DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on July 7, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed July 7, 2026 has been entered. Claims 32, 33 and 35 – 44 are pending in the application with claims 1 – 31 and 34 being cancelled.
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.
Claims 32, 33, 35 – 37 and 39 – 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayleben et al. (US 2011/0110794 – herein after Mayleben) in view of Nirenberg, David B (US 2013/0140912 – herein after Nirenberg) and Burdi et al. (US 2011/0146399 – herein after Burdi).
In reference to claim 32, Mayleben teaches a pump (10, see fig. 1), comprising:
a printed circuit board (42; see fig. 3 and ¶60: “... the circuit board 42 includes a power supply 52, a capacitive sensor 54, a controller, such as microprocessor 58, an AC switch, such as solid state relay (SSR) 60, and signaling circuitry 70”) configured with a capacitive liquid sensing device (54; see figs. 1-3 and disclosure in ¶60-¶65) therein having pump intelligence with built-in programming (programmed controller, see ¶60) configured to sense a level of a liquid collecting outside the pump and turn the pump ON/OFF for pumping the liquid (pump is turned ON/OFF based on upper limit 30 and lower limit 32 respectively); and
a pump body (pump housing of pump 12, see fig. 1)
configured with a pump body part cavity (space/pump chamber) having an impeller arranged therein (pump 12 has a pump housing having a space for an impeller; this being an inherent feature in view of Mayleben’s claim 10),
having a bottom part with a pump inlet (pump 12 in fig. 1 has claimed features of “bottom part with a pump inlet”; it is discussed or visible in other embodiments of the pump system such as in fig. 9 or fig. 13; furthermore ¶109 discusses the presence of pump inlet) configured to receive the liquid being pumped by the impeller,
having a front side (in view of fig. 1: left side) of the pump with an outlet (outlet being a port to which discharge pipe 16 is connected) configured to provide the liquid being pumped by the impeller from the pump inlet, through the pump body part cavity, and to the outlet, and
having a back part (part constituted by housing 36 of the sensor unit 14; see figs. 1-3) configured at a back side (in view of fig. 1: right side) of the pump on an opposite side (in view of fig. 1: →) of the outlet and configured to receive and contain the capacitive liquid sensing device (in view of figs. 2-3 and ¶61-¶62: the asserted back part is capable of receiving and containing components such as capacitor 33 (with sensor plates 38, 40 isolated by dielectric layer 71) and capacitive sensing integrated circuit 57 of the capacitive liquid sensing device 54), the back part (housing 36 of the sensor unit 14) being separate from the pump body part cavity (space within pump housing of pump 12) [see ¶57: “this configuration enables the sensor unit 14 and the pump 12 to be constructed independent of each other”] and having a housing wall (wall as a whole constituted by various wall portions 35+39+41+47+43+45+37; see fig. 2 and ¶58) with an outside wall surface (of wall 45; wherein “outside wall surface” = left surface of wall 45 in view of fig. 2) and an outside sensing surface (“outside sensing surface” = region/portion in the asserted outside wall surface of wall 45 that is overlapped by sensor plates 38, 40 of the asserted capacitive liquid sensing device 54 because this region/portion allows capacitance to be measured), the printed circuit board (42) having the capacitive liquid sensing device (54) being arranged or mounted inside the back part (housing 36 of the sensor unit 14) in relation to the outside sensing surface (see ¶60, ¶63, ¶65 and figs. 2-3) in order to allow the capacitive liquid sensing device to sense the level of the liquid collecting outside the pump and touching the outside sensing surface (as discussed in ¶56, ¶64-¶65);
the outside sensing surface having a predefined first level sensor (30, see fig. 2) opposite to the capacitive liquid sensing device (for instance, in view of fig. 2, “predetermined upper limit 30” is “opposite” to left side of component 40 of the capacitive liquid sensing device 54) and a predefined second level sensor (32, see fig. 2) opposite to the capacitive liquid sensing device (for instance, in view of fig. 2, “predetermined lower limit 32” is “opposite” to left side of component 40 of the capacitive liquid sensing device 54), the predefined first level sensor and the predefined second level sensor corresponding to the pump function ON/OFF respectively (as discussed in ¶56);
the outside sensing surface being a flat surface (part/portion of the asserted outside sensing surface in wall 45 being a flat surface, see fig. 2).
Mayleben remains silent on the pump wherein the pump intelligence with built-in programming (“programmed controller”) is “also configured to sense when the pump is running but not pumping the liquid when wet debris fouls the capacitive liquid sensing device, turn OFF the pump, and implement a periodic checking routine”.
However, Nirenberg teaches a similar pump wherein the controller (44) is configured to sense when the pump is running but not pumping the liquid when wet debris fouls the capacitive liquid sensing device, turn OFF the pump, and implement a periodic checking routine (see ¶27: “Because the current through the bilge pump 16 is proportional to the work being done by the bilge pump 16, the microcontroller 44 can determine if the bilge pump 16 is pumping water or 17 just spinning in air. It is noted that any other suitable pump value or variable can alternatively be monitored rather than the pump current. A threshold current value indicating the pumping of water is predetermined and programmed or embedded in the microcontroller 44. If the current through the bilge pump 16 is at or above the threshold current value, the microcontroller 44 permits the bilge pump 16 to continue to operate until the current through the bilge pump 16 drops below this threshold current value as the water 17 and/or other bilge fluid is fully evacuated from the bilge 12. If the bilge pump 16 is falsely triggered by the probe signal due to high humidity or residual moisture or contamination around the probes 22 as indicated by the current through the bilge pump 16 being below the threshold current value, the microcontroller 44 immediately shuts off the bilge pump 16 and the actual probe signal strength is averaged into the probe threshold signal level. This adjustment of the threshold signal level allows the probe threshold signal level to constantly follow or adjust for any environmental changes or help compensate for any dielectric build up due to dirty liquid coming in contact with the probes 22” and see ¶29: “From the foregoing disclosure it is apparent that by monitoring the current draw of the bilge pump 16, the bilge pump 16 operates only as long as it takes to completely evacuate the bilge 12 of water 17 and other bilge fluids.... It is also apparent that by keeping a running average of the probe signal strength, the bilge pump switch 10 has the ability to intelligently determine the state of the water level in the bilge 12. The signal strength can vary due to changing environmental conditions or the accumulation of dirt on the probes 22. Changing conditions and or dirty probes 22 can result in damage to the bilge pump 16 by running it dry, or the probes 22 not triggering at all resulting in a sinking boat 14”).
Both references of Mayleben and Nirenberg teach a submersible pump that use a microprocessor/controller to manage a dual-sensor system (level sensor + current sensor) for pump control. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure the pump intelligence with built-in programming (i.e. programmed controller) of Mayleben to sense when the pump is running but not pumping the liquid when wet debris fouls the capacitive liquid sensing device, turn OFF the pump, and implement a periodic checking routine as taught by Nirenberg for the purpose of preventing damage to the bilge/submersible pump, as recognized by Nirenberg (see ¶29).
Mayleben remains silent on the pump wherein “the outside sensing surface having back side pump ribs extending at least partially between the predefined first level sensor and the predefined second level sensor, the back side pump ribs configured to extend or project outwardly away from the outside wall surface, in order to prevent the wet debris from being stuck on the outside sensing surface, so as to reduce a malfunction of the pump due to the wet debris contacting the outside sensing surface” and wherein “the back side pump ribs being arranged on and projecting from the flat surface”.
However, Burdi teaches a similar pump comprising a liquid sensing device (¶37: 22 with 50+52+60+62 in sensor system 20) configured to sense a level of a liquid collecting outside the pump and turn the pump on/off for pumping the liquid (see ¶36); and a housing (¶37: fluid tight housing or container 24) configured to receive and contain therein the liquid sensing device, wherein the housing has a housing wall (wall of 24 seen in fig. 1 or fig. 2, left picture or see fig. A below: “housing wall” is labelled) with an outside wall surface [left side of the asserted housing wall in view of fig. A below (fig. 2, right picture)] with an outside sensing surface [this outside sensing surface is viewed as the region/portion in the asserted outside wall surface (region/portion parallel to “rectangular shaped border” as seen in fig. A below) that is overlapped by the shape of the liquid sensing device 20/22 because it is within this region/portion through which the electric fields generated by the electrodes 50, 52, 60, 62 (as discussed in ¶37) of the liquid sensing device 20 passes through], the outside sensing surface having back side pump ribs (27; in fig. 1) extending at least partially between a predefined first level sensor (predetermined upper level 16H; in fig. 1) and a predefined second level sensor (predetermined lower level 16L; in fig. 1); the back side pump ribs configured to extend or project outwardly away from the outside wall surface, in order to prevent wet debris from being stuck on the outside sensing surface, so as to reduce a malfunction of the pump due to the wet debris contacting the outside sensing surface (see ¶49; the outside surface with ribs is capable of having the claimed features: ribs 27 allow bilge debris to slough off and in view of fig. 5, allows the sensing device to sense the liquid level; thus reducing the malfunction of the pump); the outside sensing surface being a flat surface (as evident from fig. A below), and the back side pump ribs being arranged on and projecting from the flat surface (as evident from fig. A below or fig. 1 and in view of disclosure in ¶49).
PNG
media_image1.png
862
2298
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. A: Edited figs. 1 and 2 of Burdi to show claim interpretation.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the back side pump ribs as taught by Burdi on the flat outside sensing surface in the pump of Mayleben for the purpose of allowing bilge debris to slough off or away from housing as the fluid level falls during pumping, as recognized by Burdi (in ¶49).
In reference to claim 33, Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs (of Burdi) are arranged on the flat surface (of Mayleben) and dimensioned so that there is a space to receive the liquid between adjacent back side pump ribs when the wet debris is stuck on, or in contact with, the backside pump ribs (in view of Burdi’s disclosure in ¶49).
In reference to claim 35, Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs (of Burdi) are configured to provide heat resistance and structural rigidity to prevent deformation of the outside wall surface (of Mayleben) from thermal stress (Burdi’s ribs are capable of having the claimed features; similar arguments/remarks as made by the applicant on page 9 of the arguments dated 08/12/2022 applies herein as well for the modified Mayleben’s pump; first argument/reasoning by the applicant: the ribs provide heat resistance and structural rigidity to prevent deformation of the outside wall surface from thermal stress by drawing heat from the outside wall surface to surrounding water/liquid when the temperature of the surrounding water/liquid is cooler than the corresponding temperature of the outside wall surface of the housing of the pump; second argument/reasoning by the applicant: this cooler relation between the extension or projection of the ribs outwardly away from the outside wall surface of the housing (14) of the pump and the associated provisioning of the heat resistance and the structural rigidity will also more likely prevent deformation of the outside wall surface from any associated thermal stress, since a cooler outside wall surface of the housing is less likely to deform due to heat than a hotter outside wall surface of the housing).
In reference to claim 36, Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs (of Burdi) include three back side pump ribs.
Mayleben, as modified, remains silent on the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs include five back side pump ribs.
Burdi further teaches the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs include one or more back side pump ribs (see ¶49).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide five back side pump ribs in the modified pump of Mayleben and Burdi since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Please note that in the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the number of back side pump ribs in the pump.
In reference to claim 37, Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs (of Burdi) are arranged vertically in relation to a pump axis (in view of Burdi’s fig. 1 and ¶49 or in view of Mayleben’s fig. 1: pump axis is viewed as in vertical direction).
In reference to claim 39, Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs (of Burdi) are symmetrically arranged (as seen in Burdi’s fig. 1) on the outside sensing surface (of Mayleben).
In reference to claim 40, Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs (27; of Burdi) are of equal length in axial direction (see Burdi’s fig. 1).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the back side pump ribs include a shorter middle back side pump rib and longer outer back side pump ribs in the modified pump of Mayleben as long as the back side pump ribs effectively allow the bilge debris to slough off or away from the housing. Further, applicant in the instant application (see ¶51 of pg. pub of the instant application) has not disclosed that “shorter middle back side pump rib and longer outer back side pump ribs” provides unexpected results or solves a stated problem.
In reference to claim 41, Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs (of Burdi) include three back side pump ribs.
Mayleben, as modified, remains silent on the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs include seven back side pump ribs.
Burdi further teaches the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs include one or more back side pump ribs (see ¶49).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide seven back side pump ribs in the modified pump of Mayleben and Burdi since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. Please note that in the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the number of back side pump ribs in the pump.
In reference to claim 42, Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the pump is a bilge pump for configuring in, and pumping the liquid from, a hull of a vessel, or a sump pump for configuring in, and pumping the liquid from, a sump, or a shower drain pump for configuring in, and pumping the liquid from, a shower drain (for instance, modified pump of Mayleben is considered to be a sump pump in view of disclosure in ¶3 of Mayleben).
In reference to claim 43, Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the capacitive liquid sensing device (54, see fig. 3 of Mayleben) includes a high capacitive liquid level sensor (44a) configured to sense a high liquid level and turn the pump ON (see Mayleben’s fig. 2 and ¶59; “44a” is considered to be a high capacitive liquid level sensor because it enables the detection electrode 40 to provide a corresponding output across its length; liquid near 44a generates capacitance that corresponds to high liquid level at or in proximate to predetermined upper limit 30; wherein the upper limit activates the pump as per ¶56), and includes a low capacitive liquid level sensor (44b) configured to sense a low liquid level and turn the pump OFF (see Mayleben’s fig. 2 and ¶59; “44b” is considered to be a low capacitive liquid level sensor because it enables the detection electrode 40 to provide a corresponding output across its length; liquid near 44b generates capacitance that corresponds to low liquid level at or in proximate to predetermined lower limit 32; wherein the lower limit deactivates the pump as per ¶56).
In reference to claim 44, Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the capacitive liquid sensing device is configured to implement the periodic checking routine to revert the pump to normal operation once the wet debris is removed [the periodic checking routine, once implemented (as taught by the combination discussed in claim 32 above), would inherently return the pump to normal operation once the fault condition (wet debris) is gone and the primary condition (liquid level) returns].
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mayleben in view of Nirenberg and Burdi further in view of Daley et al. (US 2006/0260993 – herein after Daley).
Mayleben, as modified, teaches the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs (27; of Burdi) are arranged vertically in relation to a pump axis (in view of Burdi’s fig. 1 and ¶49 or in view of Mayleben’s fig. 1: pump axis is viewed as in vertical direction).
Mayleben, as modified, remains silent on the pump, wherein the back side pump ribs are arranged horizontally in relation to a pump axis.
However, Daley teaches the system (10, in fig. 1/2) with housing/tank (21) and pump (12), wherein a plurality of ribs (27) are provided on the housing (21) and are arranged horizontally (see ¶30 and figs. 1-2: ribs 27 are referred as “horizontal ribs”) in relation to a pump axis (in ↨ direction with respect to fig. 1/2).
Thus, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the ribs arranged horizontally in relation to the pump axis in the modified pump of Mayleben as long as the ribs effectively allow the bilge debris to slough off or away from the housing. Further, applicant in the instant application has not disclosed any criticality associated with “horizontal” ribs (for instance, see ¶52 of pg. pub of the instant application, where applicant states “However, the scope of the invention is not intended to be limited to the number of ribs 16, the placement/configuration of the ribs 16, the orientation (e.g., vertical or horizontal) of the ribs 16, the dimension of the ribs 16, etc.; and embodiments are envisioned, and the scope of the invention is intended to include, implementations having a different number of ribs, a different placement/configuration of the ribs, a different orientation (e.g., vertical or horizontal) of the ribs, a different dimension of the ribs, etc., than that shown and described herein”). One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected modified Mayleben’s pump to perform equally well with claimed ribs arranged horizontally in relation to the pump axis.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's following arguments filed 07/07/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regards to the applicant’s argument “In contrast to the claimed invention, the primary reference (Mayleben) does not disclose, teach or suggest a pump (10) having a printed circuit board (PCB) configured with a capacitive liquid sensing device (12) therein that includes pump intelligence with built-in programming configured to sense a level of a liquid collecting outside the pump (10) and turn the pump (10) ON/OFF for pumping the liquid, as claimed. Instead, Mayleben's the sensor unit 14 has its liquid level sensing device that includes Mayleben's reference electrode 38 and its detection electrode 40 that are isolated and separated by the dielectric wall 71 formed by the first side wall 45 of its housing 36, and that also includes Mayleben's circuit board 42 that are electrically connected to its reference electrode 38 and its detection electrode 40 by the wires 48, 50. In further contrast to the claimed invention, the primary reference (Mayleben) 's pump 12 does not house or contain any liquid level sensing device, e.g., including its reference electrode 38, its detection electrode 40, its circuit board 42, its capacitive sensor 54 or its capacitor 33 shown in Figures 2, 3 and 4A. Instead, Mayleben's pump 12 merely responds to activation/deactivation signaling received from the circuit board 42 of the sensor unit 14 and pumps liquid from the reservoir 26 via the discharge pipe 16”:
This is not found to be persuasive. This contention overlooks the explicit disclosures and structural mapping present in the office action for Mayleben. As discussed above in the rejection, Mayleben teaches the argued limitations/features in view of figs. 1-3 and disclosure in ¶60-¶61. As established, Mayleben teaches a pump system (10) comprising a pump body (housing of pump 12) and a separate or adjacently configured back part (the sensor unit 14 or its housing 36) positioned at the back side (viewed as right side in view of fig. 1) of the pump on an opposite side of the outlet. The housing 36 receives and contains the capacitive liquid sensing device 54 and the printed circuit board 42. As discussed by Mayleben in ¶60, “…the circuit board 42 includes a power supply 52, a capacitive sensor 54, a controller, such as microprocessor 58, an AC switch, such as solid state relay (SSR) 60, and signaling circuitry 70”.
The structural features recited in amended claim 32 – specifically a pump body featuring an impeller and inlet, along with a distinct back part enclosing the printed circuit board having the capacitive liquid sensing device – align directly with the cooperative structural configuration illustrated and described in Mayleben. Insofar as the applicant seeks to establish a differentiation predicated on whether these elements reside in a single integrated structure verses a modular, cable-linked adjacent housing, Mayleben teaches the claimed setup wherein a sensor housing 36 (the “back part”) remains separate from the pump body cavity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIRAG JARIWALA whose telephone number is (571)272-0467. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 AM-5 PM.
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, ESSAMA OMGBA can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/CHIRAG JARIWALA/Examiner, Art Unit 3746
/BRYAN M LETTMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights