DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the initial filing dated 10/7/2024. Claims 1-20 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 3/11/2025 is acknowledged and has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 10/7/2024. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
The use of the terms “Haynes 188” and “Inconel”, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 11, 12, 19 and 20 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.
Claims 11, 12, 19 and 20 contains the trademark/trade name “Haynes 188”. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe the material of the second layer and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claims 11, 12, 19 and 20 contains the trademark/trade name “Inconel”. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe the material of the second layer and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
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) 1-9 and 13-17 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 (72) 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.
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 4, the McCrone reference discloses 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).
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).
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 16, the McCrone reference discloses 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).
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).
Claim(s) 11, 12, 19 and 20 will be treated as best understood in view of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above.
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, Haynes 188, Inconel, 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, Haynes 188, Inconel, 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Amaral et al. (US 8434999), Masuyama et al. (US 6860485), Webert (US 3604716), and Haug (US 2253904) disclose various sealing assemblies having a bimetallic seal.
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
/CRAIG M SCHNEIDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753