DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the amendment dated 7/13/2026. Claims 1, 7, 8, 11-13, and 18-20 are currently amended. Claims 4 and 16 have been canceled. No claims are newly added. Presently, claims 1-3, 5-15 and 17-20 are pending.
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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see the Claim Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 112 section on page 8 of the response dated 7/13/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 11-12 and 19-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112 as provided in the Office action dated 3/11/2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 11-12 and 19-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112 as provided in the Office action dated 3/11/2026 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 7/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the rejection of claims 1-9 and 13-17 under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by McCrone (US 4,658,847) on pages 8-11 of the response dated 7/13/2026.
Applicant argues that the McCrone reference does not disclose or suggest wherein the thermally induced deformation of the biasing member modifies the force applied to the side wall portions of the seal jacket channel so as to compensate for a temperature-induced change in sealing force between the seal jacket and the movable shaft and maintain sealing engagement at that surface.
However, the McCrone reference discloses wherein the spring (C-ring 74) expands as temperature decreases (col. 4, lines 42-43) and wherein the spring (C-ring 74) compensates for the ineffectiveness of the jacket (78) as the temperature lowers by increasing the biasing force (col. 4, lines 55-58) and this increased sealing force compensates for the poorer sealing characteristics of most surfaces in extreme cold due to brittleness (col. 4, lines 59-62) and the bimetallic seal will expand to improve seal quality (col. 4, lines 65-68).
It is considered that the bimetallic nature of the C-ring / spring 74 modifies the force applied to the side wall portions of the channel so as to compensate for a temperature-induced change in sealing force between the seal jacket and the movable shaft while maintain sealing engagement between the seal jacket and the movable shaft.
Therefore, it is considered that the McCrone reference addresses applicant’s concerns and claim language relating to wherein the thermally induced deformation of the biasing member modifies the force applied to the side wall portions of the seal jacket channel so as to compensate for a temperature-induced change in sealing force between the seal jacket and the movable shaft and maintain sealing engagement at that surface.
Applicant argues the rejection of claims 10-12 and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCrone (US 4,658,847) in view of Skf AB (EP 3015747) on pages 11-14 of the response dated 7/13/2026.
Applicant argues that the Skf AB reference teaches a substantially different sealing architecture and for a substantially different purpose.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
However, the Skf AB reference was utilized in order to teach a bimetal element that is utilized within the area of sealing wherein the bimetal element is preferably a metallic element consisting of two layers of different metals that are bonded together (Skf AB: see paragraph [0016]) wherein the metals can be steel and brass (Skf AB: see paragraph [0016]) and wherein a change in shape occurs when the temperature changes.
It is considered that it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide the first layer and the second layer of the McCrone reference as brass and steel, respectively, as taught by the Skf AB reference in order to ensure a desired deformation of the biasing member to ensure a desired sealing by the sealing assembly.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
In this case, the McCrone reference only discloses that the bimetallic spring (McCrone: C-ring 74) includes a first metallic strip (McCrone: 72) and a second metallic strip (McCrone: 76) that have different rates of thermal expansivity in order to permit the spring (C-ring) to expand as temperature decreases (McCrone: col. 4, lines 39-43). The McCrone reference does not expressly disclose what materials are utilized for the first metallic strip and the second metallic strip.
Therefore, it is considered that one of ordinary skill in the art would look to other temperature responsive bimetallic structures for metallic materials to utilize for the materials of the first metallic strip and the second metallic strip of the McCrone reference.
The Skf AB reference provides a bimetal element that is preferably a metallic element consisting of two layers of different metals that are bonded together (Skf AB: see paragraph [0016]) wherein the metals can be steel and brass (Skf AB: see paragraph [0016]) and wherein a change in shape occurs when the temperature changes.
Therefore, it is considered that it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide the first layer and the second layer of the McCrone reference as brass and steel, respectively, as taught by the Skf AB reference in order to ensure a desired deformation of the biasing member to ensure a desired sealing by the sealing assembly.
Further, it is considered that the combination of the McCrone reference and the Skf AB reference addresses applicant’s concerns and claim language relating to the specific temperature-compensating seal-jacket energizer architecture as recites within the claims. It is considered that the McCrone reference addresses applicant’s concerns and claim language relating to the amended claims 1 and 13 as discussed above with respect to the rejections of claims 1 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McCrone. With respect to claims 10-12 and 18-20, it is considered that the modification of the McCrone reference in view of the Skf AB reference provides for the specific materials (brass and steel) for the first layer and the second layer as taught by the Skf AB reference.
Therefore, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Since modified grounds of rejection were necessitated by applicant’s amendment, the instant Office action is made final.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 10/7/2024. These drawings are acceptable.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-9, 13-15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McCrone (US 4658847).
Regarding claim 1, the McCrone reference discloses a sealing assembly (see figure 6), comprising
a seal jacket (78) having a main body having a channel formed therein (see “channel” in the annotated figure 6 below), wherein the channel has opposed side wall portions (see “side wall portion” in the annotated figure 6 below), the seal jacket being sized and configured for seating in a channel (see “channel of device” in the annotated figure 6 below) formed in the fluid regulating device, a biasing member (74) sized and configured for seating in the channel and being formed from at least first and second layers (the biasing member 74 is formed of two layers 72, 76), wherein the first layer is formed from a first metal material and the second layer is formed from a second metal material different than the first metal material (see col. 4, lines 31-68), wherein the biasing member places a force on the side wall portions of the channel when mounted therein;
wherein the first metal material (considered the material of the layer 72) has a first coefficient of thermal expansion and the second metal material (considered the material of layer 76) has a second coefficient of thermal expansion, wherein the first coefficient of thermal expansion is different than the second coefficient of thermal expansion (see col. 4, lines 39-43);
wherein the first layer (layer 72) and the second layer (layer 76) are configured such that differential thermal expansion between the first layer and the second layer causes deformation of the biasing member (74) in response to changes in temperature (see col. 4, lines 39-43 wherein the spring 74 expands as temperature decreases);
wherein deformation of the biasing member modifies the force applied to the side wall portions of the channel so as to compensate for a temperature-induced change in sealing force between the seal jacket and the movable shaft and maintain sealing engagement between the seal jacket and the movable shaft (see col. 4, lines 44-68; wherein the C-ring / spring 74 compensates for the ineffectiveness of the jacket 78 as the temperature lowers by increasing the biasing force (col. 4, lines 55-58); and this increased sealing force compensates for the poorer sealing characteristics of most surfaces in extreme cold due to brittleness (col. 4, lines 59-62); and the bimetallic seal will expand to improve seal quality (col. 4, lines 65-68); therefore, it is considered that the bimetallic nature of the C-ring / spring 74 modifies the force applied to the side wall portions of the channel so as to compensate for a temperature-induced change in sealing force between the seal jacket and the movable shaft while maintain sealing engagement between the seal jacket and the movable shaft).
PNG
media_image1.png
502
822
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2, the McCrone reference discloses wherein the first and second layers (72, 76) of the biasing member (74) are secured together to form a bimetallic biasing member (col. 4, lines 39-43).
In regards to claim 3, the McCrone reference discloses wherein the seal jacket (78) has a base portion (it is considered that the base portion connects the side wall portions together) that is sized and dimensioned for seating within the channel of the fluid regulating device (see figure 6).
In regards to claim 5, the McCrone reference discloses wherein the first metal material (considered that material of the layer 76) has a high coefficient of thermal expansion and the second metal material (considered the material of layer 72) has a low coefficient of thermal expansion (the material of layer 72 has a lower rate of thermal expansion than the material of layer 76; see col. 4, lines 39-43; therefore, it is considered that the material of layer 72 has a lower coefficient of thermal expansion than the material of layer 76).
In regards to claim 6, the McCrone reference discloses wherein the first metal material (considered the material of layer 72) has a low coefficient of thermal expansion and the second metal material (considered that material of the layer 76) has a high coefficient of thermal expansion (the material of layer 72 has a lower rate of thermal expansion than the material of layer 76; see col. 4, lines 39-43; therefore, it is considered that the material of layer 72 has a lower coefficient of thermal expansion than the material of layer 76).
In regards to claim 7, the McCrone reference discloses wherein the first layer and the second layer are joined together (see at least figure 6 and col. 4, lines 39-43).
In regards to claim 8, the McCrone reference discloses wherein the biasing member is configured as a spring element (see at least col. 4, lines 44-45).
In regards to claim 9, the McCrone reference discloses wherein the spring element has a spiral shape or a U-shaped configuration (it is considered that the C-ring 74 constitutes a U-shaped configuration; see figure 6).
Regarding claim 13, the McCrone reference discloses the structure wherein one of ordinary skill in the art would be perform the method of making and/or using a sealing assembly comprising:
providing a seal jacket (78) having a main body having a channel (see “channel” in the annotated figure 6 below) formed therein, wherein the channel has opposed side wall portions (see “side wall portion” in the annotated figure 6 below), the seal jacket being sized and configured for seating in a channel (see “channel of device” in the annotated figure 5 below) formed in the fluid regulating device,
forming a biasing member (74) sized and configured for seating in the channel and being formed from at least first and second layers (72, 76), wherein the first layer is formed from a first metal material and the second layer is formed from a second metal material different than the first metal material (the first layer and the second layer have different rates of thermal expansivity; see col. 4, lines 39-43),
wherein the biasing member places a force on the side wall portions of the channel when mounted therein (see at least figure 6), wherein the first metal material (considered the material of the layer 72) has a first coefficient of thermal expansion and the second metal material (considered the material of layer 76) has a second coefficient of thermal expansion, wherein the first coefficient of thermal expansion is different than the second coefficient of thermal expansion (see col. 4, lines 39-43); and
configuring the first layer (layer 72) and the second layer (layer 76) such that differential thermal expansion between the first layer and the second layer of the biasing member (74) causes deformation of the biasing member (74) in response to changes in temperature (see col. 4, lines 39-43 wherein the spring 74 expands as temperature decreases), such that deformation of the biasing member modifies the force applied to the side wall portions of the channel so as to compensate for a temperature-induced change in sealing force between the seal jacket and the movable shaft and maintain sealing engagement between the seal jacket and the movable shaft (see col. 4, lines 44-68; wherein the C-ring / spring 74 compensates for the ineffectiveness of the jacket 78 as the temperature lowers by increasing the biasing force (col. 4, lines 55-58); and this increased sealing force compensates for the poorer sealing characteristics of most surfaces in extreme cold due to brittleness (col. 4, lines 59-62); and the bimetallic seal will expand to improve seal quality (col. 4, lines 65-68); therefore, it is considered that the bimetallic nature of the C-ring / spring 74 modifies the force applied to the side wall portions of the channel so as to compensate for a temperature-induced change in sealing force between the seal jacket and the movable shaft while maintain sealing engagement between the seal jacket and the movable shaft).
.
PNG
media_image1.png
502
822
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 14, the McCrone reference discloses wherein the first and second layers of the biasing member are secured together to form a bimetallic biasing member (see at least col. 4, lines 44-45).
In regards to claim 15, the McCrone reference discloses the seal jacket to have a base portion that is sized and dimensioned for seating within the channel of the fluid regulating device (see at least figure 6).
In regards to claim 17, the McCrone reference discloses wherein the spring element has a spiral shape or a U-shaped configuration (it is considered that the C-ring 74 constitutes a U-shaped configuration; see figure 6).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 10-12 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCrone (US 4658847) in view of Skf AB (EP 3015747 A1; provided with the Information Disclosure Statement filed 3/11/2025).
In regards to claim 10, the McCrone reference does not disclose wherein the first layer is formed of brass and the second layer is formed of steel.
However, the Skf AB reference teaches a sealing arrangement having a bimetal element that is a metallic element consisting of two layers of different metals that are bonded together in a material-locking or form-fitting manner wherein the metals are brass and steel in order to manifest deformation since the two metals have different coefficients of linear expansion such that the two metals extend by different distances when heated (see paragraph [0016] of the translation provided with the Information Disclosure Statement filed 3/11/2025).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide the first layer and the second layer of the McCrone reference as brass and steel, respectively, as taught by the Skf AB reference in order to ensure a desired deformation of the biasing member to ensure a desired sealing by the sealing assembly.
In regards to claims 11 and 12, the McCrone reference does not disclose wherein the first metal material of the first layer is formed from one of (is selected from the group consisting of) brass, stainless steel, nickel-based alloys low-alloy steel, bronze, nickel-manganese steel, nickel, and nickel-silver and manganese bronze, and the second metal material of the second layer is formed from one of (is selected from the group consisting of) nickel-iron alloys, alloy 42, nickel-cobalt-chromium-tungsten alloys, nickel-chromium-based superalloys, nickel-based alloys, and steel.
However, the Skf AB reference teaches a sealing arrangement having a bimetal element that is a metallic element consisting of two layers of different metals that are bonded together in a material-locking or form-fitting manner wherein the metals are brass and steel in order to manifest deformation since the two metals have different coefficients of linear expansion such that the two metals extend by different distances when heated (see paragraph [0016] of the translation provided with the Information Disclosure Statement filed 3/11/2025).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide the first layer and the second layer of the McCrone reference as brass and steel, respectively, as taught by the Skf AB reference in order to ensure a desired deformation of the biasing member to ensure a desired sealing by the sealing assembly.
In regards to claim 18, the McCrone reference does not disclose wherein the first layer is formed of brass and the second layer is formed of steel.
However, the Skf AB reference teaches a sealing arrangement having a bimetal element that is a metallic element consisting of two layers of different metals that are bonded together in a material-locking or form-fitting manner wherein the metals are brass and steel in order to manifest deformation since the two metals have different coefficients of linear expansion such that the two metals extend by different distances when heated (see paragraph [0016] of the translation provided with the Information Disclosure Statement filed 3/11/2025).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide the first layer and the second layer of the McCrone reference as brass and steel, respectively, as taught by the Skf AB reference in order to ensure a desired deformation of the biasing member to ensure a desired sealing by the sealing assembly.
In regards to claims 19 and 20, the McCrone reference does not disclose wherein the first metal material of the first layer is formed from one of (is selected from the group consisting of) brass, stainless steel, nickel-based alloys low-alloy steel, bronze, nickel-manganese steel, nickel, and nickel-silver and manganese bronze, and the second metal material of the second layer is formed from one of (is selected from the group consisting of) nickel-iron alloys, alloy 42, nickel-cobalt-chromium-tungsten alloys, nickel-chromium-based superalloys, nickel-based alloys, and steel.
However, the Skf AB reference teaches a sealing arrangement having a bimetal element that is a metallic element consisting of two layers of different metals that are bonded together in a material-locking or form-fitting manner wherein the metals are brass and steel in order to manifest deformation since the two metals have different coefficients of linear expansion such that the two metals extend by different distances when heated (see paragraph [0016] of the translation provided with the Information Disclosure Statement filed 3/11/2025).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide the first layer and the second layer of the McCrone reference as brass and steel, respectively, as taught by the Skf AB reference in order to ensure a desired deformation of the biasing member to ensure a desired sealing by the sealing assembly.
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 Andrew J. Rost whose telephone number is (571) 272-2711. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607 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 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.
/ANDREW J ROST/Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/MICHAEL R REID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
