DETAILED ACTION
The amendments filed on 03/18/2026 have been entered.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 9-12, 16-17, 19, 23, 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Malone et al. (WO2019125987).
Regarding claims 1 and 26-28, Malone discloses an isolation valve comprising: a valve body (32) mountable on or integrally formed with a tubular (36) (figs 1-5), the valve body defining a valve pocket (interior portion of 32, fig 1); a first flow path portion extending within the valve body between a tube inlet (right end of 42, fig 1) and a valve inlet port (48), the tube inlet being connectable to an inlet tube (42) and the valve inlet port being in communication with the valve pocket (figs 1-5); a second flow path portion extending within the valve body between a valve outlet port (56) and a tube outlet (left end of 44, fig 1-2), the valve outlet port being in communication with the valve pocket and the tube outlet being connectable to an outlet tube (44) (figs 1-5), an intermediate portion (62) of the valve pocket separating the valve inlet and the valve outlet ([0029], figs 1-5); and a valve rod (34) disposed within the valve pocket of the valve body (figs 1-5), the valve rod being moveable within the valve pocket between an open position in which the valve inlet port and valve outlet port are in communication with each other (fig 5), and a closed position in which the valve inlet port and the valve outlet port are isolated from each other (fig 5), wherein the valve rod comprises a flow guide (34) comprising an open-sided recess (50) formed in a side of the valve rod (figs 1-5); and wherein, when the valve rod is in the open position, the open-sided recess of the flow guide is exposed to the valve inlet, the intermediate portion,and the valve outlet and permits communication between the valve inlet port and the valve outlet port (figs 1-5).
,
Regarding claim 2, Malone further discloses at least one of:one or both of the first and second flow path portions comprise a component extending at an angle with respect to a longitudinal axis of the valve pocket (figs 1-5); and one or both of the first and second flow path portions comprise a nonlinear component (figs 1-5).
Regarding claim 4, Malone further discloses that the valve body defines an internal surface (internal surface of 32, fig 1) and an external surface (external pocket of 32, fig 1), the valve pocket located between the internal and external surfaces of the valve body (figs 1-5).
Regarding claim 7, Malone further discloses that the valve rod is configured to translate axially within the valve pocket between the open and closed positions (figs 1-5);
Regarding claim 9, Malone further discloses that the valve rod comprises a sealing arrangement (60) configured to sealingly isolate the valve inlet port and the valve outlet port from each other when the valve rod is in the closed position (figs 1-5).
Regarding claim 10, Malone further discloses that he sealing arrangement comprises a plurality of sealing elements (58,60) disposed along a length of the valve rod (figs 1-5, [0029]).
Regarding claim 11, Malone further discloses that two of the plurality of sealing elements (58) are located either side of the flow guide (figs 1-5).
Regarding claim 12, Malone further discloses that at least one of: the tube inlet is located on a first end face of the valve body (figs 1-5), and the tube outlet is located on a second end face of the valve body opposite to the first end face (figs 1-5); the valve body comprises a clamshell arrangement for mounting on the tubular; the valve body comprises an eccentric shape (figs 1-5); and the valve body is partly or fully integrally formed with the tubular (figs 1-5).
Regarding claim 16, Malone further discloses that a drive arrangement, wherein the drive arrangement comprises a valve actuator configured to move the valve rod between the open and closed positions ([0046]).
Regarding claim 17, Malone further discloses that the valve body is mounted on the tubular or the valve body is integrally formed with the tubular (figs 1-5); and wherein the valve actuator is slideably disposed internally of the tubular ([0046] discloses the use of a shifting device to mechanically actuate 30).
Regarding claim 19, Malone further discloses that the tubular comprises an axial shoulder (annotated fig 3) configured to limit axial movement of the valve actuator (figs 1-5).
Regarding claim 23, Malone further discloses that the isolation valve is a shunt tube isolation valve (abstract, figs 1-5); and wherein the tube inlet comprises a shunt tube inlet connectable to an inlet shunt tube and wherein the tube outlet comprises a shunt tube outlet connectable to an outlet shunt tube (abstract, figs 1-5).
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.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malone et al. (WO2019125987) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Greci et al. (US 20230113839)
Regarding claim 18, Malone is silent regarding the fact that the drive arrangement comprises a drive member configured connect the valve rod to the valve actuator.
Greci teaches that regarding the fact that the drive arrangement comprises a drive member (216) configured connect the valve rod to the valve actuator (406, 310) (figs 3-4).
Before the effective filling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Malone and Greci before him or her, to modify the apparatus/method disclosed by Malone to include the drive member as taught by Greci in order to actuate the shunt isolation system ([0016]).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malone et al. (WO2019125987) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Krech et al. (WO2016178889A1).
Regarding claim 22, Malone is silent regarding the fact that the flow guide defines a first flow guide; and wherein the valve rod comprises a second flow guide.
Krech teaches that the flow guide defines a first flow guide(100A) ; and wherein the valve rod comprises a second flow guide (100B) (figs 6A-B).
Before the effective filling date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Malone and Krech before him or her, to modify the apparatus/method disclosed by Greci to include the fact that the flow guide defines a first flow guide; and wherein the valve rod comprises a second flow guide as taught by Krech in order to allow multiple fluid flow configurations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is 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 with respect to claim(s) 1-28 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANY E AKAKPO whose telephone number is (469)295-9255. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached on (571) 272-5405. 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.
/DANY E AKAKPO/Examiner, Art Unit 3672
04/09/2026
Prosecution Insights