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 .
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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 23 May 2025, 13 Feb 2026 and 17 Feb 2026 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
On the IDS dated 13 Feb 2026 foreign reference #4 was misnumbered and therefore crossed out. The correct number was provided on the IDS dated 17 Feb 2026.
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 1-20 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 limitation "the opening" in lines 8 and 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the corresponding through hole" in line 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3 and 11 recite the limitation "the channel" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3 and 11 recite the limitation "the through hole" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 7 and 15 recite the limitation "the limiting part" in lines 3 and 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 7 and 15 recite the limitation "the limiting column" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 8 and 16 recite the limitation "the limiting column" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims not specifically referenced are rejected as being dependent on a rejected base claim.
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) 1-2, 10 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qu et al (US 20240035581) in view of Qu et al (hereinafter Qu CN; CN 115199778 provided by Applicant on the IDS dated 13 Feb 2026).
Regarding Claim 1, Qu et al disclose a multi-channel electromagnetic valve (Figures 1-4). The valve comprising:
a valve core assembly (20 generally), a valve seat assembly (123 and 13), a sealing unit (30), and a power unit (800),
wherein the valve seat assembly (123 and 13) comprises a valve seat (123) and a valve cover (13), the valve seat is a rotary member (Figure 2 in which 23 rotates), two ends of the valve seat are respectively provided with two openings to form a first accommodating cavity (Figure 2; and covered by 13 and 124 in Figure 3), the valve cover (13) covers one of the two openings (Figure 4), and each of the valve core assembly (20 generally) and the sealing unit (30) is located in the first accommodating cavity (Figure 2);
the valve core assembly (20 generally) comprises a valve core body (23, 24a and 24b), a shape of an outer wall of the valve core body is consistent with a shape of the opening (Figure 2), the valve core body (23, 24a and 24b) is provided with a plurality of channels extending along an axial direction of the valve seat (Figure 6), the plurality of channels are distributed at intervals along a circumferential direction of the valve core body (Figure 6);
the sealing unit (30) comprises a sealing ring (30), a shape of the sealing ring matches the shape of the opening of the valve seat (Figure 2), the sealing ring is provided with a plurality of through holes (Figure 4), the sealing ring is connected to an opening on a side of the valve seat facing away from the valve cover (Figure 4 away from 13), and the valve core body (23, 24a and 24b) is abutted against the sealing ring (Figure 2); and
the power unit (800) is connected to drive the valve core body to rotate relative to the valve seat (Figure 2), so that at least one channel in the valve core body and the corresponding through hole in the sealing ring are opposite to form a circulation passage for a cooling liquid1 (¶ 37),
but fails to expressly disclose where the multi-channel electromagnetic valve is spring-loaded, the valve core assembly comprising a stop member and the stop member is connected to the valve core body, the sealing unit comprises an elastic member, the elastic member is connected between the valve core body and the stop member, the valve core body is abutted against the sealing ring under an action of the elastic member; the power unit and the stop member are connected to drive the valve core body to rotate relative to the valve seat.
Qu CN teaches a spring loaded (via 20; Figure 2) multi-channel electromagnetic valve (Figure 2) with a valve core assembly (20 and 40) comprising a stop member (40), with the stop member connected to the valve core body (20 via 216),
the sealing unit comprises an elastic member (502) and the valve core body (20) is abutted against the sealing ring (60) under an action of the elastic member (Figure 2),
the elastic member is connected between the valve core body and the stop member (Figure 2 between 21 and 40), the valve core body is abutted against the sealing ring under an action of the elastic member (against 60 downward in the orientation of Figure 2); the power unit (800 of Qu et al) and the stop member (40) are connected to drive the valve core body to rotate relative to the valve seat (Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valve of Qu et al with the stop member and elastic member as taught by Qu CN for the advantage of combining prior art elements according to known methods (the stop member and elastic member of Qu CN with the valve of Qu et al) to yield predictable results (to secure the valve core body within the valve seat in a biased manner).
Regarding Claim 2, Qu CN teaches where the elastic member is a spring (Figure 4 shows a wave spring), the spring extends along an axial direction of the valve core body (Figure 4 along 22), and a first end of the spring is connected to a side of the valve core body facing away from the channel (the top end of the orientation of Figure 2), and a second end of the spring is connected to the stop member (to 40 shown in Figure 2).
Regarding Claims 10 and 18, Qu et al disclose where the power unit (800) comprises a second housing (Figure 1), a transmission gear unit (the gear train of ¶ 39), and a motor (¶ 39), the transmission gear unit and the motor are connected to the second housing (Figure 1), the second housing is connected to the valve seat assembly (Figure 1 via 20), and the transmission gear unit is connected to the stop member (Figure 1 via 20).
Claim(s) 3-9, 11-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious over Qu et al (US 20240035581) in view of Qu et al (hereinafter Qu CN; CN 115199778 provided by Applicant on the IDS dated 13 Feb 2026).
Regarding Claims 3 and 11, Qu et al disclose wherein the plurality of through holes have a fan-shaped cross-section (fanned around 231); and
the channel is provided with a plurality of channel ports, shapes of the plurality of channel ports are all fan-shaped (Figure 4)
but fails to expressly disclose where an area of each channel port is smaller than an area of the through hole.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the areas of each channel port of Qu et al such that an area of each channel port is smaller than an area of the through hole since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component, since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentable distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). MPEP § 2144.05(II)(A): Smith v. Nichols, 88 U.S. 112, 118-19 (1874) (a change in form, proportions, or degree "will not sustain a patent"); In re Williams, 36 F.2d 436, 438 (CCPA 1929) ("It is a settled principle of law that a mere carrying forward of an original patented conception involving only change of form, proportions, or degree, or the substitution of equivalents doing the same thing as the original invention, by substantially the same means, is not such an invention as will sustain a patent, even though the changes of the kind may produce better results than prior inventions."). In the instant case, the channels of Qu et al would not operate differently with the claimed channel dimensions since the channels of Qu et al function in the same manner as the inventor’s disclosed channels.
Regarding Claims 4 and 12, Qu et al disclose where the plurality of through holes are distributed at intervals along a circumferential direction of the sealing ring (31 of 30 in Figure 4); and parts of the through holes and the channels are relatively distributed (Figure 4).
Regarding Claims 5 and 13, Qu et al disclose where the valve core body (23, 24a and 24b) comprises a first end cover (24a), a valve core housing (23), and a second end cover (24b), and the first end cover, the valve core housing, and the second end cover are sequentially connected along an axis of the valve seat and form a second accommodating cavity (Figure 4).
Regarding Claims 6 and 14, Qu et al disclose where the plurality of channels are located in the second accommodating cavity (within 23), and two ends of the plurality of channels are respectively connected to the plurality of channel ports (26; Figure 2), and the plurality of channel ports are located in the first end cover (in 24a).
Regarding Claims 7 and 15, Qu et al disclose all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose where a center of the valve core housing is provided with a plurality of limiting parts that extend along an axial direction of the valve core housing, and a side of the limiting part facing away from the first end cover is provided with an opening; and
the stop member comprises a plurality of limiting columns that extend along the axial direction of the valve core body, and the limiting column is inserted into the limiting part.
Qu CN teaches where a center of the valve core housing is provided with a plurality of limiting parts that extend along an axial direction of the valve core housing (216),
But fails to expressly teach where a side of the limiting part facing away from the first end cover is provided with an opening; and
the stop member comprises a plurality of limiting columns that extend along the axial direction of the valve core body, and the limiting column is inserted into the limiting part.
However, Qu CN does teach where the stop member has a limiting part provided with an opening (410) and the valve core body having a plurality of limiting columns (216) that extend along the axial direction of the valve core body, and the limiting column is inserted into the limiting part (Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the location of the limiting openings to be on the valve core body and the limiting columns to be on the stop member since rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to remove material from the valve core body to make it less bulky.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valve of Qu et al with the limiting parts as taught by Qu CN for the advantage of combining prior art elements according to known methods (the limiting parts of Qu CN with the valve of Qu et al) to yield predictable results (to secure the valve core body within the valve seat in a biased manner).
Regarding Claims 8 and 16, Qu CN teaches where the stop member (40) further comprises a first housing (flange 41) and a transmission member (the core through which 22 extends), the limiting column and the transmission member are respectively connected to opposite sides of the first housing (Figure 2), the first housing and the second end cover are connected and form a third accommodating cavity (within which spring sits), and the transmission member is connected to the power unit (via 22).
Regarding Claims 9 and 17, Qu CN teach where the elastic member is located in the third accommodating cavity (Figure 2), and two ends of the elastic member are respectively abutted against the second end cover and the first housing (Figure 2).
Regarding Claims 19 and 20, Qu et al disclose where the power unit (800) comprises a second housing (Figure 1), a transmission gear unit (the gear train of ¶ 39), and a motor (¶ 39), the transmission gear unit and the motor are connected to the second housing (Figure 1), the second housing is connected to the valve seat assembly (Figure 1 via 20), and the transmission gear unit is connected to the stop member (Figure 1 via 20).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE GARDNER whose telephone number is (571)270-0144. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM-4PM EST.
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, KENNETH RINEHART (571-272-4881) or CRAIG SCHNEIDER (571-272-3607) can be reached by telephone. 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.
/NICOLE GARDNER/
Examiner, Art Unit 3753
1 The recitation of the actual fluid handled has been given no patentable weight in the apparatus claims, MPEP 2115.
Prosecution Insights