NON-FINAL 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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11 March 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 25 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s argument that “Göhmann and Maehans disclose outlets that are coaxially arranged with respect to the axis of rotation but not axially-aligned as claimed” (page 9 of Remarks), the examiner respectfully disagrees. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, “axially-aligned with the axis of rotation” is considered to mean the arrangement of components or parts along a central, shared line or axis of rotation, and in this case, that the opening at the first of the two axial ends of the drum and the at least one outlet at the second of the two axial ends of the drum are arranged along the central axis of rotation of the rotor. Göhmann discloses an inlet opening 103 at the upper axial end of the drum that is arranged along and centered on the axis of rotation, and a discharge opening that exits from the lower axial boundary wall of the housing that is arranged along and centered on the axis of rotation (see annotated Fig. 1 of Göhmann in the rejections below). Both openings therefore satisfy the “axially-aligned with the axis of rotation” limitation. Applicant’s specification does not define “axially-aligned” in a manner that would exclude structures that are also coaxially arranged with the rotational axis. The terms used in this respect are given their broadest reasonable interpretation in their ordinary usage in context as they would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art, in light of the written description in the specification, including the drawings, without reading into the claim any disclosed limitation or particular embodiment. See, e.g., In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2004); In re Hyatt, 211 F.3d 1367, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2000); In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55 (Fed. Cir. 1997); In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22 (Fed. Cir. 1989). Furthermore, the specification describes the feed pipe as passing “concentrically to the axis of rotation of the rotor through the housing 1” (para. [0080]), and the discharge pipe as passing “through the housing 1 and the lower magnetic bearing 5 concentrically to the axis of rotation D” (para. [0096]). Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, a structure that is concentric with the axis of rotation is axially-aligned with it.
Applicant argues that Göhmann’s “shaft 205b of distributor 204 is arranged between lower rotor magnet 332. Göhmann accordingly does not disclose or suggest that ‘the discharge pipe passes axially through a lower one of the at least two rotor units’ as recited in amended independent claim 24” (page 9 of Remarks). The examiner notes that although Göhmann does not disclose a stationary discharge pipe that passes through the lower rotor unit, the rejection of amended 24 does not depend on Göhmann alone for this limitation. The claimed stationary discharge pipe is taught by Maehans (liquid transferring member 21, Fig. 1, Maehans). In the combination of Göhmann and Maehans, the stationary discharge pipe of Maehans would extend axially into drum 20 of Göhmann from the lower axial end. Göhmann discloses that the lower rotor unit (second magnets 322 and/or rotor magnet 332, Fig. 1) is circumferentially disposed on the underside of drum 20 (Fig. 1). The stationary discharge pipe entering the drum axially from below would pass through where the second magnets 322 and/or rotor magnet 332 are circumferentially arranged, thereby satisfying the limitation “the discharge pipe passes axially through a lower one of the at least two rotor units”. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the separator insert of Göhmann with the discharge pipe and peeling disk of Maehans for the purpose of conducting liquid into and out of space 17 for maintaining the interface layer between oil and water in the separating chamber at a radial level (para. [0036], [0040], Maehans).
The rejection over Göhmann in view of Maehans is therefore still deemed valid and is maintained.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 13 February 2023. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Objections
Claim 34 is objected to because of the following informalities: it appears that the phrase “adjust a speed of the speed of the drum” should be ---adjust a speed of the drum---. Appropriate correction is required.
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 32 and 35 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.
Regarding claim 32, the preamble recites “the separator of claim 24”, but claim 24 is directed to a “separator insert”, not a “separator.
Regarding claim 35, the preamble recites “a separator insert of claim 24”, but should be “the separator insert of claim 24”. Furthermore, the limitation “wherein the separating means is arranged on the drum is a stack of separator disks arranged in the drum” is confusing and renders the claim indefinite.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Such claim limitations are: separating means in claim 24, and separating means in claim 39. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
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 24, 27-29, and 32-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102017128027 (Göhmann) in view of Maehans (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2005/0054505).
Regarding claim 24, Göhmann discloses a separator insert (centrifuge 1, Fig. 1) for a separator configured to separate a flowable suspension in a centrifugal field into at least two flowable phases of different density, the separator insert comprising: a) a housing (10, Fig. 1) comprising a feed pipe (inlet pipe 106, Fig. 1) and a discharge pipe (passage 105, Abstract, Fig. 1), wherein the housing is stationary in operation and is a container that is closed except for a supply opening (inlet opening 103, Fig. 1) in a first axial boundary wall of the housing and configured to receive an inflowing suspension; and two discharge openings (see annotated Fig. 1 below) for the at least two flowable phases of different density, wherein the two discharge openings are formed on an outer casing of the housing and a second axial boundary wall of the housing, or the first and the second axial boundary wall of the housing (opening to passage 104 is formed on a first axial boundary wall of the housing, opening to passage 105 is formed on a second axial boundary wall of the housing, Fig. 1); b) a rotor (drum 20, Fig. 1), which is rotatable about an axis of rotation, arranged within the housing, wherein the rotor comprises a drum (drum 20, Fig. 1), which has multiple openings (opening for inlet pipe 106 and openings at “ro” and “ru”, Fig. 1) comprising an opening at a first of two axial ends of the drum into which the feed pipe (inlet pipe 106, Fig. 1), which does not rotate during operation of the separator, extends to feed the suspension to be processed in the drum, wherein the feed pipe does not touch the drum; d) separating means (plate pack 207, Fig. 1) arranged in the drum; and e) at least two rotor units (upper radially acting bearing device 310, second magnets 322, and/or rotor magnet 332, Fig. 1) for magnetic bearing devices, wherein the at least two rotor units are arranged at two axially spaced locations of the rotor, and wherein the at least two rotor units are configured to hold the rotor in a suspended state, to rotatably mount the rotor, and to rotate the rotor within the housing during operation of the separator (page 5 lines 5-28 of machine translation), but does not disclose at least one outlet at a second of the two axial ends of the drum into which a discharge pipe, which does not rotate during operation of the separator, extends, wherein the discharge pipe forms a peeling disk shaft of a first peeling disk, which does not rotate during operation of the separator and which is arranged in the drum; wherein the first peeling disk is arranged below the separating means.
PNG
media_image1.png
897
792
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Maehans discloses a centrifuge rotor (Fig. 1) comprising at least one outlet at a second of the two axial ends of the drum into which a discharge pipe (liquid transferring member 21, Fig. 1), which does not rotate during operation of the separator, extends, wherein the discharge pipe forms a peeling disk shaft of a first peeling disk (para. [0016], [0036], Fig. 1), which does not rotate during operation of the separator and which is arranged in the drum (Fig. 1, para. [0036]); wherein the first peeling disk (liquid transferring member 21, Fig. 1) is arranged below the separating means (separation discs 10, Fig. 1).
Regarding the newly added limitation that “the opening at the first of the two axial ends of the drum and the at least one outlet at the second of the two axial ends of the drum are axially-aligned with the axis of rotation of the rotor”, Göhmann discloses that the inlet opening 103 at the upper axial end of the housing 10 is centered on the axis of rotation D (Fig. 1), and that the discharge opening to outlet passage 105 at the lower axial boundary wall of the housing 10 (see annotated Fig. 1 of Göhmann) is centered on axis of rotation D. Both openings are disposed on the central axis of rotation and are “axially-aligned with the axis of rotation of the rotor” within the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding the newly added limitation “wherein the feed pipe of the housing passes axially through an upper one of the at least two rotor using and the discharge pipe passes axially through a lower one of the at least two rotor units”, Göhmann discloses that the feed pipe (inlet pipe 106, Fig. 1) of the housing (10, Fig. 1) passes axially through an upper one of the at least two rotor units (upper radially acting bearing device 310, Fig. 1).
Göhmann does not disclose the discharge pipe passes axially through a lower one of the at least two rotor units. As set forth above, Maehans teaches the stationary discharge pipe (liquid transferring member 21, Fig. 1). In the combination of Göhmann and Maehans, the stationary discharge pipe of Maehans would extend axially into drum 20 of Göhmann from the lower axial end. Göhmann discloses that the lower rotor unit (second magnets 322 and/or rotor magnet 332, Fig. 1) is circumferentially disposed on the underside of drum 20 (Fig. 1). The stationary discharge pipe entering the drum axially from below would pass through where the second magnets 322 and/or rotor magnet 332 are circumferentially arranged, thereby satisfying the limitation “the discharge pipe passes axially through a lower one of the at least two rotor units”.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the separator insert of Göhmann with the discharge pipe and peeling disk of Maehans for the purpose of conducting liquid into and out of space 17 for maintaining the interface layer between oil and water in the separating chamber at a radial level (para. [0036], [0040], Maehans).
Regarding claims 27 and 28, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans discloses a second peeling disk (outlet member 15, Fig. 1, Maehans); wherein the second peeling disk (outlet member 15, Fig. 1, Maehans) comprises a peeling disk shaft formed as a second discharge pipe (para. [0033], Maehans), wherein the peeling disk shaft is arranged coaxially with the feed pipe (inlet pipe 9, Fig. 1, Maehans) and is guided coaxially therewith out of the drum and through the supply opening in the wall of the first axial boundary wall of the housing (central annular cap 13, Fig. 1, Maehans).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans discloses a regulating valve (constant pressure valve 27, Fig. 2, Maehans) connected on a flow side downstream of the first peeling disk (liquid transferring member 21, Fig. 2, Maehans).
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans discloses wherein the housing and the drum are made entirely or predominantly of plastic or a plastic composite material (page 3 lines 34-35; page 4 lines 15-16 of machine translation, Göhmann).
Regarding claim 33, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans discloses wherein the at least two rotor units (upper radially acting bearing device 310, second magnets 322, and/or rotor magnet 332, Fig. 1, Göhmann) are respectively arranged at the two axial ends of the drum (page 5 lines 5-28 of machine translation, Göhmann), and wherein the feed pipe (inlet pipe 106, Fig. 1, Göhmann) and the discharge pipe (liquid transferring member 21, Fig. 1, Maehans) each pass axially through one of the at least two rotor units (inlet pipe 106 extends through inlet opening 103 into drum 20 and axially passes through upper bearing device 310, Fig. 1, Göhmann; in the combination of Göhmann and Maehans, the liquid transferring member 21 of Maehans extends axially into drum 20 from the lower axial end of the drum and axially passes through second magnets 322 of the lower rotor unit which are circumferentially disposed on the underside of drum 20, Fig. 1, Göhmann).
Regarding claim 34, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans discloses wherein one or both of the magnetic bearing devices are configured to rotate and adjust a speed of the speed of the drum (page 5 lines 24-26 of machine translation, Göhmann), and wherein one or both of the magnetic bearing devices act in a radially and axially bearing manner and keep the rotor suspended in the drum at a distance from the drum during operation (page 5 lines 9-23 of machine translation, Göhmann).
Regarding claim 35, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans discloses wherein the separating means is arranged on the drum is a stack of separator disks (plate pack 207, Göhmann) arranged in the drum, wherein the first peeling disk (liquid transferring member 21, Fig. 1, Maehans) is arranged in the drum (lower part 1 and upper part 2, Fig. 1, Maehans) below a distributor (5, Fig. 1, Maehans) and below the stack of separator disks (10, Fig. 1, Maehans).
Regarding claim 36, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans discloses wherein all components of the separator insert are assembled into the pre-assembled unit (the drum and housing are disposable components, and the drum has exclusively three openings and is otherwise formed hermetically closed, and therefore it is assumed that all components of the separator insert are assembled inside the housing, page 3 lines 25-27, Göhmann), wherein all of the product-contacting elements of the separator insert are made of plastic or other non-magnetic material (page 4 lines 15-16, Göhmann).
Regarding claim 37, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans discloses wherein the feed pipe (inlet pipe 106, Fig. 1, Göhmann) and the discharge pipe (passage 105, Fig. 1, Göhmann) project outwardly from the housing as nozzles that are connected to the housing in a sealed manner (page 3 lines 26-28, line 38 – page 4 line 1. Göhmann) or are formed integrally with the housing.
Regarding claim 38, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans discloses wherein the housing is hermetically closed except for the supply opening and the two discharge openings (page 3 lines 26-28, line 38 – page 4 line 1, Göhmann).
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Göhmann in view of Maehans, as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of CN 12221721 (Xiao et al., hereafter Xiao).
Regarding claims 25 and 26, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans does not disclose wherein the drum includes further openings that are free radial outlets for a second of the flowable phases from the drum into the housing, from which the second of the flowable phases can be discharged; wherein the free outlets are associated with a trapping ring chamber of the housing, which has a discharge from the housing.
Xiao discloses wherein the drum 11 includes further openings that are free radial outlets for a second of the flowable phases from the drum into the housing 17, from which the second of the flowable phases can be discharged (Fig. 2-4); wherein the free outlets are associated with a trapping ring chamber 23, 41 and/or 42 of the housing, which has a discharge from the housing (Fig. 2-4). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the separator insert of the combination of Göhmann and Maehans with the further openings taught by Xiao for the purpose of collecting the light and heavy phase liquid in corresponding flow passages of the machine frame to flow out of the machine (Abstract, Xiao).
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Göhmann in view of Maehans, as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of EP 0241128 (Krook).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans does not disclose a second regulating valve connected on a flow side downstream of the second peeling disk.
Krook discloses a second regulating valve connected on a flow side downstream of the clarified liquid outlet (corresponding to the second peeling disk) (Abstract, Figure). A second peeling disk is taught by Maehans as discussed above regarding claim 27. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the separator insert of the combination of Göhmann and Maehans with the second regulating valve as taught by EP 0241128 for the purpose of controlling the amount of separated sludge leaving the centrifugal separator (Abstract). In this way the concentration of the separated sludge may be maintained substantially constant and the amount of sludge having accumulated in the centrifuge rotor may be maintained substantially unchanged (col. 6 line 56 – col. 7 line 4, Krook).
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Göhmann in view of Maehans, as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of WO 2014000829 (Mackel et al., hereafter Mackel).
Regarding claim 31, the combination of Göhmann and Maehans discloses a pre-assembled, exchangeable unit (separator together with housing are for single use, page 5 lines 35-36, Göhmann), but does not disclose configured for insertion into a frame of the separator. However, a frame of the separator has not been positively recited as an element of the separator insert, and therefore does not further limit the claimed apparatus.
Nevertheless, Mackel discloses the pre-assembled, exchangeable unit 1 and/or 2 configured for insertion into a frame of the separator (the drum 2 is inside the housing 1 and the housing can be screwed to a machine frame, page 4 lines 14-15 of machine translation). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the separator insert of the combination of Göhmann and Maehans with the frame of Mackel for the purpose of supporting the separator insert and the motor (page 4 lines 14-15 of machine translation, Mackel).
Claims 39 and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Göhmann in view of Maehans, and further in view of Mackel.
Regarding claim 39, Göhmann discloses a separator (Abstract) configured to separate a flowable suspension in a centrifugal field into at least two flowable phases of different density, the separator comprising: and a separator insert (centrifuge 1, Fig. 1), wherein the separator insert comprises: a) a housing (10, Fig. 1) comprising a feed pipe (inlet pipe 106, Fig. 1) and a discharge pipe (passage 105, Abstract, Fig. 1), wherein the housing is stationary in operation and is a container that is closed except for a supply opening (inlet opening 103, Fig. 1) in a first axial boundary wall of the housing and configured to receive an inflowing suspension; and two discharge openings (see annotated Fig. 1 of Göhmann) for the at least two flowable phases of different density, wherein the two discharge openings are formed on an outer casing of the housing and a second axial boundary wall of the housing, or the first and the second axial boundary wall of the housing (opening to passage 104 is formed on a first axial boundary wall of the housing, opening to passage 105 is formed on a second axial boundary wall of the housing, Fig. 1); b) a rotor (drum 20, Fig. 1), which is rotatable about an axis of rotation, arranged within the housing, wherein the rotor comprises a drum (drum 20, Fig. 1), which has multiple openings (opening for inlet pipe 106 and openings at “ro” and “ru”, Fig. 1) comprising an opening at a first of two axial ends of the drum into which the feed pipe (inlet pipe 106, Fig. 1), which does not rotate during operation of the separator, extends to feed the suspension to be processed in the drum, wherein the feed pipe does not touch the drum; d) separating means (plate pack 207, Fig. 1) arranged in the drum; and e) at least two rotor units (upper radially acting bearing device 310, second magnets 322, and/or rotor magnet 332, Fig. 1) for magnetic bearing devices, wherein the at least two rotor units are arranged at two axially spaced locations of the rotor, and wherein the at least two rotor units are configured to hold the rotor in a suspended state, to rotatably mount the rotor, and to rotate the rotor within the housing during operation of the separator (page 5 lines 5-28 of machine translation), but does not disclose a frame; the separator insert is exchangeably arranged on the frame; at least one outlet at a second of the two axial ends of the drum into which a discharge pipe, which does not rotate during operation of the separator, extends, wherein the discharge pipe is part of a first peeling disk, which does not rotate during operation of the separator and which is arranged in the drum.
Maehans discloses a rotor comprising at least one outlet at a second of the two axial ends of the drum into which a discharge pipe (liquid transferring member 21, Fig. 1), which does not rotate during operation of the separator, extends, wherein the discharge pipe is part of a first peeling disk (para. [0016], [0036], Fig. 1), which does not rotate during operation of the separator and which is arranged in the drum (Fig. 1, para. [0036]). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the separator of Göhmann with the peeling disk of Maehans for the purpose of conducting liquid into and out of space 17 for maintaining the interface layer between oil and water in the separating chamber at a radial level (para. [0036], [0040]).
Regarding the newly added limitation that “the opening at the first of the two axial ends of the drum and the at least one outlet at the second of the two axial ends of the drum are axially-aligned with the axis of rotation of the rotor”, Göhmann discloses that the inlet opening 103 at the upper axial end of the housing 10 is centered on the axis of rotation D (Fig. 1), and that the discharge opening to outlet passage 105 at the lower axial boundary wall of the housing 10 (see annotated Fig. 1 of Göhmann) is centered on axis of rotation D. Both openings are disposed on the central axis of rotation and are “axially-aligned with the axis of rotation of the rotor” within the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding the newly added limitation “wherein the feed pipe of the housing passes axially through an upper one of the at least two rotor using and the discharge pipe passes axially through a lower one of the at least two rotor units”, Göhmann discloses that the feed pipe (inlet pipe 106, Fig. 1) of the housing (10, Fig. 1) passes axially through an upper one of the at least two rotor units (upper radially acting bearing device 310, Fig. 1).
Göhmann does not disclose the discharge pipe passes axially through a lower one of the at least two rotor units. As set forth above, Maehans teaches the stationary discharge pipe (liquid transferring member 21, Fig. 1). In the combination of Göhmann and Maehans, the stationary discharge pipe of Maehans would extend axially into drum 20 of Göhmann from the lower axial end. Göhmann discloses that the lower rotor unit (second magnets 322 and/or rotor magnet 332, Fig. 1) is circumferentially disposed on the underside of drum 20 (Fig. 1). The stationary discharge pipe entering the drum axially from below would pass through where the second magnets 322 and/or rotor magnet 332 are circumferentially arranged, thereby satisfying the limitation “the discharge pipe passes axially through a lower one of the at least two rotor units”.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided separator of Göhmann with the discharge pipe and peeling disk of Maehans for the purpose of conducting liquid into and out of space 17 for maintaining the interface layer between oil and water in the separating chamber at a radial level (para. [0036], [0040], Maehans).
The combination of Göhmann and Maehans does not disclose a frame; the separator insert is exchangeably arranged on the frame.
Mackel discloses a frame, and a separator insert (housing 1 and drum 2, Fig. 1) exchangeably arranged on the frame (the drum 2 is inside the housing 1, and the housing can be screwed to a machine frame, page 4 lines 14-15 of machine translation). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the separator insert of the combination of Göhmann and Maehans with the frame of Mackel for the purpose of supporting the separator insert and the motor (page 4 lines 14-15 of machine translation, Mackel).
Regarding claim 46, the combination of Göhmann, Maehans, and Mackel discloses a regulating valve (27, Fig. 2, Maehans) coupled to one of the two discharge openings; and a control device (control equipment, para. [0040], Maehans) connected to the regulating valve.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 40-45 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, since the prior art does not teach or suggest spaced-apart receptacles with stator units of the magnetic bearing devices, between which the separator insert is insertable in an exchangeable manner and the housing of the separator insert is insertable with the separator insert in a non-rotatable manner.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHUYI S LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-0496. The examiner can normally be reached MON - FRI 9:30AM - 2:30PM 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, Claire Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/Shuyi S. Liu/Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights