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 1/8/2026. The previous drawing objection has been withdrawn due to the replacement drawings submitted on 1/8/2026. Claims 1-8 remain pending. Any new ground(s) of rejection below have been made due to applicant’s amendment. This action is Final.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/5/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Rejection on 10/8/2025. 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 § 112(a), first paragraph
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 has been amended to recite that the partition member is configured to come into close contact with one of the at least two pairs of side walls of the groove and with only one of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case and not come into close contact with an other of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case, under every state in which there is any differential pressure between the cold water gap and the hot water gap. Support for the described contacting of the partition member under every state in which there is any differential pressure cannot be found in the originally filed disclosure. Applicant’s original claim 1 and specification (paragraph 48) just describes there being “a pressure differential” between the cold and hot water gaps for when the partition member is kept away from the inner surface of the groove of the valve case. There is no description of this type of contact or non-contact of the partition member occurring for every state in which there is any pressure differential.
Claims 2-8 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 1.
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) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hideyuki (JP2011064301)(reference and translation supplied herewith and referred to below).
Hideyuki discloses a hot water and cold water mixing apparatus comprising: a cold water channel (94) into which cold water is supplied from a cold water supply source (fig. 1), a hot water channel (95) into which hot water is supplied from a hot water supply source (fig. 1), a tubular valve body (15) arranged movably in an axial direction thereof (para. 48-49), the valve body being configured to adjust an introduction amount of the cold water from the cold water channel and an introduction amount of the hot water from the hot water channel by moving in the axial direction thereof (para. 48-49), a valve case (11, 12, 19, 27) covering an outer side of the valve body, and an annular hot water and cold water partition member (26) arranged between an outer surface of the valve body and an inner surface of the valve case (fig. 4, fig. 5), the annular hot water and cold water partition member being configured to divide a gap therebetween into a cold water gap (from 22 and the same as the applicant’s device) communicating with the cold water channel and a hot water gap (from 23 and the same as the applicant’s device) communicating with the hot water channel, wherein a groove portion (the groove that 26 is received in) for receiving the annular hot water and cold water partition member is provided on at least one of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case (inner surface of the valve case and the same as the applicant’s device), the groove portion has at least one pair of side walls (on the left and right of 26 in figs. 5 and 7, the vertical wall of 27 and the vertical wall of 11) and the annular hot water and cold water partition member is configured to come into close contact with one of the at least one pair of side walls of the groove portion and with only one of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case and not to come into close contact with another of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case, under every state in which there is any differential pressure between the cold water gap and the hot water gap (see the positioning best shown in figs. 5 and 7, notice how 26 contacts 11 on the left side and contacts 15 at the bottom, this is the same as that claimed by applicant and shown in fig. 4 of the applicant’s disclosure, thus, as the structure of Hideyuki is the same as that claimed and disclosed by the applicant, Hideyuki is deemed to meet the claim including the functional language of the differential pressure).
Regarding claim 2, Hideyuki further discloses wherein the annular hot water and cold water partition member is configured to be away from the other of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case, under the state in which there is a differential pressure between the cold water gap and the hot water gap (see the positioning best shown in figs. 5 and 7, notice how 26 contacts 11 on the left side and contacts 15 at the bottom, this is the same as that claimed by applicant and shown in fig. 4 of the applicant’s disclosure, thus, as the structure of Hideyuki is the same as that claimed and disclosed by the applicant, Hideyuki is deemed to meet the claim including the functional language of the differential pressure).
Regarding claim 3, Hideyuki further discloses wherein the groove portion is provided on only the other of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case (inner surface of the valve case), and the annular hot water and cold water partition member is configured to come into close contact with the only one of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case, wherein the groove portion is not provided on the only one, and not to come into close contact with the other of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case, wherein the groove portion is provided on the other, under the state in which there is a differential pressure between the cold water gap and the hot water gap (see the positioning best shown in figs. 5 and 7, notice how 26 contacts 11 on the left side and contacts 15 at the bottom, this is the same as that claimed by applicant and shown in fig. 4 of the applicant’s disclosure, thus, as the structure of Hideyuki is the same as that claimed and disclosed by the applicant, Hideyuki is deemed to meet the claim including the functional language of the differential pressure).
Regarding claim 4, Hideyuki further discloses wherein the groove portion is provided only on the inner surface of the valve case, and the annular hot water and cold water partition member is configured to come into close contact with only the outer surface of the valve body and not to come into close contact with the inner surface of the valve case, under the state in which there is a differential pressure between the cold water gap and the hot water gap (see the positioning best shown in figs. 5 and 7, notice how 26 contacts 11 on the left side and contacts 15 at the bottom, this is the same as that claimed by applicant and shown in fig. 4 of the applicant’s disclosure, thus, as the structure of Hideyuki is the same as that claimed and disclosed by the applicant, Hideyuki is deemed to meet the claim including the functional language of the differential pressure).
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) 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hideyuki.
Hideyuki discloses the claimed invention and further discloses wherein the groove portion has an axial direction clearance in the axial direction under an open atmospheric state in which the annular hot water and cold water partition member is received therein and a shutoff valve is closed (see the positioning best shown in figs. 5 and 7, notice how 26 contacts 11 on the left side and contacts 15 at the bottom, this is the same as that claimed by applicant and shown in fig. 4 of the applicant’s disclosure, thus, as the structure of Hideyuki is the same as that claimed and disclosed by the applicant, Hideyuki is deemed to meet the claim including the functional language of the open atmospheric state, further, see stop valves 97 in fig. 1 in the fluid lines).
Hideyuki does not appear to explicitly disclose the axial direction clearance being smaller than a moving stroke of the valve body.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hideyuki by having the axial clearance of the groove portion be smaller than a moving stroke of the valve body, since it has been held that a change in size of a component generally involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP2144.04. The motivation for doing so would be to have the groove not be unnecessarily large in the axial direction, providing a more compact assembly and still allowing for an adequate moving stroke of the valve.
Regarding claim 6, Hideyuki as modified discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the groove portion has a radial direction clearance in a direction perpendicular to the axial direction under the open atmospheric state in which the annular hot water and cold water partition member is received therein and the shutoff valve is closed, and the radial direction clearance is smaller than the axial direction clearance.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hideyuki by having a radial direction clearance in a direction perpendicular to the axial direction be smaller than the axial direction clearance, since it has been held that a change in size of a component generally involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP2144.04. The motivation for doing so would be to have the groove not be unnecessarily large in the radial direction, providing a more compact assembly and saving space in the radial direction.
Regarding claim 7, Hideyuki as modified discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the axial direction clearance is smaller than a radial direction gap between the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case on an outside of the groove portion.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hideyuki by having the axial direction clearance be smaller than a radial direction gap between the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case on an outside of the groove portion, since it has been held that a change in size of a component generally involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP2144.04. The motivation for doing so would be to provide a more compact assembly and have the valve components interact in a similar functional manner as desired by a user.
Regarding claim 8, Hideyuki as modified discloses the claimed invention but does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the radial direction gap is smaller than the moving stroke of the valve body.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hideyuki by having the radial direction gap be smaller than the moving stroke of the valve body, since it has been held that a change in size of a component generally involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP2144.04. The motivation for doing so would be to have the groove not be unnecessarily large in the radial direction, providing a more compact assembly and saving space while allowing for an adequate moving stroke of the valve.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 7 and continuing on to page 8 that the Hideyuki reference does not suggest the feature of the partition member configured to come into close contact with one of the at least one pair of side walls of the groove portion and with only one of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case and not come into close contact with an other of the outer surface of the valve body and the inner surface of the valve case, under every state in which there is any differential pressure between the cold water gap and the hot water gap.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. It is first noted that these newly added limitations do not appear to be supported by the disclosure as originally filed. It is additionally noted that the structure of the device as claimed by the applicant is the same as the structure of the device of Hideyuki, therefore, Hideyuki is seen to meet the functional language stated above absent any further clarifying structural limitations.
For at least the above reasons, applicant’s arguments have not been found persuasive.
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