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
Claims 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse of Species I, in the reply filed on 5/28/2026. It is noted that a complete reply requires an election of all requirements, further incomplete replies will be held as non-responsive.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/10/2026 was filed prior to the mailing date of the mailing of this action. The submission complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because; the lines and numbers have poor quality, see 37CFR 1.84. (l) Character of lines, numbers, and letters. All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. The weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. This requirement applies to all lines however fine, to shading, and to lines representing cut surfaces in sectional views. Lines and strokes of different thicknesses may be used in the same drawing where different thicknesses have a different meaning. (p)(3) Numbers, letters, and reference characters must measure at least .32 cm. (1/8 inch) in height. They should not be placed in the drawing so as to interfere with its comprehension. Therefore, they should not cross or mingle with the lines. They should not be placed upon hatched or shaded surfaces. When necessary, such as indicating a surface or cross section, a reference character may be underlined and a blank space may be left in the hatching or shading where the character occurs so that it appears distinct.
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.84(h) (3) are required in this application because “hatching must be used to indicate section portions of an object...”, see MPEP 608.02, IX, drawing symbols chart. Applicant is advised that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings.
The drawings are objected to because the use of shading reduces legibility 37 CFR 1.84(m).
See the drawings in US patent 7,789,066 as a representative example for drawings.
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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “biasing mechanism” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because, the abstract should be in
narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet
within the range of 50 to 150 words. Correction is required. See MPEP 608.01(c).
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 6-9 recites the limitation "its" which is indefinite as to what structure is intended to be defined.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by McQueen (US 3481356).
Regarding claim 1, McQueen discloses an oscillating flow controller comprising: a housing;
a first valve (2,3,15) operable between a first position and a second position;
a second valve (30,32,33,23,24) operable between a first position and a second position; and
a biasing mechanism (50-54,56-64) configured to simultaneously bias both of the first valve and the second valve toward their respective first positions or toward their respective second positions,
wherein the housing, the first valve, and the second valve cooperate to define a first pilot chamber (at 25 left) and a second pilot chamber (at 25 right),
wherein the first valve is configured to: (i) disable fluid communication through a first fluid inlet (7) into the first pilot chamber and enable fluid communication through a second fluid inlet (8) into the second pilot chamber when the first valve is in the first position (fig. 2); and
(ii) enable fluid communication through the first fluid inlet into the first pilot chamber (using regulator 24) and disable fluid communication through the second fluid inlet into the second pilot chamber when the first valve is in the second position (fig. 1),
wherein the second valve is configured to: (i) enable fluid communication through a first fluid outlet (at 27 left) from the first pilot chamber and disable fluid communication through a second fluid outlet (at 27 right) from the second pilot chamber when the second valve is in the first position; and
(ii) disable fluid communication through the first fluid outlet from the first pilot chamber and enable fluid communication through the second fluid outlet from the second pilot chamber when the second valve is in the second position (col.4, lns. 3-10 with regulator 23 operating valve 30 to open the second outlet at 27 right).
Regarding claim 16, McQueen discloses a first flow restrictor (the largest rounded outside diameter portion of valve 30 within 25 left) located in the first pilot chamber between the first valve and the second valve, wherein the first flow restrictor divides the first pilot chamber into a first section (the section to the left of the rounded diameter) proximate the first valve and a second section (the section to the right of the rounded diameter) proximate the second valve.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McQueen ‘356 in view of Stearns (US 4715397).
Regarding claim 21, McQueen discloses all of the features of the claimed invention, although is silent that to having the system comprising the oscillating flow controller of claim 1, further comprising a fluid pump having a fluid outlet fluidly coupled to the first and second fluid inlets of the oscillating flow controller and a fluid inlet fluidly coupled to the first and second fluid outlets of the oscillating flow controller.
Stearns teaches the use of a fluid pump (65) having a fluid outlet fluidly coupled to the first and second fluid inlets (135 to 110 and 125) of the oscillating flow controller and a fluid inlet (the inlet of 65 connected to tank 60 is connected to the outlet 70, col. 3, lns. 8-13) fluidly coupled to the first and second fluid outlets of the oscillating flow controller (at 90).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a pump as taught by Stearns into the device of McQueen to have a fluid pump having a fluid outlet fluidly coupled to the first and second fluid inlets of the oscillating flow controller and a fluid inlet fluidly coupled to the first and second fluid outlets of the oscillating flow controller, in order to pull the fluid from the reservoir into the system, as is old and well known in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 and 10-15 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.
None of the prior art discloses or renders as obvious, “a first pressure barrier defining a first aperture and movable between a first position and a second position; and a second pressure barrier defining a second aperture and movable between a first position and a second position,2wherein the second armature is configured to move between first and second positions within the second armature chamber, wherein, when the second armature is in the first position, the first end of the second armature cooperates with the first pressure barrier to enable fluid communication through the first aperture from the first pilot chamber to the second armature chamber, and the second end of the second armature cooperates with the second pressure barrier to disable fluid communication through the second aperture from the second pilot chamber to the second armature chamber, and wherein, when the second armature is in the second position, the first end of the second armature cooperates with the first pressure barrier to disable fluid communication through the first aperture from the first pilot chamber to the second armature chamber, and the second end of the second armature cooperates with the second pressure barrier to enable fluid communication through the second aperture from the second pilot chamber to the second armature chamber”, in combination with the rest of the limitations in claim 2.
Claims 6-9 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Craig Price, whose telephone number is (571)272-2712 or via facsimile (571)273-2712. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (8:00AM-4:30PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Craig Schneider, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3607, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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.
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) Form at Form at;
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
/CRAIG J PRICE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights