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
Applicant's election with traverse of Species III in the reply filed on 3/12/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that no serious search burden exists to search and examine Species I-X together. This is not found persuasive because searching the distinct species (including the distinct arrangements and configurations of the septum) require a different field of search, including different classification based search queries, different text search queries, and different citation based search queries.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Therefore, claims 1-20 remain pending with claims 7-10 and 13 withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-6, 11, 12, and 14-20 are treated on their merits.
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.
Claim 20 is 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 20 recites the limitation "the fluid pressure threshold" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the 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 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) 1-6, 11, 12, and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sands (US Patent 4,030,520).
Regarding Claim 1, Sands discloses a valve 10, comprising: an enclosure (including sections 11 and 12) comprising an inlet (23 capable of being used as an inlet) and an outlet (24 capable of being used as an outlet); a septum V (the term “septum” is defined as “a dividing partition or membrane between two cavities in a mechanical device and therefore the valve V is readable as a “septum” as claimed because it provides a dividing partition between upstream and downstream portions of the enclosure in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device) positioned within an interior of the enclosure (as shown in Figure 1), the septum V comprising a first configuration (e.g. the position shown in Figure 1 provides a first configuration) at a first fluid pressure within the interior (at low differential pressures between the upstream and downstream lines the valve V will remain in the position shown in Figure 1), and a second configuration (second configuration as shown in Figure 3) at a second fluid pressure within the interior (a second, larger differential pressure between the upstream and downstream lines will cause the valve V to move to the second configuration shown as the position in Figure 3); a primary fluid path extending from the inlet to the outlet (primary fluid path extending from the inlet 23, through intermediate portion 19, through seat 30, to the outlet 24), wherein the primary fluid path is open when the septum V is in the first configuration (when the septum is not seated on seat 30), and closed when the septum is in the second configuration (as shown in Figure 3, the primary fluid path is closed by the valve V seating against the seat 30); and a secondary fluid path extending from the inlet to the outlet (secondary fluid path extending from the inlet 23, through intermediate portion 19, through bypass passage 38, to the outlet 24), wherein the secondary fluid path is open when the septum is in the second configuration (as shown in Figure 3, fluid flows through the bypass passage 38), wherein the primary fluid path comprises a primary flow rate capacity that is greater than a secondary flow rate capacity of the secondary fluid path (the flow path area through the seat 30 is significantly larger than the flow path area through the bypass passage 38, thereby providing a greater flow rate capacity in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device).
Regarding Claim 2, Sands further discloses the secondary fluid path (through bypass passage 38) is open when the septum is in either the first configuration or the second configuration (the secondary fluid path extending through passage 38 is open in both the first configuration and the second configuration).
Regarding Claim 3, Sands is seen as further disclosing the septum V further comprises a fluid pressure threshold at which the septum switches from the first configuration to the second configuration (there is inherently a pressure differential at which the spring force is overcome and the valve moves from the first configuration to the second configuration).
Regarding Claim 4, Sands further discloses the first configuration is an open configuration (allowing fluid to flow along the primary fluid path as described above), and the first fluid pressure is equal to, or less than the fluid pressure threshold (i.e. less than the fluid pressure required to overcome the spring force to cause the valve V to close the primary fluid path), and the second configuration is a closed configuration (such that the primary fluid path is closed as described above), and the second fluid pressure is greater than the fluid pressure threshold (at fluid pressures greater than the fluid pressure threshold the valve occupies the second configuration as described above).
Regarding Claim 5, Sands is seen as further disclosing the fluid pressure threshold is a fluid vacuum pressure threshold (although Sands does not specifically disclose a vacuum pressure threshold, the valve member V moves according to pressure differentials across the valve; therefore, there is inherently a vacuum pressure threshold across the valve which will overcome the spring force and cause the valve to move into the closed position), the first fluid pressure is a first fluid vacuum pressure (i.e. a vacuum pressure below the threshold which will move the valve member V), and the second fluid pressure is a second fluid vacuum pressure (i.e. a vacuum pressure greater than the threshold which will move member V). As described above, a vacuum pressure threshold is inherent in the structure of Sands. That is, when a vacuum is applied at 24 which is greater than a vacuum applied at 23 by a certain amount, the valve will move toward 24 to close the valve. It is noted that the claims only require a valve which comprises a pressure threshold and the claims do not require a system which applies a vacuum.
Regarding Claim 6, Sands is seen as further disclosing the first configuration is an open configuration (allowing fluid to flow along the primary fluid path as described above), and the first fluid vacuum pressure is less than or equal to the fluid vacuum pressure threshold of the septum (as described above; a first vacuum pressure is less than the threshold and therefore does not overcome the spring force), and the second configuration is a closed configuration (such that the primary fluid path is closed as described above), and the second fluid vacuum pressure is greater than the fluid vacuum pressure threshold (as described above; a second vacuum pressure is greater than the threshold and therefore overcomes the spring force to move the valve into the closed position).
Regarding Claim 11, Sands further discloses the primary fluid path includes a space between an outer surface of the septum V and one or more inner walls of the enclosure (as shown in Figure 1, the primary fluid path extending through 19 includes a space between valve V and an interior wall of the enclosure).
Regarding Claim 12, Sands further discloses at least a portion of the septum V moves with respect to the enclosure when transitioning from the first configuration to the second configuration (the entire septum V moves when transitioning from the first configuration to the second configuration).
Regarding Claim 14, Sands further discloses the septum V moves axially towards the outlet 24 when transitioning from the first configuration to the second configuration (there is at least an axial component of the movement of valve V as it transitions from the first configuration to the second configuration).
Regarding Claim 15, Sands discloses a valve 10, comprising: an enclosure (including sections 11 and 12) comprising an inlet (23 capable of being used as an inlet), an outlet (passage through seat 30 capable of being used as an outlet), and an aperture (bypass passage 38 forms an aperture) adjacent the outlet (as shown in Figures 1 and 3 in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device); a primary fluid path through the outlet (primary fluid path extending from the inlet 23, through intermediate portion 19 and through seat 30); a secondary fluid path through the aperture (secondary fluid path extending from the inlet 23, through intermediate portion 19 and through bypass passage 38); and a septum V (the term “septum” is defined as “a dividing partition or membrane between two cavities in a mechanical device and therefore the valve V is readable as a “septum” as claimed because it provides a dividing partition between upstream and downstream portions of the enclosure in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device) positioned within the enclosure (as shown in Figure 1), the septum comprising a first configuration (a first configuration of the septum is achieved when the septum is located in the space between and not contacting the springs 31 and 32) at a first fluid pressure within the enclosure (for the purpose of this claim, the first configuration is shown in Figure 1 and is achieved at low differential pressures between the upstream and downstream lines; at such a first fluid pressure the valve V will remain in the position shown in Figure 1), and a second configuration (second configuration as shown in Figure 3) at a second fluid pressure within the enclosure (a second, larger differential pressure between the upstream and downstream lines will cause the valve V to move to the second configuration shown as the position in Figure 3), wherein the primary fluid path is open when the septum V is in the first configuration (when the septum is not seated on seat 30), and closed when the septum is in the second configuration (as shown in Figure 3, the primary fluid path is closed by the valve V seating against the seat 30), and wherein the secondary fluid path is open when the septum is in either the first configuration or the second configuration (as shown in Figures 1 and 3, fluid flows through the bypass passage 38 at all configurations of the septum).
Regarding Claim 16, Sands is seen as further disclosing the septum V is spaced apart from all inner walls of the enclosure and unconstrained within the interior of the enclosure when in the first configuration. It is noted that the valve of Sands is capable of achieving the claimed first configuration because the valve is capable of being used in a vertical orientation in the same manner as disclosed by applicant. It is further noted that when used in a vertical orientation, there is necessarily a pressure differential which will cause the valve V to be moved to a position in which the valve is lifted from both springs 31 and 32 and, when used in such a vertical orientation, the valve V is capable of occupying a central location within the enclosure such that it is spaced apart from all inner walls of the enclosure. It is lastly noted that these parameters are all similarly required for applicant’s septum to reach the claimed first configuration.
Regarding Claim 17, Sands further discloses the primary fluid path (extending through seat 30) comprises a primary flow rate capacity that is greater than a secondary flow rate capacity of the secondary fluid path (the flow path area through the seat 30 is significantly larger than the flow path area through the bypass passage 38, thereby providing a greater flow rate capacity in the same manner as achieved by applicant’s device).
Regarding Claim 18, Sands further discloses the primary fluid path includes a space between an outer surface of the septum V and one or more inner walls of the enclosure (as shown in Figure 1, the primary fluid path extending through 19 includes a space between valve V and an interior wall of the enclosure).
Regarding Claim 19, Sands is seen as further disclosing the septum V further comprises a fluid pressure threshold at which the septum switches from the first configuration to the second configuration (there is inherently a pressure differential at which the spring force is overcome and the valve moves from the first configuration to the second configuration).
Regarding Claim 20, Sands further discloses the first configuration is an open configuration (allowing fluid to flow along the primary fluid path as described above), and the first fluid pressure is equal to, or less than the fluid pressure threshold (i.e. less than the fluid pressure required to overcome the spring force to cause the valve V to close the primary fluid path), and the second configuration is a closed configuration (such that the primary fluid path is closed as described above), and the second fluid pressure is greater than the fluid pressure threshold (at fluid pressures greater than the fluid pressure threshold the valve occupies the second configuration as described above).
Conclusion
The prior art of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Akimoto et al. (US Patent 9,410,635) teaches a valve with a primary and secondary (at 33) flow path. Goerg (US Patent 1,788,358) teaches a valve with a primary flow path and a secondary flow path (at 17).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN MURPHY whose telephone number is (571)270-5243. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached on (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 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.
/KEVIN F MURPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights