DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 14 Oct 2025 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the pressure sensing devices of Claim 32 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 22, 23 and 26 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 22, line 2 “an interior wall of the barrel leg” should likely read “the interior wall of the barrel leg”.
In Claim 23, line 3 “a seal” should likely read “the seal”.
In Claim 26, line 1 “the barrel” should likely read “the barrel leg”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8, 10-14, 17, 19-22, 28 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yocum (US 3438391) in view of Frantz (US 3272219).
Regarding Claim 1, Yocum discloses a Y-check valve for installation in a piping system (Figure 1). The check valve comprising:
a body (1 generally) having an inlet port (3), an outlet port (4), a central portion (generally at 8) extending between the inlet port and the outlet port (Figure 1), and a barrel leg (14), the central portion defining a first chamber placing the inlet port in fluidic communication with the outlet port (Figure 1) and the barrel leg defining a second chamber that is in fluidic communication with the first chamber (Figure 1);
a nut (see Annotated Figure A) removably fastened to a distal end of the barrel leg (Figure 1);
a retainer (see Annotated Figure A) coupled to the nut and at least partially positioned within the second chamber defined by the barrel leg (within 14 as seen in Figure 1);
a retainer seal (see Annotated Figure A) forming a seal between the retainer and the barrel leg (Figure 1);
a disc (13 geenrally); and
a spring (16), the spring biasing the disc into the first position (Figure 1),
but fails to expressly disclose a cage subassembly including a sealing surface and a cage having a cylindrical body with a plurality of openings extending therethrough, the cage subassembly being engaged with the retainer, positioned within the second chamber defined by the barrel leg, and forming a seal with an inner wall of the barrel leg;
a disc positioned within the cage subassembly, the disc being movable between (i) a first position in which the disc sealingly engages the sealing surface of the cage subassembly and prevents backflow of fluid through the body, and (ii) a second position in which the disc does not sealingly engage the sealing surface and fluid is permitted to flow through the body; and
a spring positioned within the cage subassembly, the spring biasing the disc into the first position.
Frantz teaches a check valve (Figure 6) with a cage subassembly (19, 30 and 23) including a sealing surface (30) and a cage (19) having a cylindrical body (Figure 7) with a plurality of openings extending therethrough (26), the cage subassembly being engaged with the retainer (the portion of 20 at 10), positioned within the second chamber defined by the barrel leg (disclosed in Yocum as discussed above with bore 3 of Frantz being the barrel leg), and forming a seal with an inner wall of the barrel leg (via at least 31);
a disc (12) positioned within the cage subassembly (Figure 6), the disc being movable between (i) a first position in which the disc sealingly engages the sealing surface of the cage subassembly and prevents backflow of fluid through the body (Figure 6), and (ii) a second position in which the disc does not sealingly engage the sealing surface and fluid is permitted to flow through the body (Col 2 lines 66-69); and
a spring (36) positioned within the cage subassembly (Figure 6), the spring biasing the disc into the first position (Figure 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the check valve of Yocum with the cage subassembly as taught by Frantz for the advantage of allowing the removal of the entire valve cartridge for maintenance or repair, as taught by Frantz (Col 3, lines 60-69).
PNG
media_image1.png
375
687
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure A
Regarding Claim 2, Yocum discloses where the barrel leg (14) interconnects with the central portion at an acute angle (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Yocum discloses where the retainer (see Annotated Figure A) includes a counter-bore defining an internal chamber (into which spring 16 sits), and wherein the spring is at least partially inserted into the internal chamber and retained by the retainer (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 4, Yocum discloses where the spring engages an interior surface of the retainer (Figure 1) and is compressible between the disc and the interior surface of the retainer (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 5, Yocum discloses where the retainer (see Annotated Figure A) guides compression of the spring and prevents lateral displacement of the spring (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 7, Frantz teaches where the cage subassembly (19, 30 and 23) comprises: a retainer end cap (the threaded section at 22 of the section 19) engaged with a first end of the cylindrical body and interconnecting the cage subassembly with the retainer (via the threaded at 22); and a disc seal end cap (23) engaged with a second end of the cylindrical body, the disc seal end cap including the sealing surface (Figure 1 at 30).
Regarding Claim 8, Yocum discloses where the retainer end cap is spin welded to the cylindrical body and the disc seal end cap is spin welded to the cylindrical body (The limitation “spin welded” renders this claim a product by process claim. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. 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 of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP 2113.)
Regarding Claim 10, Yocum discloses where the disc (12) includes an annular channel (see Annotated Figure B) that receives a disc seal (13), the disc seal forming a seal between the disc and the sealing surface of the cage subassembly when the disc is in the first position (Figure 2; with the cage subassembly taught by Frantz).
PNG
media_image2.png
239
949
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure B
Regarding Claim 11, Yocum discloses where the disc (12) includes a head (see Annotated Figure B) extending from an end wall (see Annotated Figure B), the annular channel is defined between the head and the end wall (see Annotated Figure B), the head retains the disc seal in the annular channel when the disc is in the first position (see Annotated Figure B), and the end wall retains the disc seal in the annular channel when the disc is in the second position (see Annotated Figure B).
Regarding Claim 12, Yocum discloses where the disc (12) defines an internal cup (into which spring 16 sits) that receives fluid when the disc is in the first position and enhances the seal between the disc seal, the disc, and the sealing surface (from 8).
Regarding Claim 13, Yocum discloses where the body (1 generally includes a fillet (at 2) between the barrel leg and the outlet port or the barrel leg and the central portion (Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 14, Yocum discloses all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly disclose where the barrel leg includes an open end in fluidic communication with the second chamber defined by the barrel leg and threads on an exterior of the open end, and wherein the nut includes interior threads configured to engage the threads on the exterior of the open end of the barrel leg.
Since Yocum discloses threads on the interior of the barrel leg and exterior of the nut, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided for where the barrel leg includes an open end in fluidic communication with the second chamber defined by the barrel leg and threads on an exterior of the open end, and wherein the nut includes interior threads configured to engage the threads on the exterior of the open end of the barrel leg, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167.
Regarding Claim 17, Frantz teaches a retainer end cap (the threaded section at 22 of the section 19) engaged with a first end of the cylindrical body and interconnecting the cage subassembly with the retainer (with 3; Figure 6), wherein the retainer end cap (the threaded section at 22 of the section 19) is removably engaged with the retainer (via the threads).
Regarding Claim 19, Frantz teaches where unfastening of the nut causes the retainer, the cage subassembly, the disc, and the spring to be drawn out from the second chamber defined by the barrel leg, and a pressure relief passage to be formed (by removing the entirety of the structure of Figure 7, thereby forming an open passageway that will function to release pressure out the opening at 10).
Regarding Claim 20, Yocum discloses where unfastening of the nut (15) causes the seal between the retainer and the barrel leg formed by the retainer seal to be broken and a pressure relief passage to be formed (as the nut 16 is released from the opening at 6).
Regarding Claim 21, Yocum discloses where the retainer seal (see Annotated Figure A) is a piston seal or a face seal (along the face of the flange formed by the nut of 15).
Regarding Claim 22, Yocum discloses where the retainer seal (see Annotated Figure A) is positioned about a portion of the retainer (see Annotated Figure A) and forms a seal between the retainer and an interior wall of the barrel leg (see Annotated Figure A) when the retainer is positioned within the second chamber defined by the barrel leg (see Annotated Figure A).
Regarding Claim 28, Frantz teaches where the nut, the retainer, the cage subassembly, the disc, and the spring are removable from the barrel leg as a single unit (by removing the entirety of the structure of Figure 7).
Regarding Claim 33, Yocum discloses where the spring is injection molded (The limitation “the spring is injection molded” renders this claim a product by process claim. Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. 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 of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP 2113.)
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yocum (US 3438391) in view of Frantz (US 3272219) in further view of Hedding (US 20080210898).
Regarding Claim 6, Yocum, as modified by Frantz, teach all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly teach where the spring and the disc are integrally formed as a single unit.
Hedding teaches a valve (Figure 4) with a spring (28) and a disc (22) where the spring and the disc are integrally formed as a single unit (Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the spring of Yocum, as modified by Frantz to be integral with the disc as taught by Hedding 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. The motivation for doing so would be to reduce manufacturing material waste or decrease assembly time by decreasing the number of discrete elements.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yocum (US 3438391) in view of Frantz (US 3272219) in further view of Mccarra (US 20210123538).
Regarding Claim 9, Yocum, as modified by Frantz teach all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly teach a cage seal positioned about the disc seal end cap, the cage seal forming a seal between the disc seal end cap and the inner wall of the barrel leg.
Mccarra teaches a valve (Figure 2) with a disc seal end cap (90; Figure 4) and a cage seal (88) positioned about the disc seal end cap (Figure 4), the cage seal forming a seal between the disc seal end cap and the inner wall of the barrel leg (of 12; Figure 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disc seal end cap of Yocum, as modified by Frantz with the cage seal as taught by Mccarra for the advantage of sealing the interface between the cage and the body, as taught by Mccarra (¶ 35).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-16, 18, 23-27, 29-32 and 34-39 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE GARDNER whose telephone number is (571)270-0144. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM-4PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisors, KENNETH RINEHART (571-272-4881) or CRAIG SCHNEIDER (571-272-3607) can be reached by telephone. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NICOLE GARDNER/
Examiner, Art Unit 3753
