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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/02/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Please note that USPN 4217921 has been crossed-out as the name provided was not accurate. The reference has been considered and is cited in the action.
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.
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: “fastening means” in claim 11.
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 Objections
Claims 1-16 are objected to because of the following informalities: claim 1, line 3, “at its first” should read --at a first--; claim 1, line 4, “the housing side” should read --a housing side--; claim 1, line 4, “its lateral” should read --a lateral--; claim 1, line 14, “the internal pressure” should read --an internal pressure--; claim 1, line 16, “the radial direction” should read --a radial direction--; claim 1, line 17, “outer surfaces” should read --outer surface--; claim 2, line 2, “its second base” should read --a second base--; claim 2, line 3, “the area” should read --an area--; claim 3, line 2, “its second base” should read --a second base--; claim 5, line 5, “the area” should read --an area--; claim 11, line 2, “the area” should read --an area--; claim 11, line 3, “it” should read --the base body--; claim 15, line 3, “its lateral” should read --a lateral--. Appropriate correction is required. Claims not specifically referenced are objected to as being dependent on an objected to base claim.
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 1-16 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.
Regarding claim 1, lines 9-10, the limitation “is in contact with the housing and the lateral surface of the housing” is unclear and indefinite. It is unclear and indefinite how the sealing region is in contact with the housing twice. Furthermore, a lateral surface of the housing has not been claimed. It appears that the claim should read --is in contact with the housing and the lateral surface of the base body--.
Regarding claims 5, and 10, the phrase "in particular" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Regarding claim 8, the limitation “comprise substantially the same distance” is unclear and indefinite. It is unclear and indefinite how openings can comprise a distance. For examination purposes, the limitation will be read as --and are at the same distance--.
Regarding claim 10, the limitation “a threshold value” in line 9 is unclear and indefinite. It is unclear and indefinite whether a second threshold value is being claim different from the threshold value in claim 1. For examination purposes, the limitation will be read as the same threshold value.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "a second base surface" in 3. 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 § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 7-16, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gidner (U.S. Patent No. 4,217,921).
Regarding claim 1, Gidner discloses:
A pressure equalization device for a housing (101), comprising
a base body (109) having an inner surface and an outer surface, the base body (109) being at least partially configured as a hollow cylinder, wherein the base body (109) comprises, at a first base surface, a gas passage opening on a housing side, and at a lateral surface, at least one gas pressure relief opening 110 (Col. 3, line 58 - Col. 4, line 28; see Figure 1)
a housing seal (113, 114) arranged on the outer surface of the base body (109) in a circumferential direction and comprising a first sealing region (114) and a second sealing region 113 (Col. 3, line 58 - Col. 4, line 28; see Figure 1)
wherein the first sealing region (114) of the housing seal (113, 114), in a state in which the pressure equalization device is mounted in the housing (101), is in contact with the housing (101) and the lateral surface of the base body (109) and seals the housing (101) with respect to the pressure equalization device and the second sealing region (113) completely covers the gas pressure relief opening 110 (Col. 3, line 58 - Col. 4, line 28; see Figure 1)
wherein the second sealing region (113) of the housing seal (113, 114), when a pressure difference between the internal pressure on the inner surface of the base body (109) and the external pressure on the outer surface of the base body (109) exceeds a threshold value, is elastically deformable outward in the radial direction and thereby providing a flow-conducting connection between the inner surface and outer surfaces through the gas pressure relief opening 110 (Col. 3, line 58 - Col. 4, line 28; see Figures 1 and 2)
Regarding claim 7, Gidner discloses:
wherein the lateral surface of the base body (109) comprises a plurality of gas pressure relief openings (110) extending in the circumferential direction, all of which are covered by the second sealing region (113) of the housing seal 113, 114 (Col. 3, line 58 - Col. 4, line 28; see Figure 1)
Regarding claim 8, Gidner discloses:
wherein the gas pressure relief openings (110) are slot-shaped and are at a same distance from the first base surface (see Figure 1)
Regarding claim 9, Gidner discloses:
wherein the housing seal (113, 114) is ring-shaped and has an L-shaped cross-section (Col. 3, line 58 - Col. 4, line 28; see Figure 1)
Regarding claim 10, Gidner discloses:
wherein a first, shorter, leg of the housing seal (113, 114) forms the first sealing region (114), which is in contact with a circumferential retaining projection attached to the lateral surface of the base body 109 (Col. 3, line 58 - Col. 4, line 28; see Figure 1)
wherein a second, longer, leg of the housing seal (113, 114) forms the second sealing region (113), which is in contact with the lateral surface of the base body (109) and completely covers the gas pressure relief opening (110) and which tilts relative to the first leg when the pressure difference between the inner pressure on the inner surface of the base body (109) and the outer pressure on the outer surface of the base body (109) exceeds the threshold value (Col. 3, line 58 - Col. 4, line 28; see Figures 1 and 2)
Regarding claim 11, Gidner discloses:
wherein fastening means (per the 112f interpretation, shown as element 30 in applicant’s figure 1 and described in paragraph 0018; functional equivalent 107 in Gidner) are arranged in an area of the first base surface of the base body (109) for detachably fastening the base body (109) in or to an installation opening of the housing 101
Regarding claim 12, Gidner discloses:
wherein the fastening means (107) are configured as a screw or snap connection (Col. 3, lines 58 - Col. 4, line 15)
Regarding claim 13, Gidner discloses:
wherein the base body (109) is at least partially configured as a straight hollow cylinder with a circular cross-section (Col. 3, line 58 - Col. 4, line 28; see Figure 1)
Regarding claim 14, Gidner discloses:
a protective body (117) surrounding the housing seal (113, 114) and at least partially surrounding the base body (109) in the circumferential direction (Col. 4, lines 29-53; see Figure 1)
Regarding claim 15, Gidner discloses:
wherein the protective body (117) is ring-shaped and comprises at least one further gas pressure relief opening (121) in a lateral surface and/or between the lateral surface and a second base surface (Col. 4, lines 29-53; see Figure 1)
Regarding claim 16, Gidner discloses:
A housing (101) comprising a pressure equalization device according to claim 1 (see rejection above)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Stradella (U.S. 2017/0259895) discloses a pressure equalizing device for a housing comprising a base body having an inner and outer surface and having openings on a lateral surface that are closed by a first sealing region of a seal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELSEY E CARY whose telephone number is (571)272-9427. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am-5:30pm.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached at (571)-272-3607 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.
/KELSEY E CARY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights