Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/909,170

CLAMPED DIAPHRAGM VALVE ASSEMBLY

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 08, 2024
Examiner
DO, HAILEY KYUNG AE
Art Unit
3753
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Irr Manufacturing Enterprises LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
503 granted / 682 resolved
+3.8% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
719
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
37.8%
-2.2% vs TC avg
§102
31.9%
-8.1% vs TC avg
§112
27.6%
-12.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 682 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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: “safety mechanism” in claim 3, line 2, the corresponding structure for which can be found in the specification . 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. 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 Objections Claim(s) 4 and 14 is/are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 4, line 2, the recitation “a wing nut a hex nut” should read –a wing nut, a hex nut--. In claim 14, line 2, the recitation “a wing nut a hex nut” should read –a wing nut, a hex nut--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim(s) 1-6, 8 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE102015202775 (“Gelbmann”) in view of US8720858 (“Böttcher”). Regarding claim 1, Gelbmann discloses a diaphragm valve assembly comprising: a body portion (16) having an inner wall (interior surface of body 16), a first port (12) defined by a first portion of the inner wall, a second port (14) defined by a second portion of the inner wall, and a controllable flow path defined by a third portion (20) of the inner wall between the first port and the second port; a diaphragm assembly (mainly defined by 22) positioned over an opening (opening defined by wall 74) along the third portion of the inner wall, the diaphragm assembly configured to provide a peripheral seal (via compression of periphery 24 between shoulder 26 and pressure ring 30) along a periphery of the opening and a passage seal (sealing between diaphragm 22 and weir seat 20) along a diametric weir (20) within the opening; a bonnet (18) to house an assembly (mainly defined by 30, 32, 50 and 52) comprising a pressure ring (30), a compressor (52), and a spindle (50) to actuate a position of the compressor between a closed position (position where diaphragm 22 contacts seat 20) and an open position (position illustrated in fig. 2) such that the diaphragm assembly forms the passage seal in the closed position or releases the passage seal in the open position; an actuator (“an external drive”; see English translation page 4) to actuate a position of the spindle between the open position and the closed position; and the body portion affixed to the bonnet. Gelbmann does not disclose a clamp assembly to affix the body portion and the bonnet together through application of substantially even pressure by an inside surface of the clamp assembly. However, Böttcher teaches a clamp assembly (25) to affix a body portion (4) and a bonnet (19) together through application of substantially even pressure by an inside surface (beveled surfaces of clamp 25; see cross-section of fig. 1) of the clamp assembly. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the invention of Gelbmann by employing a clamp assembly to affix the body portion and the bonnet together through application of substantially even pressure by an inside surface of the clamp assembly, as taught by Böttcher, to allow for easier machining and assembling of the bonnet and body portion. Regarding claim 2, the combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher discloses the invention as claimed except for the actuator being one of a manual actuator, an electrical actuator, and a pneumatic actuator. However, Böttcher teaches (see fig. 1) an actuator (3), which is an electrical actuator (“motor-driven cam disk”; see specification col. 4, lines 45-49). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to further modify the combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher by configuring the actuator to be an electrical actuator, as taught by Böttcher, to have a diaphragm valve assembly with low operating costs. Regarding claim 3, the combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher discloses the clamp assembly (Böttcher, 25) comprises two or more clamp portions (Böttcher, see left and right clamp portions of clamp 25, relative to the orientation of fig. 3), one or more hinges (Böttcher, see two hinges connecting left and right clamp portions of clamp 25 in fig. 3), and a safety mechanism (Böttcher, see annotated fig. 3, below). PNG media_image1.png 710 850 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 4, the combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher discloses the safety mechanism (Böttcher, see annotated fig. 9, above) comprises a nut-bolt employing a wing nut a hex nut, or a safety nut (Böttcher, see fig. 9). Regarding claim 5, the combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher discloses an inside surface (Böttcher, see conical interior surfaces of clamp 25, which engage beveled flanges 23 and 24; see fig. 1) of the two or more clamp portions includes an angled top portion (Böttcher, surface engaging bonnet flange 24) and an angled bottom portion (Böttcher, surface engaging valve body flange 23) to slidably mate with matching angled outside surfaces of the bonnet (Gelbmann, 18, as modified by Böttcher, 19 and 24, above) and the body portion (Gelbmann, 16, as modified by Böttcher, 4 and 23, above). Regarding claim 6, the combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher discloses the assembly (Gelbmann, mainly defined by 30, 32, 50 and 52) in the bonnet (Gelbmann, 18, as modified by Böttcher, 19 and 24, above) further comprises a spring member (Gelbmann, 32). Regarding claim 8, Gelbmann discloses a diaphragm stud (stud which connects diaphragm 22 to actuator shaft 50) mechanically coupled to the compressor (52) and inserted into a center portion of the diaphragm assembly (22) in order to engage the diaphragm assembly when releasing the passage seal (sealing between diaphragm 22 and seat 20) based on a reverse thrust (upward motion, relative to the orientation of fig. 2) from the compressor (52). Regarding claim 20, Gelbmann discloses a method of manufacturing a diaphragm valve assembly comprising: forming a body portion (16) having an inner wall (inner surface), a first port (12) defined by a first portion of the inner wall, a second port (14) defined by a second portion of the inner wall, and a controllable flow path defined by a third portion (20) of the inner wall between the first port and the second port; positioning a diaphragm assembly (22) over an opening (opening defined by shoulder 26) along the third portion of the inner wall to provide a peripheral seal (seal between periphery 24 of diaphragm 22 against shoulder 26) along a periphery of the opening and a passage seal (seal between diaphragm 22 and seat 20) along a diametric weir (20) within the opening; coupling a bonnet (18) to the body portion, wherein the bonnet houses an assembly comprising a pressure ring (30), a compressor (52), and a spindle (50) to actuate a position of the compressor between a closed position and an open position (see English translation page 4) such that the diaphragm assembly forms the passage seal in the closed position or releases the passage seal in the open position; and coupling an actuator (“an external drive”; see English translation page 4) to the bonnet to actuate a position of the spindle between the open position and the closed position. Gelbmann does not disclose coupling the bonnet to the body portion through a clamp assembly to affix the body portion and the bonnet together through application of substantially even pressure by an inside surface of the clamp assembly, and the actuator being one of a manual actuator, an electrical actuator, and a pneumatic actuator. However, Böttcher coupling a bonnet (19) to a body portion (4) through a clamp assembly (25; see figs. 1 and 3) to affix the body portion and the bonnet together through application of substantially even pressure by an inside surface (conical interior surfaces of clamp 25; see cross-section of fig. 1) of the clamp assembly, and an actuator (3) which is an electrical actuator (see specification col. 4, lines 45-49). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the invention of Gelbmann by coupling the bonnet to the body portion through a clamp assembly to affix the body portion and the bonnet together through application of substantially even pressure by an inside surface of the clamp assembly, as taught by Böttcher, to allow for easier machining and assembling of the bonnet and body portion. Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to further modify the combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher by configuring the actuator to be an electrical actuator, as taught by Böttcher, to have a diaphragm valve assembly with low operating costs. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gelbmann in view of Böttcher, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US12055240 (“Limura”). Regarding claim 7, the combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher discloses the pressure ring (Gelbmann, 30) is in contact with a peripheral surface (Gelbmann, surface of portion 24) of the diaphragm assembly (Gelbmann, 22) configured to provide a pressure load (Gelbmann, via compression force of spring 32) to the diaphragm assembly to provide the peripheral seal (Gelbmann, seal formed by periphery 24 of diaphragm 22); the diaphragm assembly (Gelbmann, 22) disposed within the pressure ring (Gelbmann, 30; see fig. 2); and the compressor (Gelbmann, 52) is within the pressure ring (Gelbmann, see fig. 2) and in partial contact with the diaphragm assembly (Gelbmann, 22), the compressor configured to selectively engage a center portion of the diaphragm assembly effective to form the passage seal (Gelbmann, see English translation page 4). The combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher does not disclose a substantially ring-shaped elastic reduced backing cushion configured to be fitted over the diaphragm assembly within the pressure ring; and the compressor being in partial contact with the reduced backing cushion. However, Limura teaches a substantially ring-shaped elastic reduced backing cushion (20c) configured to be fitted over a diaphragm assembly (20s), the diaphragm assembly formed of a chemically resistive material, and a compressor (60) in partial contact with the reduced backing cushion (see fig. 1), the compressor configured to selectively engage a center portion of the diaphragm assembly effective to form the passage seal (seal formed by seating diaphragm 20s against valve seat 103). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to further modify the invention of Gelbmann and Böttcher by employing a substantially ring-shaped elastic reduced backing cushion is configured to be fitted over the diaphragm assembly within the pressure ring, wherein the compressor is in partial contact with the reduced backing cushion, as taught by Limura, to have diaphragm valve having a sealing member formed with different materials to increase sealing capability and chemical resistance. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gelbmann in view of Böttcher, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US11713825 (“Newberg”). Regarding claim 9, the combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher discloses the invention as claimed except for a gasket positioned between a bottom surface of the bonnet and a top surface of the body portion, wherein the gasket provides a secondary seal when loaded by pressure applied from the clamp assembly. Newberg teaches a diaphragm valve assembly (see fig. 3) comprising: a gasket (see annotated fig. 3, below) positioned between opposing clamped surfaces, wherein the gasket provides a secondary seal when loaded by pressure applied from a clamp assembly (see clamp(s) in fig. 3). PNG media_image2.png 718 580 media_image2.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to further modify the combination of Gelbmann and Böttcher by employing a gasket between opposing clamped surfaces, more specifically, between a bottom surface of the bonnet and a top surface of the body portion, as taught by Newberg, to provide better sealing between clamped surfaces. Allowable Subject Matter Claim(s) 10-13 and 15-19 is/are allowed. Claim(s) 14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the claim objection (s), set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 10, the closest prior art does not disclose the diaphragm valve assembly wherein the adapter is to fit over the body portion and the clamp assembly is to affix the adapter and the bonnet together through application of substantially even pressure by an inside surface of the clamp assembly, in combination with the remainder limitations of the claim. Claims 11-19 are allowable because they depend on an allowable claim. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US10428973 and US8616525 discloses a valve having a body and a bonnet clamped together by a clamping assembly. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 08, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601417
VALVE AND FLUID CONTROL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596388
OPTIMIZED CONTROL OF OILFIELD SEPARATOR LEVEL AND DUMP VALVES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595862
VENT ASSEMBLY FOR A SEALED ENCLOSURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595859
BALANCE VALVE, BATTERY AND POWER CONSUMPTION APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12595860
BALANCE VALVE, BATTERY AND POWER CONSUMPTION APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+15.8%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 682 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month