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 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 1-13 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 1 and 9 recite “wherein when the compression spring is in the compressed state the valve plunger is compressed to send the fluid flow from the inlet to the first outlet” that renders the scope of the claim unclear. It is unclear what is meant by “the valve plunger is compressed.” A valve plunger is generally understood to be a rigid mechanical component that is moved or displaced between positions, rather than compressed. Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of whether the claim requires the valve plunger itself to undergo compression or whether the claim instead intends to recite that the compression spring, when compressed, moves or biases the valve plunger to direct fluid flow. Because the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear, the claims fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter regarded as the invention.
Claims 2-8 and 10-13 are also rejected because of its dependency on claims 1 and 9 respectively.
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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wood (US 3,974,998) in view of Coombs et al. (US 2012/0097282 A1) and Burkley (WO 2020/190727 A1).
With regard to claims 1-6 and 9, Wood discloses a spray system (abstract) for use in a turf applicator, the spray system comprising:; one or more spray tips (nozzles) for dispensing the fluid material; an injection molded manifold (10), wherein the manifold includes: an inlet (15) connected to the inflow line (15A) and configured to receive fluid flow from the inflow line; a first outlet and a second outlet (14 and 20) for directing the fluid flow (Fig. 2); a valve plunger (32); a solenoid valve (62) to raise and lower the valve plunger (32); a compression spring (46) moveable between a compressed state and an uncompressed state (Fig. 2 and 3); wherein when the compression spring is in the compressed state the valve plunger is compressed to send the fluid flow from the inlet to the first outlet to the one or more spray tips; wherein when the compression spring is in the uncompressed state the fluid flow is from the inlet to the second outlet to the inflow agitation (recirculation system, see Col. 4 line 63 – Col. 5 line 10); and an orifice (26) in the manifold through which fluid flows to the inflow agitation (Fig. 1).
Wood is silent to disclose that a spray tank for holding a fluid material and the manifold is an injection molded manifold.
Coombs teaches a manifold (12) is an injection molded manifold (Par. [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the manifold of Wood, by making it out of injection molded plastic as taught by Coombs, for the benefit of providing more cost effective and easier to manufacture (Par. [0011]).
Burkley teaches a spray system comprising a spray tank for holding a fluid material (17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Wood, by incorporating the spray tank as taught by Burkley, doing it would providing sufficient supply of spraying material for the operation.
With regard to claims 7 and 10, the spray system of Wood as modified by Coombs and Murphy discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claims 1 and 9 above. Wood further discloses that an O-ring (60) disposed on the manifold (10) to seal the solenoid valve (62) against the manifold (Fig. 3).
With regard to claims 8 and 11, the spray system of Wood as modified by Coombs and Burkley discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claims 1 and 9 above. Burkley further discloses that a pressure transducer to monitor spray pressure (44/52).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Wood, by incorporating the pressure transducer as taught by Burkley to monitor the spray pressure in the system of Wood, doing it would providing pressure regulation in the system to prevent excessive pressure built-up (Par. [0033-0034]).
With regard to claim 12, the spray system of Wood as modified by Coombs and Burkley discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claim 9 above. Burkley further discloses that a strainer (27) and a bulkhead (structural wall between 10a and 17 shown in Fig. 1), and wherein the fluid flow exits the spray tank (17) through the bulkhead and passes through the strainer (27).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wood in view of Coombs and Burkley as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Murphy et al. (US 5,320,280).
With regard to claim 13, the spray system of Wood as modified by Coombs and Burkley discloses the invention as disclosed in the rejection of claim 9 above. They are silent to disclose that a spray wand and a manual valve for control of the fluid flow to the spray wand.
Murphy teaches a spray system comprising a spray wand (20) and a manual valve (24) for control of the fluid flow to the spray wand.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Wood, by incorporating the spray wand and manual valve as taught by Murphy, doing it would providing a spray gun to facilitate coating application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL ZHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-1163. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9AM-5PM.
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 supervisor, ARTHUR HALL can be reached at 5712701814. 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.
JOEL . ZHOU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3752
/QINGZHANG ZHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights