DETAILED ACTION
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-10 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.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed on 3/22/2026 is acknowledged by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "4111" and "411" have both been used to designate “First Portion”. 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. 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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 line 9 recites “push g”. This appears to be a typographic error. It should state pushing. Appropriate correction is required.
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 following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
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.
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:
Reset Members in claims 6 and 10.
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 does not intend 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 avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-10 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 lines 6-9 recite “first anti-misoperation device, comprising a rotating member and a sliding member, wherein the rotating members and the valve rods are fixed, clamping grooves are formed in the rotating members, in a rotation process of the rotating members, the clamping grooves are able to be clamped with the sliding members and push g the sliding members to move back and forth in a first direction, and when the ball valve is in the through-flow state”. It is unclear whether the “rotating member” is singular as in line 6 or “rotating members” as recited in lines 7, 8, etc. It is also unclear whether “sliding member” is singular as in line 6 or “sliding members” as recited in line 9.
Claim 1 line 12 recites “a second anti-misoperation device” while line 13 recites “second anti-misoperation devices”. It is unclear if this term is singular or plural.
The interchangeable use of plural and singular forms of the elements are throughout the Claims.
Claims 2-10 are rejected based on their dependency on Claim 1.
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.
(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.
Claims 1 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Brown US 5332001 (“Brown”).
Regarding Claim 1, Brown disclose a valve (10, fig. 1) with dual ball valves (12), comprising two ball valves (12) arranged side by side (see figs. 1 and 2) and clamped with each other (clamped with locking lugs 48 and 50), wherein each ball valve (12) comprises a valve body (20), a valve rod (28) and a handle (18), the valve bodies (20) comprise abutting surfaces (40) provided with clamping structures (48, 50), the valve rods (28) make the ball valves (12) switch between a through-flow state (open) and a closed state in a process of rotating along axes of the valve rods, and each ball valve further comprises: a first anti-misoperation device (62), comprising a rotating member (30) and a sliding member (66), wherein the rotating members (30) and the valve rods (28) are fixed, clamping grooves (fig. 4 illustrates rotating member 30 with protrusion 72 which has a groove for sliding element 62 and spring 64) are formed in the rotating members (30), in a rotation process of the rotating members (30), the clamping grooves (groove in pin 30 opposite protrusion 72) are able to be clamped with the sliding members (22, 62) and push g the sliding members (22, 62) to move back and forth in a first direction (direction along longitudinal axis of sliding element 62), and when the ball valve (12) is in the through-flow state (open whish flow through bore 36), the sliding member (62, element 66 of sliding element 22 extends out of abutting surface 40, see fig. 5) extends out of the abutting surface (40) and is inserted into the other ball valve (12); and a second anti-misoperation device (84), configured to lock the handles (18) in the closed state when the two ball valves (12) are separated, wherein the second anti-misoperation devices (84) comprise first locking mechanisms (88) and first positioning grooves (92), the first locking mechanisms (88) are arranged on the valve bodies (20), the first positioning grooves (92) are formed in the handles (18), and when the ball valves (12) are in the closed state, the first locking mechanisms (88) are able to be inserted into the first positioning grooves (92).
PNG
media_image1.png
442
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
BROWN – ANNOTATED FIGURE 2
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brown US 5332001 (“Brown”) in view of McCracken et al. US 5488972 (“McCracken”).
Regarding Claim 2, Brown discloses the rotating members (30) comprise first portions (ann. fig. 2), side walls of the first portions (ann. fig. 2) are surfaces coaxial with the valve rods (28), second portions (72).
Brown discloses the claimed invention, except second portions protruding out of the side walls of the first portions are connected to the first portions, and the clamping grooves formed by sinking inwards are formed in butt-joint positions of the first portions and the second portions; and the sliding members are slidably connected with the valve bodies and located on one sides of the first portions, the sliding members comprise clamping portions, the clamping portions comprise first rod bodies as well as first bosses and second bosses which extend outwards in a circumferential direction of the first rod bodies, and in the rotation process of the rotating members, the clamping grooves are able to be clamped with the first bosses and drive the sliding members to move back and forth in the first direction to extend out of or retract into the valve bodies.
McCracken teaches rotating members (actuator 32) second portions (74, see ann. fig. 4) protruding out of side walls of the first portions (ann. fig. 4) are connected to the first portions, and the clamping grooves (72) formed by sinking inwards are formed in butt-joint positions of the first portions and the second portions; and sliding members (70) are slidably connected with the valve bodies (10) and located on one sides of the first portions (ann. fig. 4), the sliding members (70) comprise clamping portions (76), the clamping portions (76) comprise first rod bodies (ann. fig. 4) as well as first bosses and second bosses (76, ann. fig. 4 illustrates 5 bosses) which extend outwards in a circumferential direction of the first rod bodies (ann. fig. 4), and in the rotation process of the rotating members (32), the clamping grooves (74) are able to be clamped with the first bosses (76) and drive the sliding members (70) to move back and forth in the first direction to extend out of (72, ann. fig. 4 illustrates 72 extends out of valve body 10) or retract into the valve bodies (10, 10’).
PNG
media_image2.png
411
565
media_image2.png
Greyscale
MCCRACKEN – ANNOTATED FIGURE 4
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at a time prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rotatable shaft and sliding portion (key portion), as disclosed by Brown, with a rack and pinion rotatable shaft and sliding portion, as taught by McCracken, for the purpose of using a common gear mechanism. The substitution of the rack and pinion gear mechanism saves on cost of manufacturing a more complex system that requires special tooling.
Regarding Claim 3, Brown discloses the claimed invention, except the clamping grooves are triangular, the clamping grooves comprise first inclined surfaces and second inclined surfaces, the first bosses comprise third inclined surfaces and fourth inclined surfaces, and the third inclined surfaces and the fourth inclined surfaces are able to abut against the first inclined surfaces and the second inclined surfaces respectively.
McCracken teaches clamping grooves (74) are triangular (see ann. fig. 4 for shape of elements 74), the clamping grooves comprise (74) first inclined surfaces and second inclined surfaces (ann. fig. 4 illustrates clamping grooves as a V shape of a triangle), the first bosses comprise third inclined surfaces and fourth inclined surfaces (ann. fig. 4 illustrates first and second bosses as a V shape of a triangle), and the third inclined surfaces and the fourth inclined surfaces are able to abut against the first inclined surfaces and the second inclined surfaces respectively (ann. fig. 4 illustrates the interface between the clamping grooves inclined faces with the first and second bosses inclined faces).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at a time prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the rotatable shaft and sliding portion (key portion), as disclosed by Brown, with a rack and pinion rotatable shaft and sliding portion, as taught by McCracken, for the purpose of using a common gear mechanism. The substitution of the rack and pinion gear mechanism saves on cost of manufacturing a more complex system that requires special tooling.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Allread US 4438779, Haunhorst US 8132781, Hsu PG PUB 20260078853, Maiville US 5099883, Haunhorst US 8967177, Friedell US 3902694, and Densel et al. US 8887762 disclose dual ball valves.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daphne Barry whose telephone number is (571)272-9966 and fax number is (571) 273-9966. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 9 AM-6 PM (eastern).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor either Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at (571) 272-4881 or Craig Schneider can be reached at (571) 272-3607. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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 https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/DAPHNE M BARRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights