Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/762,650

MOBILE PUMP SYSTEM PROVIDED WITH COUPLED MOTOR DRIVE FOR PUMPING WATER AND METHOD THEREFOR

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Mar 22, 2022
Examiner
KASTURE, DNYANESH G
Art Unit
3746
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Hytrans Beheer B V
OA Round
5 (Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
6-7
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
75%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allow Rate
304 granted / 627 resolved
-21.5% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+26.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
659
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
46.9%
+6.9% vs TC avg
§102
16.4%
-23.6% vs TC avg
§112
34.2%
-5.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 627 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to the amendments to the claims filed on 31 October 2025. Claims 15 – 34 are pending and currently being examined. 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. Claims 15 – 20 and 22 – 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA (Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art, Page 1, Lines 8 – 12 of Applicant’s Specification) in view of Shaefer (PG Pub US 20060207659 A1) and in view of Opfel (PG Pub US 20030222000 A1) and further in view of Angell (US Patent 2,781,831 A). In Re Claim 15, AAPA discloses a mobile pump system for pumping water and/or extinguishing agent (Page 1, Line 8), comprising: a frame (Page 1, Line 9) for housing the pump system; a booster pump (Page 1, Line 9) arranged in the frame; one or more submersible pumps (Page 1, Lines 10 – 11) arranged in the frame; a booster pump motor drive (Page 1, Line 11) configured to drive the booster pump; a motor drive (Page 1, Line 12) configured to drive the one or more submersible pumps, wherein the booster pump is configured to displace water and/or extinguishing agent (Page 1, Lines 9 – 10) and the submersible pump is configured to pump water for extinguishing and/or pumping up flood water (since it is a submersible pump, it pumps flood water). Although AAPA does not explicitly disclose that the submersible pump is driven by a hydraulics motor drive, however it is known to drive such submersible pumps by hydraulics as attested by Shaefer, see paragraph [0067]. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a hydraulics motor to drive the submersible pump of AAPA, in light of the teachings of Shaefer, as is conventional in the art. AAPA and Shaefer do not disclose a coupling for coupling the booster pump to the hydraulics motor drive such that the hydraulics motor drive can function as auxiliary drive for the booster pump. However, it is well known that pumps can move fluid over greater distance when provided with extra power either by increasing the power of a single pump motor or by combining plural pump motors to obtain a much higher output power as attested by Opfel, see paragraph [0042]. Therefore, 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 extra power to the booster pump of AAPA/Schaefer by using an auxiliary drive such as another pump motor, in light of the teachings of Opfel, in order to displace water and/or extinguishing agent over a greater distance than is achievable using the booster pump motor drive alone, as is known in the art. AAPA/Schaefer/Opfel does not specifically disclose that the extra power provided to the booster pump motor drive is coming from coupling the booster pump to the hydraulics motor drive however, Angell discloses a hydraulic motor drive (30; “turbine”; Column 1, Lines 37 – 45) that drives the motive fluid pump (“main pump” 42) of a hydraulic drive (that includes hydraulic motor 16). The booster pump (11) is initially driven by a booster pump motor drive (electric motor 15), and the hydraulic motor drive is configured to function as auxiliary drive for the booster pump (Column 1, Lines 41 – 42 and 51 – 52) when the discharge pressure of the booster pump reaches a sufficient value (Column 1, Lines 42 – 52). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the hydraulics drive motor of AAPA/Schaefer to provide the extra power to the booster pump, in light of the teachings of Angell since using the already present hydraulics motor drive would alleviate the need for bringing in an extra motor and as such would make the pump system more compact. Applicant should note that it is inherent that there would have to be some type of coupling for coupling the booster pump to the hydraulics motor drive. In Angell for example, booster pump (11) is coupled to the hydraulics motor drive through common shaft 23, tube 29 and nipple 46 (fig. 1). In Re Claim 16, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 15, and Shaefer further discloses a hydraulic drive (66) drivable by the hydraulic motor drive (68) (paragraph [0094]: “hydraulic motors fixed to the floating submersible satellite pumps”, 66 provides motive fluid to drive the hydraulic motors). In the modified apparatus, when the submersible pump drive is coupled to the booster pump drive, the submersible pumps are still driven by the submersible pump drive, therefore (66) and (68) can be designated as part of the broadly claimed coupling. In Re Claim 17, AAPA does not explicitly disclose a controller. However, Shaefer further discloses a controller for controlling the booster pump (paragraph [0094] states that the electronic engine control system controls the main pump discharge pressure) and the hydraulics motor drive (paragraph [0081] discloses a control interface for the engine 68 section of the hydraulic motor drive: 68 + 66). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate the controller of Shaefer to control the booster pump and hydraulic motor drive of AAPA since conventional controllers are known to be suitable for controlling pumps. In Re Claim 18, AAPA does not explicitly disclose sensors. However, Shaefer further discloses that the pump system is provided with one or more sensors (paragraph [0016] discloses “sense water inlet pressure”; paragraph [0094] discloses: “track main pump discharge pressure”; which is tantamount to the existence of two sensors) operatively connected to the controller (paragraph [0094] states that the electronic engine control system controls the main pump discharge pressure) for controlling the booster pump (paragraph [0094]: “and automatically increase or decrease engine speed as needed to continuously maintain discharge”) and hydraulics motor drive (paragraph [0083]: “hydraulic pump driver control”; paragraph [0016]: “control output of the first and second satellite pumps” which is tantamount to controlling the hydraulics motor drive that drives the hydraulic motor of the satellite pumps). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to modify AAPA to incorporate sensors operatively connected to the controller as taught by Shaefer for the purpose of enabling the controller to perform its function. In Re Claim 19, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 15, and Shaefer further discloses a control panel (paragraph [0066]) for operating and/or setting the pump system (paragraph [0066] discloses access to suction and discharge connections). In Re Claim 20, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 19, and Shaefer further discloses that the control panel (paragraph [0066]) is provided on an outer side of the frame (paragraph [0066] discloses a side door that provides access to the control panel, so the control panel is on an outer side of the frame). In Re Claim 22, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 15, and Shaefer further discloses that the hydraulics motor drive (68 + 66) is provided with radiator (68a; Figure 3A) cooling (paragraph [0085]). In Re Claim 23, AAPA does not disclose a metering pump. Shaefer further discloses a metering pump (paragraph [0092]: “transfer pump” for pumping additive like foam, a foam pump in applicant’s specification is referred to as a metering pump). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to modify AAPA to incorporate a metering pump as taught by Shaefer for the purpose of delivering foam additive which assists in firefighting. In Re Claim 24, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 23, and Shaefer further discloses that the metering pump is provided with a displaceable metering pump frame (paragraph [0092] discloses a tanker which reads on a displaceable frame). In Re Claim 25, AAPA does not disclose a displaceable frame for the submersible pump. However, Shaefer further discloses that the one or more submersible pumps (60) are provided with a displaceable submersible pump frame (61; paragraph [0077]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to modify the submersible pump of AAPA to incorporate a displaceable submersible pump frame as taught by Shaefer for the purpose of filtering the water (paragraph [0077] discloses that the frame includes a “suction inlet strainer”). In Re Claim 26, AAPA, Shaefer, Angell and Opfel as applied to Claim 15 discloses a device that anticipates the claimed method steps (MPEP 2112.02 – I states that if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device). In Re Claim 27, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 26, and Shaefer further discloses a hydraulic drive (66) drivable by the hydraulic motor drive (68) (paragraph [0094]: “hydraulic motors fixed to the floating submersible satellite pumps”, 66 provides motive fluid to drive the hydraulic motors). In the modified apparatus, when the submersible pump drive is coupled (by the mechanical coupling of Angell) to the booster pump drive, the submersible pumps are still driven by the submersible pump drive, therefore (66) and (68) perform the claimed “hydraulic driving of the coupling”. In Re Claims 28 – 30, AAPA does not explicitly disclose autonomous controlling and a controller. However, Shaefer further discloses autonomous controlling (paragraph [0020]: “automatic control”) and a controller for controlling the booster pump (paragraph [0094] states that the electronic engine control system controls the main pump discharge pressure) and the hydraulics motor drive (paragraph [0081] discloses a control interface for the engine 68 section of the hydraulic motor drive: 68 + 66). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate the controller and autonomous controlling of Shaefer to control the booster pump and hydraulic motor drive of AAPA since conventional controllers are known to be suitable for controlling pumps. In Re Claim 31, AAPA does not explicitly disclose sensors. However, Shaefer further discloses that the pump system is provided with one or more sensors (paragraph [0016] discloses “sense water inlet pressure”; paragraph [0094] discloses: “track main pump discharge pressure”; which is tantamount to the existence of two sensors) operatively connected to the controller (paragraph [0094] states that the electronic engine control system controls the main pump discharge pressure) for controlling the booster pump (paragraph [0094]: “and automatically increase or decrease engine speed as needed to continuously maintain discharge”) and hydraulics motor drive (paragraph [0083]: “hydraulic pump driver control”; paragraph [0016]: “control output of the first and second satellite pumps” which is tantamount to controlling the hydraulics motor drive that drives the hydraulic motor of the satellite pumps). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to modify AAPA to incorporate sensors operatively connected to the controller as taught by Shaefer for the purpose of enabling the controller to perform its function. In Re Claim 32, AAPA, Shaefer, Angell as applied to Claims 15, 17 and 19 disclose all the claimed limitations. In Re Claim 33, AAPA, Shaefer, Angell as applied to Claims 15, 17, 18 and 19 disclose all the claimed limitations. In Re Claim 34, AAPA, Shaefer, Angell as applied to Claims 15, 17, 18, 19 and 25 disclose all the claimed limitations. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA (Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art, Page 1, Lines 8 – 12 of Applicant’s Specification) in view of Shaefer (PG Pub US 20060207659 A1) and in view of Opfel (PG Pub US 20030222000 A1) and in view of Angell (US Patent 2,781,831 A) and further in view of Brown (PG Pub US 20080302316 A1). In Re Claim 21, AAPA does not disclose water cooling. However, Brown discloses an engine that is cooled by coolant water pumped from a lake directly to the engine jacket (paragraph [0006]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to pump lake water as taught by Brown to a cooling jacket of the booster pump motor drive of AAPA / Shaefer / Angell for cooling purposes (paragraph [0006] of Brown). Claims 15 – 20 and 22 – 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA (Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art, Page 1, Lines 8 – 12 of Applicant’s Specification) in view of Shaefer (PG Pub US 20060207659 A1) and in view of Opfel (PG Pub US 20030222000 A1) and further in view of Houck (US Patent 4,004,470 A). In Re Claim 15, AAPA discloses a mobile pump system for pumping water and/or extinguishing agent (Page 1, Line 8), comprising: a frame (Page 1, Line 9) for housing the pump system; a booster pump (Page 1, Line 9) arranged in the frame; one or more submersible pumps (Page 1, Lines 10 – 11) arranged in the frame; a booster pump motor drive (Page 1, Line 11) configured to drive the booster pump; a motor drive (Page 1, Line 12) configured to drive the one or more submersible pumps, wherein the booster pump is configured to displace water and/or extinguishing agent (Page 1, Lines 9 – 10) and the submersible pump is configured to pump water for extinguishing and/or pumping up flood water (since it is a submersible pump, it pumps flood water). Although AAPA does not explicitly disclose that the submersible pump is driven by a hydraulics motor drive, however it is known to drive such submersible pumps by hydraulics as attested by Shaefer, see paragraph [0067]. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a hydraulics motor to drive the submersible pump of AAPA, in light of the teachings of Shaefer, as is conventional in the art. AAPA and Shaefer do not disclose a coupling for coupling the booster pump to the hydraulics motor drive such that the hydraulics motor drive can function as auxiliary drive for the booster pump. However, it is well known that pumps can move fluid over greater distance when provided with extra power either by increasing the power of a single pump motor or by combining plural pump motors to obtain a much higher output power as attested by Opfel, see paragraph [0042]. Therefore, 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 extra power to the booster pump of AAPA/Schaefer by using an auxiliary drive such as another pump motor, in light of the teachings of Opfel, in order to displace water and/or extinguishing agent over a greater distance than is achievable using the booster pump motor drive alone, as is known in the art. AAPA/Schaefer/Opfel does not specifically disclose that the extra power provided to the booster pump motor drive is coming from coupling the booster pump to the hydraulics motor drive however, Houck discloses a mobile (Abstract: “the entire system can be transported by helicopters”) pump system (Figures 1 – 3) for pumping water and/or extinguishing agent (a mud pump is also capable of pumping water), comprising: a frame (50; Figure 3) for housing the pump system; a booster pump (42B) arranged in the frame; one or more submersible pumps (42A; conventional mud pumps are submersible) arranged in the frame (50); a booster pump motor drive (14B) configured to drive the booster pump; a hydraulics motor drive (14A) configured to drive the one or more submersible pumps (42A)(mud pumps are known to have hydraulic drives in the form of a motive fluid pump which drives a hydraulic motor which drives the mud pump; the motive fluid pump would be driven by the engine 14A), wherein the hydraulics motor drive (14A) is configured to function as auxiliary drive for the booster pump (42B)(engine 14B drives the draw works and booster pump 42B simultaneously – see Column 2, Lines 32 – 41; when jaw clutch 24A is disengaged each engine drives its pump independently, when jaw clutch is engaged engine 14A functions as an auxiliary drive for engine 14B – see Column 1, Lines 50 – 54; in doing so engine 14A functions as an auxiliary drive for pump 42B); and a coupling (24A, 26A, 36, 26B) for coupling the booster pump (42B) to the hydraulics motor drive (14A) such that the hydraulics motor drive (14A) can function as auxiliary drive for the booster pump (42B) when jaw clutch 24A is engaged (Column 2, Lines 42 – 49); wherein the booster pump (42B) is configured to displace water and/or extinguishing agent (a mud pump is capable of pumping water) and the submersible pump (42A) is configured to pump water for extinguishing and/or pumping up flood water (a mud pump is capable of pumping water). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the hydraulics drive motor of AAPA/Schaefer to provide the extra power to the booster pump, in light of the teachings of Houck since using the already present hydraulics motor drive would alleviate the need for bringing in an extra motor and as such would make the pump system more compact. Note that Houck is relevant to the problem “Conventional pump systems therefore make use here of heavy drives” (Page 1 Line 15 of Applicant’s specification) that applicant is trying to solve in view of Houck’s disclosure in Column 1, Line 67: “demountable into small subassemblies, each of which weigh less than a selected magnitude”. Further, Houck also satisfies the field of endeavor test because it is a similar structure to applicant’s invention (MPEP 2141.01(a) Section IV) in view of Houck’s disclosure: “This application deals only with the engine, power compound and pump system” in Column 1, Line 43. In Re Claim 16, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 15, and Shaefer further discloses a hydraulic drive (66) drivable by the hydraulic motor drive (68) (paragraph [0094]: “hydraulic motors fixed to the floating submersible satellite pumps”, 66 provides motive fluid to drive the hydraulic motors). In the modified apparatus, when the submersible pump drive is coupled to the booster pump drive via the coupling of Houck, the submersible pumps are still driven by the submersible pump drive, therefore (66) and (68) can be designated as part of the broadly claimed coupling. In Re Claim 17, AAPA does not explicitly disclose a controller. However, Shaefer further discloses a controller for controlling the booster pump (paragraph [0094] states that the electronic engine control system controls the main pump discharge pressure) and the hydraulics motor drive (paragraph [0081] discloses a control interface for the engine 68 section of the hydraulic motor drive: 68 + 66). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate the controller of Shaefer to control the booster pump and hydraulic motor drive of AAPA since conventional controllers are known to be suitable for controlling pumps. In Re Claim 18, AAPA does not explicitly disclose sensors. However, Shaefer further discloses that the pump system is provided with one or more sensors (paragraph [0016] discloses “sense water inlet pressure”; paragraph [0094] discloses: “track main pump discharge pressure”; which is tantamount to the existence of two sensors) operatively connected to the controller (paragraph [0094] states that the electronic engine control system controls the main pump discharge pressure) for controlling the booster pump (paragraph [0094]: “and automatically increase or decrease engine speed as needed to continuously maintain discharge”) and hydraulics motor drive (paragraph [0083]: “hydraulic pump driver control”; paragraph [0016]: “control output of the first and second satellite pumps” which is tantamount to controlling the hydraulics motor drive that drives the hydraulic motor of the satellite pumps). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to modify AAPA to incorporate sensors operatively connected to the controller as taught by Shaefer for the purpose of enabling the controller to perform its function. In Re Claim 19, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 15, and Shaefer further discloses a control panel (paragraph [0066]) for operating and/or setting the pump system (paragraph [0066] discloses access to suction and discharge connections). In Re Claim 20, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 19, and Shaefer further discloses that the control panel (paragraph [0066]) is provided on an outer side of the frame (paragraph [0066] discloses a side door that provides access to the control panel, so the control panel is on an outer side of the frame). In Re Claim 22, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 15, and Shaefer further discloses that the hydraulics motor drive (68 + 66) is provided with radiator (68a; Figure 3A) cooling (paragraph [0085]). In Re Claim 23, AAPA does not disclose a metering pump. Shaefer further discloses a metering pump (paragraph [0092]: “transfer pump” for pumping additive like foam, a foam pump in applicant’s specification is referred to as a metering pump). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to modify AAPA to incorporate a metering pump as taught by Shaefer for the purpose of delivering foam additive which assists in firefighting. In Re Claim 24, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 23, and Shaefer further discloses that the metering pump is provided with a displaceable metering pump frame (paragraph [0092] discloses a tanker which reads on a displaceable frame). In Re Claim 25, AAPA does not disclose a displaceable frame for the submersible pump. However, Shaefer further discloses that the one or more submersible pumps (60) are provided with a displaceable submersible pump frame (61; paragraph [0077]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to modify the submersible pump of AAPA to incorporate a displaceable submersible pump frame as taught by Shaefer for the purpose of filtering the water (paragraph [0077] discloses that the frame includes a “suction inlet strainer”). In Re Claim 26, AAPA, Shaefer and Houck as applied to Claim 15 discloses a device that anticipates the claimed method steps (MPEP 2112.02 – I states that if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device). In Re Claim 27, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 26, and Shaefer further discloses a hydraulic drive (66) drivable by the hydraulic motor drive (68) (paragraph [0094]: “hydraulic motors fixed to the floating submersible satellite pumps”, 66 provides motive fluid to drive the hydraulic motors). In the modified apparatus, when the submersible pump drive is coupled (by the mechanical coupling of Houck) to the booster pump drive, the submersible pumps are still driven by the submersible pump drive, therefore (66) and (68) perform the claimed “hydraulic driving of the coupling”. In Re Claims 28 – 30, AAPA does not explicitly disclose autonomous controlling and a controller. However, Shaefer further discloses autonomous controlling (paragraph [0020]: “automatic control”) and a controller for controlling the booster pump (paragraph [0094] states that the electronic engine control system controls the main pump discharge pressure) and the hydraulics motor drive (paragraph [0081] discloses a control interface for the engine 68 section of the hydraulic motor drive: 68 + 66). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate the controller and autonomous controlling of Shaefer to control the booster pump and hydraulic motor drive of AAPA since conventional controllers are known to be suitable for controlling pumps. In Re Claim 31, AAPA does not explicitly disclose sensors. However, Shaefer further discloses that the pump system is provided with one or more sensors (paragraph [0016] discloses “sense water inlet pressure”; paragraph [0094] discloses: “track main pump discharge pressure”; which is tantamount to the existence of two sensors) operatively connected to the controller (paragraph [0094] states that the electronic engine control system controls the main pump discharge pressure) for controlling the booster pump (paragraph [0094]: “and automatically increase or decrease engine speed as needed to continuously maintain discharge”) and hydraulics motor drive (paragraph [0083]: “hydraulic pump driver control”; paragraph [0016]: “control output of the first and second satellite pumps” which is tantamount to controlling the hydraulics motor drive that drives the hydraulic motor of the satellite pumps). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to modify AAPA to incorporate sensors operatively connected to the controller as taught by Shaefer for the purpose of enabling the controller to perform its function. In Re Claim 32, AAPA, Shaefer and Houck as applied to Claims 15, 17 and 19 disclose all the claimed limitations. In Re Claim 33, AAPA, Shaefer and Houck as applied to Claims 15, 17, 18 and 19 disclose all the claimed limitations. In Re Claim 34, AAPA, Shaefer and Houck as applied to Claims 15, 17, 18, 19 and 25 disclose all the claimed limitations. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA (Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art, Page 1, Lines 8 – 12 of Applicant’s Specification) in view of Shaefer (PG Pub US 20060207659 A1) and in view Opfel (PG Pub US 20030222000 A1) and in view of Houck (US Patent 4,004,470 A) and further in view of Brown (PG Pub US 20080302316 A1). In Re Claim 21, AAPA does not disclose water cooling. However, Brown discloses an engine that is cooled by coolant water pumped from a lake directly to the engine jacket (paragraph [0006]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to pump lake water as taught by Brown to a cooling jacket of the booster pump motor drive of AAPA / Shaefer / Houck for cooling purposes (paragraph [0006] of Brown). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. 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. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DNYANESH G KASTURE whose telephone number is (571)270-3928. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu, 7:30 AM to 6:00 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. /D.G.K/Examiner, Art Unit 3746 /ESSAMA OMGBA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 22, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 31, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 08, 2024
Response Filed
May 20, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Aug 22, 2024
Notice of Allowance
Oct 22, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 07, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 15, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 13, 2025
Notice of Allowance
May 07, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 25, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 31, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 14, 2025
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601332
INTEGRATED ELECTRO-HYDRAULIC UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12553444
VACUUM PUMP
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12529364
PUMP
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12460627
TORSION PUMP AND APPARATUS FOR SUPPLYING CHEMICAL LIQUID
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 04, 2025
Patent 12448971
COMPACT LOW NOISE ROTARY COMPRESSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 21, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
48%
Grant Probability
75%
With Interview (+26.9%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 627 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month