CTNF 19/099,300 CTNF 87913 DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-20 were filed with the Preliminary Amendment dated 01/28/2025. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Drawings 06-22-07 AIA The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 34 . Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA 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. 07-30-05 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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, 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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (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) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, 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: Actuating element (claim 1) Actuating portion (claim 1) Bending portion (claim 1) Actuator element (claim 1) First sealing element (claim 1) Second sealing element (claim 1) Third sealing element (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. The actuating element, actuating portion and bending portion are as shown in Fig 1. The actuator element is described as a shape memory alloy wire (para [0043]). The sealing elements are described as being thin and rigid or elastic material (para [0021]). The first sealing element can be integrally formed on the plunger (para [0039]). The second sealing element can be made of elastic material (para [0040]). The third sealing element can be connected to the second sealing element (para [0047]), and can be a spherical cap with the second sealing element ((paras [0064] [0065]). 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 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 4, 9-13, and 17 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. 07-34-03 AIA The term “ significantly ” in claim s 4, 9, and 17 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ significantly ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not clear how much larger the area must be to be considered “significantly” larger. For purposes of examination, the phrase will be construed that any larger area is “significantly larger.” The examiner suggests deleting the term “significantly.” Dependent claims 10-13 are rejected for being dependent upon a rejected claim . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 1-3, 5-8, 14-16, and 18-20 are allowed. 07-43-02 AIA Claim s 4, 9-13, and 17 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art fails to disclose or render obvious “wherein a third sealing element is arranged in the air chamber, said third sealing element being elastically connected to the second sealing element and being arranged downstream of the second sealing element in a flow direction of the compressed air from the supply opening to the connecting opening, wherein the elastic element acts directly on the third sealing element and via the elastic connection on the second sealing element, and wherein the third sealing element closes the supply opening in case of a non-positive pressure difference between the pressure at the supply opening and the pressure at the connecting opening” (claim 1) in combination with the other limitations set forth in the independent claim. The closest prior art references of record are: DE 102019208051(“Beuschel”) and CN114587955 (“Wang”). Beuschel discloses a pneumatic valve (Fig 1) with a plunger (80), circuit board (56), actuating element (62) and actuator element (68) and a sealing element (52). However, Beuschel does not teach or suggest a third sealing element as required by claim 1. Wang discloses a valve with a sealing element (61) connected via an elastic connection (60) to another sealing element (58). However, Wang fails to teach or suggest, among other things, the pneumatic valve with a circuit board, actuating element, a supply opening, connecting opening, and a discharge opening, or that the third sealing element closes the supply opening in case of a non-positive pressure difference between the pressure at the supply opening and the pressure at the connecting opening. Beuschel with Wang lack teaching all of the recited elements of claim 1. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to modify Beuschel with Wang because the combination would improperly change the principle of operation of either reference. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2020/80103047 discloses a pneumatic valve . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA CAHILL whose telephone number is (571)270-5219. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 6:30 to 3:00. 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 supervisors can be reached by phone. Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-60073607 or 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. /JESSICA CAHILL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/099,300 Page 2 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/099,300 Page 3 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/099,300 Page 4 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/099,300 Page 5 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/099,300 Page 6 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/099,300 Page 7 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/099,300 Page 8 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/099,300 Page 9 Art Unit: 3753
Prosecution Insights