DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 5/15/2026 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 § 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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8-9, 11-12 and 15 are 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. Added limitation “wherein no communication passages are provided for discharging the fluid from the drive space”, unclear what applicant means by this. It is also noted that this is not mentioned and/or shown in the original disclosure. Furthermore one skilled in the art would supply gas to the drive space and when pressure is built the pump would explode or be non-functionable. Further noted that when supply gas pressure is enough the gas would communicate with fluid introduction grooves 40 and flow into chamber W.
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 1-3, 5-6, 8-9, 11-12 and 15 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.
As stated above unclear what applicant is trying to claim with the limitation “no communication…drive space”?
Examiner has provided a rejection below as best understood.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 8-9, 11-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimasaki (US20200080641A1) in view of Mayer et al (US. 3746350) and further in view of Nishikawa et al (JP2016186297A).
Shimasaki discloses a shaft sealing device, comprising a casing (e.g. 60) which has a drive space (e.g. figure 1) accommodating a drive unit (e.g. 15, figure 1), a rotating shaft (e.g. shaft 14) which penetrates the casing and is disposed to extend from the drive space to a sealed fluid side space (e.g. see figure), a seal component (e.g. figures) which is disposed between the casing and the rotating shaft, and has a pair of sliding parts (e.g. 22 and 24) rotating relatively with each other, the sliding parts having sliding surfaces sliding relatively with each other in a facing state, respectively (e.g. figure 1 shows sliding faces of 22 and 24 facing each other), wherein at least one of the sliding parts (e.g. 22, figure 2) is provided with a fluid introduction mechanism (e.g. groove mechanism of 226 communicating to an outer diameter of the sliding face of the at least one sliding part 22) so that a fluid in the drive space is introduced between the sliding surfaces (e.g. fluid in the sliding face of 22, SF1 in figure below), wherein the sliding surface of the sliding part in which the fluid introduction mechanism is formed has an inner peripheral surface (e.g. ID) extending in a circumferential direction and an axial direction from an inner diameter side edge of the sliding surface (e.g. see figure) and an outer peripheral surface extending in the circumferential direction and the axial direction from an outer diameter side edge (e.g. OD) of the sliding surface, wherein one of the inner peripheral surfaces and the outer peripheral surface faces the drive space (e.g. figure 1 shows that OD faces the drive space), the fluid introduction mechanism is configured to open at a one of the inner peripheral surfaces and the outer peripheral surface and to not open at a remaining one of the inner peripheral surfaces and the outer peripheral surface (this is the case as shown in figures 2-3 and figure below), and wherein a 1st communication path (e.g. path above an outer peripheral surface of 24 in figure 1) which communicates with an external space (e.g. pump connected to the drive space which is connected to outside space similar to what is provided in paragraph 0077 in specification of application) is connected to the drive space.
Regarding claim 2: Wherein a flow blocking portion (e.g. 38) is provided in the casing, wherein the drive space is partitioned into a seal component side space (e.g. space having 36) and a drive unit side space (e.g. space having 15) by the flow blocking portion, and wherein the communication path is connected to the seal component side space (e.g. the communication path is connected to 30).
Regarding claim 3: Wherein the flow blocking portion is a bearing.
Regarding claim 5: Wherein the shaft sealing device is configured for use in a device immersed in water, and wherein the communication path is partially defined by a tube which is connected to a communication hole provided in the casing and extends to the external space (e.g. tubing connecting the space 30 to pump 80 and 82).
Regarding claim 6: Wherein a fluid in the drive space is a gas (e.g. gas at 15) and a fluid (e.g. fluid in space 30) in the sealed fluid side space (e.g. the space having 30) is a liquid (e.g. liquid in space 30), wherein the casing is provided with a through hole through which the rotating shaft is inserted (e.g. figure 1 shows this) and a liquid reservoir groove (e.g. groove having space 30) which is formed on an outer radial side in relation to the through hole, and wherein the communication path communicates with the drive space at a position above the liquid reservoir groove (e.g. see figures 1-3).
PNG
media_image1.png
570
413
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8: Wherein the shaft sealing device is configured for use in a device immersed in water, and wherein the communication path is partially defined by a tube which is connected to a communication hole provided in the casing and extends to the external space (e.g. see rejection of claim 5).
Regarding claim 9: Wherein a fluid in the drive space is a gas and a fluid in the sealed fluid side space is a liquid, wherein the casing is provided with a through hole through which the rotating shaft is inserted and a liquid reservoir groove which is formed on an outer radial side in relation to the through hole, and wherein the communication path communicates with the drive space at a position above the liquid reservoir groove (e.g. see rejection of claim 6).
Regarding claim 11: Wherein the shaft sealing device is configured for use in a device immersed in water, and wherein the communication path is partially defined by a tube which is connected to a communication hole provided in the casing and extends to the external space (e.g. see rejection of claim 5).
Regarding claim 12: Wherein a fluid in the drive space is a gas and a fluid in the sealed fluid side space is a liquid, wherein the casing is provided with a through hole through which the rotating shaft is inserted and a liquid reservoir groove which is formed on an outer radial side in relation to the through hole, and wherein the communication path communicates with the drive space at a position above the liquid reservoir groove (e.g. see rejection of claim 6).
Regarding claim 15: Wherein a fluid in the drive space is a gas and a fluid in the sealed fluid side space is a liquid, wherein the casing is provided with a through hole through which the rotating shaft is inserted and a liquid reservoir groove which is formed on an outer radial side in relation to the through hole, and wherein the communication path communicates with the drive space at a position above the liquid reservoir groove (e.g. see rejection of claim 6).
Shimasaki discloses the invention as claimed above but fails to disclose only gas is supplied from the external gas space to the drive space via a 2nd communication path or another communication path which communicates with an external gas space is connected to the drive space. Mayer discloses a mechanical seal with a housing that having a communication path which communicates with an external gas space (e.g. gas space supplied by 22) which provides pressurize gas via the communication path (e.g. 19). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the housing of Shimasaki to have another communication path that is connected to only gas as taught by Mayer with reasonable expectation of success to provide dry lubricant between the seal faces (e.g. see description of 18, 19, 22 and 21 of Mayer).
Shimasaki discloses the invention as claimed above but fails to disclose wherein no communication passages are provided for discharging the fluid from the drive space. Nishikawa teaches to have supplied fluid to a system having a drive space and then providing a plug to close an opening that supplied the fluid. It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the outlet of Shimasaki to be plugged as taught by Nishikawa with reasonable expectation of success to provide a close system (e.g. benefit is obvious, since one would only need to supply the fluid and provide a plug then disconnect the pump for different use of the pump).
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 VISHAL A PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-7060. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am to 4:00pm.
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, Christine Mills can be reached on 571-272-8322. 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.
/VISHAL A PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights