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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Germany on 07/14/2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the DE102022117627.4 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Germany on 06/30/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the DE102023117369.3 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) was/were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) was/were considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because at least Figs. 4A, 4B, and 5 do not comply with MPEP § 608.02(V)(h)(3) which necessitates that sectional views include hatching to indicate section portions of an object. 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.
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 11-20 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.
Claim 11 recites, “a ball valve housing of two housing parts which each have”. Claim 1 goes on to recite features of the ball valve housing and of the two housing parts. It is unclear and indefinite when applicant’s feature description are intended to refer to the housing as a whole and/or an individual housing part. For example, it is unclear and indefinite whether applicant intends the housing as a whole or each individual housing part to include, “two opposite housing side walls, a bottom wall and with an upper housing wall opposite the bottom wall and with two mutually opposite open sides”.
Claim 1 recites, “their ends”. It is unclear and indefinite what structure applicant intends to reference with the term “their”. Additionally, the limitation "ends" lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 1 recites, “with the help of”. It is unclear and indefinite what applicant intends the metes and bounds of the term “help” to be.
Claim 1, line 6, recites, “a ball valve housing”. It is unclear and indefinite whether this housing is the same as, or different from, the ball valve housing recited in claim 1, line 3. The office regards the ball valve housings as one and the same for purposes of examination.
Claim 1, line 6, recites that the valve housing has “a rectangular cross-sectional geometry”. However, claim 1, lines 17-19, appear to recite that the valve housing has a tapering truncated cone” shape. Further clarification is required to more clearly recite the cross-sectional shape of the valve housing.
Claim 13 recites that, “the respective annular receiving recess is aligned perpendicularly in each direction to a surface of the curved and aligned outer sides.” It is unclear and indefinite what applicant intends by “in each direction”. Further clarification is requested.
Claims not specifically recited are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art does disclose ball valve housings which include open sides. See for example: 2018/0283562; 2018/0119839; 2014/0306139; and 4576234.
Additionally, the prior art discloses ball valve housings which include two symmetrical housing parts. See for example: 2008/0099712; 4476891; and 3166098.
Additionally, the prior art discloses ball valve housings which include a truncated cone shape. See for example: 5135019 and 4606368.
However, the prior art does not disclose or teach in useable combination: “two housing parts which each have an L-shaped cross-sectional geometry, are aligned rotationally symmetrically to one another, and which are connected to one another at their ends with the help of fastening elements to form a ball valve housing with a rectangular cross-sectional geometry, with two opposite housing side walls, a bottom wall and with an upper housing wall opposite the bottom wall and with two mutually opposite open sides”.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to R.K. Arundale whose telephone number is 571-270-3453. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (9:30AM-6:00PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881, and Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. 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.
/ROBERT K ARUNDALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753