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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
---Para. [0066] recite the following:
[0066] As illustrated, the body 12 and/or the end portion 20 that defines a cylindrical or generally cylindrical body 12 has a dimension that is slightly less than a diameter of the conduit or hose 52 or opening 54 in wall 56 such that the assembly 10 can be inserted slide therein in the direction of arrow 70 and then the outermost edge of the outwardly flared portion 22 will engage surface 72 of the conduit or hose 52 or opening 54 in wall 56 in order to retain the assembly 10 in its desired location withing the conduit or hose 52 or opening 54 in wall 56 as fluid flow pressures on opposite sides of the assembly vary thus preventing it from being removed from the conduit or hose 52 or opening 54 in wall 56 in a direction opposite to arrow 70. In other words, the outermost edge of the outwardly flared portion 22 will allow for movement in the direction of arrow 70 but prevent movement in a direction opposite to arrow 70 once the assembly is in it desired location within conduit or hose 52 or opening 54 in wall 56.
Note the use of the word “withing” (a slender-bodied marine fish) when it should be “within” (inside something).
The Office suggests that Para. [0066] is amended as follows:
[0066] As illustrated, the body 12 and/or the end portion 20 that defines a cylindrical or generally cylindrical body 12 has a dimension that is slightly less than a diameter of the conduit or hose 52 or opening 54 in wall 56 such that the assembly 10 can be inserted slide therein in the direction of arrow 70 and then the outermost edge of the outwardly flared portion 22 will engage surface 72 of the conduit or hose 52 or opening 54 in wall 56 in order to retain the assembly 10 in its desired location within the conduit or hose 52 or opening 54 in wall 56 as fluid flow pressures on opposite sides of the assembly vary thus preventing it from being removed from the conduit or hose 52 or opening 54 in wall 56 in a direction opposite to arrow 70. In other words, the outermost edge of the outwardly flared portion 22 will allow for movement in the direction of arrow 70 but prevent movement in a direction opposite to arrow 70 once the assembly is in it desired location within conduit or hose 52 or opening 54 in wall 56.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
---Claim 20 recites the following:
20. A method for forming an assembly for limiting fluid flow in a conduit, comprising: inserting a fluid flow restricting member into an inner cavity of a body of the assembly; crimping a wall of the body to define a crimp that extends into the inner cavity in order to retain the fluid flow restricting member in the inner cavity of the body; flaring the wall of the body to define an outwardly flared portion that extends away from the inner cavity, the flaring step being performed after the crimping step, the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity .
Notice the spacing at the final word of the claim.
The Office suggests that claim 20 is amended as follows:
20. A method for forming an assembly for limiting fluid flow in a conduit, comprising: inserting a fluid flow restricting member into an inner cavity of a body of the assembly; crimping a wall of the body to define a crimp that extends into the inner cavity in order to retain the fluid flow restricting member in the inner cavity of the body; flaring the wall of the body to define an outwardly flared portion that extends away from the inner cavity, the flaring step being performed after the crimping step, the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity. [[.]]
Appropriate correction is required.
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:
---“fluid flow restricting member” in claim 1 and 20 and applicable dependent claims.
---"biasing member” in claims 8 and 19 and applicable dependent claims.
Notice that these limitations uses generic placeholders “member” that is coupled with the functional language “fluid flow restricting” / “biasing” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-8, 11-12, 16-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venable US-6182363 in view of Hachiro US-4295412.
Regarding claims 1-8, 11-12 and 16-18, Venable US-6182363 teaches in Figs. 2-4 (see at least Figs. 2 and 4) of:
An assembly (poppet valve assembly 62 of Venable) for limiting fluid flow in a conduit (see the conduit formed by spool 160 of Venable), comprising: a body (housing 70 of Venable) defining an inner cavity (chamber 72 of Venable), the body having a wall portion (side wall 74 of Venable) that extends from an end portion of the body (end wall 78 of Venable), the wall portion and the end portion defining the inner cavity, an open end of the body (opposite end portion 84 of Venable), the open end being opposite to the end portion of the body, the wall portion having a crimp (see the crimped portion near the second end 84 of Venable wherein the crimp aids in fixing the spring stop 120 to the housing 70), the crimp extends towards the inner cavity; and a fluid flow restricting member (poppet valve member 100) retained within the inner cavity of the body, wherein the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity and the crimp prevents the fluid flow restricting member from being removed from the inner cavity (see at least Figs. 3-4 of Venable). Notice that Venable fails to disclose the limitation of an outwardly fared portion as claimed. However, such a structure is well-known in the art.
Hachiro US-4295412 teaches in Figs. 1-6 (see at least Figs. 1-2 and 4) of a spring biased check valve assembly V comprising a body 2 with an end portion (the upstream end) and an opposite open-end portion (the downstream end) wherein a spring biased valve member 6 within the body allows fluid to flow in one direction. The valve assembly V is mounted to a conduit/hose 1 and secured to the conduit via an outwardly flared portion 5 of the body 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was effectively filed to modify the body of the device of Venable to include an outwardly flared portion 5 similar to the one as taught by Hachiro since such a modification is a known and simple method for securing check valves within conduits allowing the valve assembly of Venable to be capable of coupling to a conduit/hose similar to the one as taught by Hachiro.
As such, the device of the combination of Venable US-6182363 in view of Hachiro US-4295412 teaches the limitations of:
---Claim 1. An assembly (poppet valve assembly 62 of Venable as modified by Hachiro) for limiting fluid flow in a conduit (hose 1 of Hachiro), comprising: a body (housing 70 of Venable as modified by Hachiro) defining an inner cavity (chamber 72 of Venable), the body having a wall portion (side wall 74 of Venable) that extends from an end portion of the body (end wall 78 of Venable), the wall portion and the end portion defining the inner cavity, the wall portion having an outwardly flared portion (see the outward flared portion 5 as taught by Hachiro) that extends away from the inner cavity at an open end of the body (opposite end portion 84 of Venable), the open end being opposite to the end portion of the body, the wall portion having a crimp (see the crimped portion near the second end 84 of Venable wherein the crimp aids in fixing the spring stop 120 to the housing 70) proximate to the outwardly flared portion, the crimp extends towards the inner cavity; and a fluid flow restricting member (poppet valve member 100) retained within the inner cavity of the body, wherein the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity and the crimp prevents the fluid flow restricting member from being removed from the inner cavity (see at least Figs. 3-4 of Venable).
---Claim 2. The assembly as in claim 1, wherein the body is a cylindrical member, the wall portion having an inner diameter defining the inner cavity and an outer diameter defining an outer periphery of the body, the outwardly flared portion defining an outermost dimension of the outer diameter and the crimp defining an innermost dimension of the inner diameter (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro).
---Claim 3. The assembly as in claim 2, wherein the outwardly flared portion and the crimp are formed in the body after the fluid flow restricting member is inserted into the inner cavity (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro, it is further noted that this limitation is a Product-by-Process limitation; the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product in the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process (see MPEP 2113)).
---Claim 4. The assembly as in claim 2, wherein the crimp extends completely about the inner diameter and the outwardly flared portion extends completely about the outer diameter (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro).
---Claim 5. The assembly as in claim 1, wherein the fluid flow restricting member is movably retained within the inner cavity of the body for movement between a first position (the closed position of the valve) where the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity and at least a second position (the opened position of the valve) where fluid flow through the inner cavity is greater than when the fluid flow restricting member is in the first position and the crimp defines a limit of movement of the fluid flow restricting member away from the first position (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro, notice that the crimp in Venable fixes the spring stop 120 which in turn limits the movement of the poppet 100 and spring 110).
---Claim 6. The assembly as in claim 1, wherein the fluid flow restricting member is movably retained within the inner cavity of the body for movement between a first position (the closed position of the valve) where the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity and at least a second position (the opened position of the valve) where fluid flow through the inner cavity is greater than when the fluid flow restricting member is in the first position and the assembly further comprising a stop member (spring stop 120 of Venable) located between the crimp and the fluid flow restricting member, the stop member defining a limit of movement of the fluid flow restricting member away from the first position (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro, notice that the crimp in Venable fixes the spring stop 120 which in turn limits the movement of the poppet 100 and spring 110).
---Claim 7. The assembly as in claim 1, wherein the fluid flow restricting member is movably retained within the inner cavity of the body for movement between a first position (the closed position of the valve) where the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity and at least a second position (the opened position of the valve) where fluid flow through the inner cavity is greater than when the fluid flow restricting member is in the first position and the crimp defines the second position of the fluid flow restricting member (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro, notice that the crimp in Venable fixes the spring stop 120 which in turn limits the movement of the poppet 100 and spring 110).
---Claim 8. The assembly as in claim 1, wherein the fluid flow restricting member is movably retained within the inner cavity of the body for movement between a first position (the closed position of the valve) where the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity and at least a second position (the open position of the valve) where fluid flow through the inner cavity is greater than when the fluid flow restricting member is in the first position and the assembly further comprising: a biasing member (spring 110 of Venable) contacting and retaining the fluid flow restricting member in the first position; and a stop member (spring stop 120 of Venable) located between the crimp and the biasing member, the stop member providing a reaction surface (end face 122 of Venable) for the biasing member and the crimp retaining the stop member, the biasing member and the fluid flow restricting member in the inner cavity (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro, notice that the crimp in Venable fixes the spring stop 120 which in turn limits the movement of the poppet 100 and spring 110).
---Claim 11. The assembly as in claim 1, wherein the fluid flow restricting member is movably retained within the inner cavity of the body for movement between a first position (the closed valve position) where the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity and at least a second position (the opened valve position) where fluid flow through the inner cavity is greater than when the fluid flow restricting member is in the first position (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro).
---Claim 12. The assembly as in claim 11, wherein the assembly further comprises: a stop member (spring stop 120 of Venable) located between the crimp and the fluid flow restricting member, the stop member providing a reaction surface (end face 122 of Venable) for the fluid flow restricting member and the crimp retaining the stop member and the fluid flow restricting member in the inner cavity (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro, notice that the crimp in Venable fixes the spring stop 120 which in turn limits the movement of the poppet 100 and spring 110).
---Claim 16. The assembly as in claim 2, wherein an inner diameter of the conduit is less than the outermost dimension of the outer diameter such that the outwardly flared portion retains the assembly in the conduit by frictionally engaging an inner surface of the inner diameter of the conduit when the assembly is inserted into the conduit (see at least Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro).
---Claim 17. The assembly as in claim 1, wherein the outwardly flared portion is located at a distal end of the body (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro).
---Claim 18. The assembly as in claim 1, wherein the body is a cylindrical member, the wall portion having a first inner diameter ID-1 defining the inner cavity and a first outer diameter OD-1 defining an outer periphery of the body, the outwardly flared portion defining a second outer diameter OD-2 defining an outermost diameter of the body and the crimp defining a second inner diameter ID-2 defining an innermost diameter of the inner cavity, the first inner diameter ID-1 being greater than the second inner diameter ID-2 and the first outer diameter OD-1 being less than the second outer diameter OD-2 (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro).
Regarding claim 20, in making and/or using the device of the combination of Venable US-6182363 in view of Hachiro US-4295412, the device of the combination teaches the limitations of:
A method for forming an assembly (poppet valve assembly 62 of Venable as modified by Hachiro) for limiting fluid flow in a conduit (hose 1 of Hachiro), comprising: inserting a fluid flow restricting member (poppet valve member 100) into an inner cavity (chamber 72 of Venable) of a body (housing 70 of Venable as modified by Hachiro) of the assembly; crimping a wall of the body to define a crimp (see the crimped portion near the second end 84 of Venable wherein the crimp aids in fixing the spring stop 120 to the housing 70) that extends into the inner cavity in order to retain the fluid flow restricting member in the inner cavity of the body (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro, notice that the crimp in Venable fixes the spring stop 120 which in turn limits the movement of the poppet 100 and spring 110); flaring the wall of the body to define an outwardly flared portion (see the outward flared portion 5 as taught by Hachiro) that extends away from the inner cavity, the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity (see at least Figs. 3-4 of Venable). Notice that the device of the combination of Venable in view of Hachiro fails to explicitly disclose the limitation of “the flaring step being performed after the crimping step”. However, one of ordinary skill in the art can recognize that there are only three possible options with regards to the timing between the flaring step and the crimping step. Either: A) the flaring step is performed AFTER the crimping step (as claimed); or B) the flaring step is performed BEFORE the crimping step; or C) the flaring step is performed SIMULTANEOUSLY-WITH the crimping step with all three having reasonable expectation of success since these are well-known manufacturing techniques for providing the crimp as taught by Venable and the outward flare as taught by Hachiro. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was effectively filed to modify the method of the device of the combination so that the flaring step is performed after the crimping step since there are only three possible options [either: a) the flaring step is performed AFTER the crimping step as claimed; or b) the flaring step is performed BEFORE the crimping step; or c) the flaring step is performed SIMULTANEOUSLY-WITH the crimping step] with all three having reasonable expectation of success since these are well-known manufacturing techniques for providing the crimp as taught by Venable and the outward flare as taught by Hachiro.
As such, in making and/or using the modified device of the combination of Venable US-6182363 in view of Hachiro US-4295412, the device of the combination teaches the limitations of:
---Claim 20. A method for forming an assembly (poppet valve assembly 62 of Venable as modified by Hachiro) for limiting fluid flow in a conduit (hose 1 of Hachiro), comprising: inserting a fluid flow restricting member (poppet valve member 100) into an inner cavity (chamber 72 of Venable) of a body (housing 70 of Venable as modified by Hachiro) of the assembly; crimping a wall of the body to define a crimp (see the crimped portion near the second end 84 of Venable wherein the crimp aids in fixing the spring stop 120 to the housing 70) that extends into the inner cavity in order to retain the fluid flow restricting member in the inner cavity of the body (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro, notice that the crimp in Venable fixes the spring stop 120 which in turn limits the movement of the poppet 100 and spring 110); flaring the wall of the body to define an outwardly flared portion (see the outward flared portion 5 as taught by Hachiro) that extends away from the inner cavity, the flaring step being performed after the crimping step (as modified above considering that there are only three possibilities and all three have having reasonable expectation of success since these are well-known manufacturing techniques for providing the crimp as taught by Venable and the outward flare as taught by Hachiro), the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity (see at least Figs. 3-4 of Venable).
Claim(s) 9-10, 13-15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venable US-6182363 in view of Hachiro US-4295412 as applied to the intervening claims above, and further in view of Handley US-10125476.
Regarding claims 9-10, 13-15 and 19, the device of the combination of Venable US-6182363 in view of Hachiro US-4295412 as modified above fails to disclose the limitations of the end portion of the body having an opening that is a) at least partially sealed by the fluid flow restricting member (such as provided via a bleed passage in the valve) or b) that is completely sealed by the fluid flow restricting member. Notice that in the case of Venable, the valve poppet 100 seals against a valve seat 90 as opposed to the opening 82 of the body. However, valve seats integral with the housing body are well-known in the art.
Handley US-10125476 teaches in Figs. 1-22 (see at least Fig. 11 and 13) of other examples of spring biased check valve 200/300 including at least a body having a poppet valve 224/324 that engages with a valve seat 226/326 that is integral with the body. Notice that an integral valve seat simplifies the assembly by reducing the total amount of parts of the assembly. Furthermore, notice that Handley teaches of: a) a first embodiment (Fig. 11) wherein the poppet valve 224 engages the valve seat 226 completely sealing the opening of the upstream end of the body; and b) a second embodiment (Fig. 13) wherein the poppet valve 324 includes small bleed passages 350, 352 that when the poppet valve is in the “closed” position the opening of the upstream end of the body is partially sealed by the poppet valve. These bleed channels allows for fluid to flow at very low flow rates through the valve during low flow conditions which prevents excessive pressure differential on both sides of the poppet valve while allowing it to operate as a normal check valve during high flow conditions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time that the invention was effectively filed to modify the body of the device of the combination of Venable in view of Hachiro to have an integral valve seat 226/326 at the upstream end of the body in a similar manner as taught by Handley since such a modification is a known method of providing a valve seat with the added advantage that by making the valve seat integral with the body it simplifies the assembly by reducing the total amount of parts of the assembly. Additionally, if it is required to provide a bleed passage. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add one or more bleed passages 350, 352 in the poppet valve of the device of the combination in a similar manner as taught by the second embodiment of Fig. 13 of Handley since such a modification allows for when the poppet valve is in the “closed” position, the opening of the upstream end of the body is partially sealed by the poppet valve with the bleed channels allowing for fluid to flow at very low flow rates through the valve during low flow conditions which prevents excessive pressure differential on both sides of the poppet valve while allowing it to operate as a normal check valve during high flow conditions.
As such, the device of the combination of Venable US-6182363 in view of Hachiro US-4295412 and Handley US-10125476 teaches the limitations of:
---Claim 9. The assembly as in claim 8, wherein the end portion of the body has an opening that is at least partially sealed by the fluid flow restricting member when the fluid flow restriction member is in the first position (see at least Fig. 13 of Handley wherein the upstream end portion of the body include an integral valve seat 326 with an opening that is partially sealed via the engagement of the poppet valve and wherein the poppet valve include one or more bleed passages 350, 352 that allow a very small flow rate to flow through).
---Claim 10. The assembly as in claim 8, wherein the end portion of the body has an opening that is completely sealed by the fluid flow restricting member when the fluid flow restriction member is in the first position (see at least Fig. 11 of Handley wherein the upstream end portion of the body include an integral valve seat 326 with an opening that is completely sealed via the engagement of the poppet valve).
---Claim 13. The assembly as in claim 11, wherein the fluid flow restricting member is movably retained within the inner cavity of the body for movement between a first position (the closed position of the valve) where the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity and at least a second position (the open position of the valve) where fluid flow through the inner cavity is greater than when the fluid flow restricting member is in the first position (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro) and the end portion of the body has an opening that is at least partially sealed by the fluid flow restricting member when the fluid flow restriction member is in the first position (see at least Fig. 13 of Handley wherein the upstream end portion of the body include an integral valve seat 326 with an opening that is partially sealed via the engagement of the poppet valve and wherein the poppet valve include one or more bleed passages 350, 352 that allow a very small flow rate to flow through).
---Claim 14. The assembly as in claim 13, wherein the fluid flow restricting member has at least one opening (one or more bleed passages 350, 352 as taught by Fig. 13 of Handley) that is smaller than the opening in the end portion, the at least one opening allowing fluid flow through the inner cavity when the fluid flow restriction member is in the first position (see at least Fig. 13 of Handley).
---Claim 15. The assembly as in claim 1, wherein the fluid flow restricting member is movably retained within the inner cavity of the body for movement between a first position (the closed position of the valve) where the fluid flow restricting member reduces or prevents fluid flow through the inner cavity and at least a second position (the opened position of the valve) where fluid flow through the inner cavity is greater than when the fluid flow restricting member is in the first position (see at least Figs. 2-4 of Venable and Figs. 2 and 4 of Hachiro) and the end portion of the body has an opening that is completely sealed by the fluid flow restricting member when the fluid flow restriction member is in the first position (see at least Fig. 11 of Handley wherein the upstream end portion of the body include an integral valve seat 326 with an opening that is completely sealed via the engagement of the poppet valve).
---Claim 19. A valve assembly (poppet valve assembly 62 of Venable as modified by Hachiro and Handley), comprising: a body (housing 70 of Venable as modified by Hachiro and Handley) defining an inner cavity (chamber 72 of Venable), the body having a wall portion (side wall 74 of Venable) extending from an end portion of the body (end wall 78 of Venable), the wall portion and the end portion defining the inner cavity, the wall portion having an outwardly flared portion (see the outward flared portion 5 as taught by Hachiro) that extends away from the inner cavity at an open end of the body (opposite end portion 84 of Venable), the open end being opposite to the end portion of the body, the wall portion having a crimp (see the crimped portion near the second end 84 of Venable wherein the crimp aids in fixing the spring stop 120 to the housing 70) proximate to the outwardly flared portion, the crimp extends towards the inner cavity; a poppet (poppet valve member 100) movably retained within the inner cavity of the body for movement between a first position (the closed position of the valve) where the poppet seals an opening in the end portion of body (see at least Fig. 11 of Handley wherein the upstream end portion of the body include an integral valve seat 326 with an opening that is completely sealed via the engagement of the poppet valve) and at least a second position (the open position of the valve) where the opening in the end portion of body is not sealed by the poppet; a biasing member (spring 120 of Venable) maintaining the poppet in the first position; and a stop member (spring stop 120) located between the crimp and the biasing member, the stop member providing a reaction surface (end face 122) for the biasing member and the crimp retaining the stop member in the inner cavity (see at least Figs. 2 and 4 of Venable).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
---References A (Bleed valves):
Deferme US-12442430, Handley US-10125476, Zitarosa US-9435236, Ohrn US-3910306, Persichetti US-20250389338 and Kay EP-1956277.
---References B (Check valves):
Kuhn US-12169027, Vega US-12049969, Kuhn US-11982367, Vega US-11946568, Tanigawa US-11879556, Kuhn US-11808367, Yoon US-10844853, Jeon US-10648580, Akamatsu US-10184576, Doyen US-10047866, Koch US-7581560, deCler US-6978800, Venable US-6182363, Truax US-5174327, Knapp US-4709722, Hachiro US-4295412, Basch US-4212316, Brandt US-4071045, Griswold US-3256905, Schulz US-20220065358, Hitzelberger US-20160223117, Barsan DE-102023207924, Hamada CN-115306927, Shen CN-213420011, Kuhn DE-102018131094, Kuhn DE-102019108694, Ness DE-19943516, Fuhrmann DE-102009057327, Fuhrmann DE-102007029466, Dienstbier WO-2008128839 and Buechs DE-10059954.
---References C (Valve component shaping techniques):
Reuter US-7588052, Vogel US-5848616, Lee US-5160226, Macks US-3560030 and Courtot US-3442537.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID COLON-MORALES, whose telephone number is 571-270-1741 and fax number is 571-270-2741. If the applicant has authorized internet communications via the filling of form PTO/SB/439, the examiner can be reached via email at david.colon-morales@uspto.gov , email communication is not permitted if the applicant has not filed an authorization for internet communication (see MPEP 502.03 for more details on internet communications). The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday (7:30AM-3:30PM 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 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 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.
/DAVID COLON-MORALES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights