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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claim(s) 1 appears generic to the following disclosed patentably distinct species: Species I, Figure 2; Species II, Figure 3;Species III, Figure 4;Species IV, Figures 5,6;Species V, Figures 7;Species VI, Figure 8.
The species are independent or distinct because as disclosed the different species have mutually exclusive characteristics for each identified species, relative to the plug shapes and inner channel geometry structures. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record.
Applicant is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 to elect a single disclosed species, or a single grouping of patentably indistinct species, for prosecution on the merits to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable.
There is a search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because at least the following reason(s) apply:
the species or groupings of patentably indistinct species require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes /subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries relative to the structural differences between the species as shown regarding the plug shapes or the inner channel passage features) and may acquire a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent matter.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a species or a grouping of patentably indistinct species to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered nonresponsive unless accompanied by an election.
The election may be made with or without traverse. To preserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the election of species requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable on the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the species, or groupings of patentably indistinct species from which election is required, are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the species to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other species.
Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141.
Mr. Baker elected provisionally, on, 2/5/2026 over the phone to prosecute species IV, without traverse.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancellation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/29/2024 was filed prior to the mailing date of the mailing of this action. The submission complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 10/18/2024. These drawings are accepted.
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 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- 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Schnall et al. (US 4258750).
Regarding claim 1, Schnall et al. disclose a fluid flow control device (valve assembly see Fig. 1-13), comprising:
an outer housing (10,and the small rectangular seal surrounding 23) having a fluid inlet (11) and a fluid outlet (12);
an inner housing (18,19,20,21,23) disposed at least partially within the outer housing and fixed relative to the outer housing, the inner housing comprising a plurality of passageways (at 24, within 21 and 20), each of the plurality of passageways extending through the inner housing from an exterior of the inner housing to an interior of the outer housing; and
a plug (26) disposed at least partially within the interior of the inner housing and rotatable about an axis of rotation (the inherent vertical axis through 28, col. 5,lns. 16-19) relative to the inner housing, the plug comprising a plurality of apertures (within 31,32,33) extending through the plug, the plurality of apertures located to be in fluid communication with the plurality of passageways when the plug is rotated to an open position such that the plurality of apertures are connected together in series via the plurality of passageways to form a zigzagging (col.4, lns. 61-68) fluid pathway from the fluid inlet to the fluid outlet.
PNG
media_image1.png
817
599
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
925
962
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Schnall et al. disclose the plurality of apertures are additionally located to at least partially block the zigzagging fluid pathway to at least partially inhibit fluid flow when the plug is rotated from the open position to a second position (col. 4,lns. 21-27).
Regarding claim 3, Schnall et al. disclose the plug further comprises a stem (28) configured to facilitate the rotation of the plug via an actuator (col.4,lns. 8-13).
Regarding claim 4, Schnall et al. disclose the outer housing is sealed to the inner housing (at 23 and the un-numbered rectangular ring between numerals 14 and 18 at the bottom).
Regarding claim 5, Schnall et al. disclose the outer housing is (the outer housing is closely fit with the inner housing at 23) shrink fit over the inner housing. “[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985), see MPEP 2113.
Regarding claim 6, Schnall et al. a cross-sectional area of the zigzagging fluid pathway increases in size from the fluid inlet to the fluid outlet (as shown in Fig. 2,3).
Regarding claim 7, Schnall et al. a cross-sectional area of the plurality of apertures incrementally increases in size along the zigzagging fluid pathway from the fluid inlet to the fluid outlet (as shown in Fig. 2,3).
Regarding claim 8, Schnall et al. at least a portion of the plug exhibits a conical shape (at 27, see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Schnall et al. at least a portion of the plug exhibits a stepped shape (the steps are considered as transitioning from 31 to 32 to 33, where the shape is considered as being a vertical wall section as shown in Fig. 1 if the cross-sectional view).
Regarding claim 10, Schnall et al. the plurality of apertures exhibit an oval cross-section (see Fig. 10a-c).
Regarding claim 11, Schnall et al. disclose fluid flow control device, comprising:
a housing (10) having a fluid inlet (11) and a fluid outlet (12); and
a plug (26) disposed at least partially within a housing and rotatable about an axis of rotation relative to the housing, the plug comprising:
a first aperture (at the opening within 31) extending through the plug at a longitudinal location proximate the fluid inlet, the first aperture located to selectively provide fluid communication between the fluid inlet (11) and a first connecting passageway (within 13) in the housing;
a second aperture (at the opening within 33) extending through the plug at a longitudinal location proximate the fluid outlet, the second aperture located to selectively provide fluid communication between a second connecting passageway (at 16) in the housing and the fluid outlet (12); and
at least one intermediate aperture (the opening within 32) extending laterally through plug at a longitudinal location between the first aperture and the second aperture, the at least one intermediate aperture located to selectively provide fluid communication between the first connecting passageway in the housing and the second connecting passageway in the housing (as shown in Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
817
599
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Schnall et al. disclose at least one of the at least one intermediate aperture, the first aperture, or the second aperture extends through the axis of rotation (as shown in Figure 1, the apertures extend through the axis of rotation considering that both sides of the wall that contain the aperture(s) provide an opening(s)).
PNG
media_image3.png
684
815
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Schnall et al. disclose at least one of the at least one intermediate aperture, the first aperture, the second aperture, the first connecting passageway, or the second connecting passageway increases in cross-sectional area along a fluid pathway (as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 14, Schnall et al. disclose at least one of the at least one intermediate aperture, the first aperture, the second aperture, the first connecting passageway, or the second connecting passageway gradually increases in cross-sectional area along a fluid pathway (the openings within 32,intermediate, and 31,first, increase) as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 15, Schnall et al. disclose the at least one intermediate aperture comprises a plurality of intermediate apertures (see Fig. 2, the apertures within 32 are between the first and second apertures) spaced longitudinally between the first aperture and the second aperture.
PNG
media_image4.png
221
453
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Schnall et al. disclose an outer housing (17) at least partially surrounding the housing.
In an alternative reading of the claims;
Regarding claim 16,11, Schnall et al. disclose an outer housing (10) at least partially surrounding the housing (18,19).
Regarding claim 11, Schnall et al. disclose fluid flow control device, comprising:
a housing (18,19) having a fluid inlet (16) and a fluid outlet (at the right most port 24); and
a plug (26) disposed at least partially within a housing and rotatable about an axis of rotation relative to the housing, the plug comprising:
a first aperture (at the left opening within 31) extending through the plug at a longitudinal location proximate the fluid inlet, the first aperture located to selectively provide fluid communication between the fluid inlet (16) and a first connecting passageway (within 13) in the housing;
a second aperture (at the left opening within 33) extending through the plug at a longitudinal location proximate the fluid outlet, the second aperture located to selectively provide fluid communication between a second connecting passageway (the passageway along the length of the inner bore at 16) in the housing and the fluid outlet (12); and
at least one intermediate aperture (the left opening within 32) extending laterally through plug at a longitudinal location between the first aperture and the second aperture, the at least one intermediate aperture located to selectively provide fluid communication between the first connecting passageway in the housing and the second connecting passageway in the housing (as shown in Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17/16, Schnall et al. disclose each of the first connecting passageway and the second connecting passageway comprises an opening (one of the other plurality of openings of 24, not relied on above) in the housing extending from the plug to the outer housing (the first connecting passageway is connected to one of the openings at 24 not relied on above and therefore comprises that other opening 24, and, the second connecting passageway comprises another of the openings of 24 not relied on above that extends from the plug to the outer housing in that the second connecting passageway is connected to this another opening of 24 through the other openings through the inner passages/openings in the plug and the housing).
Regarding claim 18/16, Schnall et al. disclose the housing is sealed (at seal 23) to the outer housing to collectively define each of the first connecting passageway and the second connecting passageway.
Regarding claim 19, Schnall et al. disclose a multistage fluid flow control device, comprising:
an outer housing (10);
an inner housing (18,19,20) disposed at least partially within the outer housing and sealed to the outer housing, the inner housing comprising a plurality of passageways (the ports within 19,20,21); and
a plug (26) disposed at least partially within an interior of the inner housing and rotatable about an axis of rotation relative to the inner housing, the plug comprising a plurality of apertures (the ports within 31,32,33) extending laterally through the plug an being collectively defined by the inner housing and the outer housing, the plurality of apertures located to be in fluid communication with the plurality of passageways when the plug is rotated to an open position such that fluid flows through the plurality of passageways and the plurality of apertures in a series of stages (each of the stages shown by path 36 in Figure 2) and wherein fluid pressure is reduced in each of the stages.
Regarding claim 20, Schnall et al. disclose the stages comprise at least seven stages (in figure 2, there are about 10 stages as the path 36 transitions between and through the apertures).
Should the above rejection not be found persuasive, the following rejection is given.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schnall et al. ‘750 in view of Daly et al. (US 5035214).
Regarding claim 6, Schnall et al. disclose that part of the outer housing is closely fit to the inner housing at 23. Schnall et al. is silent that the outer housing is shrink fit over the inner housing.
Daly et al. teach that the use of shrink fitting a seal with a housing (col. 6, lns 3-9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a shrink fit technique as taught by Daly et al. when assembling the device of Schnall et al. to have the outer housing being shrink fit over the inner housing, in order to ensure the seal is properly fit in the groove to provide a leak-tight fit, as is old and well known in the art.
“[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985), see MPEP 2113.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Craig Price, whose telephone number is (571)272-2712 or via facsimile (571)273-2712. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:00AM-4:30PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3607, 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.
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 Form at;
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
/CRAIG J PRICE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753