a second non-sealed position different from the sealing position and the first non-sealed position. These features are not found in or described with respect to the elected embodiment of Figures 2A, 3A, and 3B; instead these features are only described with respect to the embodiment shown in Figures 11A-11E and there is not sufficient description as to how such features would or could be included in the elected embodiment. Claims 19 and 20 recite a spring configured to controllably move the plug. These features are not found in or described with respect to the elected embodiment of Figures 2A, 3A, and 3B. Claims 21-25 recite a vent outlet configured to receive the pressurized gas from the outlet, the plug configured to be controllably adjusted amongst at least three configurations. These features are not found in or described with respect to the elected embodiment of Figures 2A, 3A, and 3B; instead these features are only described with respect to the embodiment shown in Figures 12A-12DE and there is not sufficient description as to how such features would or could be included in the elected embodiment.
Therefore, claims 1-26 are pending with claims 11-14, 16-25 withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-10, 15, and 26 are treated on their merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10, 15, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the plug in the at least one non-sealed position biased away from the sealed position by the pressurized gas”. These limitations are unclear because the valve as depicted in elected Figures 2A, 3A, and 3B does not appear to be dimensioned such that this function will occur. Although applicant’s specification states that the plug in the non-sealed position is biased away from the sealed position by the pressurized gas, it is unclear how this will be achieved. Specifically, the first plug portion 154 and second plug portion 156 are shown to have equal diameters and therefore one of ordinary skill in the art would expect the pressures acting on the plug as a whole will be a net zero (because fluid pressure, when the plug is in the open position, is present on both sides of both plug portions 154 and 156). Therefore, as best understood the claim requires at least some fluid pressure forces to act in an opening direction of the plug.
Claim 26 recites “an open state in which the plug is driven open by the gas pressure from the pressurized gas”. These limitations are unclear because, similar to the rejection of claim 1 above, the valve as depicted in elected Figures 2A, 3A, and 3B does not appear to be dimensioned such that this function will occur. Because the first plug portion 154 and second plug portion 156 are shown to have equal diameters, it is unclear how the plug is driven open by the gas pressure as claimed.
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 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) 1-6, 8, 10, 15, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Carpenter et al. (US Patent 9,982,602).
Regarding Claim 1, Carpenter discloses a valve (Figures 3A and 3B especially) comprising: a body (body shown at 300 having inlet 301 and outlet 303a; see annotated Figure 3B below); an inlet 301 configured to receive a pressurized gas (the inlet is capable of receiving a pressurized gas; furthermore, it is noted that recitations of fluids handled by an apparatus in an apparatus claim are not accorded patentable weight as per MPEP 2115); an outlet 303a configured to receive the pressurized gas from the inlet (as shown in Figure 3A, i.e. in the event that pressurized gas is supplied to the valve); a region (region above the second plug portion as shown in the annotated Figure 3B below) configured to receive the pressurized gas from the inlet 301 (this occurs when the second plug portion moves away from the respective seat in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s valve); and a plug 305 having a longitudinal axis (vertical axis through the center of 305) and configured to be controllably moved (e.g. via armature 405 as shown in Figure 4) within the body along the longitudinal axis (as shown between Figures 3A and 3B), the plug 305 movable between a sealed position (as shown in Figure 3B) and at least one non-sealed position (as shown in Figure 3A), the plug in the sealed position forming a first seal (via seal 309a) and a second seal (via seal 309b) with the body, the first seal between the inlet 301 and the outlet 303a and the second seal between the inlet 301 and the region (as shown in the annotated Figure 3B below), the plug in the sealed position biased towards the sealed position by the pressurized gas (this is seen to be achieved at least because the seal 309a has a large diameter relative to seal 309b, thereby resulting in a larger total surface area forcing the valve closed; this is achieved via relative seal sizes in the same manner in which it is achieved by applicant’s device), the plug in the at least one non-sealed position biased away from the sealed position by the pressurized gas (as best understood as described above; the fluid in the valve, e.g. a pressurized gas if provided, will provide at least some fluid pressure forces to act in an opening direction of the plug by acting on the lower surfaces of the first plug portion and second plug portion in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device).
PNG
media_image1.png
550
712
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Carpenter further discloses the plug 305 comprises: a first plug portion (as shown in the annotated Figure 3B above) configured to be in mechanical communication with a first body portion of the body (i.e. the first body portion surrounding the outlet 303a) to form the first seal between the inlet and the outlet (via 309a); and a second plug portion (as shown in the annotated Figure 3B above) configured to be in mechanical communication with a second body portion (as shown in the annotated Figure 3B above) of the body to form the second seal between the inlet and the region (via 309b).
Regarding Claim 3, Carpenter further discloses the first seal (seal achieved via seal 309a) comprises a first face seal 309a with one of the first plug portion and the first body portion comprising a first sealing surface configured to press against the first face seal (the first body portion comprises a first sealing surface which presses against the first face seal as shown in Figure 3B).
Regarding Claim 4, Carpenter further discloses the second seal (seal achieved via seal 309b) comprises a second face seal 309b with one of the second plug portion and the second body portion comprising a second sealing surface configured to press against the second face seal (the second body portion comprises a second sealing surface which presses against the second face seal as shown in the annotated Figure 3B above).
Regarding Claim 5, Carpenter further discloses the first sealing surface (the surface surrounding the outlet 303a which engages seal 309a) is substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the plug (the first sealing surface extends horizontally while the longitudinal axis extends vertically).
Regarding Claim 6, Carpenter further discloses the first plug portion is configured to press against the first body portion along a first perimeter of a first region having a first area (i.e. the first plug portion pushes against the first body portion along a first perimeter defined by the seal member 309a; the area within the seal defines a first area in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s valve) and the second plug portion is configured to press against the second body portion along a second perimeter of a second region having a second area (i.e. the second plug portion pushes against the second body portion along a second perimeter defined by the seal member 309b; the area within the seal defines a second area in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s valve), the second area smaller than the first area (as clearly shown in Figures 3A and 3B in which the diameter of seal member 309b is less than the diameter of seal member 309a).
Regarding Claim 8, Carpenter further discloses an actuator (including float 403 and actuator 405 as shown in Figure 4) configured to controllably move the plug 305 from the sealed position to simultaneously decouple the first plug portion from the first body portion and to decouple the second plug portion from the second body portion (as shown between the positions of Figure 3B and Figure 3A, the first and second plug portions simultaneously decouple from the first body portion and the second body portion, respectively), thereby simultaneously allowing the pressurized gas to flow from the inlet to the outlet and from the inlet to the region (as shown in Figure 3A; as noted above the limitation of “pressurized gas” is not accorded patentable weight).
Regarding Claim 10, Carpenter further discloses the pressurized gas (in the event that a pressurized gas is supplied to the valve as described above) applies a first force on a first surface area of the plug in the sealed position (e.g. fluid applies a first force on the upwardly facing surface of the first plug portion when the plug is in the sealed position), and the pressurized gas applies a second force on a second surface area of the plug in the at least one non-sealed position (e.g. fluid applies a second force on the upwardly facing surface of the second plug portion when the plug is in the non-sealed position as shown in Figure 3A).
Regarding Claim 15, Carpenter further discloses the plug 305 comprises a piston portion (the portion between the first plug portion and the second plug portion as shown in the annotated Figure 3B above) having the longitudinal axis (vertical axis as shown in Figure 3B) and extending through an orifice of the body (the orifice providing the fluid flow path), a first lip (the portion indicated as the “first plug portion” in the annotated Figure 3B above is relied upon as readable on the recited first lip; this claim does not require the first plug portion) extending substantially perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis (i.e. the first lip extends horizontally) from a first end portion of the piston portion (a lower end portion of the piston portion), and a second lip (the portion indicated as the “second plug portion” in the annotated Figure 3B above is relied upon as readable on the recited second lip; this claim does not require the second plug portion) extending substantially perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis (i.e. the second lip extends horizontally) from a second end portion of the piston portion (an upper end portion of the piston portion).
Regarding Claim 26, Carpenter is seen as further disclosing the valve has a closed state (as shown in Figure 3B) in which the plug 305 is seated by gas pressure (in the event that a pressurized gas is supplied to the valve as described above) from the pressurized gas and/or by a spring (fluid pressure acts on the upper surface of the first plug portion to seat the valve in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s valve); and an open state (as shown in Figure 3A) in which the plug 305 is driven open by the gas pressure from the pressurized gas (as best understood as described above; the fluid in the valve, e.g. a pressurized gas if provided, will provide at least some fluid pressure forces to act in an opening direction of the plug by acting on the lower surfaces of the first plug portion and second plug portion in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device).
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 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carpenter et al. (US Patent 9,982,602).
Regarding Claim 7, Carpenter does not disclose the specific dimensions of the seal members 309a and 309b and therefore does not disclose the first perimeter is substantially circular and has a first diameter in a range of 90 millimeters to 150 millimeters and the second perimeter is substantially circular and has a second diameter in a range of 90 millimeters to 150 millimeters.
However, the selection of the shape and size of the sealing members is seen to have been an obvious matter of design choice in providing appropriately sized seals for a particular application. Furthermore, it has been generally held that mere changes in shape/form and size/proportion are within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Carpenter such that the seal members are any desired shapes and sizes, including the first seal being substantially circular and having a first diameter in a range of 90 millimeters to 150 millimeters and the second seal being substantially circular and having a second diameter in a range of 90 millimeters to 150 millimeters, for the purpose of providing desired flow characteristics through the valve.
Claim 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carpenter et al. (US Patent 9,982,602) in view of Wright (US Patent 572,592).
Regarding Claim 9, Carpenter does not disclose the actuator is selected from the group consisting of: electromagnetic actuator; piezoelectric actuator; magnetic actuator; mechanical plunger; pilot valve.
Wright teaches a reciprocating valve 7a having an actuator (including rod 14 and float 16), the actuator selected from the group consisting of: electromagnetic actuator; piezoelectric actuator; magnetic actuator; mechanical plunger; pilot valve (the actuator includes a mechanical plunger 14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to modify the device of Carpenter such that the actuator includes a mechanical plunger as taught by Wright for the purpose of utilizing an alternative, functionally equivalent mechanical transmission mechanism for transferring movement of the float to the valve.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Rogers (US Patent 8,235,356) teaches a valve having a front seal with a diameter slightly larger than a diameter of the rear seal. Reeves (US Patent 5,263,514) teaches a valve with seals being seated operated simultaneously.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN MURPHY whose telephone number is (571)270-5243. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached on (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.
/KEVIN F MURPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753