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, see Remarks, filed 3/5/2026, have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant submits that the rejection is improper since Viloria does “not show or describe that either its wear ring 5, 5’ and stator part 4a, 4b in Fig. 1 or its wear ring 5 and stator part 4a, 4b in Figure 2 or its wear ring 5 and stator part 4 in Fig. 3 have mated threaded faces”. Applicant’s argument rest on the drawings’ depiction of flat surfaces in the figures. Applicant submits this even after spending three pages (pg. 6-8) citing the paragraph that explicitly states a “threaded connection” may be used.
Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant then identifies three examples of how a threaded connection may be used. In each example Applicant identifies a threaded fastener being mated with “inner threads”. Applicant then submits that Viloria “does not even remotely suggest … using mated threaded faces”. It is unclear how Applicant can recite three examples where mated threaded faces are used and then submit that mated threaded faces are not “remotely suggested”.
Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
For these reasons the rejections are maintained.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JPH0667889 in view of Viloria CN 102536872.
Regarding claim 1, JPH0667889 discloses a double suction impeller (1A, Fig. 1) for arranging in a pump casing (2) of a double suction pump having a pump inlet and a pump outlet (Fig. 1), comprising:
an impeller main body (1A) having suction eye adapter coupling members (8 on both sides of impeller, Fig. 2), and the impeller main body being configured to rotate and move fluid from the pump inlet to the pump outlet (Fig. 1); and
impeller suction eyes (open inlet to each side of the impeller, Fig. 1), each impeller suction eye having, and being formed by,
a separate removable integrated wear ring impeller skirt (1B, Fig. 2; see also translation page 4 lines 9-12 wherein the skirt is described as harder than the main body, i.e. wear resistant, and an “annular shape”, i.e. a ring) with a corresponding suction eye adapter coupling member (10, Fig. 2) coupled detachably (via screw 13) to a respective one of the suction eye adapter coupling members (8) of the impeller main body,
each separate removable integrated wear ring impeller skirt (1B)
being configured as a respective removable integrated wear ring (see Remarks for how the skirt is configured as a wear ring),
being configured to allow fluid to enter the impeller main body (Fig. 1), and
also configured to detach (via screw 13) and be removed and replaced when wear and erosion occur (pg. 4 lin. 34-38);
the suction eye adapter coupling member (8) and the corresponding suction eye adapter coupling member (10) having mated faces (10A with 8A, 10B with 8B and 10C with 8C).
PNG
media_image1.png
695
704
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
673
610
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, it does not teach that the mated faces are configured to provide a fully threaded attachment between the impeller main body and the separate removable integrated wear ring impeller skirt.
Viloria teaches pump comprising the technique of fastening a wear ring (5) using various means comprising shrink fit, welding, tin welding or a screw thread connection ([0023]). Since the known techniques of attaching wear rings to another component include screw thread connections, 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 mated surfaces of the suction eye adapter coupling member and the corresponding suction eye adapter coupling member as taught by JPH0667889, by utilizing the known fastening technique of screw threads, as taught by Viloria, in order to yield the predictable results of securing a wear ring to its mated counterpart. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007), MPEP 2143 (I)(D).
Regarding claim 18, JPH0667889 discloses a double suction pump having a pump casing (2) with a pump inlet and a pump outlet (Fig. 1), comprising: a double suction impeller (1A) configured to arrange in the pump casing (2), having:
an impeller main body (1A) having suction eye adapter coupling members (8 on both sides of impeller, Fig. 2), and the impeller main body being configured to rotate and move fluid from the pump inlet to the pump outlet (Fig. 1); and
impeller suction eyes (open inlet to each side of the impeller, Fig. 1), each impeller suction eye having, and being formed by,
a separate removable integrated wear ring impeller skirt (1B, Fig. 2) with a corresponding suction eye adapter coupling member (10 and 11, Fig. 2) configured to couple detachably (via screw 13) to a respective one of the suction eye adapter coupling members (8) of the impeller main body,
each separate removable integrated wear ring impeller skirt (1B)
being arranged between the double suction impeller (1A) and the pump casing (2) of the double suction pump (Fig. 2) as a respective removable integrated wear ring (Fig. 2),
being configured to allow fluid to enter the impeller (Fig. 1), and also configured to detach (via screw 13) and be removed and replaced when wear and erosion occur (pg. 4 lin. 34-38);
the suction eye adapter coupling member (8) and the corresponding suction eye adapter coupling member (10) having mated faces (10A with 8A, 10B with 8B and 10C with 8C).
However, it does not teach that the mated faces are configured to provide a fully threaded attachment between the impeller main body and the separate removable integrated wear ring impeller skirt.
Viloria teaches pump comprising the technique of fastening a wear ring (5) using various means comprising shrink fit, welding, tin welding or a screw thread connection ([0023]). Since the known techniques of attaching wear rings to another component include screw thread connections, 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 mated surfaces of the suction eye adapter coupling member and the corresponding suction eye adapter coupling member as taught by JPH0667889, by utilizing the known fastening technique of screw threads, as taught by Viloria, in order to yield the predictable results of securing a wear ring to its mated counterpart. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007), MPEP 2143 (I)(D).
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 BRIAN O PETERS whose telephone number is (571)272-2662. The examiner can normally be reached Tue-Sat, 12:00pm-10pm 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 supervisor, Eugene Kim can be reached on (571) 272-4463. 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.
/BRIAN O PETERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights