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 .
Specification
The specification is objected to because the references to prior applications 18/791,183 and 17/915,461 in paragraph 1 should be amended to reflect those applications respective current status.
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 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 15 lacks antecedent basis for “the sled assembly” in line 19 and is therefore indefinite. Claim 16 does introduce “a sled assembly” but is also indef9inite as being dependent on an indefinite claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-11, and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Gano et al. (US 5,479,986).
In regard to claim 1, Gano et al. disclose a rupture disc assembly for use in a vessel, the rupture disc assembly comprising: a housing (55/53 as in fig 2A) having at least one tubular member defining a fluid passageway therethrough (as in fig 2A); a rupture disc (70) installed within the housing and comprising a pressure facing surface (top surface), a bottom surface (as in fig 2A), and a side surface having a tapered side portion tapering inwardly towards the bottom surface of the rupture disc (66); an actuating mechanism (80/60) adjacent the rupture disc within the housing and comprising a sled assembly provided with a supporting surface (inner tapered surface of 60 at 66) configured to support the rupture disc (as in fig 2A), the supporting surface having a tapered support portion complementarily shaped relative to the tapered side portion (col. 7, lines 3-15, as in fig 2A), the tapered side portion and the tapered support portion being configured to engage one another to produce a compressive force on the rupture disc upon applying an acting pressure on the pressure facing surface of the rupture disc (as would occur as arranged in fig 2A), the sled assembly being operable to generate an upward axial force on the bottom surface of the rupture disc to disengage the rupture disc from the supporting surface (as on 81, col. 7, lines 56+), thereby reducing the compressive force on the rupture disc, wherein the rupture disc is operable: to form a temporary seal within the housing when engaged with the supporting surface (as in col. 7, lines 3-15, fig 2A); and to break after the rupture disc is disengaged from the supporting surface upon operation of the sled assembly (as in col. 7, lines 56+, where “disengaging from the supporting surface” may be considered as the initial breaking which would disengage the rupture disk which further breaks into pieces col. 8, lines 11-15).
In regard to claim 2, Gano et al. disclose wherein the sled assembly is operable in response to the pressure facing surface of the rupture disc being subjected to a disc failure trigger pressure, the sled assembly being operable between a first configuration, where the supporting surface engages and supports the rupture disc (as in fig 2A), and a second configuration, where the sled assembly is displaced along the housing to enable the generation of the upward axial force on the bottom surface of the rupture disc (as in figs 2B-2C, col. 7, lines 56+).
In regard to claim 3, Gano et al. discloses wherein the actuating mechanism comprises a securing mechanism (78) operable to secure the sled assembly in the first configuration, and is further operable to release the sled assembly to enable displacement of the sled assembly to the second configuration to generate the upward axial force on the bottom surface of the rupture disc (col. 7, lines 56+).
In regard to claim 4, Gano et al. disclose wherein the sled assembly comprises: an outer sled (60) operatively mounted within the housing and provided with the supporting surface; and an inner sled (72) operatively mounted within the outer sled and operable to generate the upward axial force on the bottom surface of the rupture disc upon release of the sled assembly by the securing mechanism (col. 7, lines 56+).
In regard to claim 5, Gano et al. disclose wherein the outer sled is operable to move in a downhole direction from a first outer sled position to a second outer sled position upon operation of the sled assembly from the first configuration to the second configuration (fig 2A to fig 2C as shown), and wherein the inner sled is operable to move in the downhole direction from a first inner sled position to a second inner sled position upon operation of the sled assembly from the first configuration to the second configuration (fig 2A to fig 2B/2C as shown).
In regard to claim 6, Gano et al. disclose wherein the securing mechanism is operable to secure the outer sled and the inner sled in the first outer sled position and the first inner sled position (as in fig 2A), respectively, and wherein, in response to the pressure facing surface of the rupture disc being subjected to the disc failure trigger pressure, the securing mechanism is operable to release both the outer sled and the inner sled (as in fig 2C).
In regard to claim 7, Gano et al. disclose wherein the housing comprises a stop shoulder (58/84) extending inwardly within the fluid passageway, and wherein the outer sled and the inner sled are adapted to contact the stop shoulder to stop movement thereof at the second outer sled position and the second inner sled position, respectively (as in fig 2C as would function together, col. 8, lines 9-11).
In regard to claim 8, Gano et al. disclose wherein, in response to the pressure facing surface of the rupture disc being subjected to the disc failure trigger pressure, the securing mechanism releases the outer sled and the inner sled, allowing the outer sled and the inner sled to move in the downhole direction, and wherein the inner sled stops at the second inner sled position upon contacting the stop shoulder (as in fig 2B) prior to the outer sled stopping at the second outer sled position (as in fig 2B), thereby enabling the inner sled to generate the upward axial force on the bottom surface of the rupture disc to disengage the rupture disc from the supporting surface of the outer sled (as occurs fig 2B-2C, col. 7, lines 56+).
In regard to claim 9, Gano et al. disclose wherein the securing mechanism comprises a shear ring (78).
In regard to claim 10, Gano et al. disclose wherein the actuating mechanism further comprises a ring (76) abutting the supporting surface (as abutting the inside surface of 60) and having an impact surface (as may be defined), and wherein the ring is operable to move in the downhole direction together with the sled assembly upon operation of the sled assembly in response to the pressure facing surface of the rupture disc being subjected to the disc failure trigger pressure (as from fig 2A-2C, col. 7, lines 56+).
In regard to claim 11, Gano et al. disclose wherein the rupture disc is adapted to break in response to the pressure facing surface being subjected to: a disc rupture pressure (col. 7, lines 56+), the impact surface of the ring or a combination.
In regard to claim 14, Gano et al. disclose wherein the tapered side portion and the tapered support portion are configured to provide respective taper angles between 3 degrees and 30 degrees (as shown appears well within range) such that the compressive forces from the sled assembly to the rupture disc is adapted to reduce or eliminate tensile stresses in the rupture disc (as would occur).
In regard to claim 15, Gano et al. disclose a rupture disc assembly for use in a vessel, the rupture disc assembly comprising: a housing (55/53 as in fig 2A); a rupture disc (70) installed within the housing and comprising a pressure facing surface (top surface), a bottom surface (as in fig 2A), and a side surface having a tapered side portion tapering inwardly towards the bottom surface of the rupture disc (66); an actuating mechanism comprising: a supporting surface (as complementary to 66 as in fig 2A) to support the rupture disc, the supporting surface having a tapered support portion complementarily shaped relative to the tapered side portion (col. 7, lines 3-15, as in fig 2A), the tapered side portion and the tapered support portion being configured to engage one another to produce a compressive force on the rupture disc upon applying an acting pressure on the pressure facing surface of the rupture disc (as would occur in fig 2A), the actuating mechanism being operable to generate an upward axial force on the bottom surface of the rupture disc to disengage the rupture disc from the supporting surface (as on 81, col. 7, lines 56+), thereby reducing the compressive force on the rupture disc, wherein the rupture disc is operable: to form a temporary seal within the vessel when engaged with the supporting surface (as in fig 2A, col. 7, lines 3-15); and to break after the rupture disc is disengaged from the supporting surface upon operation of the sled assembly (as in col. 7, lines 56+, where “disengaging from the supporting surface” may be considered as the initial breaking which would disengage the rupture disk which further breaks into pieces col. 8, lines 11-15).
In regard to claim 16, Gano et al. disclose wherein the actuating mechanism comprises: a sled assembly (66/72) provided with the supporting surface configured to support the rupture disc, the sled assembly being slidable along the housing in order to generate the upward axial force on the bottom surface of the rupture disc (fig 2A-2B-2C); and a securing mechanism (78) operable to secure the sled assembly to the housing, the securing mechanism being operable to release the sled assembly to enable displacement thereof in order to generate the upward axial force (col. 7, lines 56+).
In regard to claim 17, Gano et al. disclose wherein the securing mechanism is operable in response to the pressure facing surface of the rupture disc being subjected to a disc failure trigger pressure (col. 7, lines 56+).
In regard to claim 18, Gano et al. disclose a rupture disc assembly for use in a vessel, the rupture disc assembly comprising: a rupture disc (70) installed within the vessel and comprising a pressure facing surface (top surface), a bottom surface, and a side surface having a downhole portion (as may be defined on surface at 66); an actuating mechanism (60) comprising a supporting surface adapted to support the rupture disc (as in fig 2A), the supporting surface having an uphole portion being complementarily shaped relative to the downhole portion (as in fig 2A), the downhole portion and the uphole portion being configured to engage one another to produce a compressive force on the rupture disc upon applying an acting pressure on the pressure facing surface of the rupture disc (as would occur), the rupture disc assembly being operable in: a sealing mode, where the rupture disc forms a temporary seal within the vessel when engaged with the supporting surface (as in fig 2A); and a disc failure mode, where the temporary seal is broken and the rupture disc breaks upon disengagement of the rupture disc from the supporting surface (as in col. 7, lines 56+, where “disengagement of the rupture disc from the supporting surface” may be considered as the initial breaking which would disengage the rupture disk which further breaks into pieces col. 8, lines 11-15).
In regard to claim 19, Gano et al. disclose wherein the actuating mechanism is operable to disengage the rupture disc from the supporting surface to change the rupture disc assembly from the sealing mode to the disc failure mode (initial breaking of disc relieves stress where disc is then further broken into pieces col. 8, lines 11-15).
In regard to claim 20, Gano et al. disclose wherein the actuating mechanism is operable to generate a force on the bottom surface of the rupture disc adapted to disengage the downhole portion and the uphole portion in order to reduce the compressive force on the rupture disc (as would occur with initial break).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,404,743. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because, for example, instant claim 1 appears generic to all that is recited in claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,404,743. In other words, claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,404,743 fully encompasses the subject matter of instant claim 1 and therefore anticipates instant claim 1, as both include a rupture disc, an actuating mechanism including a sled assembly, and a housing (as inherent within claim 1 of ‘743 as being for use “within a vessel”). Since instant claim 1 is anticipated by claim 1 of the patent, it is not patentably distinct from claim 1. Thus the invention of claim 1 of the patent is in effect a “species” of the “generic” invention of instant claim 1. It has been held that the generic invention is anticipated by the species, see In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Since instant claim 1 is anticipated (fully encompassed) by claim 1 of the patent, they are not patentably distinct, regardless of any additional subject matter present in claim 1 of the patent. Claims 2-20 appear similarly encompassed by claims 2-20 of ‘743.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Trahan (US 12,209,480) and Eriksen et al. (US 11,332,999) also disclose rupture disc assemblies with sled assemblies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to D Andrews whose telephone number is (571)272-6558. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-3.
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, Nicole Coy can be reached at 571-272-5405. 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.
/D. ANDREWS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3672
3/4/2026