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 .
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 following features must be shown or feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
“a sealing element at least partially disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer” recited in claims 7, 14 and 20.
No new matter should be entered.
The drawings (see fig. 15) illustrate a sealing element (“1528”; see fig. 15) disposed between a stem connector (“1524”) and a thermal displacer (“1520”); however, the drawings do not show a valve stem (“150”), which extends entirely through the thermal displacer (“120” or “1520”), as required by parent claims 1 and 15, in combination with the “sealing element at least partially disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer” as required by dependent claims 7 and 20. The drawings further do not illustrate an embodiment where “the stem connector provides a stop that engages an end of the thermal displacer to retain the thermal displacer within the extension cavity between the stem connector and the control element” as required by parent claim 8, in combination with the “sealing element at least partially disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer” as required by dependent claim 14.
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The specification does not provide sufficient written support for the “sealing element at least partially disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer” as required by claims 7, 14 and 20. The specification provides support for, in one embodiment of the invention, a sealing element (see specification paragraph [0049]), which is connected to a valve stem (“150”) or a stem connector (“220”); however, this sealing element would not be disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer (“120”). In a different embodiment (see fig. 15), the specification describes (see specification paragraph [0052]) a bellows seal (“1528”) disposed between a stem connector (“1524”) and the thermal displacer (“1520”); however, the specification lacks support for a valve stem (“150”), which extends entirely through the thermal displacer (“120” or “1520”), as required by parent claims 1 and 15, in combination with the “sealing element at least partially disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer” as required by dependent claims 7 and 20. The specification further lacks support for “the stem connector provides a stop that engages an end of the thermal displacer to retain the thermal displacer within the extension cavity between the stem connector and the control element” as required by parent claim 8, in combination with the “sealing element at least partially disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer” as required by dependent claim 14.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim(s) 7, 14 and 20 is/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.
Claims 7, 14 and 20 recite the limitation “a sealing element at least partially disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer”; however, there is insufficient written support for this limitation in the specification. The specification provides support for, in one embodiment of the invention, a sealing element (see specification paragraph [0049]), which is connected to a valve stem (“150”) or a stem connector (“220”); however, this sealing element would not be disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer (“120”). In a different embodiment (see fig. 15), the specification describes (see specification paragraph [0052]) a bellows seal (“1528”) disposed between a stem connector (“1524”) and the thermal displacer (“1520”); however, the specification lacks support for a valve stem (“150”), which extends entirely through the thermal displacer (“120” or “1520”), as required by parent claim 1, in combination with the “sealing element at least partially disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer” as required by dependent claim 7. The specification further lacks support for “the stem connector provides a stop that engages an end of the thermal displacer to retain the thermal displacer within the extension cavity between the stem connector and the control element” as required by parent claim 8, in combination with the “sealing element at least partially disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer” as required by dependent claim 14
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 1-6, 8-13 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US12435793 (“Cao”).
Regarding claim 1, Cao discloses (see figs. 21-35) a control valve, comprising:
a valve body (mainly defined by “3100”) defining an inlet (“3112”), an outlet (“3114”), and a fluid flow path (at least partially defined by “3110”) extending between the inlet and the outlet;
a valve seat (“3120”) disposed in the fluid flow path;
a control element (defined mainly by “3420”);
a valve stem (“3413”) coupled to the control element and configured to move the control element between a closed position (see position illustrated in figs. 21 and 25), in which the control element sealingly engages the valve seat, and an open position (position where control element “3420” is lifted from valve seat “3120), in which the control element is spaced from the valve seat;
an extension (“3150”) coupled to the valve body and comprising an extension cavity (interior cavity of extension “3150”);
a bonnet (“3300”) coupled to the extension to close the extension cavity; and
a thermal displacer (“3440”) coupled to the valve stem and disposed within the extension cavity, the thermal displacer configured to limit thermal conductivity between process fluid flowing through the fluid flow path and the bonnet,
wherein the valve stem extends entirely through the thermal displacer (see fig. 24).
Regarding claim 2, Cao discloses the thermal displacer (“3440”) is made of a non-metallic material (see specification col. 16, lines 9-13).
Regarding claim 3, Cao discloses the thermal displacer (“3440”) is made entirely of PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene), PCTFE (polychlorotrifluoroethylene), or PEEK (polyether ether ketone) (see specification col. 16, lines 9-13).
Regarding claim 4, Cao discloses a stem connector (“3500”) coupled to the valve stem (“3413”), wherein the thermal displacer (“3440”) is retained between the control element (“3420”) and the stem connector.
Regarding claim 5, Cao discloses the extension (“3150”) comprises an extension body (“3150”), further comprising a clearance gap (radial gap formed by larger inner diameter surface “3154” and radially outer surface of thermal displacer “3440”; see detail of fig. 25) between an inner surface (“3154”) of the extension body and the thermal displacer (“3440”).
Regarding claim 6, Cao discloses a guide sleeve (“3320”; see fig. 32) coupled (via elements “3500” and “3600”) to an end (top end of stem “3413”, relative to the orientation of fig. 21) of the valve stem (“3413”) and a vapor barrier (“3660”, “3504” and/or “3502”) disposed between the guide sleeve and the thermal displacer (“3440”).
Regarding claim 8, Cao discloses a control valve, comprising:
a valve body (mainly defined by “3100”) defining an inlet (“3112”), an outlet (“3114”), and a fluid flow path (at least partially defined by “3110”) extending between the inlet and the outlet;
a valve seat (“3120”) disposed in the fluid flow path;
a control element (defined mainly by “3420”);
a valve stem (“3413”) coupled to the control element and configured to move the control element between a closed position (see position illustrated in figs. 21 and 25), in which the control element sealingly engages the valve seat, and an open position (position where control element “3420” is lifted from valve seat “3120”), in which the control element is spaced from the valve seat;
an extension (“3150”) coupled to the valve body and comprising an extension cavity (interior cavity of extension “3150”);
a bonnet (“3300”) coupled to the extension to close the extension cavity;
an actuator stem (“3610”) movably disposed in the bonnet;
a thermal displacer (“3440”) configured to limit thermal conductivity between process fluid flowing through the fluid flow path and the bonnet; and
a stem connector (“3500”) configured to couple the actuator stem to the valve stem, wherein the stem connector provides a stop (“3502”) that engages an end (top end, relative to the orientation of fig. 25) of the thermal displacer to retain the thermal displacer within the extension cavity between the stem connector and the control element (see assembly of fig. 21).
Regarding claim 9, Cao discloses the thermal displacer (“3440”) is made of a non-metallic material (see specification col. 16, lines 9-13).
Regarding claim 10, Cao discloses the thermal displacer (“3440”) is made entirely of PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene), PCTFE (polychlorotrifluoroethylene), or PEEK (polyether ether ketone) (see specification col. 16, lines 9-13).
Regarding claim 11, Cao discloses the thermal displacer (“3440”) is clamped to the valve stem (“3413”) via the stem connector (“3500”; see fig. 25).
Regarding claim 12, Cao discloses the extension (“3150”) comprises an extension body (“3150”), further comprising a clearance gap (radial gap formed by larger inner diameter surface “3154” and radially outer surface of thermal displacer “3440”; see detail of fig. 25) between an inner surface (“3154”) of the extension body and the thermal displacer (“3440”).
Regarding claim 13, Cao discloses a guide sleeve (“3320”) coupled (via elements “3500” and “3600”) to an end (top end, relative to the orientation of fig. 21) of the valve stem (“3413”) and a vapor barrier (“3660”, “3504” and/or “3502”) disposed between the guide sleeve and the thermal displacer (“3440”).
Regarding claim 15, Cao discloses a control valve, comprising:
a valve body (mainly defined by “3100”) defining an inlet (“3112”), an outlet (“3114”), and a fluid flow path (at least partially defined by “3110”) extending between the inlet and the outlet;
a valve seat (“3120” disposed in the fluid flow path;
a control element (“3420”);
a valve stem (“3413”) coupled to the control element and configured to move the control element between a closed position (see position illustrated in figs. 21 and 25), in which the control element sealingly engages the valve seat, and an open position (position where control element “3420” is lifted from valve seat “3120”), in which the control element is spaced from the valve seat;
an extension (“3150”) coupled to the valve body and comprising an extension cavity (interior cavity of extension “3150”);
a bonnet (“3300”) coupled to the extension to close the extension cavity; and
a thermal displacer (“3440”) disposed within the extension cavity and having a cylindrical body (“3440”) and a central aperture (aperture through which valve stem “3413” extends) that is formed in the cylindrical body and sized to receive the valve stem to couple the thermal displacer to the valve stem, the thermal displacer configured to limit thermal conductivity between process fluid flowing through the fluid flow path and the bonnet,
wherein the valve stem extends entirely through the thermal displacer (see fig. 24).
Regarding claim 16, Cao discloses the thermal displacer (“3440”) is made of a non-metallic material (see specification col. 16, lines 9-13).
Regarding claim 17, Cao discloses a stem connector (“3500”) coupled to the valve stem (“3413”), wherein the thermal displacer (“3440”) is retained between the control element (“3420”) and the stem connector (see fig. 21).
Regarding claim 18, Cao discloses the extension (“3150”) comprises an extension body (“3150”), further comprising a clearance gap (radial gap formed by larger inner diameter surface “3154” and radially outer surface of thermal displacer “3440”; see detail of fig. 25) between an inner surface (“3154”) of the extension body and the cylindrical body (“3440”) of the thermal displacer (see fig. 25).
Regarding claim 19, Cao discloses a guide sleeve (“3320”; see fig. 32) coupled (via elements “3500” and “3600”) to an end (top end, relative to the orientation of fig. 21) of the valve stem (“3413”) and a vapor barrier (“3660”, “3504” and/or “3502”) disposed between the guide sleeve and the thermal displacer (“3440”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 14 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st 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:
Regarding claims 7, 14 and 20, the closest prior art does not disclose or render obvious the control valve further comprising a sealing element at least partially disposed between the valve stem and the thermal displacer, in combination with the limitations of the respective base claim(s).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed February 13, 2026, have been fully considered.
With regards to the objection(s) to claims 3 and 10, in light of Applicant’s amendments filed February 13, 2026,
With regards to claims 1 and 15, Applicant argues that “Cao fails to teach or suggest that the stem 3500 (“the valve stem”) extends entirely through the plug buffer 3440 (“the thermal displacer”), as would be required to reach amended independent claim 1.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Under a different adaptation of the prior art, Cao discloses a valve stem (“3413”), which extends entirely through a thermal displacer (“3440”).
With regards to claim 7, Applicant argues that Cao fails to teach or suggest “Cao fails to teach or suggest a control valve that includes a stem connector configured to couple the actuator stem to the valve stem, wherein the stem connector provides a stop that engages an end of the thermal displacer to retain the thermal displacer within the extension cavity between the stem connector and the control element, as required by amended independent claim 8.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Under a different adaptation of the prior art, Cao discloses a stem connector (“3500”) which provides a stop (“3502”) that engages an end (top end, relative to the orientation of fig. 25) of the thermal displacer (“3440”) to retain the thermal displacer within the extension cavity between the stem connector and the control element (see assembly of fig. 21).
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 Hailey K. Do whose direct telephone number is (571)270-3458 and direct fax number is (571)270-4458. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (8:00AM-5:00PM ET) and Friday (8:00AM-12:00PM ET).
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, Kenneth Rinehart at 571-272-4881, or Craig M. Schneider 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 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.
/HAILEY K. DO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights