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 .
Response to Amendment
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The response filed on September 29, 2026 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 “sequentially connected chambers” recited in claim 15; the “snap connection” recited in claim 16; the “screw connection” recited in claim 17; and the “piston” recited in claim 22 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
Claims 1, 3-8 and 13-22 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 1 recites the limitation "the flow" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the flow" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the dosing valve is configured to control the flow of the first component through the first valve inlet and to control the flow of the second component through the second valve inlet” in lines 8-10. The claim fails to recite structure to accomplish the function “to control” (two occurrences). The structure recited in the claim is not commensurate in scope with the function recited in the claim.
Regarding claim 13, the preamble is directed to a method comprising spraying. The claim further recites “using the device of claim 1.” It is uncertain whether the claim is directed to a method of spraying or a method of using. The claim appears to be cross two statutory classes of invention.
Claim 21 recites the limitation “the dosing valve is configured to control…at a 2:1 ratio.” The claim fails to recite structure to accomplish the function of controlling the flow of the first component and the flow of the second component at a 2:1 ratio. The structure recited in the claim is not commensurate in scope with the function recited in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 1, 3, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20 and 22 (as best understood) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Scarpa et al. (6,663,021).
Scarpa et al. disclose a device for applying a multicomponent plastic to a substrate, the device comprising:
a dosing valve 162, 162a comprising a cylinder unit 164 controlled by compressed air (col. 8, l. 12) that is fed into the cylinder unit through an inlet port 170 and that leaves the cylinder unit through an exit port 172, the dosing valve having a first valve inlet 174 for receiving a first component of the multicomponent plastic, a second valve inlet 176 for receiving a second component of the multicomponent plastic, and a valve outlet (opening into paddled mixer 166 in housing 178), wherein the dosing valve is configured to control the flow of the first component through the first valve inlet and to control the flow of the second component through the second valve inlet (control feature; col. 8, ll. 34-40; additionally, the mere confinement and channeling of the resin, provided to inlets 174 and 176, through the gun 162 is a form of “control the flow”);
a static spray mixer 166, 168, 178 comprising a mixer housing 178, 168 extending along a longitudinal axis (longitudinal axis of spray gun 160) between a valve-side end (upstream end) and a distal end (downstream end), a mixing element 166 disposed within the mixer housing, and an atomization sleeve 90 disposed on the distal end of the mixer housing, the atomization sleeve having an inlet (upstream end for air entry; opening at entry end 94) for receiving a pressurized atomizing medium (air);
wherein the mixer housing and the mixing element comprise plastic (polyurethane is a plastic; col. 3, l. 30-35; polyurethane is between the mixer housing and the mixing element) and
wherein the mixing element is a single piece configured to be inserted into the mixer housing (see figures 8 and 9);
wherein the atomization sleeve is configured to be attached to the distal end of the mixer housing along the longitudinal axis;
wherein the multicomponent plastic is a polyurea adhesive that is solvent-free and free of volatile organic compounds (the multicomponent plastic is not a positively recited limitation; claim 14 further defines a non-positively recited limitation; the device of Scarpa et al. is capable of spraying a polyurea adhesive that is solvent-free and free of volatile organic compounds);
wherein the mixing element defines a plurality of sequentially connected chambers (space/chambers between paddles);
wherein the atomization sleeve is configured to be attached to the distal end of the mixer housing via a screw connection (see threads of air cap 90 in figures);
wherein the valve outlet has a first valve outlet (inherent) for the first component and a second valve outlet (inherent) for the second component (two outlets are inherent in the double type feed; col. 8, l. 14);
wherein the substrate is a flat metal sheet (the claim further defines the substrate which is not a positively recited limitation; the device of Scarpa et al. is capable of applying a multicomponent plastic to a substrate that is a flat metal sheet);
wherein the cylinder unit includes at least one piston (inherent whether it be a rotary piston or a reciprocating piston).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, 16 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scarpa et al. (6,663,021).
Regarding claims 1 and 3,
Scarpa et al. disclose a device for applying a multicomponent plastic to a substrate, the device comprising:
a dosing valve 162, 162a comprising a cylinder unit 164 controlled by compressed air (col. 8, l. 12) that is fed into the cylinder unit through an inlet port 170 and that leaves the cylinder unit through an exit port 172, the dosing valve having a first valve inlet 174 for receiving a first component of the multicomponent plastic, a second valve inlet 176 for receiving a second component of the multicomponent plastic, and a valve outlet (opening into paddled mixer 166 in housing 178), wherein the dosing valve is configured to control the flow of the first component through the first valve inlet and to control the flow of the second component through the second valve inlet (control feature; col. 8, ll. 34-40);
a static spray mixer 166, 168, 178 comprising a mixer housing 178, 168 extending along a longitudinal axis (longitudinal axis of spray gun 160) betweem a valve-side end (upstream end) and a distal end (downstream end), a mixing element 166 disposed within the mixer housing, and an atomization sleeve 90 disposed on the distal end of the mixer housing, the atomization sleeve having an inlet (upstream end for air entry; opening at entry end 94) for receiving a pressurized atomizing medium (air);
wherein the mixing element is a single piece configured to be inserted into the mixer housing (see figures 8 and 9);
Scarpa et al. disclose the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of the mixer housing and the mixing element being made of plastic, i.e., the mixer housing and the mixing element each comprising plastic. Plastic materials are well known. Plastic materials are light weight and are less subject to corrosion. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have made the mixer housing and the mixing element of Scarpa et al. from plastic material to reduce weight and prevent corrosion.
Scarpa et al. further disclose:
wherein the atomization sleeve is configured to be attached to the distal end of the mixer housing along the longitudinal axis.
Regarding claim 4,
Scarpa et al. disclose the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of a separate adapter. Scarpa et al. show an adapter (threaded downstream end of gun 162 that attaches to housing 178 and paddled mixer 166). Making the attachment portion/section into a separate element is a mere separation of parts. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have made the gun 162 into multiple/separate parts/sections for ease of assembly and/or maintenance, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 5,
Scarpa et al. further disclose the adapter comprises an adapter housing (housing of the downstream end portion of gun 162), a valve connector (inherent when gun 162 is made of multiple/separable parts), and a mixer connector (the threads) to releasably attach the static spray mixer to the adapter.
Regarding claim 6,
Scarpa et al. further disclose wherein the valve connector or the mixer connector is integrally formed with the adapter housing (threads are integrally formed).
Regarding claim 7,
Scarpa et al. disclose the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of the adapter housing is made of metal. Metal is well known. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have made the adapter housing of metal in the device of Scarpa et al. to improve strength.
Regarding claim 16,
Scarpa et al. disclose the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of the snap connection between the atomization sleeve and the mixer housing. Scarpa et al. disclose a screw connection (see threads of air cap 90 in figures). A snap connection is well known. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have replaced the screw connection of Scarpa et al. with a snap connection to ease/speed assembly.
Regarding claim 21,
Scarpa et al. disclose the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of the 2:1 ratio of the first component and the second component. Scarpa et al. disclose proper proportions in column 8, lines 34-35. Doing so is a mere optimization of value. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided a 2:1 ratio of flow of the first component and the second component where the resin mixture requires as such, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claims 14, 15, 17, 18, 20 and 22 have not been rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 to avoid duplicative rejections. It does not mean that claims 14, 15, 17, 18, 20 and 22 cannot be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 29, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the device of Scarpa et al. does not correspond to a dosing valve that is configured to control the flow of the first component through the first valve inlet and to control the flow of the second component through the second valve inlet. Scarpa et al. disclose the control of flow feature in column 8, lines 34-40 by disclosing the proper proportion of resin. Additionally, the mere confinement and channeling of the resin, provided to inlets 174 and 176, through the gun 162 is a form of flow control.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER S KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-4905. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30.
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 O Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER S KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 CHRISTOPHER S. KIM
Examiner
Art Unit 3752
CK
