DETAILED ACTION
Non Final
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
Each information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/24/2025, 07/13/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, each the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-7 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 valve unit and rotates the valve element such that a communication state among the first inlet/outlet opening, the second inlet/outlet opening, and the third inlet/outlet opening is selectively switched…”. It is unclear and/or uncertain (i.e. there appears to be a zone of uncertainty) from a reading of the claim as to what is intended by the term/phrase/idea and how such a term/phrase/idea should be interpreted. In other words, it appears that the valve unit can switch between providing fluid flow between the first inlet/outlet opening and the third inlet/outlet opening or the second inlet/outlet opening and the third inlet/outlet opening, but not between the first and second inlet outlet openings, unless there is a fluid pathway bypass or implied in the claimed phrase? In the interest of compact prosecution, the term/phrase will be given its broadest reasonable interpretation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 further recites “wherein a plurality of the valve units are connectable in series by respectively connecting, to the first port and the second port of the valve unit, the first port and the second port of another valve unit” where there is a lack of objective meaningful reference as to if the first port of the valve unit can be connected to the second port of another valve unit in series, or merely first to first, second to second etc…
Claim 4 recites “provided for the one valve unit and another valve unit is a direction intersecting a connection direction of the one valve unit and another valve unit” where there is a lack of objective meaningful reference as to how or in what way the valve unit direction intersecting a connecting direction is any different from the central axis etc…
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.
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.
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.
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) 1, 3-6 is/are rejected (as indefinitely understood) under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Whitmore (US 9964329);
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected (as indefinitely understood) under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitmore as applied to claim 1 (as indefinitely understood) above, and further in view of Choi (US 2012/0312404);
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected (as indefinitely understood) under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitmore as applied to claim 1 (as indefinitely understood) above.
Whitmore discloses in Claim 1: (see at least annotated figure 7 below)
PNG
media_image1.png
660
888
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A flow path switching valve (20 figure 1-7), comprising: a valve unit including (20a,b): a valve body (30) that includes a valve chest (at 1002 the interior of 30 that holds the valve element 23) formed inside the valve body, a first inlet/outlet opening (at opening of 31) and a second inlet/outlet opening (at opening of 32), through each of which a fluid is capable of entering or exiting (via valve control), formed on a wall surface (inner surface of the chest/chamber 1002) forming the valve chest, and a third inlet/outlet opening (via 25/35) formed on a bottom surface (the terms top, bottom, side considered relative viewpoint locations) of the valve chest; a valve element (22’/23) that is rotatably disposed in the valve chest and at which a flow path is formed; a first port (at 33) that is communicated with the first inlet/outlet opening; a second port (at 34) that is provided in parallel (in that as seen in figure 1 and 2 the ports 1 and 5 are parallel, flow paths, where 1 is 33 and 5 is 34) with the first port with the valve body interposed between the first port and the second port (as shown in figure 7), and that is communicated with the second inlet/outlet opening; and a third port (35 which in figure 2 is port 2 for example) that is communicated with the third inlet/outlet opening and has an opening at an opposite side (the out-“side” from the in-“side” of 25) from the third inlet/outlet opening; and a rotation drive unit (motor M/actuator per Col 1 ln 65-67 connected to the flange 21 and the shaft stem 36/37 best seen in figure 7) that is connected to the valve unit and rotates the valve element such that a communication state among the first inlet/outlet opening, the second inlet/outlet opening, and the third inlet/outlet opening is selectively switched (see figure 4 a-c) through the flow path (22) of the valve element, wherein a plurality of the valve units (11a-c) are connectable in series by respectively connecting, to the first port and the second port of the valve unit, the first port and the second port of another valve unit (as shown figure 1, first port 1/33a-c are in series and second port 5/34a-c are in series along their respective flow paths.)
Whitmore discloses in Claim 2: The flow path switching valve according to claim 1, (see at least annotated figure 1 below)
PNG
media_image2.png
436
888
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the first port (1/33) and the second port (5/34) each have one end provided with a [right] joint (at 1004a), and the first port and the second port each have another end provided with a [left] joint (at 1004b) having a structure connectable to the [right] joint (as shown to form the fluid line); but Whitmore does not disclose, although Choi teaches: a T-shaped joint (100a) for the first port and the second port each have one end with a female joint (right side of 100a) and another end provided with a male joint (left side of 100a) having a structure connectable to each other (where the male and female joints of the T-shaped joints are connectable in serries with one another, so as to provide for example an assembled fluid pathway.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide Whitmore as taught in Choi, with a T-shaped joint for the first port and the second port where each can have one end with a female joint and another end provided with a male joint having a structure connectable to each other as taught in Choi, and all for the purpose of connecting the male and female joints of the T-shaped junction in serries with one another, so as to provide for example an assembled fluid pathway.
Whitmore discloses in Claim 3: The flow path switching valve according to claim 1, wherein a gap is provided between the first port and the second port that are adjacent to each other (i.e. there is a gap or distance between the ports so that the chest/chamber at 1002 is formed for the valve element 23.)
Whitmore discloses in Claim 4: The flow path switching valve according to claim 1, wherein: to one valve unit (20a), another valve unit (20b) is connected in series, and a longitudinal direction (i.e. the central axis) of a plurality of the rotation drive units (36/37 are driven by the motor M) provided for the one valve unit and another valve unit is a direction intersecting a connection direction of the one valve unit and another valve unit (the actuator M is on a flange 21 that is perpendicular to the central axis.)
Whitmore discloses in Claim 5: The flow path switching valve according to claim 1, wherein to one valve unit (20a), another valve unit (20b) is connectable so as to overlap with the one valve unit at an opposite side (bottom) from the rotation drive unit (M/21 side.)
Whitmore discloses in Claim 6: The flow path switching valve according to claim 5, wherein to the one valve unit (20a), another valve unit (20b) is connected so as to overlap with the one valve unit (stacked), and two of the valve elements (23’s) in the one valve unit and another valve unit are rotated by the one rotation drive unit (M via the connection drive units of 36/37 as connected figure 7c.)
Whitmore discloses in Claim 7: The flow path switching valve according to claim 1,wherein at least [three] (20’s of 11a-c) of the valve units are connected in series; Whitmore does not disclose: four valve units connected in series; but considering one of ordinary skill in the art would consider adding another valve unit for larger capacity requirement for fluid flow control (i.e. another room to heat or cool);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to provide Whitmore with an additional valve unit in the series of three, making four valve units in series, all for the purpose of providing for example, another valve unit to heat or cool another room based on a larger capacity requirement for fluid flow control, especially since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960.)
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 MATTHEW W JELLETT, whose telephone number is 571-270-7497. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (9:30AM-6:00PM EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Ken 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 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.
/Matthew W Jellett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
