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 .
Status of the Application
This Office action is in response to the amendment of August 15, 2024 which amended claims 4, 7, 9, 13, 15, 16 and 19; and cancelled claims 1-3, 5-6, 8, 10-12, 14, 17 and 18.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 11 and 12 “which is relatively harder then a material” should be “which is relatively harder than a material”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim7 is 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.
The term “relatively harder” in claim 7 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “relatively harder” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 9, 13, 15, 16 and 19 are allowed.
Claim 7 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art neither discloses nor makes obvious a pulsation damper having a housing surrounding a flexible inner tube as claimed; and with regards to claim 4 includes a plurality of individual sealing structures disposed in the outer chamber in a radial array about a periphery of the housing, each sealing structure defining a sealing surface, wherein an outlet orifice extends from the sealing surface through the sealing structure to the exterior surface of the housing; and wherein the inner tube is moveable between an open position in which it is spaced away from the sealing surface, and a closed position in which it seals against the sealing surface so as to close off the outlet orifice; with regards to claim 7 where there is a sealing structures and wherein an open-ended shroud of a material which is relatively harder than a material of the tube is affixed to the sealing structure; with regards to claim 9 wherein the housing has a clamshell configuration including two halves joined by one or more hinges; with regards to claim 13 wherein an optical sensor disposed in the outer chamber and operatively connected to the pressure regulator; with regards to claim 15, where the pulsation dampener comprises a pressure regulator coupled in fluid communication with the outlet orifice and configured to regulate a gas pressure within the outer chamber; and an optical sensor disposed in the outer chamber and operatively connected to the pressure regulator; with regards to claim 15 where a strain gage coupled to the inner tube and operatively connected to the pressure regulator; with regards to claim 16 where a pressure transducer coupled in flow communication with an interior of the inner tube and operatively coupled to the pressure regulator; and with regards to claim 19 wherein a resilient cushion element disposed in the outer chamber, wherein the cushion element comprises a series of individual segments having differing stiffnesses.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cobb et al discloses a damper with a sealing element; Fickert discloses a damper with pressure regulation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES G FREAY whose telephone number is (571)272-4827. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri: 8:00 - 5:00.
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, Essama Omgba can be reached at (469)295-9278. 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.
/CHARLES G FREAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
CGF
June 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights