DETAILED ACTION
Claims filed 24 September 2025 have been entered. The amendments correct the 112(b) rejection of claims 10-11 in the previous office action.
Claims 1-4, 8-15, 17, 21-26 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 15 recites “a bent-axis actuator including a plate and main shaft.” Add the indefinite article “a” before “main shaft,” so that it reads “a bent-axis actuator including a plate and a main shaft.”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 2 recites “a piston head, does not contact the sleeve because it is spaced apart from the sleeve by the piston ring.” The piston head spaced apart from the sleeve because of the piston ring constitutes new matter. The material was not presented in the originally filed specification. Applicant has also failed to point out the basis for support for the amendment in the originally filed specification, if such support exists. Therefore, applicant has failed to show that at the time the application was filed, that applicant had possession of the claimed invention. Therefore claim 2 is rejected for new matter.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-2, 4, 8, 9, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiina (US 7,131,822) in view of Zhu (CN 110617190, citations to NPL translation)
PNG
media_image1.png
488
624
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Shiina fig 1
PNG
media_image2.png
314
392
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Shiina fig 4
Regarding claim 1, Shiina discloses a pump (compressor, c 3 ln 29-34) assembly comprising: a cylinder block (4) defining a piston bore (6) therein extending in an axial direction; a sleeve lining (sleeves 62, c 4 ln 59-63) the piston bore; a piston (50, c 4 ln 23-29) in the piston bore, configured to reciprocate along a stroke in the axial direction within the sleeve (c 4 ln 29); and a piston ring (fig 5, piston ring 76, c 5 ln 39-45; including piston head 68 which extends outside of piston body 66 like ring 76, c 5 ln 32-37) engaged circumferentially about the piston, wherein the piston ring is fixed to the piston (id.), and is slidingly engaged to an inner surface of the sleeve (ring seals against the cylinder 6 in an airtight manner, c 5 ln 46-49),
Wherein one of the sleeve and the piston ring is a ceramic material and the other of the sleeve and the piston ring is a metallic material (ring 76 is metallic, c 5 ln 39-45; sleeve is a metallic, c 2 ln 19-20), wherein the material of the sleeve is in sliding engagement with the material of the piston ring (piston ring 80 and sleeve seal together, which reasonably indicates that they are in conventional sliding contact, c 5 ln 39-45).
Shiina is silent on one of the sleeve and the piston ring is a ceramic material.
Zhu teaches a rotary piston type high pressure pump (abstract) where the piston (324) and cylinder sleeve (45) are made of a friction pair material which is preferably a stainless steel substrate with a durable corrosion resistant ceramic material or surface nitriding and carburizing in order to make a better friction couple (pg 10).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the piston ring and sleeve sliding surfaces of Shiina by adding the surface treatment of Zhu by adding the durable corrosion resistant ceramic material to the metallic substrate of the metallic piston ring and sleeve of Shiina thereby improving the friction surface of the sliding surface between piston and cylinder, while reducing corrosion, while being easy to replace (Zhu, pg 10, second paragraph).
By adding the ceramic material to the metallic surface of both the piston ring and the sleeve, the combination meets the limitation “one of the sleeve and the piston ring is a ceramic material.”
Regarding claim 2, Shiina in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1, wherein the piston, including a piston head (Shiina, fig 4, piston head 68), does not contact the sleeve because it is spaced apart from the sleeve by the piston ring (Shiina, fig 4, seal rings 74 and 80 are in contact with the sleeve, c 6 ln 52; fig 4 shows that the piston head 68 and ring 78 are spaced away from the outer diameters of 74 and 80, which suggests that portions of 68 and 78 do not contact the sleeve).
Regarding claim 4, Shiina in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1. Shiina is silent on the material of the piston, and therefore is silent on wherein the piston ring is of a different material (piston ring 76 is made of metallic ring 78 and resin ring 80, c 5 ln 39-45) from the piston.
Nevertheless, Zhu suggests selecting different materials such as stainless steel, ceramic, polymer composite, for the cylinder body, cylinder, sleeve, and piston based on desired design life and changing material in order to improve the friction couple between mating surfaces (Zhu, pg 10, second paragraph).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture the piston of Shiina of steel or ceramic as taught by Zhu for predictably using a material suited for use in a compressor. The combination meets the limitation because a piston of steel would differ from the resin portion of a piston ring; similarly, a piston of ceramic would differ from the steel portion of a piston ring.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed suitable material for the piston is obvious.
Regarding claim 8, Shiina in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1, wherein the sleeve is of the ceramic material and the piston ring is of the metallic material (in the combination, the sleeve and rings both comprise a stainless steel substrate with a ceramic material surface, which meet this limitation).
Regarding claim 9, Shiina in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1, wherein the sleeve is of the metallic material and the piston ring is of the ceramic material (in the combination, the sleeve and rings both comprise a stainless steel substrate with a ceramic material surface, which meet this limitation).
Regarding claim 14, Shiina in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1, wherein the sleeve defines an inner stroking surface where the piston ring engages the sleeve throughout the stroke of the piston (Shiina, ring seals against the cylinder 6 in an airtight manner, c 5 ln 46-49), wherein the inner stroking surface is free of steps in diameter (no changes in diameter are disclosed, reasonably there are no changes in diameter because the ring seals against the cylinder during the stroke, implying no changes in diameter that would affect the seal).
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiina in view of Zhu in view of Higuchi (US 2015/0362072).
Regarding claim 3, Shiina in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1. Shiina is silent on the cylinder block is tool steel.
Nevertheless, Shiina teaches the cylinder block comprises metallic sleeves (sleeves 62, c 2 ln 19-20), wherein the sleeve defines the cylinder bores (6, c 4 ln 59-63) and are therefore a component of the cylinder block (4, c 3 ln 32-34).
Furthermore, Zhu teaches the friction material (of the sleeve in the combination) is based on a stainless steel substrate (pg 10).
Higuchi teaches a sliding member using an iron alloy member of stainless steel (par 0029) where a preferred iron alloy includes a tool steel (par 0030).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture the stainless steel cylinder sleeves of Shiina in view of Zhu of tool steels as taught by Higuchi as an improvement over stainless steel for use as a sliding member (Higuchi, par 0029-0030).
Regarding claim 13, Shiina in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1. Shiina is silent on the metallic material is a tool steel.
Nevertheless, Shiina teaches the cylinder block comprises metallic sleeves (sleeves 62, c 2 ln 19-20), wherein the sleeve defines the cylinder bores (6, c 4 ln 59-63) and are therefore a component of the cylinder block (4, c 3 ln 32-34).
Furthermore, Zhu teaches the friction material (of the sleeve in the combination) is based on a stainless steel substrate (pg 10).
Higuchi teaches a sliding member using an iron alloy member of stainless steel (par 0029) where a preferred iron alloy includes a tool steel (par 0030).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture the stainless steel cylinder sleeves of Shiina in view of Zhu of tool steels as taught by Higuchi as an improvement over stainless steel for use as a sliding member (Higuchi, par 0029-0030).
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiina in view of Zhu in view of Gamble (US 2009/0007859) in view of Jun (WO 2021060731 citations to the attached NPL Machine Translation, previously provided).
Regarding claim 10, Shiina in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1. Shiina is silent on wherein the ceramic material is partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ).
Nevertheless, Zhu suggests selecting different materials for the cylinder body, cylinder, sleeve, and piston based on desired design life and changing material in order to improve the friction couple between mating surfaces (Zhu, pg 10, second paragraph).
Gamble teaches a reciprocating piston compressor, where piston and cylinder liner may be made of steel or ceramic (abstract) where the ceramic may be zirconia nitrite (par 0086). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the composition of the ceramics of Shiina in view of Zhu by using ceramic zirconia nitrite as taught by Gamble in order to improve over excessive friction losses and wear (Gamble, par 0005).
Gamble is silent on the zirconia material being partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ).
Jun teaches sintered zirconia comprising partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ )or yttria stabilized zirconia (YST) has the effect of improving the bending strength of the zirconia (NPL pg 4, 4th paragraph).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a zirconia ceramic taught by Gamble as partially stabilized zirconia as taught by Jun in order to increase the strength of the ceramic.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed steel and ceramic for use in a compressor is obvious.
Regarding claim 11, Shiina in view of Zhu in view of Gamble in view of Jun teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 10. Shiina is silent on wherein the PSZ includes yttria-stabilized zirconia YSZ.
Gamble is silent on the zirconia material being yttria- stabilized zirconia (PSZ).
Jun teaches sintered zirconia comprising partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ )or yttria stabilized zirconia (YST) has the effect of improving the bending strength of the zirconia (NPL pg 4, 4th paragraph).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a zirconia ceramic taught by Gamble as yttria stabilized zirconia as taught by Jun in order to increase the strength of the ceramic.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed steel and ceramic for use in a compressor is obvious.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiina in view of Zhu in view of Gamble in view of Thut (US 2004/0056395).
Regarding claim 12, Shiina in view of Gamble teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1. Shiina does not disclose wherein the ceramic material is silicon nitride (Si3N4).
Nevertheless, Zhu suggests selecting different materials for the cylinder body, cylinder, sleeve, and piston based on desired design life and changing material in order to improve the friction couple between mating surfaces (Zhu, pg 10, second paragraph).
Gamble teaches a reciprocating piston compressor, where piston and cylinder liner may be made of steel or ceramic (abstract) where the ceramic may be silica nitrite (par 0053), which would suggest to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a ceramic of silicon and nitrogen.
Thut teaches a reciprocating piston comprising ceramic silicon nitride to combat wear (par 0007, 0024).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceramics of Shiina in view of Zhu in view of Gamble to use silicon nitride as taught by Thut for the predictable result of using a ceramic which improves wear and heat resistance of a compressor.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiina in view of Zhu in view of Higuchi in view of Thut.
Regarding claim 21, Shiina in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly of claim 1. Shiina is silent on the sleeve is tool steel and the piston ring is silicon nitride.
Nevertheless, Zhu suggests selecting different materials for the cylinder body, cylinder, sleeve, and piston based on desired design life and changing material in order to improve the friction couple between mating surfaces (Zhu, pg 10, second paragraph).
Furthermore, Zhu teaches the friction material (of the sleeve in the combination) is based on a stainless steel substrate (pg 10).
Higuchi teaches a sliding member using an iron alloy member of stainless steel (par 0029) where a preferred iron alloy includes a tool steel (par 0030).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture the stainless steel cylinder sleeves of Shiina in view of Zhu of tool steels as taught by Higuchi as an improvement over stainless steel for use as a sliding member (Higuchi, par 0029-0030).
Thut teaches a reciprocating piston comprising ceramic silicon nitride to combat wear (par 0007, 0024).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceramics of Shiina in view of Zhu in view of Higuchi to utilize a silicon nitride as taught by Thut in order to improve wear and heat resistance in a compressor.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed ceramic for use in a compressor is obvious.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiina in view of Gamble.
Regarding claim 1, Shiina discloses a pump (compressor, c 3 ln 29-34) assembly comprising: a cylinder block (4) defining a piston bore (6) therein extending in an axial direction; a sleeve lining (sleeves 62, c 4 ln 59-63) the piston bore; a piston (50, c 4 ln 23-29) in the piston bore, configured to reciprocate along a stroke in the axial direction within the sleeve (c 4 ln 29); and a piston ring (fig 5, piston ring 76, c 5 ln 39-45; including piston head 68 which extends outside of piston body 66 like ring 76, c 5 ln 32-37) engaged circumferentially about the piston, wherein the piston ring is fixed to the piston (id.), and is slidingly engaged to an inner surface of the sleeve (ring seals against the cylinder 6 in an airtight manner, c 5 ln 46-49),
Wherein one of the sleeve and the piston ring is a ceramic material and the other of the sleeve and the piston ring is a metallic material (ring 76 is metallic, c 5 ln 39-45; sleeve is a metallic, c 2 ln 19-20), wherein the material of the sleeve is in sliding engagement with the material of the piston ring (piston ring 80 and sleeve seal together, which reasonably indicates that they are in conventional sliding contact, c 5 ln 39-45).
Shiina is silent on one of the sleeve and the piston ring is a ceramic material.
Gamble teaches a reciprocating piston compressor, where piston and cylinder liner may be made of steel or ceramic (abstract). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the piston sleeve of Shiina by manufacturing the sleeve of ceramic as taught by Gamble for predictably using a material suited for use in a compressor, and also to reduce wear on the sleeve (Gamble, par 0058, 0059). Gamble further teaches that the compression rings (98) and the sleeve (48) be formed of different materials in order to minimize wear (par 0059). Therefore, the reduction of wear between the combination of the metallic sleeve of Shiina and the ceramic sleeve of Gamble produces a predictable result because the materials work together in the combination in the same way that they work in the Gamble reference.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed suitable material for the piston is obvious.
Claims 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiina in view of Gamble in view of Jun.
Regarding claim 10, Shiina in view of Gamble teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1. Shiina is silent on wherein the ceramic material is partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ).
Nevertheless, Gamble teaches a reciprocating piston compressor, where piston and cylinder liner may be made of steel or ceramic (abstract) where the ceramic may be zirconia nitrite (par 0086). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the piston sleeve of Shiina by manufacturing the sleeve of ceramic zirconia nitrite as taught by Gamble for predictably using a material suited for use in a compressor.
Gamble is silent on the zirconia material being partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ).
Jun teaches sintered zirconia comprising partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ )or yttria stabilized zirconia (YST) has the effect of improving the bending strength of the zirconia (NPL pg 4, 4th paragraph).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a zirconia ceramic taught by Gamble as partially stabilized zirconia as taught by Jun in order to increase the strength of the ceramic.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed steel and ceramic for use in a compressor is obvious.
Regarding claim 11, Shiina in view of Gamble in view of Jun teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 10. Shiina is silent on wherein the PSZ includes yttria-stabilized zirconia YSZ.
Gamble is silent on the zirconia material being yttria- stabilized zirconia (PSZ).
Jun teaches sintered zirconia comprising partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ )or yttria stabilized zirconia (YST) has the effect of improving the bending strength of the zirconia (NPL pg 4, 4th paragraph).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a zirconia ceramic taught by Gamble as yttria stabilized zirconia as taught by Jun in order to increase the strength of the ceramic.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed steel and ceramic for use in a compressor is obvious.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shiina in view of Gamble in view of Thut.
Regarding claim 12, Shiina in view of Gamble teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 1. Shiina does not disclose wherein the ceramic material is silicon nitride (Si3N4).
Nevertheless, Gamble teaches where piston and cylinder liner may be made of steel or ceramic (abstract) where the ceramic may be silica nitrite (par 0053), which would suggest to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a ceramic of silicon and nitrogen.
Thut teaches a reciprocating piston comprising ceramic silicon nitride to combat wear (par 0007, 0024).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceramics of Shiina in view of Gamble to use silicon nitride as taught by Thut for the predictable result of using a ceramic which improves wear and heat resistance of a compressor.
Claims 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabhi (KR 2019/7021689) in view of Zhu.
Claim 15, Rabhi discloses a pump assembly (fig 1, pg 2-3) comprising:
a cylinder block (cylinder block 35, pg 6) defining a plurality of piston bores (a cylinder 4 for each piston 3, pg 6) therein extending in an axial direction (fig 1 depicts axis of rotor),
wherein the cylinder block is disposed about a first axis (fig 1 depicts axis of rotor on the right side of fig 1);
…; a respective piston in each of the plurality of piston bores (piston 3, pg 6), configured to reciprocate along a stroke in the axial direction within the [cylinder] (pistons 3 reciprocate cylinders, pg 6); and
a respective piston ring (piston sealing device 2, pg 6, fig 6 and fig 7 depict sealing device as a ring around the piston 3) engaged circumferentially about each respective piston, wherein the respective piston ring is fixed to the respective piston (fig 1-5 show the ring 2 fixed in the piston 3 groove), and is slidingly engaged to an inner surface of the [cylinder] (2 sliding engages with inner surface of cylinder, pg 8);
a bent-axis actuator (fig 1 depicts the bent axis) including a plate (fig 1 depicts a plate at the piston rod end of power transmission means 9) and [a] main shaft (fig 1, 36), the main shaft disposed about second axis angled relative to the first axis (fig 1 shows the shaft 36 on a different axis than rotor 35), wherein the plate (plate on 9) and main shaft (36) are configured to rotate around the second axis (fig 1 shows shaft 36 and the plate on 9 rotating on the same axis) and wherein the plate is operatively connected to actuation ends of all the respective pistons for positive displacement pumping in the plurality of piston bores (fig 1 shows plate on the end of 9 attached to the ends of pistons 3 that connect to the power transmission means 9).
Rabhi is silent on a respective sleeve lining each of the plurality of piston bores; the piston bore… wherein one of the sleeve and the piston ring is of a ceramic material and the other of the sleeve and the piston ring is of a metallic material, wherein the material of the sleeve is in sliding engagement with the material of the piston ring.
Zhu teaches a pump assembly (fig 1) comprising a rotating cylinder block (cylinder body rotor assembly 4, pg 8) with a piston (fig 2, 316) a piston bore (cylinder body 43, pg 8); a sleeve lining the piston bore (cylinder sleeve 44, pg 8), where the sleeve (44) and the corresponding surface of the piston (316) may be made of a friction pair material such as stainless steel and a ceramic material, etc. (pg 10).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sliding surface of the cylinder block and piston rings of Rabhi by adding a cylinder sleeve lining to the cylinder and modifying the sliding surface of the piston ring as taught by Zhu, thereby making the wear surfaces easily replaceable and also reducing the wear.
Claims 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabhi in view of Zhu in view of Tovey (US 4,757,743).
Regarding claim 17, Rabhi in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 15, further comprising a port plate (Rabhi, fig 1, valve plate 37) engaged to an inlet/outlet side of the cylinder block (fig 1 depicts valve plate 37 on the cylinder block)
Rabhi is silent on with an outlet port in fluid communication with a first subset of the plurality of the piston bores, and an inlet port in fluid communication with a second subset of the plurality of the outlet bores.
Nevertheless, Rabhi discloses the system is usable as a pump (page 2 and 3).
Tovey teaches a valve plate (fig 2, 44/64, c 3 ln 66-c 4 ln 1) on a cylinder block (abstract) for use in a bent axis pump (c 5 ln 60) with an outlet port (slot 48 connects to outlet port 52, c 3 ln 54) in fluid communication with a first subset of the plurality of the piston bores (fig 2 shows slot 48 connecting to left side cylinders on disc 44/64), and an inlet port (slot 46 in communication with inlet port, c 5 ln 12) in fluid communication with a second subset of the plurality of the outlet bores (fig 2 shows slot 46 is communication with the right side cylinders on disc 44/64).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valve plate of Rabhi with the inlet and outlet ports of Tovey in order to configure Rabhi for conventional pump operation.
Claims 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabhi in view of Zhu in view of Gamble in view of Jun.
Regarding claim 22, Rabhi in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 15. Rabhi is silent on wherein the ceramic material is partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ).
Nevertheless, Zhu suggests selecting different materials for the cylinder body, cylinder, sleeve, and piston based on desired design life and changing material in order to improve the friction couple between mating surfaces (Zhu, pg 10, second paragraph).
Gamble teaches a reciprocating piston compressor, where piston and cylinder liner may be made of steel or ceramic (abstract) where the ceramic may be zirconia nitrite (par 0086). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the composition of the ceramics of Rabhi in view of Zhu by using ceramic zirconia nitrite as taught by Gamble in order to improve over excessive friction losses and wear (Gamble, par 0005).
Gamble is silent on the zirconia material being partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ).
Jun teaches sintered zirconia comprising partially stabilized zirconia (PSZ )or yttria stabilized zirconia (YST) has the effect of improving the strength of the zirconia (NPL pg 4, 4th paragraph).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a zirconia ceramic taught by Gamble as partially stabilized zirconia as taught by Jun in order to increase the strength of the ceramic.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed steel and ceramic for use in a compressor is obvious.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabhi in view of Zhu in view of Thut.
Regarding claim 23, Rabhi in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 15. Rabhi does not disclose wherein the ceramic material is silicon nitride (Si3N4).
Nevertheless, Zhu suggests selecting different materials for the cylinder body, cylinder, sleeve, and piston based on desired design life and changing material in order to improve the friction couple between mating surfaces (Zhu, pg 10, second paragraph).
Thut teaches a reciprocating piston comprising ceramic silicon nitride to combat wear (par 0007, 0024).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceramics of Rabhi in view of Zhu utilize a silicon nitride as taught by Thut for the predictable result of using a nitride ceramic which improves wear and heat resistance.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed ceramic for use in a compressor is obvious.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabhi in view of Zhu in view of Thut in view of Komuro (US 5,743,536).
Regarding claim 24, Rabhi in view of Zhu in view of Thut teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 23. Rabhi is silent on wherein the metallic material is tool steel.
Komuro teaches a compressor (abstract) where a piston ring of the compressor may be coated with tool steels (c 3 ln 1-9).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to enable the metallic piston rings of Rabhi by selecting a metallic tool steel as taught by Komuro for the predictable use of using a material suit for use on a piston ring in a compressor.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed steel for use in a compressor is obvious.
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabhi in view of Zhu in view of Higuchi in view of Thut.
Regarding claim 25, Rabhi in view of Zhu teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 15. Rabhi does not disclose wherein the sleeve is tool steel and the piston ring is silicon nitride (Si3N4).
Nevertheless, Zhu suggests selecting different materials for the cylinder body, cylinder, sleeve, and piston based on desired design life and changing material in order to improve the friction couple between mating surfaces (Zhu, pg 10, second paragraph).
Furthermore, Zhu teaches the friction material (of the sleeve in the combination) is based on a stainless steel substrate (pg 10).
Higuchi teaches a sliding member using an iron alloy member of stainless steel (par 0029) where a preferred iron alloy includes a tool steel (par 0030).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture the stainless steel cylinder sleeves of Rabhi in view of Zhu of tool steels as taught by Higuchi as an improvement over stainless steel for use as a sliding member (Higuchi, par 0029-0030).
Thut teaches a reciprocating piston comprising ceramic silicon nitride to combat wear (par 0007, 0024).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceramics of Rabhi in view of Zhu to utilize a silicon nitride as taught by Thut in order to improve wear and heat resistance in a compressor.
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed ceramic for use in a compressor is obvious.
Regarding claim 26, Rabhi in view of Zhu in view of Thut teaches the pump assembly as recited in claim 25. Rabhi is silent on wherein the cylinder block is a tool steel.
Furthermore, Zhu teaches the friction material (of the sleeve in the combination) is based on a stainless steel substrate (pg 10).
Higuchi teaches a sliding member using an iron alloy member of stainless steel (par 0029) where a preferred iron alloy includes a tool steel (par 0030).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture the stainless steel cylinder sleeves of Rabhi in view of Zhu of tool steels as taught by Higuchi as an improvement over stainless steel for use as a sliding member (Higuchi, par 0029-0030).
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a _prima facie_ obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07; _Sinclair & Carroll Co. v._ _Interchemical Corp.,_ 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)). The selection of the claimed steel for use in a compressor is obvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 24 September 2025 have been fully considered. They are not persuasive in regards to claims 1-14 and the piecemeal analysis of references. The arguments regarding claim 15 and the bent axis actuator are moot as new art has been applied.
Arguments against claim 15 are moot, as the arguments do not apply to the cited references.
On Page 8 bottom paragraph, for claim 1, applicant argues that Gamble provides no teaching or suggestion of combining a ceramic material with a metallic material, and that Gamble (par 0059) only provides examples of the compression rings are steel and the sleeve is cast iron, or vice versa. Applicant’s arguments are not convincing. Applicant has overlooked that Gamble discloses that the cylinder sleeve and the pistons may be steel or ceramic (par 0012, 0053). Since Gamble clearly teaches that the sleeve or piston may be ceramic (par 0012, 0053) then the examples (par 0059) would reasonably not be considered an exhaustive list of all possible material combinations of piston and sleeve.
On page 9, second paragraph, for claim 1, applicant argues that neither Shiina nor Gamble teaches the piston ring is ceramic or metallic is sliding engaged with the inner surface of the sleeve. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Shiina clearly discloses sliding contact between the piston ring and cylinder (Shiina, c 2 ln 30-36). While Gamble clearly shows a piston ring of steel (Gamble, par 0059) and teaches pistons of ceramic (par 0012, 0058) which suggests that ceramic is a suitable material for piston rings as the component of the piston.
Page 9, applicant argues that Thut does not teach a pump assembly wherein one of the sleeve and piston ring is ceramic material and the other sleeve and piston ring is of a metallic material. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, Thut teaches that ceramic silicon nitride is a suitable material for use as a piston or sleeve (Thut, par 0024). While in the combination, both Zhu and Gamble teach that steel and ceramic are both suitable materials for use as pistons or sleeves, and that different materials be used for sleeve and piston (See claim 12 above).
Page 9, bottom paragraph, applicant argus that Jun teaches a way of improving zirconia and not a pump assembly. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, Gamble teaches zirconia is a ceramic material that is suitable for use in pump sleeves (See Above, Gamble, par 0086). Jun teaches obvious variations in types of zirconia and their relative benefits. Both applicant and Gamble disclose that the ceramic zirconia provides wear resistance when used as the pump material. Applicant provides no particular problem solved or unexpected result of using the claimed zirconia vis the zirconia taught by Gamble or Jun. Since Gamble discloses using zirconia in pump sleeves and its benefit is wear resistance, varying the type of ceramic zirconia and obtaining the same predictable result is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (See MPEP 2143(I)(F)).
Page 9, bottom paragraph, applicant argus that Komuro teaches a tool steel piston ring, but not with ceramic and metallic parts slidingly engaged. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, Zhu suggests selecting different materials for the cylinder body, cylinder, sleeve, and piston based on desired design life and changing material in order to improve the friction couple between mating surfaces (Zhu, pg 10, second paragraph, See claim 23) and that the metallic material is stainless steel (Zhu, pg 10, See claim 15). Applicant provides no particular problem solved or unexpected result of using the claimed tool steel vs the stainless steel taught by Zhu. Since Zhu teaches the metallic material is stainless steel for use in pump construction, varying the type of steel and obtaining the same predictable result is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art (See MPEP 2143(I)(F)).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 GEOFFREY S LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5354. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 0900-1800.
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.
/GEOFFREY S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 3746
/DOMINICK L PLAKKOOTTAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746