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 without traverse of Group II (claims 9-16) in the reply filed on 8/13/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gatten (US 2014/0319402) in view of Starzmann (US 2025/0207678).
Regarding claim 9, Gatten teaches a pilot operated shuttle valve (10, Fig. 1A, paragraph [0014]) comprising:
a shuttle pathway (15, Fig. 1A, paragraph [0013]);
a shuttle that translates within the shuttle pathway (19, Fig. 1A, paragraph [0013]); and
at least one spring which adjusts in shape based on at least one of pressure, temperature, or force applied to the spring by a fluid flowing to the pilot operated shuttle valve via an input (see at least paragraph [0014] which notes force);
wherein the adjustment in shape of the SMA spring causes at least one of:
a first output to adjust from an open position to a closed position (see Figs. 1A, 2A which show the open and closed position), or
a first output to adjust from a closed position to an open position (the limitation is not required as the claim is claimed in the alternative).
Gatten does not teach a shape memory alloy (SMA) spring. Starzmann teaches a valve which features an actuating device which uses a shape memory alloy (Starzmann, paragraph [0027]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide Gatten with an actuating device which uses shape memory alloy, as taught by Starzmann, in order to achieve actuation without electrical control steps (Starzmann, paragraph [0027]).
Gatten as modified does not specifically note a plurality of inputs and outputs. Nishimura teaches a control valve (Nishimura, Title) with a shuttle valve (Nishimura, 28, col. 6, lines 28-35) which connects a plurality of inputs (Nishimura, 25, 25’, Fig. 1, col. 6, lines 28-35) and a plurality of outputs (Nishimura, 31, 31, Fig. 1, col. 6, lines 28-35). It would have been obvious to one of orindary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide Gatten as modified with a plurality of inputs and outputs, as taught by Nishimura, in order to increase fluid flow through the valve which thereby increases the rate of heat transfer in the valve.
Regarding claim 10, Gatten as modified teaches the pilot operated shuttle valve of claim 9, wherein when at least one of the plurality of outputs is open, fluid from the plurality of inputs flows out the at least one of the plurality of outputs (Gatten, paragraph [0015]-[0017], [0019]).
Regarding claim 11, Gatten as modified teaches the pilot operated shuttle valve of claim 9, wherein adjustment in shape of the SMA spring causes the shuttle to translate within the shuttle pathway, and wherein the adjustment in shape of the SMA spring is at least one of extension or compression (Gatten, see Figs. 1A, 2A).
Regarding claim 12, Gatten as modified teaches the pilot operated shuttle valve of claim 11, wherein the shuttle translates from a first position to a second position within the shuttle pathway (Gatten, see Figs. 1A, 2A).
Regarding claim 13, Gatten as modified teaches the pilot operated shuttle valve of claim 12, further comprising a tension spring biasing the shuttle valve to a first position (Gatten, 6, paragraph [0014]).
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gatten in view of Starzmann, further in view of Eminger (US 5,727,595).
Regarding claim 14, Gatten as modified teaches the pilot operated shuttle valve of claim 9, but does not specifically teach that the shuttle valve is attached to an actuation assembly, and wherein the shuttle valve rotates a rotation portion of the actuation assembly.
Eminger teaches a valve system which features a rotation member to change the position of the valve between a first and second position (Eminger, col. 6, lines 12-28) wherein the changing of positions through the rotation adjusts the open/close position of a plurality of outlets (Eminger, col. 6, lines 27-45, see outlet ports 22, 24). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to provide Gatten as modified with the shuttle valve rotating a rotation portion of the actuation assembly, as taught by Eminger, as it would be obvious to try to one of ordinary skill to use a known actuation method to change position within the valve.
Regarding claim 15, Gatten as modified teaches the pilot operated shuttle valve of claim 9, wherein when the shuttle valve is in a first position, a first output of the plurality of outputs is open, and a second output of the plurality of outputs is closed (Eminger. col. 6, lines 27-45, see outlet ports 22, 24, see motivation to combine in the rejection of claim 14).
Regarding claim 16, Gatten as modified teaches the pilot operated shuttle valve of claim 9, wherein when the shuttle valve is in a second position, a first output of the plurality of outputs is closed, and a second output of the plurality of outputs is open (Eminger. col. 6, lines 27-45, see outlet ports 22, 24, see motivation to combine in the rejection of claim 14).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAEL N BABAA whose telephone number is (571)270-3272. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9-5 EST.
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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at (571)-270-5054. 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.
/NAEL N BABAA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights