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 .
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because the cross-sectional views do not include the appropriate hatching as laid out in 37 C.F.R. 1.84 Standards for drawings, (h) Views, (3) Sectional views. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-21 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 1 recites the broad recitation for severe industrial applications, and the claim also recites especially power and nuclear applications which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “a stem” in line 2. It is unclear if this is referring to the rotatable valve operating stem previously introduced in claim 1 or if this is an additional stem.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the body aperture" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the pressure seal bonnet aperture" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the seat assemblies" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “an aperture” in line 2. It is unclear if this is referring to the aperture in claim 1, line 6 or if this is an additional aperture.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the ball shaped structure" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-5, 7, 10, 12-13, and 16-20 are rejected due to being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
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 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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6, 8-9, 14-15, 18, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Bryant (US 2777664).
Bryant teaches:
1. (Original) A top entry ball valve (fig.6) capable of use for severe industrial applications, said top entry valve comprising: a single piece metal body (70); a rotatable metal valve structure (73), said metal valve structure being fitted within said body between metal valve seats (90, 99; col. 4, ll. 42-43 states “The ‘all metal’ sealing units 99 are interposed between the valve body on the opposite sides of the ball 73”) also fitted into said body, said valve seats making metal-to-metal sealing engagement with said metal valve structure (col. 1, ll. 35-36 states “proper sealed relation between metal to metal valve working surfaces”), said metal valve structure having an aperture (74) there-through for passing a fluid flow when in a predetermined open rotational position and for blocking a fluid flow when in a predetermined closed rotational position; said body including a top opening (83) sized to accept entry of the metal valve structure and its associated seats (as seen in fig. 6, the opening is larger than each of the ball 73 and each seat unit 90); a single piece metal bonnet (77) configured for pressure seal connection (via 87, 88) to the top of said body; and a rotatable valve operating stem (76) integral with or operatively connected (at 113) to the top of said metal valve structure so as to rotate the metal valve structure when the stem is rotated.
2. (Original) The top entry valve of claim 1 wherein the pressure seal connection between the body and the bonnet comprises of circular retaining mechanism acting (81, 84) as a barrier to prevent the bonnet and a pressure seal gasket (87 or 88) exiting the valve.
4. (Original) The top entry valve of claim 2 wherein said bonnet and the pressure seal are installed on a side of the body facing an operator (not shown but would be attached at 78, as seen in fig. 6).
6. (Original) The top entry valve of claim 4 wherein the bonnet includes an aperture (aperture in 77 in which 76 is situated) to accept a stem (76) and a stem sealing arrangement (79) comprising a pair of rotor seals (of 79) circumferentially disposed around the rotatable stem (as seen in fig. 6).
8. (Original) The top entry valve of claim 6 where the stem is maintained in a concentric position with the body aperture using encapsulated stem bushing (unlabeled bushing seen in the conventional seal gland 79 around stem 76, as well as 109, 113 around the lower portion of 76; these all assist in maintaining the concentric position of the stem within the bonnet aperture, which is within the body aperture).
9. (Original) The top entry valve of claim 6 where the stem is maintained in a concentric position with the pressure seal bonnet aperture using encapsulated stem bushing (unlabeled bushing seen in the conventional seal gland 79 around stem 76, as well as 109, 113 around the lower portion of 76; these all assist in maintaining the concentric position of the stem within the bonnet aperture).
14. (Original) The top entry valve of claim 1 wherein said metal valve structure is a ball- shaped structure (73, as seen in fig. 6) having an aperture (74) there-through for passing a valved process fluid.
15. (Original) The top entry valve of claim 1 wherein said ball shaped structure is a floating ball connected at a top side with a separately formed stem structure (as seen in fig. 6, the stem end 113 is inserted into a recess of ball 73).
18. (Currently Amended) The top entry valve of claim 1 including internal movable members (93) spring-loaded (via 94) towards the center of the valve.
19. (Original) The top entry valve of claim 1 wherein said body and the bonnet are retained together with a pressure seal arrangement (88, 87) and pressure seal gasket retainer (84 or 81).
22. (Original) A method of making a top entry valve (fig. 6) for power and nuclear industrial applications, said method comprising: providing a single piece metal valve body (70) having a top opening (83); providing a rotatable metal valve structure (73) sized to fit through said top opening of the valve body (col. 5, ll. 6-12 states “To facilitate removal of the ball its lower end is flattened as indicated at 114. Upon removal of the valve stem and the bonnet, the ball can be turned through 90˚ to bring the flattened face 114 at right angles to the axis of the passages 71 and 72, and thereafter the ball can be moved through the bore 83.”), fitting said metal valve structure within said body through said top opening between metal valve seats (99) also fitted into said body through said top opening (the seat arrangements 90 are similarly too large to fit through the side openings and would need to be inserted through the top), said valve seats making metal-to-metal sealing engagement with said metal valve structure (col. 4, ll. 42-43 states “The ‘all metal’ sealing units 99 are interposed between the valve body on the opposite sides of the ball 73”), said metal valve structure having an aperture (74) there-through for passing a fluid flow when in a predetermined open rotational position and for blocking a fluid flow when in a predetermined closed rotational position; providing a single piece metal bonnet (77) configured for pressure seal connection (via 87, 88) to the top of said body; providing aperture in the body or the bonnet (aperture in 77 through which 76 extends); fitting a rotatable valve operating stem (76), integral with or operatively connectable to the top of said metal valve structure (connected at 113), within rotator seals (79) about its circumference, through the body or the bonnet so as to rotate the metal valve structure when the stem is rotated (col. 4, ll. 17-26 states “Ball 73 has a loose driving connection with the inner end of the operating stem 76. This stem extends upwardly through the bonnet 77, and at its outer end 78 can be squared or otherwise formed for attachment of a wrench or handle. Suitable means such as a conventional packing gland 79 can be provided for establishing a seal between the stem 76 and the bonnet 77. Suitable means is also provided for holding the bonnet within the body, and for establishing a seal which will withstand relatively high fluid pressures.”).
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bryant (US 2777664).
Bryant discloses the invention as essentially claimed, except for wherein said ball shaped structure and the stem structure are combined together into a single unitary structure; or wherein the metal valve structure is a rotatable cylindrical or conical plug structure.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to form said ball shaped structure and the stem structure combined together into a single unitary structure, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1893).
It would also have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Bryant such that the valve structure is a rotatable cylindrical/conical plug structure, since the Examiner takes Official Notice of facts by asserting that the valve structure is alternatively an equivalent rotatable spherical/cylindrical/conical plug structure, is old and well known in the art and of notorious character and serves only to "fill in the gaps" which might exist in the evidentiary showing made by the examiner to support a particular ground of rejection MPEP 2144.03.
Claims 3, 5, 7, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bryant (US 2777664) in view of Muchow (US 4226263).
Bryant discloses the invention as essentially claimed, except for wherein said bonnet and the pressure seal are installed on a side of the body opposite to an operator; wherein the body includes an aperture on the opposite side of the top opening to accept a stem and a stem sealing arrangement comprising a pair of rotor seals circumferentially disposed around the rotatable stem; wherein the valve is configured to enable the operator to have direct access to replace the complete metal valve structure, its associated seats and the stem without removing an actuator or bracket of the valve; and wherein said ball shaped structure includes trunnion mounting cylindrical portions at opposite top and bottom sides interfacing between the ball and the body.
Muchow teaches a related ball valve, wherein said bonnet and the pressure seal are installed on a side of the body opposite to an operator (as seen in fig. 3, bonnet has aperture 33 in which stem/trunnion 33 extends); wherein the body includes an aperture on the opposite side of the top opening to accept a stem and a stem sealing arrangement comprising a pair of rotor seals (32) circumferentially disposed around the rotatable stem (seen in fig. 3); wherein the valve is configured to enable the operator to have direct access to replace the complete metal valve structure, its associated seats and the stem without removing an actuator of the valve (as seen in fig. 3, the actuator is on the opposite side and not affected by the bonnet having 33); and wherein said ball shaped structure includes trunnion mounting cylindrical portions (17 and 31) at opposite top and bottom sides interfacing between the ball and the body (as seen in fig. 3), for the purpose of an alternate equivalent arrangement of the location of the bonnet to provide access to the ball, with this arrangement making the actuator independent of the bonnet, in a manner yielding predictable results.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Bryant, wherein said bonnet and the pressure seal are installed on a side of the body opposite to an operator; wherein the body includes an aperture on the opposite side of the top opening to accept a stem and a stem sealing arrangement comprising a pair of rotor seals circumferentially disposed around the rotatable stem; wherein the valve is configured to enable the operator to have direct access to replace the complete metal valve structure, its associated seats and the stem without removing an actuator or bracket of the valve; and wherein said ball shaped structure includes trunnion mounting cylindrical portions at opposite top and bottom sides interfacing between the ball and the body, as suggested by Muchow, for the purpose of an alternate equivalent arrangement of the location of the bonnet to provide access to the ball, with this arrangement making the actuator independent of the bonnet, in a manner yielding predictable results.
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bryant (US 2777664) in view of Shah et al. (US 20170299070).
Bryant discloses the invention as essentially claimed, except for where the seat assemblies have an adjustable total length using external hydraulic or pneumatic pressure, or vacuum, or threads between subcomponents of the seat assembly, or cam profiles between subcomponents of the seat assembly, wherein an adjustment is completed when the pressure seal bonnet is not physically attached to the body; where the metal valve structure, upper and lower trunnion bearings can be assembled in between the two seat assemblies when the seat assemblies total length is reduced; and where the metal valve structure and the seats are configured to act as sealing barrier when the seat assemblies total length is increased.
Shah teaches a related top entry ball valve, where the seat assemblies (11, 13) have an adjustable total length using external hydraulic or pneumatic pressure, or vacuum, or threads between subcomponents of the seat assembly, or cam profiles between subcomponents of the seat assembly (cam 55 in guide groove 47, seen in fig. 11), wherein an adjustment is completed when the pressure seal bonnet is not physically attached to the body (seen in figs. 6 and 10); where the metal valve structure, upper and lower trunnion bearings can be assembled in between the two seat assemblies when the seat assemblies total length is reduced (reduction away from ball, having an upper and lower trunnion, is seen in fig. 6); and where the metal valve structure and the seats are configured to act as sealing barrier when the seat assemblies total length is increased (as seen in fig. 5), for the purpose of providing for safe in-line maintenance [0019] which does not require additional moving parts to be included in the ball member [0023], which is free from the danger of losing any external detachable part [0024], and which can be actuated using a standard and simple specific tool [0025]-[0026].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Bryant, such that the seat assemblies have an adjustable total length using external hydraulic or pneumatic pressure, or vacuum, or threads between subcomponents of the seat assembly, or cam profiles between subcomponents of the seat assembly, wherein an adjustment is completed when the pressure seal bonnet is not physically attached to the body; where the metal valve structure, upper and lower trunnion bearings can be assembled in between the two seat assemblies when the seat assemblies total length is reduced; and where the metal valve structure and the seats are configured to act as sealing barrier when the seat assemblies total length is increased, as taught by Shah, for the purpose of providing for safe in-line maintenance, which does not require additional moving parts to be included in the ball member, which is free from the danger of losing any external detachable part, and which can be actuated using a standard and simple specific tool.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bryant (US 2777664) in view of Sapija et al. (US 20220018464).
Bryant discloses the invention as essentially claimed, except for wherein one or more wetted surfaces of the body and bonnet are protected with corrosion resistant sleeves.
Sapija et al. teach a related ball valve except for wherein one or more wetted surfaces of the body and bonnet are protected with corrosion resistant sleeves, for the purpose of protecting the wetted surfaces from harsh or corrosive environments and operating conditions [0049], thereby preventing premature wear and increasing durability, in a manner yielding predictable results.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Bryant, such that one or more wetted surfaces of the body and bonnet are protected with corrosion resistant sleeves, as taught by Sapija et al., , for the purpose of protecting the wetted surfaces from harsh or corrosive environments and operating conditions depending on the protection required for the particular application, thereby preventing premature wear and increasing durability, in a manner yielding predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 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. US 20170299072 and US 20160356384 each disclose related top entry ball valves having means for displacing the seats for easier installation. US 20120080631 and WO 2015030122 each disclose related ball valves having top and bottom bonnets, with one being used for entry of the ball during installation/removal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARINA TIETJEN, whose telephone number is 571-270-5422. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (10:30AM-7:00PM CST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors can be reached by phone. Tom Barrett can be reached at 571-272-4746, Ken Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881, and Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MARINA A TIETJEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights