DETAILED ACTION
Non-Final Rejection
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 24 June 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-17 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 fluid inlets" in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-17 are rejected based upon their dependence from claim 1.
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 (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 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.
Claims 1-5 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bunda (U.S. Patent Publication 2021/0131575).
Regarding claim 1, Bunda discloses a fluid control valve 20 comprising:
a valve 34 configured to rotate about an axial center 26 and includes a valve outer wall portion defining a plurality of flow path portions 42/62 configured to cause fluid to flow therethrough; and
a housing 22 including a housing outer wall portion defining a valve accommodation space 38 to accommodate the valve, and a plurality of opening portions (24b/24c/24f/24g) in the housing outer wall portion configured to cause fluid to pass therethrough, wherein
a direction in which the axial center extends is an axial-center direction and a direction in which the valve rotates about the axial center is a circumferential direction,
the plurality of opening portions include two or more opening portions in the axial-center direction and two or more columns in the circumferential direction (FIG.1-3),
the plurality of opening portions include a fluid inlet 24b configured to allow fluid to flow into the valve accommodation space and a fluid outlet 24c configured to allow fluid to flow out of the valve accommodation space,
the fluid inlets include end-portion fluid inlets on either one side or the other side in the circumferential direction,
the fluid outlet includes an end-portion fluid outlet on the side that is the one side or the other side in the circumferential direction, where the end-portion fluid inlet is provided,
the plurality of flow path portions include a facing flow path portion 62 and a bypass flow path portion 42, the facing flow path portion facing the plurality of opening portions and configured to guide fluid flowing in from the fluid inlet directly to the fluid outlet, the bypass flow path portion configured to guide fluid flowing in from the end-portion fluid inlet to the end-portion fluid outlet while bypassing a portion facing the plurality of opening portions in the valve outer wall portion, and
the bypass flow path portion is formed continuous in the circumferential direction with the facing flow path portion (FIG. 1-3; Paragraph 26-32).
Regarding claim 2, Bunda discloses the bypass flow path portion is configured to allow communication between the end-portion fluid inlet and the end-portion fluid outlet that are spaced apart from each other (FIG. 1-3; Paragraph 34).
Regarding claim 3, Bunda discloses the bypass flow path portion functions as the facing flow path portion configured to guide fluid flowing in from the fluid inlet directly to the fluid outlet when positioned (when 42 is positioned to connect 24b, 24c, 24f, and 24g) at a position facing the plurality of opening portions (FIG. 1-4).
Regarding claim 4, Bunda discloses a seal member 32 disposed between the valve outer wall portion and a portion of the housing outer wall portion in which the plurality of opening portions are formed, wherein
the plurality of opening portions are formed in a grid pattern (FIG. 1, 3),
the seal member defines a plurality of through-holes 54 configured to allow fluid to pass therethrough,
the plurality of flow path portions are in a shape corresponding to the plurality of opening portions and the plurality of through-holes (FIG. 1-3),
the plurality of through-holes include a plurality of through-holes arranged in the axial-center direction and the plurality of through-holes arranged in a plurality of columns in the circumferential direction (FIG. 3),
the number of columns of the plurality of opening portions arranged in the circumferential direction is a number (2) of opening columns,
the number of columns of the plurality of through-holes arranged in the circumferential direction is a number (4) of through-hole columns, and
the number of through-hole columns is set to be larger than the number of opening columns (FIG. 1-3; Paragraph 26-32).
Regarding claim 5, Bunda discloses the number of through-hole columns is set to two more than the number of opening columns, and
one more column of the plurality of through-holes are provided on each of one side and the other side in the circumferential direction with respect to the plurality of opening portions arranged in the circumferential direction (FIG. 1-3).
Regarding claim 11, Bunda discloses the plurality of flow path portions are side by side in the axial-center direction,
a direction extending radially from the axial center is a radial direction, and
a distance in the radial direction from each of the plurality of flow path portions arranged side by side in the axial-center direction is constant (FIG. 4).
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.
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.
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.
Claims 7 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bunda in view of Nomura (U.S. Patent Publication 2021/0088149).
Regarding claim 7, Bunda discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1.
Bunda further discloses the seal member includes a sliding portion (interior surface at the top of 32) facing the valve outer wall portion and a pressing portion (top surface of 32) facing the housing outer wall portion (FIG. 1-4).
Bunda is silent regarding the sliding portion and the pressing portion are made of materials different from each other.
However, Nomura teaches utilizing a sealing member 97/98, the sealing member being made up of a sliding portion 97 and a pressing portion 98, the sliding portion and pressing portion being made of different materials (FIG. 126; Paragraph 1262).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Bunda by making the seal member comprise a sliding portion and a pressing portion made of different materials, as taught by Nomura, for the purpose of providing a seal made from a material that will hold up more durably based upon the sealing function being provided.
Regarding claim 12, Bunda discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1.
Bunda further discloses a housing cover 28 closing the valve accommodation space;
a cover seal 36 attached to the housing cover; and
a drive unit (“actuator” (not shown)) configured to output a rotational force to rotate the valve (Paragraph 28), wherein
the valve includes a rotating shaft 40 protruding toward one side in the axial-center direction,
the rotating shaft is connected to the drive unit and is configured to be rotated by the rotational force,
the housing has a cylindrical shape extending in the axial-center direction and opens on one side in the axial-center direction,
the housing cover has a shaft hole into which the rotating shaft is inserted, and
the valve, the cover seal, and the housing cover are removable from the housing from one side in the axial-center direction (FIG. 1-2; Paragraph 28).
Bunda is silent regarding the cover seal is provided between the shaft hole and the rotating shaft in the shaft hole.
However, Nomura teaches a cover seal 603 is provided between the shaft hole 62 and the rotating shaft 32 in the shaft hole (FIG. 11; Paragraph 768).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Bunda by adding a seal between the shaft and the cover located in the shaft hole, as taught by Nomura, for the purpose of providing a sealed relationship between the components of the valve below the shaft hole and the exterior of the valve above the shaft hole to prevent unwanted flow through the shaft hole.
Regarding claim 13, Bunda, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 12.
Bunda is silent regarding the housing cover is fixed to the housing by a snap-fit.
However, Nomura teaches utilizing a snap fit connection to connect components of the valve (Paragraph 358).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Bunda by utilizing a snap-fit connection between the housing cover and the housing, as taught by Nomura, since it has been held that use of suitable equivalent structures involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 14, Bunda, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 12.
Bunda is silent regarding the drive unit and the housing cover are fixed to the housing by a same screw member.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the same screws, as seen in FIG. 2, to connect the actuator since it has been held that use of suitable equivalent structures involves only routine skill in the art. Bunda is silent regarding the means by which the actuator is attached to the housing, however, utilizing the same screws that hole the cover on the housing would be an obvious means to connect the actuator.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bunda.
Regarding claim 8, Bunda discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 1.
Bunda further discloses a biasing portion 28 configured to bias the valve in the axial-center direction, wherein
the valve outer wall portion is along a side surface of the valve, and
the biasing portion is configured to bias the valve toward the bottom, and during both rotation and stop of the valve, keep a state in which the valve outer wall portion and the seal member are pressed, and keep a state in which the housing outer wall portion and the seal member are pressed (FIG. 1-2).
Bunda is silent regarding the valve is a conical shape with an apex on one side in the axial-center direction.
At the time the invention was made, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a conical shaped valve because Applicant has not disclosed that the conical shape provide an advantage, are used for a particular purpose, or solve a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Bunda’s cylindrical shaped valve, and Applicant’s invention, to perform equally well because both valves perform the same function of allowing fluid to pass to the correct flow path.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to modify Bunda to obtain the invention as specified in Claim 8 because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art of Bunda.
Regarding claim 9, Bunda, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 8.
Bunda is silent regarding an internal angle formed by a generatrix of a conical shape parallel to the valve outer wall portion and the axial center is 5 deg or more.
At the time the invention was made, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a conical shaped valve with an internal angle of 5 degrees or more because Applicant has not disclosed that the internal angle of the conical shape being 5 degrees or more provide an advantage, are used for a particular purpose, or solve a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Bunda’s cylindrical shaped valve, and Applicant’s invention, to perform equally well because both valves perform the same function of allowing fluid to pass to the correct flow path.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to modify Bunda to obtain the invention as specified in Claim 9 because such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art of Bunda.
Regarding claim 10, Bunda, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 8.
Bunda further teaches an inner circumferential surface defining the valve accommodation space in the housing outer wall portion is shaped along the side surface of the conical shape similar to the valve outer wall portion (FIG. 1-4).
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bunda in view of Nomura in further view of Martins (U.S. Patent Publication 2006/0118066).
Regarding claim 15, Bunda, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 12.
Bunda is silent regarding the valve includes a stopper configured to regulate rotation of the valve, and
the stopper is provided in a portion different from a portion facing the housing cover.
However, Martins teaches the valve 30 includes a stopper 36 configured to regulate rotation of the valve, and
the stopper is provided in a portion different from a portion facing the housing cover 18 (FIG. 2; Claims 8, 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Bunda by adding a stopper to the circumference of the valve, as taught by Martins, for the purpose of controlling the amount of rotation desired by the valve.
Regarding claim 16, Bunda, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 15.
Bunda/Martins further teaches the housing includes a bottom (FIG. 6) closing the other side in the axial-center direction,
the stopper protrudes toward the bottom (Martins FIG. 2), and
the bottom includes a rotation regulating portion (Martins FIG. 2) in contact with the stopper to regulate rotation of the valve (Bunda FIG. 6; Martins FIG. 2).
Regarding claim 17, Bunda, as modified above, discloses the claimed invention substantially as claimed, as set forth above for claim 16.
Bunda/Martins further teaches the stopper extends in the axial-center direction (Martins FIG. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art fails to anticipate or make obvious a gap flow path that is a gap configured to allow fluid to flow therethrough is defined between the valve outer wall portion and a portion of the housing outer wall portion offset from the seal member, and the gap flow path is configured to allow a plurality of flow path portions, among the plurality of flow path portions, that are offset from the seal member to communicate with each other, along with the other limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER D BALLMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9984. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6:00-3:00.
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 supervisor, Craig M 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.
/CHRISTOPHER D BALLMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/CRAIG M SCHNEIDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights