Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/835,509

VACUUM VALVE SYSTEM FOR A VACUUM TRANSPORT SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Aug 02, 2024
Examiner
BASTIANELLI, JOHN
Art Unit
3753
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
VAT Holding AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
673 granted / 919 resolved
+3.2% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
945
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
39.6%
-0.4% vs TC avg
§102
33.8%
-6.2% vs TC avg
§112
21.8%
-18.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 919 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 Suggestions The examiner would like to note that the claims are awkwardly written and can be interpreted in a myriad of ways and it seems that it would help the applicant to be more specific about the recess, engagement element, gap and sealing of the elements such that there is no question as to how it works. Claim 1, third to last paragraph includes the pronoun “them” and claim 7 has the pronoun “its” which can be construed as different things to please use the claim limitations that “them” and “its” refer to. 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 4, 7, 8, 10 and 12 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. In claim 8, it is unclear what the applicant is claiming as In claim 12, the claim depends upon claim 1 but is attempting to only claim the closure component of claim 1 which does not make sense as claim 1 is to a vacuum valve system and the closure component is part of this system. Also, the claim is introduced as “A” but is referring back to claim 1 so is not being initiated, but “a valve opening”, “a first sealing surface, etc. are listed as being initially introduced but are already in claim 1? It is entirely unclear as to what the applicant is trying to claim in claim 12. Regarding claims 4, 7 and 10, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). 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. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “means of the actuator” in claim 9 but this is just the movement by the actuator, “means of the drive unit” in claim 14 but this is just the movement, “means of the vacuum valve system” in claim 14 but this is just the opening and closing and “means of transportation” twice in claim 15, but this is just a way of transporting and not seen as anything specific. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-7, and 9-15, as understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by China Aerospace CN 112109740 B. Regarding claim 1, CN 112109740 discloses a vacuum valve system (Figs. 1-7, and disclosure) for substantially gas-tight closure of a valve opening for a vacuum transport system, wherein the vacuum transport system comprises a transport tube for transporting an object inside along the transport tube, comprising a valve seat arrangement (see Figs. 2-3, 5-6, valve seats on left and right) which has the valve opening, a first valve seat (right side valve seat) surrounding the valve opening and a second valve seat (left side valve seat) surrounding the valve opening, a closure component 30 for gas-tight closure of the valve opening with a first sealing surface (right side sealing surface) and a second sealing surface (left side sealing surface), wherein the first sealing surface corresponds to the first valve seat and the second sealing surface corresponds to the second valve seat, and a drive unit 20 for providing a movement of the closure component relative to the valve seat arrangement such that the closure component moves from an open position (Fig. 1), in which the closure component at least partially clears the valve opening, in the closing direction (downwards) into a closed position (Fig. 4), in which the first sealing surface is in an opposing position relative to the first valve seat and the second sealing surface is in an opposing position relative to the second valve seat, and back, wherein the closure component has a first closure side (right side closure component) with the first sealing surface and a second closure side (left side closure component) with the second sealing surface, the closure component has a closure body (30 has a body) which is arranged between the first closure side and the second closure side and connects them, the closure body and the closure sides are designed in such a way that the closure component has at least one first recess (bottom of 30 that has 2 recesses) that is open towards the edge of the closure component (they are “open” towards the edge, as seen open downwards), and an opening of the at least first recess (recesses open downwards so in the closing direction) faces in the closing direction. Regarding claim 2, the at least first recess is open on one side in the direction of the closing direction (the left and right sides have the recess open). Regarding claim 3, the first closure side, the second closure side and the closure body are formed in one piece (is one piece in the Figs.). Regarding claim 4, the closure body and the closure sides are designed such that the closure component has at least one second recess, in particular open towards the edge of the closure component, and a separating web of the closure body separates the first and the second recess (see Figs. 1 and 4, two recesses separated by what is seen as a web on the closure body). Regarding claim 5, the valve seat arrangement has at least one first engagement element (110) and the at least first engagement element is arranged between the first and the second valve seat (is between as well as further). Regarding claim 6, the at least first engagement element (36, 37) is arranged and shaped in such a way that the at least first engagement element (36, 37) engages in the at least first recess in the closed position (see Fig. 4). Regarding claim 7, the at least first engagement element has a guide element (shape of top), on its upper side facing against the closing direction for guiding the object of the transport system (see Figs. 1 and 4), in particular a rail element (is a rail). Regarding claim 9, the actuator is arranged such that by means of the actuator, in the closed position, a contact of the first valve seat and the first sealing surface with a first sealing material 70 located therebetween can be provided or a contact of the second valve seat and the second sealing surface with a second sealing material 70 located therebetween can be provided. Regarding claim 10, the closure component is mounted or suspended in such a way that the closure component is movable or displaceable orthogonally to the closing direction, in particular when the closed position is reached (seen as capable of such displacement). Regarding claim 11, the closure component is mounted or suspended in such a way that the displacement of the closure component orthogonal to the closing direction can be effected by a pressure difference between a first pressure applied to the first closure side and a second pressure applied to the second closure side (seen as capable of such displacement). Regarding claim 12 (all of this is already listed in the rejection to claim 1 above), a closure for a vacuum valve system according to claim 1, for gas-tight closure of a valve opening of the vacuum valve system, comprising a first sealing surface and a second sealing surface, a first closure side with the first sealing surface and a second closure side with the second sealing surface, a closure body arranged between the first closure side and the second closure side and connecting the closure sides, wherein the closure body and the closure sides are designed such that the closure component has at least one first recess open towards the edge of the closure component, and the at least first recess is arranged on an underside of the closure component. Regarding claim 13, CN 112109740 discloses a vacuum valve system for substantially gas-tight closure of a valve opening for a vacuum transport system, wherein the vacuum transport system has a transport tube for transporting an object inside along the transport tube, comprising a valve seat arrangement (see Figs. 2-3, 5-6, valve seats on left and right) which has the valve opening and a first valve seat (right side valve seat) surrounding the valve opening, a closure component 30 for gas-tight closure of the valve opening with a first sealing surface (right side sealing surface), wherein the first sealing surface corresponds to the first valve seat, and a drive unit 20 for providing a movement of the closure component relative to the valve seat arrangement in such a way that the closure component can be moved from an open position (Fig. 1), in which the closure component at least partially clears the valve opening, in the closing direction (downwards) into a closed position (Fig. 4), in which the first sealing surface is in an opposing position relative to the first valve seat, and back, the closure component has a first closure side (right side closure side) with the first sealing surface, the closure component has a closure body (body of the closure component) that is connected to the first closure side, the closure body and the first closure side are designed such that the first closure side extends beyond the closure body in the closing direction and the part of the first closure side extending beyond the closure body forms an engagement section (Figs. 4-6), the engagement section has at least part of the first sealing surface (Figs. 4-6). Regarding claim 14, CN 112109740 discloses a vacuum transport system, having a transport tube for transporting an object (train) inside and along the transport tube, wherein a negative pressure can be provided inside the transport tube relative to the surrounding atmosphere (this is a vacuum), and a vacuum valve system integrated into the vacuum transport system and connected to the transport tube (as rejected in claim 1) the valve seat arrangement is connected to the transport tube in such a way that a gas-tight transition is provided between the valve seat arrangement and the transport tube, and the vacuum valve system and the transport tube form a completely enclosed arrangement providing a separation between the surrounding atmosphere and an interior of the vacuum transport system (how it works), the valve seat arrangement provides the valve opening, the first sealing surface and the second sealing surface inside the vacuum transport system, the valve opening corresponds to a tube cross-section, a controlled movement of the closure component into the open position and into the closed position can be provided by means of the drive unit (how it works), and an internal volume of the vacuum transport system can be closed and can be opened as a whole or in segments by means of the vacuum valve system (how it works). Regarding claim 15, the object is a means of transportation, wherein the means of transportation is designed to transport a person and/or goods (object is a train which transports people and goods). 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. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over China Aerospace CN 112109740 B in view of Mengzhou Yuanhong CN 11059434 A. Regarding claim 8, CN 112109740 lacks a first gap for engagement of the first closure side is formed between the at least first engagement element and the first valve seat and a second gap for engagement of the second closure side is formed between the at least first engagement element and the second valve seat. CN 11059434 discloses a first gap for engagement of the first closure side is formed between the at least first engagement element and the first valve seat and a second gap for engagement of the second closure side is formed between the at least first engagement element and the second valve seat (see 12,13, 14). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make a first and second gap as disclosed by CN 11059434 for engagement of the first and second closure sides as cited in the valve of CN 112109740 as a matter of simple substitution of engagement features and/or “obvious to try” gaps to provide better engagement. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Peterson and Flynn disclose valves for transport tubes. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN BASTIANELLI whose telephone number is (571)272-4921. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider, can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-3607 or Kenneth 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. /John Bastianelli/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753 571-272-4921
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 02, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601407
NON-CIRCULAR BODY GATE VALVE WITH SKIRT PLATE HAVING SPACERS AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590646
ACTIVE BALANCING VALVE FOR A REFRIGERATION AND/OR AIR-CONDITIONING APPLICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584560
Gate Valves with Dynamic Skirts and Multiple Energizers
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578031
ADAPTOR ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571475
GATE VALVE WITH POSITIVE GATE STOP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+29.0%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 919 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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