Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/040,530

HYDRAULIC PRESSURE CONTROL DEVICE

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Feb 03, 2023
Examiner
STOUT, RILEY OWEN
Art Unit
2834
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Advics Co. Ltd.
OA Round
4 (Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
75%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
86 granted / 115 resolved
+6.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +1% lift
Without
With
+0.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
150
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
55.1%
+15.1% vs TC avg
§102
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
§112
8.8%
-31.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 115 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 8/8/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As a preliminary matter, the Applicant argues first argues that claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Haga. Since the last action, 9/11/2025, the claims have been rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 Haga in view of Inoue. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-7 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. 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. Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haga et al (US 20170201147 A1) in view of Inoue et al (US 20200207316 A1) in further view of Sato et al (US 20130224979 A1). With respect to claim 1, Haga teaches a hydraulic pressure control device comprising: an electric motor (fig. 1, motor 10) including a motor main body portion (fig. 1, motor 10, comprising housing 21, rotor 30 and stator 40), a conductive portion (fig. 1, coil connection portions 91) connecting a cavity of a substrate (fig. 1, paragraph 59 “The wiring member 92 includes the external power-supply connection terminal 94 and the circuit board connection terminal 95.”) and the motor main body portion (see at least figure 1 and paragraph 59, circuit board 71 is connected to the motor and the terminal 94), and a covering portion covering a part of the conductive portion (fig. 1, connector connection portion 68b); a housing (fig. 1, motor housing 21) that is a metal block that accommodates a pressure adjusting device (paragraph 22 “In this preferred embodiment, a material of the housing 21 is, for example, metal” Examiner notes that the housing accommodates a motor 10), and in which a through-hole for accommodating the covering portion is formed (see at least figure 1, motor housing 21); a cap (fig. 1, main body portion 62) having a terminal insertion hole (paragraph 51 “That is, the connector portion 63 protrudes from the main body portion 62 toward the radially outer side of the center axis J. As can be seen from FIG. 1,”) through which a motor terminal (fig. 1, terminal 94), which is a distal end portion of the conductive portion exposed from the covering portion, is inserted, and being fitted into the through-hole (see figure 1 and paragraph 51 “That is, the connector portion 63 protrudes from the main body portion 62 toward the radially outer side of the center axis J. As can be seen from FIG. 1,”) and a seal member (fig. 1, O-ring 82) which is a cured product of a liquid sealing agent disposed between the cap (paragraph 68 “In this preferred embodiment, the front side O-ring 81 and the rear side O-ring 82 are preferably made of, for example, resin including silicon rubber or the like.”) and the covering portion to close the through-hole (fig. 1, O-ring 82 is between main body 62 and cover 22) and is a different member from the cap and the covering portion (see at least figure 2, O-ring 82 is a different member). Haga does not teach “a pressure adjusting device driven by the electric motor to adjust hydraulic pressure, wherein the cap is a separate member from the covering portion, and wherein a gap between the conductive portion and the covering portion is filled with the seal member.” Inoue teaches a pressure adjusting device driven by the electric motor to adjust hydraulic pressure (paragraph 31 “The motor body part 8a is fixed to the housing 10 via a fixing means of the frame 8b. The output shaft 81 protrudes from the motor body part 8a and is connected to the pump 57 disposed in the housing 10 to drive the pump 57”). Inoue does not teach “wherein the cap is a separate member from the covering portion, and wherein a gap between the conductive portion and the covering portion is filled with the seal member.” Sato teaches wherein the cap is a separate member from the covering portion (fig. 4b, flange portion is separate from sealing plug 16), and wherein a gap between the conductive portion and the covering portion is filled with the seal member (fig. 4b, inside of flange is filled with filling material 41). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the motor of Haga with the pump of Inoue with the sealed plug of Sato in order to produce hydraulic changes in a system, while maintaining a sealed environment in order to protect the motor from ingress or egress thereby increasing the motor lifespan. With respect to claim 2, Haga in view of Inoue in view of Sato teaches the above-mentioned limitations. Haga further teaches the conductive portion includes a plurality of power lines for supplying power to the motor main body portion (fig. 2, the external power-supply connection terminal 94) and a plurality of signal lines (paragraph 59 “The wiring member 92 includes the external power-supply connection terminal 94 and the circuit board connection terminal 95.”) for transmitting a rotation angle signal of the motor main body portion (paragraph 34 “The controller 70 controls driving operations of the motor 10. The controller 70 preferably includes the circuit board 71, a rotating sensor 72, a sensor magnet holding member 73a, and a sensor magnet 73b. That is, the motor 10 includes the circuit board 71, the rotation sensor 72, the sensor magnet holding member 73a, and the sensor magnet 73b” the Examiner notes that the controller is connected to the circuit board connection terminals); the covering portion includes a first covering portion that covers the power line and a second covering portion that covers the signal line separately from the first covering portion (see at least figures 1 and 2, the bus bar 91 and external power-supply connection terminal 94 are separated by a non-zero distance which the Examiner is interpreting as being covered separately from one another); and the motor terminal of the power line and the motor terminal of the signal line are respectively inserted into individual terminal insertion holes (figures 1-2 and paragraph 52 “The bus bar 91 and the external power-supply connection terminal 94 protrudes from the bottom surface of the power-supply opening 63a toward one side (+X side) disposed in the longitudinal direction of the bus bar holder 61.”). With respect to claim 3, Haga in view of Inoue in view of Sato teaches the above-mentioned limitations. Haga further teaches the cap includes a main body portion formed with the terminal insertion hole (fig. 1, main body portion 62 and paragraph 51 “That is, the connector portion 63 protrudes from the main body portion 62 toward the radially outer side of the center axis J. As can be seen from FIG. 1,”), and a flange portion protruding from an outer peripheral surface of the main body portion (see figure 2 marked below); and a portion on the covering portion side than the flange portion in the main body portion is disposed in the through-hole in a state of pressing the housing (see figure 1, and paragraph 54 “the connection terminal holding portion 64 includes an inner surface 64a of the holding portion in the radial direction.”). PNG media_image1.png 697 799 media_image1.png Greyscale Haga Figure 2 With respect to claim 4, Haga in view of Inoue in view of Sato teaches the above-mentioned limitations. Haga further teaches the cap includes a main body portion formed with the terminal insertion hole (fig. 1, main body portion 62 and paragraph 51 “That is, the connector portion 63 protrudes from the main body portion 62 toward the radially outer side of the center axis J. As can be seen from FIG. 1,”), and a flange portion protruding from an outer peripheral surface of the main body portion (see figure 2 marked above); and a portion on the covering portion side than the flange portion in the main body portion is disposed in the through-hole in a state of pressing the housing (see figure 1, and paragraph 54 “the connection terminal holding portion 64 includes an inner surface 64a of the holding portion in the radial direction.”). With respect to claim 5, Haga in view of Inoue in view of Sato teaches the above-mentioned limitations. Haga further teaches the motor terminal is connected to a female terminal of the cavity of the substrate (paragraph 61 “The circuit board connection terminal 95 is located at the front side (−Z side) ahead of the end of the rear side (+Z side) of the main body portion 62, such that the circuit board connection terminal 94 is fixed to the connection terminal holding portion 64.” And paragraph 64 “The connection surface 95f contacts the circuit board rear surface 71a. Although not shown in the drawings, the plate-shaped portion 95e is preferably fixed to the circuit board 71 by, for example, soldering.” The Examiner is interpreting the contact with circuit board as the female terminal). With respect to claim 6, Haga teaches the above-mentioned limitations but does not teach “the pressure adjusting device is a pump.” Inoue teaches the pressure adjusting device is a pump (paragraph 31 “The motor body part 8a is fixed to the housing 10 via a fixing means of the frame 8b. The output shaft 81 protrudes from the motor body part 8a and is connected to the pump 57 disposed in the housing 10 to drive the pump 57”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the motor of Haga with the pump of Inoue with the sealed plug of Sato in order to produce hydraulic changes in a system, while maintaining a sealed environment in order to protect the motor from ingress or egress thereby increasing the motor lifespan. With respect to claim 7, Haga in view of Inoue in view of Sato teaches the above-mentioned limitations. Haga further teaches the seal member abuts on an outer peripheral surface of the motor terminal over an entire circumference (fig. 2, o-rings 82 cover the terminal 94 on the outer surface to left of page). With respect to claim 8, Haga in view of Inoue teaches the above-mentioned limitations but does not teach “wherein another gap formed in the terminal insertion hole is filled with the seal member.” Sato teaches wherein another gap formed in the terminal insertion hole is filled with the seal member (see at least figure 4B, entire assembly is sealed via the filling material 41) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill, in the art at the time the invention was filed, to combine the motor of Haga with the pump of Inoue with the sealed plug of Sato in order to produce hydraulic changes in a system, while maintaining a sealed environment in order to protect the motor from ingress or egress thereby increasing the motor lifespan. 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 RILEY OWEN STOUT whose telephone number is (571)272-0068. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:30pm 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, Christopher M Koehler can be reached on (571)272-3560. 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. /R.O.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 2834 /CHRISTOPHER M KOEHLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 03, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 14, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Feb 27, 2025
Response Filed
May 22, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jul 18, 2025
Interview Requested
Jul 28, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 28, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Dec 11, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 16, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12580448
Electromagnetically-Controlled Magnetic Cycloidal Gear Assembly for Achieving Enhanced Torque Capacity and Method of Operating Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12549044
A ROTOR FOR A PERMANENT MAGNET ELECTRICAL MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12531449
FIELD MAGNETON OF ROTARY ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12525839
AXIAL FLUX MOTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12519356
ROTOR AND ROTATING ELECTRIC MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
75%
With Interview (+0.6%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 115 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