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 I in the reply filed on 7/10/26 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the:
Gap between the valve core and the second step of the second control end
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 26 and 46 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.
Claim 26 requires that:
wherein the valve core is configured to be moved to the first control end, in response to an inertial force of the water in the first outlet pipe after the first water supply from the inlet pipe to the control pipe is completed, wherein the valve core is configured to be maintained at the first control end so as to cause the second outlet pipe to discharge the water, in response to the water pressure during a second water supply from the inlet pipe to the control pipe, and wherein the valve core is configured to be moved to the second control end in response to an inertial force of the water in the second outlet pipe and a gravitational force of the valve core after the second water supply from the inlet pipe to the control pipe is completed.
The claim language regarding the valve core being configured to move due to “an inertial force of water” is not clearly defined by the claim. As best understood the claimed movement of the valve core is dependent upon the outlets of the first and second outlet pipes being in fluid communication with each other in such a manner as water flowing out of the first outlet pipe as creates or maintains a pressure differential with the interior of the second outlet pipe thereby causing a pressure differential to move the valve core upwards and hold it in place during the stoppage of supplied water. The mechanism being claimed and any required structures or arrangements for this function to be achieved need to be clearly defined by the disclosure and/or claim language.
As applicant has not clearly defined what the ‘inertial force of water’ and how it functions to move the valve core what structures or arrangements are required to satisfy the claim language is undefined.
Claim 56 requires that:
wherein the valve core is configured to be moved to the first control end, in response to an inertial force of the water in the first outlet pipe after the first water supply from the inlet pipe to the control pipe is completed, wherein the valve core is configured to be maintained at the first control end so as to cause the second outlet pipe to discharge the water, in response to the water pressure during a second water supply from the inlet pipe to the control pipe, and wherein the valve core is configured to be moved to the second control end in response to an inertial force of the water in the second outlet pipe and a gravitational force of the valve core after the second water supply from the inlet pipe to the control pipe is completed.
The claim language regarding the valve core being configured to move due to “an inertial force of water” is not clearly defined by the claim. As best understood the claimed movement of the valve core is dependent upon the outlets of the first and second outlet pipes being in fluid communication with each other in such a manner as water flowing out of the first outlet pipe as creates or maintains a pressure differential with the interior of the second outlet pipe thereby causing a pressure differential to move the valve core upwards and hold it in place during the stoppage of supplied water. The mechanism being claimed and any required structures or arrangements for this function to be achieved need to be clearly defined by the disclosure and/or claim language.
As applicant has not clearly defined what the ‘inertial force of water’ and how it functions to move the valve core what structures or arrangements are required to satisfy the claim language is undefined.
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 (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 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.
Claims 23-25, 30, 43-45 and 50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 6,502,521 (Teshima).
Regarding claim 23, Teshima discloses a waterway switching assembly, comprising:
a control pipe (Fig. 18 annotated below) comprising:
a first control end (24g);
a second control end (24f); and
a side opening (Fig. 18 – connection to 10) disposed between the first control end and the second control end;
PNG
media_image1.png
308
484
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a valve core (24d) disposed in the control pipe and configured to move between the first control end and the second control end;
a first outlet pipe (10b) in fluid communication with the first control end; and
a second outlet pipe (12) in fluid communication with the second control end.
Regarding claim 24, Teshima discloses that when the valve core is moved to the first control end, the valve core and the first control end are disposed on a first side of the side opening, and the second outlet pipe discharges water (C27 L42-46), and wherein when the valve core is moved to the second control end, the valve core and the second control end are disposed on a second side of the side opening, and the first outlet pipe discharges the water (C27 L24-29).
Regarding claim 25, Teshima discloses the inclusion of an inlet pipe (10) in fluid communication with the control pipe, wherein the first control end is disposed above the second control end (Fig. 18).
Regarding claim 30, Teshima disclose the provision of a first step (24h) disposed at the first control end and configured to limit the valve core and a second step (24e) disposed at the second control end and configured to limit the valve core.
Regarding claim 43, Teshima discloses a toilet water supply device, comprising:
a toilet body (Fig. 14-15) comprising:
a bowl (102);
a washing outlet (104b) configured to supply water to the bowl; and
a siphon outlet (102a) configured to cause siphon drainage;
waterway switching assembly, comprising:
a control pipe (Fig. 18 annotated below) comprising:
a first control end (24g);
a second control end (24f); and
a side opening (Fig. 18 – connection to 10) disposed between the first control end and the second control end;
PNG
media_image1.png
308
484
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a valve core (24d) disposed in the control pipe and configured to move between the first control end and the second control end;
a first outlet pipe (10b) in fluid communication with the first control end and the washing outlet and disposed between the first control end and the washing outlet (empties into flush tank which supplies water through 114b to the washing outlet so is in fluid communication); and
a second outlet pipe (112) in fluid communication with the second control end and the siphon outlet and disposed between the second control end and the siphon outlet (supplies water through 114a to the siphon outlet so is in fluid communication).
Regarding claim 44, Teshima discloses that when the valve core is moved to the first control end, the valve core and the first control end are disposed on a first side of the side opening, and the second outlet pipe discharges water (C27 L42-46), and wherein when the valve core is moved to the second control end, the valve core and the second control end are disposed on a second side of the side opening, and the first outlet pipe discharges the water (C27 L24-29).
Regarding claim 45, Teshima discloses the inclusion of an inlet pipe (10) in fluid communication with the control pipe, wherein the first control end is disposed above the second control end (Fig. 18).
Regarding claim 50, Teshima disclose the provision of a first step (24h) disposed at the first control end and configured to limit the valve core and a second step (24e) disposed at the second control end and configured to limit the valve core.
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.
Claims 29 and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teshima in view of US 1,933,518 (Zwermann)..
Regarding claim 29, Teshima discloses that the first outlet pipe is in fluid communication with a toilet tank interior (8) for supplying fluid to the tank but does not explicitly detail the outlet of the first outlet pipe and whether it is lower than a height of the first control end.
Zwermann teaches a waterway switching assembly (17) comprising a side inlet (122), a first control end, a second control end (annotated figure below) and a valve core (18) configured to move between the first and second control ends. The first control end is in communication with a first outlet pipe (14) which supplies water to the interior of a toilet tank (6) and which has an outlet disposed at a height lower than the first control end and disposed near the bottom of the tank Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the first outlet pipe’s outlet to be lower than the first control end, as taught by Zwermann, so as to deliver water into the tank near a bottom of the tank to reduce noise from falling/splashing water during tank refills.
Regarding claim 49, Teshima discloses that the first outlet pipe is in fluid communication with a toilet tank interior (8) for supplying fluid to the tank but does not explicitly detail the outlet of the first outlet pipe and whether it is lower than a height of the first control end.
Zwermann teaches a waterway switching assembly (17) comprising a side inlet (122), a first control end, a second control end (annotated figure below) and a valve core (18) configured to move between the first and second control ends. The first control end is in communication with a first outlet pipe (14) which supplies water to the interior of a toilet tank (6) and which has an outlet disposed at a height lower than the first control end and disposed near the bottom of the tank Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure the first outlet pipe’s outlet to be lower than the first control end, as taught by Zwermann, so as to deliver water into the tank near a bottom of the tank to reduce noise from falling/splashing water during tank refills.
Claims 32 and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teshima.
Regarding claim 32, Teshima discloses that there is a gap between the valve core and an inner wall of the control pipe (Fig. 18). However Teshima is silent regarding the size of the gap. Instead Teshima discloses that the valve core and control pipe are sized to facilitate the valve core moving between the first and second control ends as part of its function. Applicant has not disclosed that having a gap between 0.1mm and 2 mm solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose besides facilitating movement of the valve core. Moreover, it appears that the valve core and control pipe of Teshima, or applicant’s invention, would perform equally well with either applicant’s claimed gap or another gap as disclosed by Teshima. Accordingly, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Teshima such that the gap between the valve core and inner wall of the control pipe is between 0.1mm and 2mm because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over Teshima.
Regarding claim 52, Teshima discloses that there is a gap between the valve core and an inner wall of the control pipe (Fig. 18). However Teshima is silent regarding the size of the gap. Instead Teshima discloses that the valve core and control pipe are sized to facilitate the valve core moving between the first and second control ends as part of its function. Applicant has not disclosed that having a gap between 0.1mm and 2 mm solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose besides facilitating movement of the valve core. Moreover, it appears that the valve core and control pipe of Teshima, or applicant’s invention, would perform equally well with either applicant’s claimed gap or another gap as disclosed by Teshima. Accordingly, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Teshima such that the gap between the valve core and inner wall of the control pipe is between 0.1mm and 2mm because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over Teshima.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 27-28, 31, 47-48 and 51 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 26 and 56 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record does not disclose a waterway switching assembly comprising a control pipe as claimed wherein a gap is intentionally maintained between the valve core and the second step when in contact so as to allow air from the first outlet pipe to enter the second outlet pipe despite the presence of the valve core at the second outlet/control end.
The prior art of record does not disclose a waterway switching assembly comprising a control pipe as claimed and further comprising a one-way valve in the inlet pipe.
The prior art of record does not disclose a waterway switching assembly comprising a control pipe as claimed wherein after an initial flow of water is supplied upward through the first control end is stopped an ‘inertial force of water’ or the arrangement of the overall fluid system which the switching assembly is part of creates a pressure differential which moves the valve core upward to the first control end where it is maintained in place until after a second flow of water is supplied through the inlet to the second control end.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 6,823,535 (Tomita) is a toilet assembly comprising a bowl outlet, a jet outlet and a switching valve however the switching valve utilizes different valve assemblies for each flow path instead of a common control pipe and valve core.
US 11,111,658 (Mityake) is a toilet assembly with a jet and bowl outlet with different flow paths and a switching valve with a common control pipe however the valve core does not block one of the control ends and the assembly is structurally and functionally different than claimed.
CN 216948592 (Li) is a waterway switching assembly comprising a control pipe with a side inlet and first and second control ends however the control pipe and ends are arranged differently than claimed and the switching function operates through a different manner utilizing a pressurized chamber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS A ROS whose telephone number is (571)270-3577. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 9:00-6:00.
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, David Angwin can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
/NICHOLAS A ROS/ Examiner, Art Unit 3754
/DAVID P ANGWIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights