DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed March 19, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1 and 3 – 7 are pending in the application with claim 2 being cancelled. The amendment to claims has overcome the claim objections set forth in the last Non-Final Action dated January 9, 2026.
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 1 and 3 – 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawashiri et al. (JP 2001003835A – herein after Kawashiri).
In reference to claim 1, Kawashiri teaches a fuel pump (10, see ¶9 of translation and fig. 2) comprising:
a plunger (14, see fig. 1) that reciprocates;
a retainer (22; see fig. 3 and fig. A below) having a mounting portion (opening formed of portions labeled A, B and C – herein after referred as A+B+C) mounted on a lower end portion of the plunger (see fig. A below); and
a spring (16) that biases the plunger via the retainer (see ¶17 of the translation),
wherein
the mounting portion (A+B+C) of the retainer has an engagement portion (“A”) that is engaged with a constricted portion (neck portion 32, see fig. 1 or labeled as “c.p.” in fig. A below) formed at the lower end portion of the plunger, and a guide portion (“C”) that guides the constricted portion toward the engagement portion (“A”),
the mounting portion (A+B+C) is formed by continuously notching (In accordance to MPEP 2113, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation “by continuously notching” has not been given patentable weight) from an outer edge portion (labeled “o.e.p.” in fig. A below) of a flange portion (labeled “f.p.” in fig. A below) of the retainer to a center portion of a flat portion (labeled in fig. A below) of the retainer (22), the mounting portion including the engagement portion (“A”) formed linearly from an outer edge portion (labeled “o.p.” in fig. A below) of the flat portion toward the center portion on the flat portion, a connection portion (“B”) formed at an angle with respect to the engagement portion on the same flat portion, and the guide portion (“C”) formed in the flange portion and continuous with the connection portion,
a length of a width of an opening (28, see fig. 3) in the engagement portion (“A”) is smaller than a diameter of the lower end portion of the plunger (in this instance, “diameter of the lower end portion of the plunger” being diameter of portion 33 of the asserted lower end portion), and a length of a width of an opening (281, see fig. 3) in the guide portion (“C”) is larger than the diameter (diameter of portion 33) of the lower end portion of the plunger (see ¶14 of translation), and
a diameter (“D1”, see fig. B below) of a circle formed by a corner portion (bottom portion) of the engagement portion (“A”) on the guide portion side and an inner peripheral wall of the spring (inner peripheral wall of the spring is indicated by circle “c3” in fig. B below) [NOTE: in view of fig. 1, a POSITA would recognize that the inner peripheral wall of the spring is closer to circle labeled “c2” in fig. A below, i.e. the inner peripheral wall of the spring is between circle “c2” and dashed circle labeled “c1” shown in fig. B below (dashed circle indicating a center of a planar surface of the flange portion)] is a diameter D1 (see fig. B below) defined by end portions (“P1”, “P2”; see fig. B below) of the engagement portion on the connection-portion side and a point (“P”; see fig. B below) at which the inner peripheral wall of the spring contacts the plunger [the physical state of “contacting the plunger” is an inherent result of the disclosed assembly; Kawashiri states (see ¶15 of translation) the contact surface 29 of the plunger is movable in “all direction” to absorb the “misalignment between the axis of the plunger 14 and the axis of the tappet 13”; because the plunger axis can deviate, the plunger must eventually reach a physical limit of lateral travel; in a structure where a spring 16 abuts a spring seat 22 surrounding the plunger, that limit is the inner wall of the spring; the point at which this movement is arrested is point P; the contact between the plunger and the point P is a physical event that occurs when deviation of the plunger occurs].
PNG
media_image1.png
882
2288
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. A: Edited figs. 1 and 3 of Kawashiri to show claim interpretation.
PNG
media_image2.png
706
796
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. B: Edited fig. 3 of Kawashiri to show claim interpretation.
Kawashiri remains silent on the fuel pump, wherein the connection portion (“B”, see fig. A above) is formed at a “right” angle with respect to the engagement portion on the same flat portion.
Kawashiri teaches a mounting portion with two distinct widths: a narrow insertion hole (28) for locking and a wide opening (281) for assembly. The specific angle of the transition (the connection portion) is not numerically defined in Kawashiri. However, a right angle is a standard, routine mechanical configuration used to transition between two sections of different widths. Thus, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the connection portion formed at “a right angle” with respect to the engagement portion in Kawashiri’s fuel pump since such a modification would be a matter of routine optimization. To satisfy the Kawashiri’s requirement form a secure “lock” while maximizing the width of the assembly opening, a right angle is the most effective way to abruptly reduce the diameter of the path, thus selecting this geometry would be a matter of routine optimization. Furthermore, applicant has not disclosed any criticality to having the claimed “right angle” relationship [see ¶93 of pg. pub of the instant application: “Note that, although the example in which the connection portion 19c is formed at a right angle with respect to the engagement portion 19a and is formed on the flat portion 16 which is flush with the engagement portion 19a is described, the present invention is not limited to this configuration, and the connection portion 19c may be formed in a tapered shape and extended to the flange portion 18” or see ¶97 of pg. pub of the instant application: “As described above, the connection portion 19c may be formed in a tapered shape and extended to the flange portion 18, but the connection portion 19c is preferably formed at a right angle with respect to the engagement portion 19a and formed on the flat portion 16 which is flush with the engagement portion 19a”].
With respect to the limitation “the diameter D1 being formed to be smaller than the diameter of the lower end portion of the plunger, such that the connection portion is formed at a right angle on the same flat portion as the engagement portion to reduce the diameter D1 and prevent disengagement of the retainer from the constricted portion, while maintaining the guide-portion opening width sufficient for lateral insertion of the plunger”:
Kawashiri explicitly states (see ¶14 of translation) that the insertion hole 28 is “smaller than the head 33” to ensure the plunger is locked to the spring seat 22. For this physical “lock” to function, the escape path (mathematically defined/claimed by the applicant as D1) must necessarily and inherently be smaller than the plunger head diameter (i.e. the diameter of the lower end portion of the plunger). Kawashiri teaches (see ¶15 of translation) that the plunger is “slidable” and “movable in all directions” to absorb “misalignment between the axis of the plunger 14 and the axis of the tapper 13”. In such a design, the plunger is inherently arrested by the surrounding structure (the spring) during maximum deviation. The identification of a specific “contact point (Q1)” on the inner wall of the spring is merely a discovery of a result already present in the “locked” assembly of Kawashiri.
Thus, Kawashiri, as modified, teaches the fuel pump, wherein the diameter D1 (labeled in fig. B above) being formed to be smaller than the diameter of the lower end portion of the plunger (i.e. diameter of head 33 which is bigger than diameter of opening 28 while less than opening 281; see ¶14 of translation), such that the connection portion is formed at the right angle on the same flat portion as the engagement portion to reduce the diameter D1 (reduction in diameter D1 being inherent feature when the connection portion is formed at the right angle) and prevent disengagement of the retainer from the constricted portion, while maintaining the guide-portion opening width (width of the opening 281) sufficient for lateral insertion of the plunger (in view of Kawashiri’s disclosure in ¶14 of translation).
In reference to claim 3, Kawashiri teaches the fuel pump, wherein the retainer (22) includes (see fig. A above)
the flat portion on which the engagement portion (“A”) is formed,
a stepped portion (“s.p.”) which is continuous from the outer edge portion (“o.p.”) of the flat portion, and
the flange portion (“f.p.”) which is continuous from an end portion (end portion corresponding to circle “c2”) of the stepped portion on a side opposite (↓) to the flat portion and on which the spring (16) is placed (in view of fig. 1), and
the guide portion (“C”) is formed in the flange portion (“f.p.”).
In reference to claim 4, Kawashiri teaches the fuel pump, wherein the mounting portion (see fig. A above) of the retainer (22) includes the connection portion (“B”) that connects the engagement portion (“A”) and the guide portion (“C”).
In reference to claim 5, Kawashiri, as modified, teaches the fuel pump, wherein (see fig. A above)
the engagement portion (“A”) is formed linearly from the center portion to the outer edge portion of the flat portion,
the connection portion (“B”) is formed at a right angle with respect to the engagement portion (“A”), and
the guide portion (“C”) is formed in the linear shape in which the width of the opening (281) of the guide portion extends from the connection portion (“B”) toward the outer edge portion (“o.e.p.”) of the flange portion (“f.p.”).
Kawashiri, as modified, remains silent on the fuel pump wherein the guide portion is formed in a “tapered” shape in which the width of the opening of the guide portion “increases” from the connection portion towards the outer edge portion of the flange portion.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the guide portion formed in “a tapered shape” in which the width of the opening of the guide portion increases from the connection portion towards the outer edge portion of the flange portion in the modified Kawashiri’s fuel pump since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Furthermore, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for having the claimed “tapered” shape [see ¶91 of pg. pub of the instant application: “Note that, by forming the guide portion 19b in a tapered shape, the plunger 2 can be smoothly inserted when the plunger 2 is inserted into the mounting portion 19 of the retainer 15. Note that, although the example in which the guide portion 19b is formed in a tapered shape is described, the present invention is not limited to this configuration, and the guide portion 19b may be formed in a linear shape”].
In reference to claim 6, Kawashiri teaches the fuel pump, wherein (see fig. A above) the connection portion (“B”) is formed on the flat portion that is flush (level) with the engagement portion (“A”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is allowable as previously indicated.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, dated 03/19/2026, have been considered but are not found to be persuasive for following reasons. The arguments addressed below focus primarily on the absence of an “explicit” literal disclosure of the claimed features within the text of Kawashiri. However, the applicant fails to substantively address or traverse the Office’s detailed explanation regarding why these features are either inherently present in the disclosed assembly or represent obvious design choices based on routine mechanical optimization. Because the applicant has not provided a technical rebuttal to the Office’s interpretation – specifically the inherent physical arrestment of the plunger by the spring to define diameter D1 or the standard nature of right-angle transitions – the underlying technical logic of the rejection remains unrebutted. Consequently, since a reference need not be a literal copy to render a claim unpatentable under 35 USC 103, the rejections of claims 1 and 3 – 6 are maintained.
With respect to claim 1:
The applicant argues that Kawashiri does not disclose a continuous notch from the flange edge to the flat portion center, nor the specific three-part architecture (engagement, connection, and guide portions).
Kawashiri’s retainer (22) includes a central through-hole (28) and an assembly opening (281). These elements are continuous, allowing the plunger to be received from the outer periphery into the insertion hole. The claimed “engagement portion”, “connection portion”, and “guide portion” are functional descriptors/labels for structural regions within Kawashiri’s assembly path. Furthermore, the limitation “formed by continuously notching” describes a method of manufacture that does not impart patentable weight to the finished device. The structural continuity required by the claim is inherently present in Kawashiri’s assembly path.
The applicant contends that Kawashiri does not identify a right-angle connection portion on the same flat portion.
While Kawashiri does not numerically define the angle of the transition between the wide assembly opening (281) and the narrow locking hole (28), a right angle is a standard, routine mechanical configuration used to transition between sections of different widths. Selecting a right angle to maximize the assembly opening while ensuring a secure lock is a matter of routine optimization. Furthermore, the applicant’s own specification states the connection portion is “preferably” a right angle but can also be “tapered,” suggesting the specific geometry lacks criticality.
The applicant asserts that Kawashiri does not disclose the guide portion formed in the flange portion and continuous with the connection portion.
As shown in the edited figures, Kawashiri’s assembly opening (281) or asserted guide portion (“C”, in fig. A above) is located in the flange area (“f.p.”) and is continuous with the internal sections. This arrangement provides the exact structural continuity required by the claim.
The applicant asserts that Kawashiri does not define its widths relative to the plunger diameter datum as claimed.
Kawashiri explicitly defines (see ¶14 of translation) its dimensions relative to the plunger head (33). Kawashiri teaches that the locking hole (28) has a diameter “smaller than that of the head 33,” while the assembly opening (281) is “wider than the head 33”. This directly corresponds to the claimed relationship where the engagement opening is undersized and the guide opening is oversized relative to the same plunger datum.
The applicant argues that Kawashiri does not disclose the D1 geometric construct or specific contact points (Q1, Q2).
The diameter D1 is not a separate structural element but a mathematical discovery of a result inherent in the assembly. Kawashiri teaches that the plunger is “movable in all directions”. In any assembly where a spring surrounds a movable plunger, the physical limit of lateral travel is defined by the plunger contacting the inner wall of the spring (point P). The claimed D1 is merely the measurement of this inherent physical arrestment point.
The applicant argues that Kawashiri does not link the right-angle geometry to the mechanical result of reducing D1 while allowing insertion.
Reduction in diameter D1 is an inherent feature when the connection portion is formed at right angle. Proving a right-angle transition is the most effective way to abruptly reduce the diameter of the path from the wide entry to the narrow lock. This geometry inherently preserves the necessary insertion width while minimizing the escape path (D1) to prevent disengagement.
With respect to claim 5:
The applicant argues Kawashiri lacks the “increasing-width taper” for the guide portion.
A mere change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Modifying Kawashiri’s linear opening to be tapered would be an obvious design choice to facilitate “smoother insertion” of the plunger, a function that applicant admits is not limited to this configuration.
With respect to claim 6:
The applicant contends Kawashiri does not show the connection portion as “flush” with the engagement portion.
Kawashiri’s figs. 1 and 3 show the spring seat has a uniform flat surface surrounding the central hole. Because the transition between the assembly opening and the locking hole occurs on this same planar surface, the connection portion (“B” in fig. A above) is inherently flush with the engagement portion (“A” in fig. A above).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to 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
/ESSAMA OMGBA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights