CTNF 19/187,803 CTNF 87241 DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-11 are pending. 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. Specification It is suggested that the title be amended to be more descriptive than “VALVE DEVICE,” and to clearly indicate the invention to which the claims are directed, such as mentioning the anti-freezing feature. See MPEP 606. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-2 and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Pechoux et al. (US 6,293,514) . Regarding claim 1, Pechoux discloses in Figs. 1-14 a valve device comprising: a valve base (comprising body 2 and cylinder 16) having a discharge flow path 6 (alternatively including outlet 4) configured to discharge a target fluid therethrough; a plunger (comprising valve stem 13, 14, and alternatively including valve member portion 8a, or alternatively comprising valve member portion 8a and excluding valve stem 13, 14) configured to be rectilinearly movable from a first position at which the plunger closes the discharge flow path 6 to a second position at which the plunger opens the discharge flow path 6 (by unseating valve member portion 8a, like the applicant’s plunger 130 opens the discharge flow path 112 by unseating diaphragm 140); a solenoid (comprising coil 11) configured to provide driving power for moving the plunger (via valve stem portion(s) 13, 14); and an anti-freezing member 8b (because member 8b reciprocates inside the discharge flow path in conjunction with the reciprocation of the plunger, such that the member 8b is structured and functions like the applicant discloses with their anti-freezing member 150/150’/150’’ on pg. 10, lines 20-23) connected to the plunger and configured to restrict freezing of the target fluid in the discharge flow path 6 by moving in the discharge flow path 6 based on a movement of the plunger. Regarding claim 2, Pechoux discloses in Figs. 1-14 that the anti-freezing member 8b is integrated with an end of the plunger 13, 14, 8a such that the anti-freezing member 8b and the plunger 13, 14, 8a form a unitary one-piece structure 13, 14, 8a, 8b (at least because all of the structures are contiguously and rigidly fixed together). Regarding claim 5, Pechoux discloses in Figs. 1-14 that the plunger 13, 14 is positioned at the first position, the anti-freezing member 8b is disposed in the discharge flow path 6, and wherein when the plunger 13, 14 is moved from the first position to the second position, (i) at least a part of the anti-freezing member 8b is extended to an outside of the discharge flow path 6, and (ii) a passing flow path through which the target fluid passes is provided in the discharge flow path 6. Regarding claim 6, Pechoux discloses in Figs. 1-14 that the discharge flow path 6 has a first length, and the anti-freezing member 8b has a second length equal to or greater than the first length, and wherein when the plunger 13, 14 is moved to the first position, an end of the anti-freezing member 8b is exposed to an outside of the discharge flow path 6. Regarding claim 7, Pechoux discloses in Figs. 1-14 a proximal end of the anti-freezing member 8b adjacent to the plunger 13, 14, 8a has a first cross-sectional area, and a distal end of the anti-freezing member 8b has a second cross-sectional area different from the first cross-sectional area (because of the change in shape of slots 23 extending through the anti-freezing member 8b). Regarding claim 8, Pechoux discloses in Figs. 1-14 that the anti-freezing member 8b has a cross-sectional area that decreases in a direction from the proximal end to the distal end (because the slots 23 formed in the anti-freezing member 8b increase in size toward the distal end) . 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-2 and 5-8 (alternatively: all) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Matsuda et al. (US 6,006,728) . Regarding claim 1, Matsuda discloses in Fig. 5 a valve device comprising: a valve base 34, 31, 36 having a discharge flow path 37 (alternatively including the widened flow path in which the tapered/rounded tip of needle 42 extends in the closed position of the valve as shown) configured to discharge a target fluid therethrough; a plunger 38, 40, 41 configured to be rectilinearly movable from a first position at which the plunger 38, 40, 41 closes the discharge flow path 37 to a second position at which the plunger 38, 40, 41 opens the discharge flow path 37; a solenoid 32 configured to provide driving power for moving the plunger 38, 40, 41; and an anti-freezing member 42 (because member 42 reciprocated inside the discharge flow path in conjunction with the reciprocation of the plunger 38, 40, 41 such that the member 42 is structured and functions like the applicant discloses with their anti-freezing member 150/150’/150’’ on pg. 10, lines 20-23) connected to the plunger 38, 40, 41 and configured to restrict freezing of the target fluid in the discharge flow path 37 by moving in the discharge flow path 37 based on a movement of the plunger 38, 40, 41. Regarding claim 2, Matsuda discloses in Fig. 5 that the anti-freezing member 42 is integrated with an end of the plunger 38, 40, 41 such that the anti-freezing member 42 and the plunger 38, 40, 41 form a unitary one-piece structure 38, 40, 41, 42 (at least because all of the structures are contiguously and rigidly fixed together). Regarding claim 5, Matsuda discloses in Fig. 5 that the plunger 38, 40, 41 is positioned at the first position, the anti-freezing member 42 is disposed in the discharge flow path 37, and wherein when the plunger 38, 40, 41 is moved from the first position to the second position, (i) at least a part of the anti-freezing member 42 is extended to an outside of the discharge flow path 37, and (ii) a passing flow path through which the target fluid passes is provided in the discharge flow path 37. Regarding claim 6, Matsuda discloses in Fig. 5 that the discharge flow path 37 has a first length, and the anti-freezing member 42 has a second length equal to or greater than the first length, and wherein when the plunger 38, 40, 41 is moved to the first position, an end of the anti-freezing member 42 is exposed to an outside of the discharge flow path 37. Regarding claim 7, Matsuda discloses in Fig. 5 a proximal end of the anti-freezing member 42 adjacent to the plunger 38, 40, 41 has a first cross-sectional area, and a distal end of the anti-freezing member 42 (on the rounded tip) has a second cross-sectional area different from the first cross-sectional area (on said rounded tip). Regarding claim 8, Matsuda discloses in Fig. 5 that the anti-freezing member 42 has a cross-sectional area (on the rounded tip) that decreases in a direction from the proximal end to the distal end (because the rounded tip provides a section with decreasing cross-sectional area) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pechoux in view of Defenbaugh (US 2,014,314) . Regarding claim 2, alternatively to the structure disclosed by Pechoux, Defenbaugh teaches in Figs. 1-3 a similar lift valve comprising a plunger 19, 20 that selectively closes a discharge flow path, and an anti-freezing member 21 connected to the plunger 19, 20 and configured to move within the discharge flow path, wherein the anti-freezing member 21 is integrated with an end of the plunger 19, 20 such that the anti-freezing member 21 and the plunger 19, 20 form a unitary one-piece structure 18, 19, 20, 21. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plunger and anti-freezing member disclosed by Pechoux to be formed as a unitary one-piece structure, as Defenbaugh teaches, to provide a more durable system as opposed to having the anti-freezing member be removably attached to the plunger, in which case, the attachment could fail or be damage such that the anti-freezing member isn’t properly attached to the plunger to function properly . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pechoux in view of Kingsford et al. (US 2007/0001137) . Regarding claims 3 and 4, Pechoux discloses in Figs. 1-14 that there is a diaphragm 19, but lacks teaching that the diaphragm is provided between the plunger and the discharge flow path, wherein the diaphragm and the anti-freezing member are provided as a unitary one-piece structure. Kingsford teaches in Figs. 1-5 a similar lift valve comprising a diaphragm 50 provided between the plunger 76 and the discharge flow path 38, wherein the diaphragm 50 and the anti-freezing member 42 are provided as a unitary one-piece structure 26. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plunger, diaphragm, and anti-freezing member disclosed by Pechoux so that the diaphragm and anti-freezing member are provided as a unitary one-piece structure attached to the end of the plunger and located between the plunger and the discharge flow path, as Kingsford teaches, to provide a simpler assembly with fewer parts, so assembly is straight-forward, and problems are easy to diagnose and fix . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pechoux in view of Hara (US 4,634,096) . Regarding claim 9, Pechoux discloses in Figs. 1-14 that the solenoid comprises a coil 11 and an elastic member 18 configured to elastically support a rectilinear movement of the plunger 13, 14, 8a (by acting on a piston 17 attached to the plunger 13, 14, 18a), but is silent with regard to other claimed structural details including whether the solenoid comprises: a bobbin around which a coil is wound; a yoke disposed in the bobbin and configured to accommodate the plunger such that the plunger is rectilinearly movable; and an elastic member configured to elastically support a rectilinear movement of the plunger relative to the bobbin. Hara teaches in Fig. 2 that the solenoid comprises: a bobbin 13 around which a coil 15 is wound (col. 2, lines 24-26); a yoke 24 disposed in the bobbin 13 and configured to accommodate the plunger 10 such that the plunger 10 is rectilinearly movable; and an elastic member 19 configured to elastically support a rectilinear movement of the plunger 10 relative to the bobbin 14. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solenoid in the Pechoux to have the coil be wound around a bobbin in which a yoke is disposed and configured to accommodate the reciprocating plunger, such that the rectilinear movement of the plunger is relative to the bobbin, as Hara teaches, to provide a compact solenoid assembly in which the coil is securely retained and protected, and an open path is provided for the reciprocating, coil-actuated plunger. Regarding claim 10, Pechoux discloses in Figs. 1-14 that there is a core 12, but lacks a bobbin as claimed in claim 17, as previously discussed. Hara teaches in Fig. 2 a core 16 disposed in the bobbin 14 and facing an end of the plunger 10. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the core in the combination of Pechoux and Hara be disposed in the bobbin taught by Hara, as Hara teaches, so that the stationary core is fixed inside and relative to the coil to provide consistent actuation of the plunger. Regarding claim 11, Pechoux discloses in Figs. 1-14 that the core 12 has an end that faces the plunger 13, 14, 8, but lacks teaching that the core has an inclined recess on the end that faces the plunger. Hara teaches in Fig. 2 that there is an inclined recess provided at an end of the core 16 that faces the plunger 10 (shaped like the inclined recess 128a disclosed by the applicant on the outer, circumferential surface of the core 128). Hara also teaches that the plunger 10 has an annular tapered surface that corresponds with the tapered surface created by inclined recess on the core 16. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the core in the combination of Pechoux and Hara to have an inclined recess on the end that faces the plunger and a matching, tapered surface on the plunger, as Hara teaches, to increase the efficiency of the attraction force when the plunger is furthest from the core because the ends of the tapered surfaces end up closer to each other compared to if the facing surfaces were flat, and a portion of the plunger can even remain concentric with the core, so the distance between the two structures is less than if the they had flat, facing surfaces. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Jonathan Waddy , whose telephone number is 571-270-3146. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (10:00AM-6:00PM EST). If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. 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. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, 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. /J. W./ Examiner, Art Unit 3753 /CRAIG M SCHNEIDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/187,803 Page 2 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/187,803 Page 3 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/187,803 Page 4 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/187,803 Page 5 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/187,803 Page 6 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/187,803 Page 7 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/187,803 Page 8 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/187,803 Page 9 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/187,803 Page 10 Art Unit: 3753 Application/Control Number: 19/187,803 Page 11 Art Unit: 3753
Prosecution Insights