DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 3-7, and 11-18 were filed with the amendment dated 04/24/2026.
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 were received on 04/24/2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments overcome the previously set forth drawing objections and claim objections, and some of the 35 USC 112b rejections. However, the amendments have created new 35 USC 112b rejections and a claim objection as set forth below.
Applicant argues that DE 4334182 (“Kirchgaessner”) does not disclose the filling opening is fluidically connected via the passage opening to the vertical inflow opening concentrically along the length of the valve. Applicant argues that the flow goes through the core of the valve and not concentrically along the length (see Remarks at pages 7-8). The examiner respectfully disagrees. First, Kirchgaessner does disclose that the filling opening (see annotated Fig 2) is fluidically connected to the passage opening (in 8, see annotated Fig 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
888
748
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Second, the fluid connection is concentrically along a length of the valve concentrically around element 16 within the valve (see arrows indicating flow path in Fig 2). Furthermore, flow, even if through a portion of the valve would still have a concentric component. The claims are broadly written. The claims do not require fluid flow concentrically around an external surface of an actuating plunger (14 in Application) and concentrically around a valve plunger (6.3 in Application) and a housing (11) of the valve plunger. The rejection is maintained and made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “the length” lacks antecedent basis and should be changed to “a length.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6, 7, and 17 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.
With regard to claim 6, claim 6 depends from cancelled claim 2. It is not clear if claim 6 should be amended to depend from claim 1 or from a different claim. As best understood, claim 6 will be construed as being dependent from claim 1.
Dependent claim 7 is rejected for being dependent upon rejected claim 6.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the actuating plunger" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear if claim 17 should be amended to write “an [[the]] actuating plunger” or if the dependencies of preceding claim 12 (which depends on claim 1) should change to account for the lack of antecedent basis. For purposes of examination, claim 17 will be construed as if lines 2-3 are written as “an actuating plunger.”
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.
Claims 1, 3-6, 11-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE 4334182 (“Kirchgaessner”) (cited on IDS with translation on 10/08/2024).
With regard to claim 1, Kirchgaessner discloses a valve (2) (para [0023] comprising: - a valve body (4) having a lateral wall (wall of 4, not labeled, but see annotated fig), a passage opening (8) (para [0025]) and a vertical filling opening (opening at top, opening through 25, see annotated Fig) and a vertical inflow opening (opening at bottom of 4 at 28), wherein the passage opening (8) extends from the vertical filling opening (opening at top, opening through 25, see annotated Fig) to the vertical inflow opening (opening at bottom of 4 at 28, see Fig 2), wherein, in a filling position of the valve (position shown in Fig 2), the passage opening (8) is closed from the lateral wall (wall of 4) in a media-tight manner (wall is closed off by 12 closing seat 18 preventing media from flowing out of 8 and into 5) and the filling opening (opening at top, opening through 25, see annotated Fig) is fluidically connected via the passage opening (8) to the vertical inflow opening (opening at bottom of 4 at 28) (see annotated Fig) concentrically along a length of the valve (concentrically around element 16 within the valve; see arrows indicating flow path in Fig 2).
PNG
media_image2.png
888
748
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 3, Kirchgaessner discloses that in the passage opening (8) a valve plunger (12) is arranged, which in a closed valve position (such as Fig. 2) of the valve (2) closes the passage opening (8) in a media-tight manner (closes off 8 from 5) and at least in one of the following positions, an outflow position and the filling position of the valve, opens the passage opening (outflow position Fig 3, passes opening 8 is open to 5, see Fig 3 and para [0034]).
With regard to claim 4, Kirchgaessner discloses that the valve (2) has a support element (as broadly recited, 16 can be considered to be a support element as the spring rests on 16) connected to (it is connected to valve body 4 via 11) or formed on the valve body and a spring element (17) arranged inside the valve body (4) and supported with a first end (top end of 17) on the support element (16) and with an opposite second end (bottom end of 17) indirectly or directly on the valve plunger (12) (see Fig 1).
With regard to claim 5, Kirchgaessner discloses that the spring element (17) is tensioned during a movement of the valve plunger (12) from the closed valve position (position in Fig. 1; where 12 is closed on seat 18) into the outflow position (position in Fig. 3) (tension because 12 moves upward pressing the spring 17) and is further tensioned during a movement of the valve plunger (12) from the outflow position (position in Fig 3) into the filling position (Fig 2 position) (further tensioned because from Fig 3 into Fig 2 position, the spring 17 is pressed even more between 12 and 16, see Fig 2) .
With regard to claim 6, (as best understood to be dependent from claim 1) Kirchgaessner discloses that a lid (25; 25 is considered a lid as it closes an opening in valve body 4) is provided, which is arranged above the valve body (at least a portion of lid 25 extends above valve body 4), the lid (25) having the vertical filling opening (opening extending through 25, see annotated Fig 2) in which an actuating plunger (11; 11 is considered a plunger as it moves up and down to move valve 12) is arranged.
With regard to claim 11, Kirchgaessner discloses that at least one of the support element and the valve body (4) has the inflow opening (bottom of 4 that opens at 28).
With regard to claim 12, Kirchgaessner discloses a pressure vessel (Fig 1), comprising: - a vessel body (1) having an opening (opening in 1 in which 4 extends, see annotated Fig), and - the valve of claim 1 (see above with respect to claim 1; valve 2) disposed in the opening (2 is in opening of 1, see Fig 1).
With regard to claim 13, Kirchgaessner discloses that the vessel body (1) has a vessel bottom arranged at a lower end (bottom not shown in Figs but inherently the vessel will have a bottom in order to contain the fluid within the vessel) and formed integrally with the vessel body (formed together is “integrally” and because vessel bottom inherently has a bottom to enclose the vessel, it is considered to be integrally formed).
With regard to claim 14, Kirchgaessner discloses an overpressure protection (rupture disk cartridge 6, para [0024]).
With regard to claim 15, Kirchgaessner discloses that the overpressure protection (6) is arranged in the valve or in the vessel bottom (6 is in valve 2, see Fig 1).
With regard to claim 16, Kirchgaessner discloses that the overpressure protection has a bursting disc (“rupture disk” 6, para [0024]).
With regard to claim 18, Kirchgaessner discloses a method for filling the pressure vessel (method is inherent in apparatus discloses in Figs 1-3) according to claim 12 (see above with respect to claim 12 and claim 1), wherein the pressure vessel (1) is arranged in a filling device (filling device is not shown, but is connected to 35 in Fig 2, see also para [0031]), wherein the passage opening (8) is closed in a media-tight manner from the lateral wall (wall is closed by 12 closing 18), wherein the valve (4) is then moved into the filling position (position in Fig 2) and the pressure vessel (1) is filled via the vertical filling opening (opening at top, opening through 25, see annotated Fig), the passage opening (8) and the vertical inflow opening (opening at bottom of 4 at 28 ; see Fig 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 35 U.S.C. 112(a), set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for indicating allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose or render obvious “an underside of the actuating plunger bears against an upper side of the valve plunger and/or is connected thereto, and wherein the actuating plunger closes the filling opening in a media-tight manner in the outflow position of the valve and opens the filling opening in the filling position of the valve” (claim 7); or “wherein an overpressure channel is formed which extends through the valve plunger and the actuating plunger and is closed in a media-tight manner by the bursting disc” (claim 17) in combination with the other limitations set forth in the independent claim.
DE 4334182 (“Kirchgaessner”) is the closest prior art reference of record. However, Kirchgaessner does not disclose at least that the actuating plunger opens the filling opening in the filling position. Rather, ball element 16 opens the filing opening in the filling position. Furthermore, Kirchgaessner does not disclose that the bursting disc closes an overpressure channel that extends through the valve plunger and the actuating plunger. In Kirchgaessner, the bursting disk (6) blocks off a separate passage (7) that does not extend through the valve plunger or the actuating plunger.
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 JESSICA CAHILL whose telephone number is (571)270-5219. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 6:30 to 3:00.
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 571-272-60073607 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 published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JESSICA CAHILL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights