DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-12 were filed with the Preliminary Amendment on 10/25/2024.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/25/2024 and 11/13/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 6-12 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.
With regard to claim 6, the phrase “one of segments of the flexible segment” (lines 11-12) renders the claim indefinite. Preceding claims 1 and 4 only refer to a single flexible segment (see, claim 1, line 4; and claim 4, line 4). It is not clear if “one of segments of the flexible segment” is now requiring additional flexible segments or if it is a typographical error and the phrase should state “the flexible segment.” For purposes of examination, claim 6 will be construed as “the flexible segment comprises plural segments and one of the plural segments of the flexible segment.”
With regard to claim 7, the phrase “the limiting portion is arranged away from the injection molded main body than the main body portion” (lines 19-20) is a confusing statement and, therefore, is indefinite. It is not clear what “than the main body portion” means. As best understood, the claim will be construed as if it is written as “the limiting portion is arranged away from the injection molded main body farther than the main body portion.”
With regard to claim 12, the phrase “the limiting portion is arranged away from the injection molded main body than the main body portion” (lines 16-17) is a confusing statement and, therefore, is indefinite. It is not clear what “than the main body portion” means. As best understood, the claim will be construed as if it is written as “the limiting portion is arranged away from the injection molded main body farther than the main body portion.”
Dependent claims 8-12 are also rejected for being dependent upon a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2022/0196172 (“Yoshida”).
With regard to claim 1, Yoshida discloses a fluid control assembly (1), comprising a control portion (portion above housing 2, see annotated Fig 1), wherein the control portion (portion above housing 2) comprises a circuit board (3; para [0019]: “a control substrate 3 that is provided with a drive circuit”), a stator assembly (60), and a connector (FP1); the connector (FP1) comprises a flexible segment (wavy middle segment of FP1 in Fig 1; also – “flexible board” para [0043]) and a rigid segment (“rigid” is a broad term that is being construed as if it is more rigid than the flexible portion; the end segments of FP1 are considered to meet the claim limitation of “rigid” because they are shown in Fig 1 as being thicker and thus less flexible, and also because the end segments are fixed to other components, providing rigidity), and the flexible segment (middle wavy portion) is electrically connected to the rigid segment (all connected together and must be electrically connected because the flexible and rigid segments connect the control substrate/circuit board 3 and the power supply portion 63; para [0043]); the stator assembly (60) comprises a coil assembly (61; para [0019]) and a first connecting portion (63),and a coil of the coil assembly (61) is electrically connected to the first connecting portion (63 (para [0019]; connected because receives an electrical signal from 3 via 63; “A pulse signal is input to the coil 61 from a control substrate 3 that is provided with a drive circuit for driving the stepping motor 60 via a power supply portion 63”); and the circuit board (3) comprises a second connecting portion (rectangular box below 3 in Fig 1, see annotated Fig), wherein the rigid segment (thicker end segment of FP1) comprises a first segment (bottom thicker end segment adjacent 63), and the first segment (bottom thicker end segment adjacent 63) is electrically connected to the first connecting portion (63, see Fig 1); and/or the rigid segment comprises a second segment (top thicker end segment of FP1 adjacent 3), and the second segment (top thicker end segment of FP1 adjacent 3) is electrically connected to the second connecting portion (rectangular box below 3 in Fig 1, see annotated Fig 1 (see para [0019]).
PNG
media_image1.png
915
893
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, Yoshida discloses that the stator assembly (60) comprises an main body (62). The main body (62) is formed by injection molding with at least the coil assembly (60). The phrase “injection molded” and the phrase “formed by injection molding” is a product by process statement. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product in the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process (see MPEP 2113). The product of the claim is the same as or obvious from a product of Yoshida. The first connecting portion (63) being as inserts (because 63 is inserted into portion of 62 as seen in Fig 1), and the injection molded main body (62) has a first wall (left wall adjacent 63 in Fig 1); the first segment ((bottom thicker end segment adjacent 63) is of a plate structure (it is considered to be a “plate structure” as it is shown as a flat, portion in Fig 1), the first segment (bottom thicker end segment adjacent 63) has a second wall (right wall/surface facing 61), at least a part of the first wall (left wall shown in annotated Fig 1) is arranged towards at least a part of the second wall (see Fig 1), and the first segment (bottom thicker end segment adjacent 63) is provided with a first hole (hole in FP1 end segment through which portion of 63 extends, see annotated Fig); and at least a part of the first connecting portion (63) protrudes from the first wall (portion of 63 extends through 1st wall/left wall of main body, see annotated Fig), at least a part of the first connecting portion (63) is located inside the first hole(portion of 63 that extends through 2nd wall/hole in bottom thicker end segment of FP1, see annotated Fig 1), and the first connecting portion (63) is fixedly connected to the first segment (shown in Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image2.png
864
1172
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 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.
Claims 6-12 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose or render obvious “the positioning block comprises a third wall; the second segment is of a plate structure, the second segment has a fourth wall, at least a part of the third wall is arranged towards at least a part of the fourth wall, and the second segment is provided with a second hole; and at least a part of the second connecting portion protrudes from the third wall, at least a part of the second connecting portion is located inside the second hole, and the second connecting portion is fixedly connected to the second segment” (claim 3) in combination with the other limitations set forth in the independent claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,041,497 discloses a electrical connector with rigid segments and a flexible segment.
U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2002/0127910 discloses a valve with an electrical connector with a flexible segment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA CAHILL whose telephone number is (571)270-5219. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 6:30 to 3:00.
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 supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-60073607 or Kenneth 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 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.
/JESSICA CAHILL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753