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 with traverse of Species A, claims 1-4, 6 and 13, and Figs 1-4
in the reply filed on 03/26/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “It is evident that both Species A and Species B address the same technical problem, namely, how to regulate the flow area between the valve head and the sealing gasket. The only difference between them lies in the difference of the flow control point: in Species A, the flow area is controlled by the cooperation between the sealing surface 11 and the second matching surface 22; in Species B, the flow area is controlled by the cooperation between the first matching surface 12 and the sealing matching surface 21. Therefore, Species A and Species B share the same inventive concept and have unity of inventions”. This is not found persuasive because a document discovered in the international search shows that there is a presumption of lack of novelty or inventive step in a main claim, so that there may be no technical relationship left over the prior art among the claimed inventions involving one or more of the same or corresponding special technical features, leaving two or more dependent claims without a single general inventive concept. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 8, 10, 14-15, 19 and 23-33 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Specifically, claims 8 and 10 is directed to Species B, Figs. 5-10, claims 14-15 is directed to Species C, Figs. 11-12, claims 19, 23-28 and 31-32 is directed to Species D Figs 13-15, claims 29-30 and 33 is directed to Species E, Figs 16-19. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 03/26/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/11/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the published application on 05/15/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a circulation area between the sealing surface and the second matching surface is able to be adjusted to control the flow of the medium in the communication channel, and a circulation area between the first matching surface and the sealing matching surface is adjusted to control the flow of the medium in the communication channel, and an inclination angle of the first matching surface is greater than an inclination angle of the second matching surface relative to an axis of the sealing gasket, wherein the second matching surface comprises a plurality of first adjustment subsection surfaces, and the plurality of first adjustment subsection surfaces are sequentially connected; or, wherein the inclination angle of the first matching surface relative to the axis of the sealing gasket is greater than 500 and less than 80” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim 4 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.
Claim 4 recite “wherein the second matching surface comprises a plurality of first adjustment subsection surfaces, and the plurality of first adjustment subsection surfaces are sequentially connected; or, wherein the inclination angle of the first matching surface relative to the axis of the sealing gasket is greater than 500 and less than 80”. However, it is unclear what the metes and bounds of the claim are. It is unclear to the Examiner what exactly is being recited as it is difficult to understand without proper illustration. Therefore, as best understood, if the prior art comprises the claimed structure, it will be presumed that the system can operate as intended.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pfetzer et al (US 20120181464 A1, hereinafter Pfetzer) in view of Nakamura et al (US 20220136612 A1, hereinafter Nakamura).
Regarding claim 1, Pfetzer teaches a flow adjustment assembly (0026, 0028) for an electronic expansion valve (100), comprising a valve head (valve housing including sealing cone, 0003) and a sealing gasket (140), wherein the sealing gasket (140) is provided with a communication channel (120, fig 1), and the valve head is able to move relative to the sealing gasket (0028), so as to adjust a flow of a medium in the communication channel (0028); wherein the valve head (valve housing including sealing cone, 0003) is provided with a sealing surface (as illustrated below on figure 1) and a first matching surface (as illustrated below on figure 1), and the sealing gasket (140) is provided with a sealing matching surface (as illustrated below on figure 1) and a second matching surface (as illustrated below on figure 1); the sealing surface and the sealing matching surface are configured to abut and engage with each other to achieve sealing between the valve head and the sealing gasket (as shown on figure 1); and as the valve head (valve housing including sealing cone, 0003) moves relative to the sealing gasket (as described in paragraph 0028).
Pfetzer teaches the invention as described above but fail to teach a circulation area between the sealing surface and the second matching surface is able to be adjusted to control the flow of the medium in the communication channel; and moreover, under the driving of the valve head, the first matching surface is able to extend into the communication channel, so as to perform flow guidance on a medium passing between the second matching surface and the sealing surface, or, as the valve head moves relative to the sealing gasket, the first matching surface is able to be driven to extend into the communication channel, and a circulation area between the first matching surface and the sealing matching surface is adjusted to control the flow of the medium in the communication channel; and moreover, under the driving of the valve head, the second matching surface is able to perform flow guidance on the medium passing between the first matching surface and the sealing matching surface.
However, Nakamura teaches a circulation area (annular passage 30) between the sealing surface (lower portion of port 22 meeting seat surface 25a, figure 5) and the second matching surface (of seat surface 25a, figure 5) is able to be adjusted to control the flow of the medium in the communication channel (in the gas relief valve 1, when the valve body 3 is lifted (that is, strokes in one axial direction), the annular passage 30 gradually expands, but the valve body 3 and the valve seat 25 are formed in a tapered shape. Therefore, the rate of change of the flow path area of the annular passage 30 during the lift differs for each position, paragraph 0038); and moreover, under the driving of the valve head (valve body 3 moving to the closed position, paragraph 0036), the first matching surface is able to extend into the communication channel (valve body 3 passage decreasing via seat part 3d, as shown on figures 5-6), so as to perform flow guidance on a medium passing between the second matching surface and the sealing surface (when the working gas is released to the outside and the pressure of the working gas in the inflow passage 23 decreases, the valve body 3 is moved to the closed position to reduce the discharged flow rate, paragraph 0036), or, as the valve head moves relative to the sealing gasket, the first matching surface is able to be driven to extend into the communication channel, and a circulation area between the first matching surface and the sealing matching surface is adjusted to control the flow of the medium in the communication channel; and moreover, under the driving of the valve head, the second matching surface is able to perform flow guidance on the medium passing between the first matching surface and the sealing matching surface.
PNG
media_image1.png
736
894
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly in the teachings of Pfetzer to include a circulation area between the sealing surface and the second matching surface is able to be adjusted to control the flow of the medium in the communication channel; and moreover, under the driving of the valve head, the first matching surface is able to extend into the communication channel, so as to perform flow guidance on a medium passing between the second matching surface and the sealing surface, or, as the valve head moves relative to the sealing gasket, the first matching surface is able to be driven to extend into the communication channel, and a circulation area between the first matching surface and the sealing matching surface is adjusted to control the flow of the medium in the communication channel; and moreover, under the driving of the valve head, the second matching surface is able to perform flow guidance on the medium passing between the first matching surface and the sealing matching surface in view of the teachings of Nakamura in order to yield the predictable result of since the seal member is externally fit on the seal groove, the seal member is easy to attach and the manufacturing cost of relief valves for gas can be reduced.
Further, it is understood, claim 1 includes an intended use recitation, for example “…configured to...”. The applicant is reminded that a recitation with respect to the manner which a claimed apparatus is intended to be does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the structural limitations of the claims, as is the case here. While features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, the claims are directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function.
Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach wherein the second matching surface is disposed on a periphery of the first matching surface in an axial direction of the sealing gasket; or, wherein the second matching surface (as illustrated above on figure 1 of Pfetzer) is disposed on a periphery of the sealing matching surface (as illustrated above on figure 1 of Pfetzer).
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach wherein when the first matching surface (valve head part 3c of Nakamura) extends into the communication channel (figure 5 of Nakamura), so as to perform flow guidance on the medium passing between the second matching surface (of seat surface 25a, figure 5 of Nakamura) and the sealing surface (seat part 3d of Nakamura), both the first matching surface (valve head part 3c of Nakamura) and the second matching surface (of seat surface 25a, figure 5 of Nakamura) are set to be inclined plane structures (as shown on figure 5 of Nakamura), and an inclination angle of the first matching surface (as shown on figure 5 of Nakamura) is greater than an inclination angle of the second matching surface (as shown on figure 5 of Nakamura) relative to an axis of the sealing gasket (seal member 5 of Nakamura).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach, in view of indefiniteness, wherein the second matching surface (of seat surface 25a, figure 5 of Nakamura) comprises a plurality of first adjustment subsection surfaces (inclined plane of surface 25a and bottom face 21a, figure 5 of Nakamura), and the plurality of first adjustment subsection surfaces are sequentially connected (as shown on figure 5 of Nakamura); or, wherein the inclination angle of the first matching surface relative to the axis of the sealing gasket is greater than 500 and less than 80.
Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings teach wherein both the sealing surface (as illustrated above on figure 1 of Pfetzer) and the sealing matching surface are set to be planar structures (as illustrated above on figure 1 of Pfetzer).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pfetzer as modified by Nakamura, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Wang et al (CN 113833867 A, hereinafter Wang).
Regarding claim 13, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to teach an electronic expansion valve, comprising a valve body and the flow adjustment assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein the flow adjustment assembly is installed on the valve body.
However, Wang teaches an electronic expansion valve (large-calibre electronic expansion valve, abstract), comprising a valve body (valve body 1) and the flow adjustment assembly (valve needle assembly 3) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the flow adjustment assembly is installed on the valve body (as shown on figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly in the combined teachings to include an electronic expansion valve, comprising a valve body and the flow adjustment assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein the flow adjustment assembly is installed on the valve body in view of the teachings of Wang in order to yield the predictable result of satisfying the flow demand of the small flow working condition and the full flow working condition at the same time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DARIO DELEON whose telephone number is (571)272-8687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Jerry Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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.
/DARIO ANTONIO DELEON/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights