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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to the amendment dated 5/16/2026. The previous drawing objection has been withdrawn due to applicant’s replacement figures submitted on 5/16/2026. The previous 112 rejection has been withdrawn due to applicant’s amendment. Applicant’s amendment to claim 1 presents a new combination of limitations. Claims 1-20 remain pending. Claims 12-20 remain withdrawn. This action is Final.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/2/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Rejection on 2/18/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code 102 not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Grove et al. (U.S. 3,841,601).
Grove discloses a control valve, comprising: a housing (101, 112, 21, 22), a first valve seat (29, 32, 41), and a first connecting pipe (38), wherein the first valve seat is made of metal (see col. 3, ll. 17-18 describing the body 10 which includes the above components as being welded from steel shapes), the first valve seat comprises a first base (the central portion at the area of 32), a first connecting portion (29) and a second connecting portion (41), the first base is annular (as it is ring shaped), the first connecting portion is tubular (as it is ring shaped and has a length), the first connecting portion extends from an outer edge of the first base towards the housing (fig. 1), the second connecting portion is tubular (as it is ring shaped and has a length), the second connecting portion extends from an inner edge of the first base towards the first connecting pipe (fig. 1), and the first connecting pipe is fixedly connected to the second connecting portion (as they are fixed together, the weld portions at 39 and 42 as well); and wherein the housing comprises a body (101, 112) and a protrusion (21, 22) that are integrally formed (as they are all part of the whole of the assembly), the protrusion protrudes from a circumferential outer wall of the body (fig. 1), the body is cylindrical (as shown in fig. 1 as it is annular and has a length), the protrusion is annular (fig. 1), the body is fixed to the first connecting portion (as all the components are fixed together), and the control valve further comprises a joint (103, 113) fixed to the protrusion (fig. 1, via the bolt(s) shown and labeled as 106 at the bottom of fig. 6 and especially as all the components are fixed together).
Regarding claim 2, Grove further discloses wherein the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion are coaxially arranged (fig. 1), and an inner diameter of the first connecting portion is larger than an outer diameter of the second connecting portion (see the inner diameter of 29 as compared to the outer diameter of 41).
Regarding claim 3, Grove further discloses wherein the control valve further comprises a valve core (14) and a first sealing gasket (the sealing assembly 59), the valve core is located in an inner cavity of the control valve (fig. 1), the first valve seat comprises an inner step portion (the surfaces of 29 and 32 facing toward 14) with a step surface facing the valve core (the surfaces of 29 and 32 facing toward 14 in fig. 1, including the right facing surface of 32 or stepped surfaces of 32 and the radially inward facing surface of 29), the inner step portion comprises the first base and the first connecting portion (fig. 1), the first sealing gasket is placed in the inner step portion (fig. 1), and the first sealing gasket supports the valve core (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Grove further discloses wherein the inner step portion has a groove (the groove for 34), and the groove is located at a connection between the first base and the first connecting portion (see fig. 1, located where 29 and 32 abut against each other).
Regarding claim 5, Grove further discloses wherein the first sealing gasket comprises a chamfered portion (the chamfered surface to the left of 69 in fig. 5), and a chamfered surface (the chamfered surface to the left of 69 in fig. 5) of the chamfered portion faces a connection between the first base and the first connecting portion (fig. 5, toward 62 which is where the connection is between the first base and the first connection portion).
Regarding claim 6, Grove further discloses wherein the first sealing gasket further comprises a first accommodating groove (the groove for 67), an opening of the first accommodating groove faces the first base (best shown in fig. 5), and the control valve further comprises a first sealing ring (67), the first sealing ring is located in the first accommodating groove (fig. 5), the first sealing ring abuts against a groove wall forming the first accommodating groove (fig. 5), and the first sealing ring abuts against the first base (fig. 5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code 103 not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grove in view of Wu et al. (U.S. 10,920,894).
Grove discloses the claimed invention and further discloses wherein the first connecting pipe comprises a first matching section (the section closer to 32), the first matching section is mounted outside the second connecting portion (fig. 1), and the first matching section is fixed to the second connecting portion (see the welds at 43).
Grove does not appear to disclose the second connecting portion comprising a convex portion, the convex portion located on an outer peripheral surface of the second connecting portion, and the first matching section fixed to the convex portion.
Wu teaches it was known in the art to similarly fix a connection pipe (102’) to a fluid handling structure (11’) and the fluid handling structure having a welding convex portion located on an outer peripheral surface (111’, see col. 13, ll. 58 – col. 14, ll. 5) and the first matching section of the connection pipe (the end of 102’ that mates with 11’) fixed to the convex portion (see fig. 15 and col. 13, ll. 58 – col. 14, ll.5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grove such that the second connecting portion has a convex portion that is fixed with the first matching section of the first connecting pipe as taught by Wu in order to provide a connection in a sealed manner (see col. 14, ll. 1-5 of Wu).
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grove in view of Yokomi (U.S. 6,643,929).
Grove discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to disclose the housing, the first valve set, and the first connecting pipe being made of stainless steel.
Yokomi teaches it was known in the art to have housing components for a ball valve made of stainless steel (col. 3, ll. 29-31).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grove by having the housing, the first valve set, and the first connecting pipe being made of stainless steel as taught by Yokomi in order to have the housing components be made of a material that is known to have high durability and corrosion resistance and especially as it has been held that selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP2144.07.
Regarding claim 11, Grove discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to disclose wherein the control valve further comprises a second valve seat and a second connecting pipe, the second valve seat is formed from a metal plate, the second valve seat comprises a second base, a third connecting portion and a fourth connecting portion, the second base is annular, the third connecting portion is tubular, the third connecting portion extends from an outer edge of the second base toward the housing, the fourth connecting portion is tubular, the fourth connecting portion extends from an inner edge of the second base towards the second connecting pipe, the housing and the third connecting portion are fixed to each other, the second connecting pipe comprises a second matching section, the second matching section is mounted outside the fourth connecting portion, and the second matching section is fixed to the fourth connecting portion.
It is noted the limitations above are the same features as described in claim 1 but for the opposite end of the valve (i.e. the other of the inlet or outlet section).
Yokomi teaches it was known in the art to have a ball valve with the same components for both the inlet and outlet to the ball valve (see figs. 1 and 2, notice how the components such as seat 30 with sealing ring 34, etc. are the same on both the inlet and outlet ends).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Grove such that both the inlet end and outlet end use the same components for the seat assembly, resulting in the control valve further comprising a second valve seat and a second connecting pipe, the second valve seat is formed from a metal plate, the second valve seat comprises a second base, a third connecting portion and a fourth connecting portion, the second base is annular, the third connecting portion is tubular, the third connecting portion extends from an outer edge of the second base toward the housing, the fourth connecting portion is tubular, the fourth connecting portion extends from an inner edge of the second base towards the second connecting pipe, the housing and the third connecting portion are fixed to each other, the second connecting pipe comprises a second matching section, the second matching section is mounted outside the fourth connecting portion, and the second matching section is fixed to the fourth connecting portion (similar to the structure as mapped out in Grove in the rejection of claim 1) as taught by Yokomi in order to have the same components for both the inlet seat assembly and outlet seat assembly which can lower overall costs and further make manufacturing and assembly less complex and especially as it has been held that the duplication of essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP2144.04.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Grove does not teach the newly added limitations of the housing comprises a body and a protrusion that are integrally formed, the protrusion protrudes from a circumferential outer wall of the body, the body is cylindrical, the protrusion is annular, the body is fixed to the first connecting portion, and the control valve further comprises a joint fixed to the protrusion. However, as described above, Grove does disclose these features as the housing has a body (101, 112) and a protrusion (21, 22) that are integrally formed (as they are all part of the whole of the assembly), the protrusion protrudes from a circumferential outer wall of the body (fig. 1), the body is cylindrical (as shown in fig. 1 as it is annular and has a length), the protrusion is annular (fig. 1), the body is fixed to the first connecting portion (as all the components are fixed together), and the control valve further comprises a joint (103, 113) fixed to the protrusion (fig. 1, especially as all the components are fixed together).
For at least the above reason(s), applicant’s arguments have not been found persuasive.
Applicant’s amendment has required further search and/or consideration and/or revision of the rejection and, as such, this action is made Final.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL R REID whose telephone number is (313)446-4859. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9am-5pm est.
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 supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607, or Ken 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.
/MICHAEL R REID/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights