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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 “protrusion extending into an inside of the sheet” of Claim 10 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Examiner anticipates this limitation is already present in the drawings but is not labeled, so it is currently unclear what the limitation is directed towards.
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. 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.
Abstract
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because Abstract includes implied phrases such as “is disclosed” and “according to the present embodiment”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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, 9, 13, and 15-20 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.
Regarding Claims 2 and 15, the limitation “a large outer diameter potion that directly communicates with the reservoir” is recited. The term “a reservoir” is only established and recited as part of the preamble of Claim 1 and thus it is not clear of the reservoir is intended to be part a claimed structure. For purposes of examination the limitation “a reservoir” will be considered functional and not as a structural limitation, such that the limitation reads “a large outer diameter portion that is configured to directly communicate with the reservoir”. As Claim 1 is directed towards “a check valve” it is not understood how a “check valve” can structurally contain the reservoir as established in Claim 1. Claims 3-4 dependent on Claim 2 are also rejected as depending on a rejected claim.
Regarding Claim 3, the limitation “inner diameter of the outer diameter portion” is recited. It is unclear what structure “the outer diameter portion” is intended to refer to as Claim 2 (the claim which Claim 3 depends on) establishes “a large outer diameter portion” and “a small outer diameter portion”. For purposes of examination the claim will be interpreted as “inner diameter of the large outer diameter portion”.
Regarding Claim 9, the limitation “a flow of fluid into the reservoir” is recited. This limitation is a method step, while the claim is an apparatus claim pointed to a “check valve”. Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the bounds of the Claims scope. Additionally, the limitation “the reservoir” is claimed as part of the method step despite only being established functionally in the preamble of Claim 1. For purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted to read “the first inclined surface of the sheet is configured to block a flow of fluid out of the valve” such that the reservoir and the method step are functionally claimed.
Regarding Claim 12, the limitation “an inner diameter” is recited. It is unclear what structure this limitation is intended to refer to. For purposes of examination the limitation will be interpreted as an “inner diameter of the lower portion of the housing”.
Regarding Claim 13, the limitation “outer dimeter similar” contains a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “similar” 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.
Regarding Claim 15, the limitation “a screw thread formed to engage the screw thread” is recited. It is unclear if the screw thread is intended to engage itself or the previously recited screw thread. This can be resolved by appending a designator such as “first screw thread” or “second screw thread” or by amending the claim limitation to read “a screw thread formed to engage the screw thread of the small outer diameter portion”.
Regarding Claims 16-20, limitations regarding the fluid flow are recited as method steps, such as “fluid flows from a reservoir”, “fluid passes through a grommet”, and “wherein when the fluid flows from the reservoir”. Thus, as the Claims 16-20 are apparatus Claims directed towards “A check valve”, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the bounds of the Claims scope. For purposes of examination the method step limitations will be interpreted as containing a “configured to” preceding the method steps to convert the method steps into functional limitation directed towards the apparatus.
Regarding Claims 16 and 18, the limitation “a reservoir” is recited. As the claim is directed towards “A check valve” it is not understood how a “check valve” can structurally contain the reservoir as claimed in Claim 16. For purposes of examination the limitation “a reservoir” will be considered functionally and not as a structural limitation, such that the limitation reads “and is configured to receive a fluid flow from a reservoir” and “wherein the plunger is configured to be lowered when fluid lows in from the reservoir” respectively. Claims 17-20 are rejected as depending on rejected Claim 16.
Regarding Claim 17, the limitation “the reservoir” is recited. As the claim is directed towards “A check valve” it is not understood how a “check valve” can structurally contain the reservoir as claimed in Claim 17. Unlike Claim 16 and 18, it is clear from the limitations of Claim 17 the reservoir is intended to be a structural limitation. For purposes of examination, Claim 17 will be interpreted as containing the limitations of Claim 16, but being directed towards “a hydraulic valve system” instead of a “check valve” such that the reservoir can be claimed structurally.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 10, 16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (US 20190120392 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee discloses a check valve installed in a bore formed in a block and controlling a flow direction of a fluid supplied from a reservoir, the check valve comprising: a sheet (1100) that is press-fitted into an inner diameter of the bore; a filter (1600) that is seated on an upper side of the sheet (1100) and through which the fluid passes; a plunger (1200) that is disposed on a lower side of the sheet (1100) to open and close the sheet (1100); a seal (1300) that is installed to surround the plunger (1200); a spring (1400) that provides a restoring force to the plunger (1200); and a housing (1500) that is assembled to the sheet (1100) and guides a vertical movement of the plunger (1200) (see Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 2, Lee discloses wherein the sheet (1100) includes: a large outer diameter portion (A) (see Annotated Fig. 6 below) that directly communicates with the reservoir; and a small outer diameter portion (B) that has a diameter smaller than the large outer diameter portion (A) (see Fig. 6, Annotated Fig. 6 below)
PNG
media_image1.png
770
796
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 6
Regarding Claim 4, Lee discloses wherein the small outer diameter portion (B) is coupled to an upper portion of the housing (1500) (see Fig. 6, Annotated Fig. 6 above, [0041]).
Regarding Claim 10, Lee discloses wherein an upper portion (X) of the plunger (1200) is formed with a protrusion (X1) extending into an inside of the sheet (1100) (see Fig. 6, Annotated Fig. 6 above).
Regarding Claim 16, Lee discloses a check valve, comprising: a sheet (1100) that is installed in a bore formed in a block (10') and into which a fluid flows from a reservoir; a housing (1500) that is assembled to a lower portion of the sheet (1100); a filter (1600) that is seated on an upper portion of the sheet (1100) and through which the fluid passes; a plunger (1200) that is disposed on a lower side of the sheet (1100) to open and close the sheet (1100); a seal (1300) that is installed to surround the plunger (1200); and a spring (1400) that provides a restoring force to the plunger (1200) (see Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 18, Lee discloses wherein when the fluid flows in from the reservoir, the plunger (1200) is lowered to form a space between the lower portion of the sheet (1100) and an upper portion of the plunger (1200) (see Fig. 5, Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 20, Lee discloses wherein the housing includes: a ring-shaped upper plate (G) (see Annotated Fig. 1 below) that is coupled to a lower end of the sheet; a lower plate (H) that is spaced apart from the upper plate by a predetermined distance and has an opening formed therein (F); and a plurality of connecting rods that connects the upper plate and the lower plate (I) (see Fig. 1, Fig. 6, Annotated Fig. 1 below; It should be noted the orientation of the housing 1500 is inverted in Fig. 1 when compared to Fig. 6 such that the “Upper plate” of Fig. 6 appears on the bottom in Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
339
338
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1
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.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20190120392 A1) as applied to Claim 2, above, in view of Chung (KR 20200011517 A).
Regarding Claim 3, Lee discloses the check valve of Claim 2.
Lee does not disclose wherein the filter is seated by contacting an inner diameter of the outer diameter portion.
Chung teaches a check valve wherein the filter (160) is seated by contacting an inner diameter of the outer diameter portion (118) (see Fig. 2, Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of the filter of Chung with the check valve of Lee in order to make the check valve more compact by providing the placement of the filter inside the check valve structure.
Claims 5-7, 11-12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20190120392 A1) as applied to Claim 1 and Claim 16, above, in view of Jeon (US 20180335154 A1)
Regarding Claim 5, Lee discloses wherein the plunger (1200) includes: an upper portion that contacts the sheet (X) (see Annotated Fig. 6 above); a middle portion (Y) that seats the seal (1300); a lower portion (Z) that supports a lower side of the seal (1300) (see Fig. 6, Annotated Fig. 6 above).
Lee does not disclose wherein the plunger includes a rod that penetrates through a lower portion of the housing.
Jeon teaches a check valve with a plunger wherein the plunger includes a rod (90) that penetrates through a lower portion of the housing (52) (see Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of the check valve and plunger of Jeon with the check valve of Lee in order to guide the linear movement of the plunger, preventing system malfunctions relating to misalignment of the plunger and allowing for quick reactivity of the plunger (see US 20180335154 A1 [Jeon]; [0071]).
Regarding Claim 6, Lee modified by Jeon teaches wherein the spring (70) is disposed between the lower portion of the plunger (66) and the lower portion of the housing (52) (see US 20180335154 A1 [Jeon]; Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 7, Lee modified by Jeon teaches wherein the lower portion of the housing (52) is formed with an opening so that the rod (90) passes therethrough, and a guide part (55) that is formed to surround an outer diameter of the rod (90) and guides the rod (see US 20180335154 A1 [Jeon]; Fig. 5, [0067], [0071]).
Regarding Claim 11, Lee modified by Jeon teaches wherein the plunger (60) has a locking jaw (T) (see Annotated Fig. 5 below) formed below the lower portion (66) (see US 20180335154 A1 [Jeon]; Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image3.png
366
357
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 5
Regarding Claim 12, Lee modified by Jeon teaches wherein the spring (70) is disposed between the lower portion of the plunger (66) and the lower portion of the housing (52), and an inner diameter is formed to be larger than an outer diameter of the locking jaw (T) so that the upper portion is fitted into the locking jaw (T) (see US 20180335154 A1 [Jeon]; Fig. 5, Annotated Fig. 5 above).
Regarding Claim 19, Lee discloses the check valve of Claim 16.
Lee does not disclose wherein the seal is disposed to surround an outer diameter of the plunger and seals between a lower surface of the sheet and an upper surface of the plunger.
Jeon teaches wherein the seal (63) is disposed to surround an outer diameter of the plunger (60) and seals between a lower surface of the sheet (40) and an upper surface of the plunger (62) (see Fig. 4, [0056]).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of the seal of Jeon with the check valve of Lee in order to prevent unwanted fluid flow between the sheet and upper side of the plunger, which could cause malfunctions of the check valve.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20190120392 A1) as applied to Claim 1, above, in view of Weh (WO 2021032330 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Lee discloses the check valve of claim 1, wherein a lower portion of the sheet (1100) is provided with a first inclined surface inclined downward (1130) (see Fig. 6).
Lee does not disclose an upper portion of the plunger is provided with a second inclined surface inclined to correspond to the first inclined surface.
Weh teaches a check valve wherein it includes a lower portion of a sheet (13) is provided with a first inclined surface inclined downward (14), and an upper portion of the plunger (12) is provided with a second inclined surface (17) inclined to correspond to the first inclined surface (14) (see Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of the inclined surfaces in the check valve of Weh with the check valve of Lee in order to create a pair of sealing surfaces to improve the sealing between the sheet and the plunger (see WO 2021032330 A1 [Weh]; [0033-0034], [0036]).
Regarding Claim 9, Lee modified by Weh teaches wherein when the plunger (12) rises, the second inclined surface (17) of the plunger (12) comes into close contact with the first inclined surface (14) of the sheet (13) to block a flow of the fluid into the reservoir (see WO 2021032330 A1 [Weh]; Fig. 2).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20190120392 A1) as modified by Jeon (US 20180335154 A1) in Claim 12, above, further in view of Bisig (US 20140166138 A1).
Regarding Claim 13, Lee modified by Jeon teaches wherein the lower portion of the housing (52) is formed with a guide part (55) that is formed to surround an outer diameter of the rod (90) and guide the rod (90) (see US 20180335154 A1 [Jeon]; Fig. 5).
Lee modified by Jeon does not teach wherein the locking jaw is formed to have a size of an outer diameter similar to that of the outer diameter of the guide part.
Bisig teaches a valve arrangement wherein a lower portion of a housing (101) is formed with a guide part (106) that is formed to surround an outer diameter of the rod (M) (see Annotated Fig. 9 below) and guide the rod (M), and the locking jaw (N) is formed to have a size of an outer diameter similar to that of the outer diameter of the guide part (106) (see Fig. 9, Annotated Fig. 9 below).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of the rod and guide arrangement of Bisig with the check valve of Lee modified by Jeon in order to improve the retainment of the spring and allow for cheaper manufacture through the use of commercially available same diameter springs.
PNG
media_image4.png
631
650
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 9
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20190120392 A1) as applied to Claim 1, above, in view of Mullaney (US 3548868 A).
Regarding Claim 14, Lee discloses the check valve of Claim 1.
Lee does not disclose wherein the sheet is screwed to the housing.
Mullaney teaches a check valve arrangement wherein the sheet (20) is screwed to the housing (11) (see Fig. 1, 1: 50-51).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of the housing attachment of Mullaney with the check valve of Lee in order to simplify and accelerate assembly and maintenance operations while providing a secure connection between the sheet and housing.
Regarding Claim 15, Lee modified by Mullaney teaches wherein the sheet (20) includes: a large outer diameter portion (A1) (see Annotated Fig. 1 (Mullaney) below) that directly communicates with the reservoir; and a small outer diameter portion (B1) that has a diameter smaller than the large outer diameter portion (A1), the small outer diameter portion (B1) has a screw thread (27) formed on an outer diameter, and an inner diameter of an upper portion of the housing (11) has a screw thread (13) formed to engage the screw thread (27) (see US 3548868 A [Mullaney]; Fig. 1, Annotated Fig. 1 (Mullaney) below).
PNG
media_image5.png
693
702
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 (Mullaney)
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 20190120392 A1) as applied to Claim 1, above, in view of Ogiwara (JP 2011207480 A).
Regarding Claim 17, Lee discloses the check valve of claim 16.
Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein the fluid passes through a grommet installed at an outlet of the reservoir that accommodates the fluid, passes through the filter, and then flows into the sheet.
Ogiwara teaches a valve arrangement configured to allow fluid to pass through a grommet (see Annotated Fig. 3 below) installed at an outlet of the reservoir (2) that accommodates the fluid, passes through the filter (47), and then flows into the sheet (38) (see Fig. 3, Annotated Fig. 3 below).
It would have been obvious, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of the valve arrangement of Ogiwara with the check valve of Lee in order to integrate the check valve of Lee into a larger hydraulic arrangement in a resilient fashion, as the grommet limits wear on the check valve inlet created by the weight of the reservoir and movement of fluid from the reservoir to the valve.
PNG
media_image6.png
618
604
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 3
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shea Irvin whose telephone number is (571)272-9952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 - 17:00.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at (571) 272-7124. 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.
/S.W.I./Examiner, Art Unit 3616
/DAVID R MORRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616
Prosecution Insights