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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 11/22/2024 is acknowledged by the Examiner.
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 “elliptical shape” of the first or second end wall in claim 4, and the “elliptical cross section” of the protruding portion in claim 9, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 § 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 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, 4-6, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Schubert et al. (US 5605172).
Schubert et al. disclose:
1. (Original) A vortex-type flow control valve comprising: a vortex chamber (within 8) defined by a cylindrical peripheral side wall (11), a first end wall (lower wall of 8 which includes 15, 16), and a second end wall (9), said first end wall and the second end wall provided opposite each other at both ends of the peripheral side wall (as seen in fig. 1); an inlet flow passage (20) extending along an inlet flow passage central axis (along AA) and being opened in the peripheral side wall; and an outlet flow passage (bottom of 17) extending along an outlet flow passage central axis (through center of opening) and being opened in the first end wall, said vortex-type control valve configured so that fluid flowing in from the inlet flow passage generates a vortex flow in the vortex chamber (vortex shape of flow path seen in fig. 2) and flows out into the outlet flow passage (along flow arrows shown in figs. 1, 2), wherein the inlet flow passage is provided such that the inlet flow passage central axis extends through a position away from a vortex chamber central axis connecting the center of the first end wall and the center of the second end wall (the inlet flow passage central axis enters the vortex chamber tangentially along the periphery of the vortex chamber at a position away from the central axis of the vortex chamber which would extend through 13 so the axes are positioned away from each other, as can be seen in fig. 2), and the vortex-type flow control valve further comprises a protruding portion (12, 13) protruding into the vortex chamber from one of the first end wall and the second end wall (12, 13 extends from the second end wall 9), and a drive unit (18) moving the protruding portion closer to or away from the other of the first end wall and the second end wall in the vortex chamber (18 is adjusted up and down via a motive force, see col. 2, ll. 38-42), said protruding portion being moved to adjust a flow rate of the fluid flowing out from the outlet flow passage (col. 2, ll. 9-12).
3. (Original) The vortex-type flow control valve according to claim 2, wherein the protruding portion is provided such that at least a part of the protruding portion (portion 12) extends to overlap an extension of the inlet flow passage into the vortex chamber (as seen in fig. 1, portion 12 overlaps an extension of the inlet flow passage into the vortex chamber).
4. (Original) The vortex-type flow control valve according to claim 1, wherein the first end wall and the second end wall have a circular shape or an elliptical shape (circular shape seen in fig. 2).
5. (Currently Amended) The vortex-type flow control valve according to claim 1, wherein the outlet flow passage is provided such that the outlet flow passage central axis extends through a position away from the inlet flow passage central axis (the outlet flow passage central axis aligns with the center of 13 and the inlet flow passage central axis enters the vortex chamber tangentially along the periphery of the vortex chamber so the axes are positioned away from each other, as can be seen in fig. 2).
6. (Currently Amended) The vortex-type flow control valve according to claim 5, wherein the outlet flow passage is provided such that the outlet flow passage central axis extends on the vortex chamber central axis (as seen in figs. 1-2, the outlet flow passage central axis would extend along the center of plug 13, which is centrally aligned in the vortex chamber).
9. (Original) The vortex-type flow control valve according to claim 5, wherein the protruding portion has a circular cross section or an elliptical cross section (circular cross section of 13 is seen in fig. 2).
10. (Original) The vortex-type flow control valve according to claim 5, wherein the drive unit drives the protruding portion to change a protruding length of the protruding portion into the vortex chamber (col. 2, ll. 9-12).
11. (Original) The vortex-type flow control valve according to claim 5, wherein the protruding portion is provided on the second end wall (12, 13 extends from the second end wall 9).
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 2, 3, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Schubert et al. (US 5605172) in view of Nitzberg et al. (US 4827961).
Schubert et al. discloses the invention as essentially claimed, except for wherein the protruding portion is provided at a position eccentric from the vortex chamber central axis; wherein the outlet flow passage is provided such that the outlet flow passage central axis extends through a position deviated from the vortex chamber central axis toward the inlet flow passage central axis.
Nitzberg et al. teach a related reciprocating valve in a vortex chamber (54) wherein the protruding portion (114) is provided at a position eccentric from the vortex chamber central axis (opening to which 114 aligns with is shown eccentric to the central axis of the chamber, as seen in fig. 4); wherein the outlet flow passage is provided such that the outlet flow passage central axis extends through a position deviated from the vortex chamber central axis toward the inlet flow passage central axis (opening to which 114 aligns with is deviated from the vortex chamber central axis resulting in a smaller space 134 and toward the inlet flow passage central axis, as seen in fig. 4), because valving within the passageways tends to undo the swirl and break the vortex, and therefore such placement ensures that the fluid does not separate from the walls of the passageways so that laminar flow is maintained (col. 7, ll. 26-46).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Schubert et al., such that the protruding portion is provided at a position eccentric from the vortex chamber central axis; wherein the outlet flow passage is provided such that the outlet flow passage central axis extends through a position deviated from the vortex chamber central axis toward the inlet flow passage central axis, as taught by Nitzberg et al., for the purpose of better ensuring that the fluid does not separate from the walls of the passageways so that laminar flow is maintained with the placement of the valve in the vortex chamber.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Schubert et al. (US 5605172) in view of Hayes et al. (US 4003405).
Schubert et al. discloses the invention as essentially claimed, except for wherein the second end wall is constituted by a diaphragm, and the protruding portion is attached to the diaphragm so that the protruding portion is driven by the drive unit via the diaphragm.
Hayes et al. teach a related cylindrical reciprocating valve (145 in fig. 16, 200 in fig. 21) in a central annular chamber (figs. 4, 5), wherein the second end wall of the chamber is alternatively constituted by a diaphragm (34, fig. 17), and the protruding portion (160) is attached to the diaphragm so that the protruding portion is driven by the drive unit (36) via the diaphragm, for the purpose of providing an alternate equivalent arrangement of a reciprocating valve member in a valve chamber.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Schubert et al., such that the second end wall is constituted by a diaphragm, and the protruding portion is attached to the diaphragm so that the protruding portion is driven by the drive unit via the diaphragm, as taught by Hayes et al., since Hayes teaches the diaphragm arrangement is an art equivalent means of a reciprocating valve member to a cylindrical plug in a chamber used to regulate a valve opening, in a manner yielding predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: none of the prior art disclose or render obvious “the protruding portion is provided at a position deviated from the outlet flow passage central axis”.
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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20100258754 A1, US 4791961 A, US 5573029 A, US 2598187 A, US 3198214 A, GB 2133902, DE 337118 C, and GB 384422 A each disclose related vortex-type valves.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARINA TIETJEN, whose telephone number is 571-270-5422. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (10:30AM-7:00PM CST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Tom Barrett can be reached at 571-272-4746, Ken Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881, and Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MARINA A TIETJEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753