DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-18 were filed with the application on 10/08/2024.
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 (IDS) submitted on 10/08/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 “at least two outflow openings are formed in the lateral wall [of the valve body]” (claim 2); a fastening structure provided on an inside wall of the lateral wall [of the valve body] (claim 8) that is an internal thread (claim 9); and the valve has an external thread corresponding to the internal thread of the fastening structure (claim 10) (note: claims 8-10 depend from claim 1, which only recites a valve, not a pressure vessel) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
The drawings are objected to because Figures 1-6 show sectional views, but do not include the required hatching for every element (see 37 C.F.R. 1.84(h)(3)).
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 objected to because of the following informalities: “the support elements” should be changed to “the support element” to correct the typographical error mistakenly making element plural. 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, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 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, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: support element in claims 4 and 11; and fastening structure in claims 8, 9, and 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The specification states that the support element can be a disc (pg. 23, lines 22-25); and that the fastening structure can include threading (pg. 16, lines 9-13).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112b
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 1-18 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the vertical passage opening” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 refers to a “passage opening”, “a vertical filling opening”, and “a vertical inflow opening.” Therefore, it is not clear what “the vertical passage opening” is referring to in line 7. For purposes of examination, claim 1, line 7 will be construed as: “the
With regard to claim 2, the phrase “at least two outflow openings are formed in the lateral wall” renders the claim indefinite. Claim 2 depends from claim 1. Claim 1 only recites a valve, with a valve body having the lateral wall. There is no support in the drawings or specification of the valve body having a lateral wall with at least two outflow openings. Rather, the specification and drawings only provide support for the wall (2.1) of the pressure vessel (1) having the outflow openings (SO) (see Fig. 1 and page 19, lines 20-22). The examiner suggests deleting claim 2.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the valve plunger" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 7 depends from claim 6, which depends from claim 2. However, claim 3 introduces a valve plunger, not claim 2. Therefore, it is not clear if claim 7 should be written as “a valve plunger” in line 2 or if claim 6 should be amended to depend from claim 3, instead of claim 2. For purposes of examination, claim 7 will be construed as if it is written as “a valve plunger.”
With regard to claim 8, the phrase “a fastening structure for the valve is provided on an inside of the lateral wall” renders the claim indefinite. There is no support in the specification or drawings for a fastening structure on an inside of a wall of the valve. Rather, the specification states that an inside wall of the pressure vessel has a fastening structure, and the valve has threads on an external wall (see page 16, lines 10-16). The examiner suggests deleting claim 8.
With regard to claim 9, the phrase “the fastening structure has an internal thread arranged on an inside of the lateral wall” renders the claim indefinite. Claim 9 depends from claim 8. As discussed above with respect to claim 8, there is no support for an internal thread on an inside of a wall of the valve. Rather, the specification states that an inside wall of the pressure vessel has a fastening structure, and the valve has threads on an external wall (see page 16, lines 10-16). The examiner suggests deleting claim 9.
With regard to claim 10, the phrase “the valve has an external thread corresponding to the internal thread of the fastening structure” renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear how the valve can have an external thread that corresponds with an internal thread on the same valve. Claim 10 depends from claim 9. As discussed above, there is no support for an internal thread on an inside of a wall of the valve. Rather, the specification states that an inside wall of the pressure vessel has a fastening structure, and the valve has threads on an external wall (see page 16, lines 10-16). The examiner suggests deleting claim 10.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the valve plunger" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear if claim 17 should be amended to write “a [[the]] valve plunger” or if the dependencies of preceding claim 12 (which depends from claim 1) should change to account for the lack of antecedent basis. For purposes of examination, claim 17 will be construed as if line 2 is written as “a valve plunger.”
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the actuation 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 from 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.”
With regard to claim 18, the phrase “a method for filling a pressure vessel according to claim 1” renders the claim indefinite and confusing. Claim 1 recites a valve, not a pressure vessel. Did Applicant intend to state “a method for filling a pressure vessel with a valve according to claim 1” or did Applicant intend to state “a method for filling a pressure vessel according to claim [[1]] 12?” For purposes of examination, claim 18 will be construed as if it depends from claim 12, not claim 1.
Dependent claims 2-18 are also rejected for being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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 1-6, 8-16, and 18 (as far as the claims are understood and definite) 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 vertical passage opening (as best understood,8) to the vertical inflow opening (opening at bottom of 4 at 28) (see annotated Fig).
PNG
media_image1.png
888
748
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, as best understood, Kirchgaessner discloses at least two outflow openings (openings 5 and 6) are formed in the lateral wall (wall of 4).
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, 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) and above the outflow openings (5, 6; see Fig 1), 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 8, Kirchgaessner discloses a fastening structure for the valve (2) is provided on an inside of the lateral wall (wall of 4) (fastening structure is threading, which would have threads on inside of wall of 4, used to screw 28 into 4, see para [0029]).
With regard to claim 9, Kirchgaessner discloses that the fastening structure has an internal thread arranged on the inside of the lateral wall (fastening structure is threading, which would have threads on inside of wall of 4, used to screw 28 into 4, see para [0029]).
With regard to claim 10, as best understood, Kirchgaessner discloses that the valve (2) has an external thread (external thread on 28) corresponding to the internal thread (internal thread on 4) of the fastening structure (para [0029]).
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, as best understood, Kirchgaessner discloses a method for filling a 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2009/0078321 discloses a valve with a filling opening, an inflow opening, and a passage opening.
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