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 Figs. 21-25 in the reply filed on 11/15/2025, is acknowledged.
Claims 5, 10, 11, 19, 21-25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/15/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) was/were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) was/were considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because they do not comply with MPEP § 608.02(V)(h)(3) which necessitates that sectional views include hatching to indicate section portions of an object. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 2-4, 6-9, 12-17, 20, 27, and 31 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 2 necessitates, “the first-fluid inlet is in fluid communication with the outlet passageway in the regulator body through a first match fit formed between an outer surface of the valve member and the first bore wall of regulator body”. Such phrasing is unclear and indefinite because the recitation seems to necessitate both “fluid communication” and a “match fit”. It is the office’s position that the term “match fit” typically implies a fluid seal between components. Accordingly, it is unclear and indefinite whether applicant intends fluid to flow from the inlet to the first outlet in all positions of the valve member or only in the non-overlap positions (i.e. open positions). For purposes of examination the office interprets the claim as necessitating fluid communication only in the non-overlap position of the valve. See also claim 6 for similar issues.
Claims not specifically recited are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that § 112(f) (pre-AIA § 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that § 112(f) (pre-AIA § 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke § 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke § 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim limitation “a first-fluid seal ring” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder “a first-fluid seal ring” coupled with functional language “restricting flow of the second fluid from the second-fluid port to the first-fluid outlet” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. .
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: an annular match fit as described in para. [0069] of applicant’s specification.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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) 1-3, 6, 14, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maroney (U.S. Patent 6,966,302).
In regards to claim 1, Maroney discloses a pressure regulator for regulating a differential pressure between a first fluid pressure of a first fluid and a second fluid pressure of a second fluid, the pressure regulator comprising: a valve (interaction between 50 and 32) between a regulator body (20) and a valve member (26); the regulator body (20) comprising: a first-fluid inlet (28) for the first fluid; a first-fluid outlet (32) for the first fluid; a second-fluid port (40) for the second fluid; a first longitudinal bore defined by a first bore wall in the regulator body (20) extending between the first-fluid inlet (28) and the second-fluid port (40); and an outlet passageway extending outward from the first bore wall to the first-fluid outlet (32); the valve in fluid communication with the first-fluid inlet (28) on an inlet side of the valve and in fluid communication with the first-fluid outlet (32) on an outlet side of the valve; the valve member (26) moveably disposed within the first longitudinal bore of the regulator body (20) between a first-fluid-pressure sensing chamber (inlet side) and a second-fluid- pressure sensing chamber (43), the first-fluid-pressure sensing chamber (inlet side) in fluid communication with the first-fluid inlet (28) and the second-fluid-pressure sensing chamber (43) in fluid communication with the second-fluid port (40); wherein the valve is moveable between a closed position (Fig. 2) where a cross-sectional flow area through the valve is below a predetermined level and an open position (Fig. 3) where the cross-sectional flow area through the valve is above the predetermined level.
In regards to claim 2, as best understood, in the closed position (Fig. 2) the valve member (26) is moveable between a range of overlap positions and in the open position (Fig. 3) the valve member (26) is moveable between a range of zero-overlap positions to maintain the differential pressure between the first fluid and the second fluid within a predetermined range; in the range of overlap positions, the first-fluid inlet (28) is in fluid communication with the outlet passageway (passageway leading to 32) in the regulator body (20) through a first match fit formed between an outer surface of the valve member (26) and the first bore wall of regulator body (20); and in the range of zero-overlap positions the first-fluid inlet (28) is in fluid communication with the outlet passageway (passageway leading to 32) such that the cross-sectional flow area through the valve increases as the valve member (26) moves further away from the range of overlap positions.
In regards to claim 3, as best understood, the cross-sectional flow area through the valve is substantially constant as the valve member (26) moves through the range of overlap positions.
In regards to claim 6, as best understood, the valve member (26) further comprising a first annular groove (50) in an outer surface thereof, a first end of the valve member (26) in the first-fluid-pressure sensing chamber, a second end in the second-fluid-pressure sensing chamber (43); and a first passageway (48) extending from the first end of the valve member (26) to the first annular groove (50), wherein in the range of overlap positions the first annular groove (50) is in indirect fluid communication with the outlet passageway (passageway leading to 32) through the first match fit, and in the range of zero-overlap positions the first annular groove (50) is in direct fluid communication with the outlet passageway (passageway leading to 32).
In regards to claim 14, the first fluid inlet (28) comprises a sealing surface (21) and the second fluid port (40) comprises a second sealing surface (The office notes that port 40 is fluidly coupled to a supply. Accordingly, it is the office’s position that the second port necessarily includes a sealing surface).
In regards to claim 18, the valve member (26) moves to maintain the differential pressure within a predetermined range by modulating flow of the first fluid between the first-fluid inlet (28) and the first-fluid outlet (32)by varying a cross-sectional flow area through the valve.
In regards to claim 20, the valve is a curtain valve or a hole valve.
Claim(s) 1,2, and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maroney (U.S. Patent 6,966,302).
In regards to claim 1, Maroney discloses a pressure regulator for regulating a differential pressure between a first fluid pressure of a first fluid and a second fluid pressure of a second fluid, the pressure regulator comprising: a valve (interaction between 126 and 132) between a regulator body (120) and a valve member (126); the regulator body (120) comprising: a first-fluid inlet (128) for the first fluid; a first-fluid outlet (132) for the first fluid; a second-fluid port (140) for the second fluid; a first longitudinal bore defined by a first bore wall in the regulator body (120) extending between the first-fluid inlet (128) and the second-fluid port (140); and an outlet passageway extending outward from the first bore wall to the first-fluid outlet (132); the valve in fluid communication with the first-fluid inlet (128) on an inlet side of the valve and in fluid communication with the first-fluid outlet (132) on an outlet side of the valve; the valve member (126) moveably disposed within the first longitudinal bore of the regulator body (120) between a first-fluid-pressure sensing chamber (inlet side) and a second-fluid- pressure sensing chamber (143), the first-fluid-pressure sensing chamber (inlet side) in fluid communication with the first-fluid inlet (128) and the second-fluid-pressure sensing chamber (143) in fluid communication with the second-fluid port (140); wherein the valve is moveable between a closed position (Fig. 4) where a cross-sectional flow area through the valve is below a predetermined level and an open position (Fig. 5) where the cross-sectional flow area through the valve is above the predetermined level.
In regards to claim 2, as best understood, in the closed position (Fig. 4) the valve member (126) is moveable between a range of overlap positions and in the open position (Fig. 5) the valve member (126) is moveable between a range of zero-overlap positions to maintain the differential pressure between the first fluid and the second fluid within a predetermined range; in the range of overlap positions, the first-fluid inlet (128) is in fluid communication with the outlet passageway (passageway leading to 132) in the regulator body (120) through a first match fit formed between an outer surface of the valve member (126) and the first bore wall of regulator body (120); and in the range of zero-overlap positions the first-fluid inlet (128) is in fluid communication with the outlet passageway (passageway leading to 132) such that the cross-sectional flow area through the valve increases as the valve member (126) moves further away from the range of overlap positions.
In regards to claim 4, at least one of the first longitudinal bore and the valve member (126) are tapered such that the cross-sectional flow area through the valve increases as the valve member (126) moves through the range of overlap positions towards the range of zero-overlap positions, wherein a rate of increase of the cross-sectional flow area in the range of overlap positions is less than a rate of increase of the cross-sectional flow area in the range of zero-overlap positions. See Figs. 4 and 5 which illustrate valve 126 having a taper at end 64.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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) 27 and 31, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maroney.
Maroney discloses all of the elements as discussed above.
The office notes that the inclusion of material worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP § 2115.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9, 12, 13, and 15-17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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 R.K. Arundale whose telephone number is 571-270-3453. 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, and 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 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.
/ROBERT K ARUNDALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753