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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 6/4/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues that Stachowick, Jr., discloses recessed channel-like features 85, does not disclose a flat or cutout in the outer perimeter of the upper portion of cone body to reduce the maximum cross-sectional area of the cone. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
PNG
media_image1.png
496
723
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
443
496
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Stachowick, Jr., clearly disclose a flat or cutout CO (attached figure, cutout Co forms channel 85 in fig. 5C - ) in the outer perimeter OP of the upper portion UP of cone body to reduce (reduced by T) the maximum cross-sectional area MA of the cone.
Applicant further argues that Claim 1 separately identifies, in feature (A), a flat or cutout in the outer perimeter of the upper portion of the cone body and, in feature (B), a flow passage that allows fluid to flow around or through the cone body. However, claim 1 requires (A) and optionally (B) – respective limitation is not required with word optionally. Thus, Stachowick, Jr., does not have to meet both (A) and (B) and Stachowick, Jr., meets (A - cutout) as described above and further it can also be called channel/flow passage (B) optionally by operator’s desire.
Regarding claim 3, Applicant argues that Stachowick, Jr., does not teach the at least one flat or cutout comprises a flat area that is oriented in a plane that is parallel to the longitudinal axis. As seen in attached figure above Stachowick, Jr., teaches the at least one flat or cutout comprises a flat area FA that is oriented in a plane that is parallel to the longitudinal axis.
Applicant’s arguments regarding claims 4, 5, 7, 9-12 and 14 are moot because these claims depend the flow page that is not required (optional). It appears that applicant tries to claim different inventions with multiple different species (i.e., species of fig. 8, fig. 12, fig. 13, fig. 23, fig. 24, fig. 25, fig. 26) in the one application that is improper. Applicant should amend claims accordingly based on the one specific species.
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.
New claims 21-26 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 21 recites the exterior flow passage extending along only a portion of the length of the cone body and being oriented at an angle greater than 0° and less than 90° relative to the longitudinal axis in a longitudinal-radial (L-R) plane is unclear because no drawing clearly shows this limitation especially respective longitudinal axis in a longitudinal-radial (L-R) plane. Claim 22 is rejected with the same reason. Claims 22-25 are rejected as being dependent on claim 21.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102b1 as being anticipated by Stachowiak (20230399903).
Stachowiak discloses a cone, comprising:
Re claim 1:
a cone body 82 (i.e., pgh. 29, "cone body", fig. 5B) having a longitudinal axis, the cone body comprising a frustoconical outer portion with an exterior surface that tapers radially inward along the length of the cone body to a narrow end, the cone body comprising at least one of (A) and (B),
wherein (A) comprises an upper portion of the cone 82 with a substantially circular outer perimeter (i.e., fig. 5C) having at least one flat or cutout 85 to reduce the maximum cross-sectional area of the cone to facilitate increased fluid flow around the cone; and
(B) comprises at least one flow passage 85 to allow fluid to flow around or through the cone body, the at least one flow passage extending along only a portion of the length of the cone body 82.
Re claim 2, the cone body comprises (A), and wherein there are at least two circumferentially spaced apart flats or cutouts 85 (i.e., fig. 5C).
Re claim 3, the at least one flat or cutout 85 comprises a flat area that is oriented in a plane that is parallel to the longitudinal axis (i.e., fig. 5A).
Re claim 4, the at least one flow passage is oriented at an angle from greater than 0° and less than 90° in a longitudinal-radial (L-R) plane relative to the longitudinal axis (i.e., fig. 5B see the tapered angle of 83a, 83b).
Re claim 5, the at least one flow passage is oriented at an angle from 10° to 40° in a L-R plane relative to the longitudinal axis (i.e., fig. 5B, see the tapered angle of 83a, 83b).
Re claim 6, the at least one flow passage 85 is a channel or groove formed in the exterior surface of the cone body (i.e., fig. 5A)
Re claim 7, the channel or groove has a bottom that is a concave curve (i.e., fig. 5C) along at least a portion of the length of the channel or groove.
Re claim 8, the channel or groove 85 has a bottom that is a flat surface (i.e., fig. 5C, top and bottom of 85) at least a portion of the length of the channel or groove.
Re claim 9, wherein the at least one flow passage is an internal port 88 (i.e., figs. 5A-5B) formed in the cone body.
Re claim 10, there are at least two circumferentially spaced apart internal ports 9i.e. fig. 5A) formed in the cone body.
Re claim 11, the internal port is cylindrical (i.e. fig. 5B).
Re claim 12, the cone body comprises (B) wherein the at least one flow passage comprises (i) a channel or groove 85 formed in an exterior surface of the cone body and (ii) an internal port 88 formed in the cone body.
Re claim 13, the cone body comprises (A) and (B) (see claim 1).
Re claim 14, the cone body comprises (A) and (B), and wherein the at least one flow passage comprises (i) a channel or groove 85 formed in an exterior surface of the cone body and (ii) an internal port 88 formed in the cone body, wherein the channel or groove is circumferentially spaced from the internal port (i.e., fig. 5A), and wherein the channel or groove passes through the at least one flat or cutout 85.
Re claim 21 (as best understood -112 issue) :
a cone body 82 (i.e., pgh. 29, “cone body’, fig. 5B) having a longitudinal axis, the cone body comprising a frustoconical outer portion with an exterior surface that tapers radially inward along the length of the cone body to a narrow end;
wherein the cone body comprises at least one flow passage CO/85 (attached figure, fig. 5C) configured to allow fluid to flow around or through the cone body, the at least one flow passage comprising at least one of:
(A) an exterior flow passage formed in the exterior surface of the frustoconical outer portion (i.e., fig. 5C depicts the passage 85 radially outward form the central longitudinal axis of the cone body forms certain degree of frustoconical shape), the exterior flow passage extending along only a portion of the length of the cone body and being oriented at an angle greater than 0° and less than 90° relative to the longitudinal axis in a longitudinal-radial (L-R) plane (i.e., frustoconical shape forms provides an angle greater than 0 degree and less than 90 degrees relative to the longitudinal axis); and
(B) an internal port formed through the cone body.
Re claim 22, the at least one flow passage comprises (A) and wherein the at least one flow passage is oriented at an angle from 10° to 40° in a L-R plane relative to the longitudinal axis (i.e., 5C, frustoconical shape forms provides an angle greater than 0 degree and less than 90 degrees relative to the longitudinal axis).
Re claim 23, the at least one flow passage comprises (A) and the exterior flow passage has a bottom that is a concave curve (i.e., 5C, 5A, 85 forms concave https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/concave#google_vignette) along at least a portion of the length of the flow passage.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONG-SUK (PHILIP) RO whose telephone number is (571)270-5466. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:30.
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, Tara Schimpf can be reached at 571-270-7741. 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.
/YONG-SUK (PHILIP) RO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3676
Prosecution Insights