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 .
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 4, 8, 15, 20 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 7 recites the limitation “two openings formed at opposing ends of the transverse spherical wall”. It is unclear whether these are the same as the pair of openings on opposite sides of the spherical chamber recited in claim 1 or additional ones. For examining purposes, it was understood that claim 7 is referring to the same pair of openings of the spherical chamber.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “two openings formed at opposing ends of the transverse spherical wall”. It is unclear whether these are the same as the pair of openings on opposite sides of the spherical chamber recited in claim 15 or additional ones. For examining purposes, it was understood that claim 16 is referring to the same pair of openings of the spherical chamber.
Claim 17 is rejected by virtue of dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Campbell (US11,661,929 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Campbell teaches a handle assembly (100) for attachment to a source selected from the group consisting of suction, air, and liquid at a rear end and attached to a tool selected from a dental tool and a medical tool at a front end (abstract and see Figures), the handle assembly for attachment comprising:
an elongated handle valve body (10+70) defining a channel (23+33+73), the channel running through a length of the elongated handle valve body (see Figures);
a spherical chamber (12; spherical shell) defined by the elongated handle valve body and positioned within a path of the channel (see Figures);
a pair of side openings (25+35, Fig. 6) formed on opposite sides of the spherical chamber and being in axial alignment with each other (see Figures); and
a ball valve rotatably positioned within the spherical chamber, wherein the ball valve comprises:
a ball (40) defining a ball channel (43), the ball channel running through a center of the ball and having a pair of open ends (see Figures and at least Col. 6 and 7);
a pair of spindle arms (44) formed on the ball, the spindle arms being in axial alignment with each other and located on opposite sides of the ball, wherein the spindle arms are positioned about 90° from the open ends of the ball channel and extend out of the pair of side openings of the spherical chamber (see Figures 1-6); and
a handle (50) coupled to the spindle arms, the handle for rotating the ball about the spindle arms (see Figures and at least Col. 5-6).
Regarding claim 2, Campbell teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 1 (see rejection above), further comprising an indentation formed in a top surface of the elongated handle valve body (see annotated Fig. below).
PNG
media_image1.png
600
842
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Campbell teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 2 (see rejection above), wherein the indentation has a width that extends across a width of the elongated handle valve body (see annotated Fig. below).
PNG
media_image2.png
600
842
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Campbell teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 2 (see rejection above), wherein a bottom area of the indentation is formed near a center line of the elongated handle valve body (see annotated Fig. below).
PNG
media_image3.png
600
842
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Campbell teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the spherical chamber (12) comprises:
a transverse spherical wall (31, 32);
an interior chamber surrounded by the transverse spherical wall (see annotated Fig. below); and
the pair of side openings (25+35) formed at opposing transverse ends of the transverse spherical wall (see annotated Fig. below).
PNG
media_image4.png
564
524
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Campbell teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the side openings (25+35) extend outwardly and laterally in opposite directions from the spherical chamber (see Figures).
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.
Claim(s) 5-6, 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell (US11,661,929 B2), in view of Betush (US 4,966,551).
Regarding claims 5-6, Campbell teaches handle assembly for attachment of claim 2 (see rejection above), but does not explicitly teach the indentation is V-shaped and has two angled side walls and wherein the two angled side walls of the indentation create a gap along a length of a top surface of the elongated handle valve body.
Betush teaches a handle for attachment to a dental suction tool (abstract) comprising a hollow body and a cylindrical valve (see abstract and Figures). Betush teaches the body comprises an indentation formed along the width of the body as to engage two ends of a U-shaped handle (20) for controlling the valve between an open, closed or to any intermediate position for flow control (see Figures and Col. 2 lines 8-44).
PNG
media_image5.png
221
458
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the indentation of Campbell to have side walls within the housing that form a V-shape, as taught by Betush, because it would be an alternative configuration for the limiting means that would provide increased control of the flow rate and providing a clear indication of when the valve is in a fully open or fully closed position.
Regarding claim 15, Campbell teaches a handle assembly (100) for attachment to a source selected from the group consisting of suction, air, and liquid at a rear end and attached to a tool selected from a dental tool and a medical tool at a front end (abstract and see Figures), the handle assembly for attachment comprising:
an elongated handle valve body (10+70) defining a channel (23+33+73), the channel running through a length of the elongated handle valve body (see Figures);
a spherical chamber (12; spherical shell) defined by the elongated handle valve body;
a pair of side openings (25+35, Fig. 6) formed on opposite sides of the spherical chamber (see Figures); and
a ball valve rotatably positioned within the spherical chamber, the ball valve comprising:
a ball (40) defining a ball channel (43), the ball channel running through a center of the ball and having a pair of open ends (see Figures and at least Col. 6 and 7); and
a pair of spindle arms (44) formed on the ball, the spindle arms located on opposite sides of the ball and positioned about 90° from the open ends of the ball channel and extending out of the pair of side openings (see Figures 1-6); and a handle coupled to the spindle arms, the handle for rotating the ball about the spindle arms.
Campbell teaches indentations around defined by the lower sides of the spherical chamber on the body but does not teach it being a V-shaped indentation formed in a top surface of the elongated handle valve body; the spherical chamber extending upwardly from the V-shaped indentation.
Betush teaches a handle for attachment to a dental suction tool (abstract) comprising a hollow body and a cylindrical valve (see abstract and Figures). Betush teaches the body comprises an indentation formed along the width of the body as to engage two ends of a U-shaped handle (20) for controlling the valve between an open, closed or to any intermediate position for flow control (see Figures and Col. 2 lines 8-44).
PNG
media_image5.png
221
458
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the indentation of Campbell to have side walls within the housing that form a V-shape, as taught by Betush, because it would be an alternative configuration for the limiting means that would provide increased control of the flow rate and providing a clear indication of when the valve is in a fully open or fully closed position.
Regarding claims 16-17, Campbell in view of Betush teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 15 (see rejection above). Campbell teaches wherein the spherical chamber comprises:
a transverse spherical wall (see annotated Fig, below);
an interior chamber surrounded by the transverse spherical wall (see annotated Fig. below); and
the pair of side openings (25+35) formed at opposing transverse ends of the transverse spherical wall (see annotated Fig. below), wherein the side openings on the spherical chamber are positioned at about 90° from the openings at each transverse end of the transverse spherical wall (see Figures).
Regarding claim 18, Campbell in view of Betush teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 15 (see rejection above). Betush teaches the V-shaped indentation has two angled side walls (see Figures). The combination teaches rotation of the handle of the ball valve is limited by the two angled side walls (such that the same configuration of Betush would control the valve of Campbell).
PNG
media_image5.png
221
458
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the indentation of Campbell to have side walls within the housing that form a V-shape, as taught by Betush, because it would be an alternative configuration for the limiting means that would provide increased control of the flow rate and providing a clear indication of when the valve is in a fully open or fully closed position.
Regarding claim 19, Campbell in view of Betush teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 15 (see rejection above). Campbell teaches wherein the handle of the ball valve moves the ball between:
an open position where the ball channel of the ball aligns with the channel of the elongated handle valve body; and a closed position wherein the ball channel of the ball blocks the channel of the elongated handle valve body (Col. 6 lines 62-67 and Col. 7 line 1-7).
Claim(s) 9-12, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campbell (US11,661,929 B2), in view of Davis (US 5,882,197).
Regarding claim 9, Campbell teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 1 (see rejection above). Campbell teaches the spindle arms are received in sockets (53) of the handle but does not teach it explicitly comprising a socket formed in each spindle arm.
Davis teaches a dental handpiece comprising a valve assembly and a handle (50) for controlling the valve. Davis teaches the valve comprises protruding arms (64, 66) each having sockets (63) for receiving protrusions (54) of the handle (see Figures and at least Col. 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the spindle arms to include sockets for receiving the handle, as taught by Davis, rather than protruding elements that engage in sockets of the handle, because it would have been an obvious matter of design choice involving mere reversal of parts, which would be an obvious modification that achieves the same expected result (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(A)).
Regarding claim 10, Campbell in view of Davis teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 9 (see rejection above). Campbell teaches each socket is multi-sided (see Figures 2-3; such that corresponding sockets and arms of Campbell have multiple opposing sides (see 53 and 44).
Regarding claims 11-12, Campbell teaches the handle assembly for attachment of claim 1 (see rejection above), wherein the handle of the ball valve is U-shaped (see Fig. 3). Campbell teaches the handle has sockets (53) for receiving the arms of the valve and does not teach a pin member formed at each end and wherein each pin member is configured to be inserted into a corresponding socket formed in a corresponding spindle arm.
Davis teaches a dental handpiece comprising a valve assembly and a handle (50) for controlling the valve. Davis teaches the valve comprises protruding arms (64, 66) each having sockets (63) for receiving protrusions (54) of the handle (see Figures and at least Col. 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the spindle arms to include sockets for receiving the handle, as taught by Davis, rather than protruding elements that engage in sockets of the handle, because it would have been an obvious matter of design choice involving mere reversal of parts, which would be an obvious modification that achieves the same expected result (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(A)).
Regarding claim 20, Campbell teaches a handle assembly (100) for attachment to a source selected from the group consisting of suction, air, and liquid at a rear end and attached to a tool selected from a dental tool and a medical tool at a front end (abstract and see Figures), the handle assembly for attachment comprising:
an elongated handle valve body (10+70);
a channel (23+33+73) having a first open end and a second open end running along a length of the elongated handle valve body (see Figures), the first open end at an opposite end of the elongated handle valve body from the second open end (see Figs);
a spherical chamber (12; spherical shell) defined by the body and positioned within a path of the channel and having openings at each transverse end (see 25+35 in Figures 1-6);
an indentation formed in a top surface of the body and extending across a width of the elongated handle valve body (see Fig. below), wherein the spherical chamber extends up from the indentation (see Figure below); and
a ball valve positioned within the spherical chamber (see Figures), wherein the ball valve comprises:
a ball (40);
a ball channel (43) running through a center of the ball and having a pair of open ends (see Figures and at least Col. 6 and 7);
a pair of spindle arms (44), wherein each spindle arm is in axial alignment and located on opposite sides of the ball and positioned about 90° from the open ends of the ball channel (see Figures 1-6);
a handle (50) having a U-shaped body coupled to the ball (see figures).
PNG
media_image1.png
600
842
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Campbell teaches the spindle arms are received in sockets (53) of the handle but does not explicitly teach a socket formed in each spindle arm; a pin member formed at an end of each leg of the U-shaped body, each pin inserted into a corresponding socket securing the handle to the ball.
Davis teaches a dental handpiece comprising a valve assembly and a handle (50) for controlling the valve. Davis teaches the valve comprises protruding arms (64, 66) each having sockets (63) for receiving protrusions (54) of the handle (see Figures and at least Col. 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the spindle arms to include sockets for receiving the handle, as taught by Davis, rather than protruding elements that engage in sockets of the handle, because it would have been an obvious matter of design choice involving mere reversal of parts, which would be an obvious modification that achieves the same expected result (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(A)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-7, 9-12, 14-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues that Betush’s indentation is not the same as the claimed indentation and further that there are two indentations and not one as recited in the claim. This is not persuasive. The indentation of Betush is a recessed area behind the handle and within the body that extends to the top surface and defines two side walls that diverge into a V-shape. It should also be noted that the claim does not limit the number of indentations and therefore even if the prior art teaches more than one, the claimed indentation would still be read upon.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 attached to this office action.
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 LINA FARAJ whose telephone number is (571)272-4580. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Edelmira Bosques can be reached at (571) 270-5614. 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.
/LINA FARAJ/ Examiner, Art Unit 3772
/HEIDI M EIDE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3772
7/31/2026
Prosecution Insights