DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 28, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed May 28, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1 – 7, 10 and 11 are pending in the application with claims 8 and 9 being cancelled.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 – 7, 10 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 5: “the axes” should read --the rotational axes--.
Claim 1, 7-8: “holes passing through the plate with each hole removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly” should read --holes passing through the plate with each hole formed by removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly--.
Claim 2, line 2: “in a plain transverse to the rotational axes” should read --in a plane transverse to the rotational axes--.
Claim 11, line 5: “the axes” should read --the rotational axes--.
Claim 11, 7-9: “holes passing through a thickness of the plate each hole removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly” should read --holes passing through a thickness of the plate with each hole formed by removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly --.
Independent claims 1 and 11 introduced a new limitation stating “a single plate”. Claim 1 then further refers this plate as either “the single plate” or “the plate”. However, claim 11 refers this plate as “the plate”. It is suggested to use either “the single plate” or “the plate” for consistency. Dependent claims should be corrected accordingly, if applicable, depending on which terminology applicant decides to use.
Independent claims 1 and 11 recites a limitation stating “each pump comprising a body”. Claim 1 then further refers this body as “the body”. However, claim 11 further refers this body as “the pump body”. It is suggested to use either “the body” or “the pump body” for consistency. Dependent claims should be corrected accordingly, if applicable, depending on which terminology applicant decides to use.
Claims 2 – 7 and 10 are objected to for being dependent on claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr et al. (EP 1369586A2 – herein after Herr) in view of Yilmaz et al. (US 2017/0343153 – herein after Yilmaz).
In reference to claim 1, Herr teaches an assembly (see figs. 1-2), comprising:
several motor vehicle pumps (first pump is 21 = 21m+21p and second pump is 22 = 22m+22p; phrase “motor vehicle” being an intended use of the pumps in a motor vehicle), each pump (21, 22) comprising a body (as evident from fig. 1: body formed by casing/housing of each of the pumps) and a rotational axis (in view of fig. 1: rotational axis of each pump being in ↨ direction), the rotational axes of the pumps being parallel to each other (as evident from fig. 1); and
a support member (25) for the pumps, wherein the support member comprises a single plate (as evident from figs. 1-2) with two parallel faces (top and bottom face in view of fig. 1) perpendicular to the rotational axes of the pumps, the single plate forming a single part arranged in a plane (horizontal plane in view of fig. 1 that extends in a direction into and out of page) perpendicular to the rotational axes, and holes (35, 36) passing through the plate with each hole formed by removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly (In accordance to MPEP 2113, with respect to the limitation “removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly”, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight; however, please note that it is further inherent that each of these holes are made by removing the material from the plate, thus reducing an overall bulk because of the reduction in weight of the plate due to formation of the holes) and each hole receiving the corresponding body of the corresponding pump with portions of the body positioned on opposite sides of the hole passing through the plate (as evident from figs. 1-2: top portion of the pump’s body is above the corresponding hole and bottom portion of the pump’s body is below the corresponding hole).
Herr remains silent on the assembly, wherein the plate “comprises several elastomeric materials having different stiffnesses”.
However, Yilmaz teaches a similar assembly, wherein a plate (plate formed in view of assembled state of holders 20 and 70 seen in fig. 6) comprises several elastomeric materials having different stiffnesses [see ¶15: “It is advantageous that at least one of the holders has an elastomer or is composed partially, in particular entirely, of an elastomer”; see ¶42: “… The holders 20, 70 may have different materials with different hardnesses. In particular, through the use of materials, such as elastomers specifically adapted to the fluid regulation unit 10, 60, vibrations can be minimized. With the minimization of vibrations, it is also the case that disturbing noises are minimized. The first holder 20 at least partially has a different material, in particular a different material composition, than the second holder 70”; the disclosure explicitly teaches that the holders may have “different materials with different harnesses” (¶42); furthermore, since both holders are elastomeric but are made of different materials/compositions (and thus different stiffnesses/hardnesses), the resulting assembled support plate comprises “several elastomeric materials” (elastomer material A of 20 and elastomer material B of 70) that have “different stiffnesses”)].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify make the plate in the assembly of Herr from several elastomeric materials having different stiffnesses as taught by Yilmaz for the purpose of minimizing the vibrations and noise, as recognized by Yilmaz (see ¶42).
In reference to claim 2, Herr, as modified above in claim 1, teaches the assembly, wherein (see Herr’s figs. 1-2) each hole (35, 36) comprises, in a plane (plane being in horizontal direction) transverse to the rotational axes (in vertical direction), a section (a portion) which is constant over a length (in axial direction) of the hole.
In reference to claim 10, Herr, as modified, teaches the assembly according to claim 1.
Herr, as modified, does not teach a motor vehicle comprising at least two coolant pumps, wherein the at least two coolant pumps are part of the several motor vehicle pumps in the assembly according to claim 1.
However, Yilmaz teaches a motor vehicle (see ¶16: referred as “vehicle”) comprising at least two coolant pumps (see ¶31 and ¶50: referred as “water pumps”), wherein the at least two coolant pumps are part of the several motor vehicle pumps in the assembly according claim 1.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the modified assembly of Herr in a motor vehicle as taught by Yilmaz for the purpose of utilizing the assembly to regulate the flow of fluid in a vehicle to cool a desired part such as drive motor, as recognized by Yilmaz (see ¶50).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Yilmaz and Collmer et al. (EP 1584821A1 – herein after Collmer; cited by applicant on IDS dated 09/07/2023).
Herr, as modified above in claim 2, teaches the assembly, wherein the constant section of each hole forms a circle (as evident from Herr’s fig. 1).
Herr, as modified above in claim 2, does not teach the assembly, wherein the circle “comprising regularly distributed hollows on a contour”.
However, Collmer teaches a pump holder (10, see fig. 1) wherein a constant section of a hole (12, see fig. 1) forms a circle comprising regularly distributed hollows (longitudinal ribs) on a contour (ribs being located on an inner surface of the hole).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide hollows as taught by Collmer in each of the Herr’s holes in the modified assembly of Herr for the purpose of enhancing the grip to keep pump in place. Furthermore, such ribs/ridges further prevent the pump from sliding or rotating unintentionally within the hole.
Claims 4 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr in view of Yilmaz and Nishimura et al. (JP 2008121522A – herein after Nishimura).
Regarding claim 4,
Herr, as modified above in claim 1, teaches the assembly, wherein one face of the plate has contour for each hole (as evident from Herr’s fig. 1).
Herr, as modified above in claim 1, remains silent on the assembly, wherein the one face of the plate comprises, on a contour of each hole, “grooves each receiving a boss protruding from an outer contour of the bodies of the pumps”.
However, Nishimura teaches an assembly wherein one face of a plate (face of plate/bracket 14 seen in fig. 4) comprises, on a contour of a hole (80), grooves (86) each receiving a boss (26, see fig. 3) protruding from an outer contour of a body of the pump (12) [see ¶41 of translation].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the pumps and the contour of each hole in the assembly of Herr such that one face of the plate comprises, on a contour of each hole, grooves each receiving a boss protruding from an outer contour of the bodies of the pumps utilizing the teaching of Nishimura for the purpose of locking the pumps in a manner that prevents rotation of the pumps from rotating in a direction around the axis relative to the plate, as recognized by Nishimura (see ¶54 of translation).
Regarding claim 5,
Herr, as modified above in claim 1, remains silent on the assembly, wherein the plate comprises slots for receiving fasteners which have a constant cross section.
However, Nishimura teaches an assembly wherein a plate (bracket 14 seen in fig. 4) comprises slots (92, see figs. 4 and 6 and ¶48 of translation) for receiving fasteners (collars 94) which have a constant cross section (cylindrical/circular cross-section, see figs. 1-2).
In Herr, the plate (25) is welded (see ¶8 of translation) to legs (26-29). Nishimura teaches a plate connected in detachable manner to a desired body (in case of Nishimura, “vehicle body or the like”, see ¶48 of translation). It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the welded connection of the plate with the legs in the assembly of Herr for a detachable connection that involves use of slots for receiving fasteners utilizing the teaching of Nishimura in order to gain one of the well-known benefits such as ease of maintenance (for instance, if plate was to be damaged in Herr, then the detachable connection allows replacement of the plate itself as opposed to plate + legs if welded connection was to be present therebetween, thus allowing the plate to be replaced easily and further reducing cost of replacement) .
Regarding claim 6,
Herr, as modified above in claim 1, teaches the assembly, wherein the plate comprises three slots spaced apart from one another (in the modified assembly of Herr, each slot corresponding to each leg of the four legs; thus, the limitation “the plate comprises three slots spaced apart from one another” is considered to be met).
Regarding claim 7,
Herr, as modified above in claim 1, teaches the assembly, wherein the slots form holes that pass through the plate [in the modified assembly of Herr, each slot form a hole (as per Nishimura) that pass through the modified plate of Herr].
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herr et al. (EP 1369586A2 – herein after Herr) in view of Collmer et al. (EP 1584821A1 – herein after Collmer; cited by applicant on IDS dated 09/07/2023) and further in view of Nishimura et al. (JP 2008121522A – herein after Nishimura).
Herr teaches an assembly (see figs. 1-2), comprising:
several motor vehicle pumps (first pump is 21 = 21m+21p and second pump is 22 = 22m+22p; phrase “motor vehicle” being an intended use of the pumps in a motor vehicle), each pump (21, 22) comprising a body (as evident from fig. 1: body formed by casing/housing of each of the pumps) and a rotational axis (in view of fig. 1: rotational axis of each pump being in ↨ direction), the rotational axes of the pumps being parallel to each other (as evident from fig. 1); and
a support member (25) for the pumps, wherein the support member comprises a single plate (as evident from figs. 1-2) with two parallel faces (top and bottom face in view of fig. 1) perpendicular to the rotational axes of the pumps, the plate forming a single part arranged in a plane (horizontal plane in view of fig. 1 that extends in a direction into and out of page) perpendicular to the rotational axes, and holes (35, 36) passing through a thickness (thickness being in vertical direction in view of fig. 1) of the plate with each hole removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly (In accordance to MPEP 2113, with respect to the limitation “removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly”, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight; however, please note that it is further inherent that each of these holes are made by removing the material from the plate, thus reducing an overall bulk because of the reduction in weight of the plate due to formation of the holes) and each hole receiving the corresponding body of the corresponding pump with portions of the pump body positioned on opposite sides of the hole passing through the plate (as evident from figs. 1-2: top portion of the pump’s body is above the corresponding hole and bottom portion of the pump’s body is below the corresponding hole), wherein the constant section of each hole forms a circle (as evident from Herr’s fig. 1).
Herr does not teach the assembly, wherein the circle “comprising regularly distributed hollows on a contour”.
However, Collmer teaches a pump holder (10, see fig. 1) wherein a constant section of a hole (12, see fig. 1) forms a circle comprising regularly distributed hollows (longitudinal ribs) on a contour (ribs being located on an inner surface of the hole).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide hollows as taught by Collmer in each of the Herr’s holes in the modified assembly of Herr for the purpose of enhancing the grip to keep pump in place. Furthermore, such ribs/ridges further prevent the pump from sliding or rotating unintentionally within the hole.
Herr, as modified above, remains silent on the assembly, wherein the one face of the plate comprises, on a contour of each hole, “grooves each receiving a boss protruding from an outer contour of the bodies of the pumps”.
However, Nishimura teaches an assembly wherein one face of a plate (face of plate/bracket 14 seen in fig. 4) comprises, on a contour of a hole (80), grooves (86) each receiving a boss (26, see fig. 3) protruding from an outer contour of a body of the pump (12) [see ¶41 of translation].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the pumps and the contour of each hole in the modified assembly of Herr such that one face of the plate comprises, on a contour of each hole, grooves each receiving a boss protruding from an outer contour of the bodies of the pumps utilizing the teaching of Nishimura for the purpose of locking the pumps in a manner that prevents rotation of the pumps from rotating in a direction around the axis relative to the plate, as recognized by Nishimura (see ¶54 of translation).
Claims 1, 2, 5 – 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yilmaz et al. (US 2017/0343153 – herein after Yilmaz) in view of Herr et al. (EP 1369586A2 – herein after Herr).
In reference to claim 1, Yilmaz teaches an assembly (1, in fig. 6), comprising:
several motor vehicle pumps (10, 60; in view of disclosure in ¶50: 10 and 60 are fluid regulation units which are in the form a pump), each pump (10, 60) comprising a body (as evident from figs. 3 and 5) and a rotational axis (in view of fig. 6: rotational axis of each pump being in ↨ direction), the rotational axes of the pumps being parallel to each other (as evident from fig. 6); and
a support member (20+70; see fig. 6 and ¶38) for the pumps, wherein the support member comprises a plate (plate formed in view of assembled state of holders 20 and 70 seen in fig. 6) with two parallel faces (top and bottom faces) perpendicular to the rotational axes of the pumps, the plate forming a part arranged in a plane (see fig. A below) perpendicular to the rotational axes, and holes (22, 72; hole being 22 for holder 20 in view of fig. 3 and hole being 72 for holder 70 in view of fig. 5) passing through the plate with each hole formed by removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly (In accordance to MPEP 2113, with respect to the limitation “removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly”, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight; however, please note that it is further inherent that each of these holes are made by removing the material from the plate, thus reducing an overall bulk because of the reduction in weight of the plate due to formation of the holes) and each hole receiving the corresponding body of the corresponding pump (as evident from figs. 2-6) with portions of the body positioned on opposite sides of the hole passing through the plate (as evident from fig. 6: top portion of the pump’s body is above the corresponding hole and bottom portion of the pump’s body is below the corresponding hole), wherein the plate (20+70) comprises several elastomeric materials having different stiffnesses [see ¶15: “It is advantageous that at least one of the holders has an elastomer or is composed partially, in particular entirely, of an elastomer”; see ¶42: “The holders 20, 70 have in particular an elastic and/or damping plastic, preferably an elastomer. The holders 20, 70 may furthermore have a plastic or metal inlay… The first holder 20 at least partially has a different material, in particular a different material composition, than the second holder 70.”; this limitation is met because the disclosure explicitly teaches that the holders may have “different materials with different harnesses” (¶42); since both holders are elastomeric but are made of different materials/compositions (and thus different stiffnesses/hardnesses), the resulting assembled support plate comprises “several elastomeric materials” (elastomer material A of 20 and elastomer material B of 70) that have “different stiffnesses”)].
PNG
media_image1.png
820
936
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. A: Edited fig. 6 of Yilmaz to show claim interpretation.
Yilmaz does not teach the assembly, wherein the plate is formed as “a single part”.
However, Herr teaches an assembly (see figs. 1-2), comprising:
several pumps (first pump is 21 = 21m+21p and second pump is 22 = 22m+22p), each pump (21, 22) comprising a body (as evident from fig. 1: body formed by casing/housing of each of the pumps) and a rotational axis (in view of fig. 1: rotational axis of each pump being in ↨ direction), the rotational axes of the pumps being parallel to each other (as evident from fig. 1); and
a support member (25) for the pumps, wherein the support member comprises a single plate (as evident from figs. 1-2) with two parallel faces (top and bottom face in view of fig. 1) perpendicular to the rotational axes of the pumps, the single plate forming a single part arranged in a plane (horizontal plane in view of fig. 1 that extends in a direction into and out of page) perpendicular to the rotational axes, and holes (35, 36) passing through the plate with each hole formed by removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly (In accordance to MPEP 2113, with respect to the limitation “removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly”, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight; however, please note that it is further inherent that each of these holes are made by removing the material from the plate, thus reducing an overall bulk because of the reduction in weight of the plate due to formation of the holes) and each hole receiving the corresponding body of the corresponding pump with portions of the body positioned on opposite sides of the hole passing through the plate (as evident from figs. 1-2: top portion of the pump’s body is above the corresponding hole and bottom portion of the pump’s body is below the corresponding hole).
Yilmaz teaches a plate formed by assembling two components (20, 70) together, i.e. respective connecting means (26, 76) produces a plug-action connection (see ¶35) between the holders (20, 70). Herr teaches a plate formed as a single plate forming a single part. Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a single piece support for the pumps of Yilmaz in light of the teaching of Herr as a matter of obvious design choice since it would have amounted to choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143 I E. Further, it has been held that “A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portion that would lead away from the claimed invention.” W.L. Gore Assoc.., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721F.2d 1540, 220 USQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). Please note that in the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality of forming the plate as a single part {with respect to advantages discussed in ¶16 of pg. pub of the instant application: advantages such as reduction in number of parts, reduction in manufacturing costs and/or assembly recognized by inventor would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art}.
In reference to claim 2, Yilmaz, as modified above in claim 1, teaches the assembly, wherein (see Yilmaz’s figs. 3 and 5) each hole (22, 72) comprises, in a plane (plane being in horizontal direction) transverse to the rotational axes (in vertical direction), a section (section is shaded for each of the holes; see fig. B below) which is constant over a length (in axial direction) of the hole.
PNG
media_image2.png
644
986
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
748
1096
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. B: Edited figs. 3 and 5 of Yilmaz to show claim interpretation.
In reference to claim 5, Yilmaz, as modified above in claim 1, teaches the assembly, wherein (see fig. B above and fig. C below) the plate (20+70) comprises slots (26a, 26b, slots labelled “slot 1”, “slot 2” and “slot 3” in fig. C below) for receiving fasteners [76a, 76b, (in view of fig. C below) portion labelled “A” forming one fastener that is inserted into slot 78 while portion labelled “B” forming another fastener that is inserted into slot 28] which have a constant cross section [“constant” cross section = cross section that does not substantially change along a defined length or direction; each of the asserted fasteners is considered to have a “constant” cross section (for instance, uniform geometric shape/area)].
PNG
media_image4.png
802
872
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. C: Edited fig. 9 of Yilmaz to show claim interpretation.
In reference to claim 6, Yilmaz, as modified above in claim 5, teaches the assembly (see Yilmaz), wherein the plate (20+70) comprises three slots (at least three slots are present in view of figs. C and D above: 26a, 26b, “slot 1”, “slot 2” and “slot 3”) spaced apart from one another.
In reference to claim 7, Yilmaz, as modified above in claim 5, teaches the assembly (see Yilmaz), wherein the slots (see fig. B above: slots 26a, 26b) form holes that pass through the plate.
In reference to claim 10, Yilmaz, as modified above in claim 1, teaches a motor vehicle (see Yilmaz’s ¶16: referred as “vehicle”) comprising at least two coolant pumps (see Yilmaz’s ¶31 and ¶50: referred as “water pumps”), wherein the at least two coolant pumps are part of the several motor vehicle pumps in the assembly according claim 1.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yilmaz in view of Herr and Collmer et al. (EP 1584821A1 – herein after Collmer; cited by applicant on IDS dated 09/07/2023).
Yilmaz, as modified above in claim 2, teaches the assembly, wherein the constant section of each hole forms a circle (as evident from fig. B above).
Yilmaz, as modified above in claim 2, does not teach the assembly, wherein the circle “comprising regularly distributed hollows on a contour”.
However, Collmer teaches a pump holder (10, see fig. 1) wherein a hole (12, see fig. 1) forms a circle comprising regularly distributed hollows (longitudinal ribs) on a contour (ribs being located on an inner surface of the hole).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide hollows as taught by Collmer in each of the Yilmaz’s holes in the modified assembly of Yilmaz for the purpose of enhancing the grip to keep pump in place. Furthermore, such ribs/ridges further prevent the pump from sliding or rotating unintentionally within the hole.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yilmaz in view of Herr and Findeisen et al. (WO 2020/083496 – herein after Findeisen; cited by applicant on IDS dated 09/07/2023).
Yilmaz, as modified above in claim 1, teaches the assembly, wherein (in view of assembled state seen in fig. 7) one face of the plate (bottom face of the plate 20+70), on a contour (boundary) of each hole (22, 72), receiving a boss (see fig. D below; “boss” = protrusion) protruding from an outer contour of the bodies of the pumps (outer contour defined by outer circumferential wall of the bodies of the pumps 10, 60).
PNG
media_image5.png
950
2114
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. D: Edited figs. 3 and 5 of Yilmaz to show claim interpretation.
Yilmaz, as modified above in claim 2, does not teach the assembly, wherein the one face of the plate comprises, on the contour of each hole, “grooves each receiving” the boss.
However, Findeisen teaches a pump holder/plate (28/32, see figs. 1-3) wherein one face of the plate (top face 33) comprises, on a contour (boundary) of a hole (31, see fig. 3), groove (42, see figs. 2-3) receiving a boss (22, see fig. 2) protruding from an outer contour of a body (18) of a pump (12).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide grooves as taught by Findeisen on contour of each of the Yilmaz’s holes in the modified assembly of Yilmaz for the purpose of providing corresponding pump with a defined and stable rotational orientation with respect to its corresponding holder/support body, as recognized by Findeisen (see page 12 of translation, lines 29-31 and page 13 of translation, lines 1-3).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yilmaz et al. (US 2017/0343153 – herein after Yilmaz) in view of Herr et al. (EP 1369586A2 – herein after Herr) and Collmer et al. (EP 1584821A1 – herein after Collmer; cited by applicant on IDS dated 09/07/2023) and further in view of Findeisen et al. (WO 2020/083496 – herein after Findeisen; cited by applicant on IDS dated 09/07/2023).
Yilmaz teaches an assembly (1, in fig. 6), comprising:
several motor vehicle pumps (10, 60; in view of disclosure in ¶50: 10 and 60 are fluid regulation units which are in the form a pump), each pump (10, 60) comprising a body (as evident from figs. 3 and 5) and a rotational axis (in view of fig. 6: rotational axis of each pump being in ↨ direction), the rotational axes of the pumps being parallel to each other (as evident from fig. 6); and
a support member (20+70; see fig. 6 and ¶38) for the pumps, wherein the support member comprises a plate (plate formed in view of assembled state of holders 20 and 70 seen in fig. 6) with two parallel faces (top and bottom faces) perpendicular to the rotational axes of the pumps, the plate forming a part arranged in a plane (see fig. A below) perpendicular to the rotational axes, and holes (22, 72; hole being 22 for holder 20 in view of fig. 3 and hole being 72 for holder 70 in view of fig. 5) passing through a thickness of the plate with each hole formed by removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly (In accordance to MPEP 2113, with respect to the limitation “removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly”, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight; however, please note that it is further inherent that each of these holes are made by removing the material from the plate, thus reducing an overall bulk because of the reduction in weight of the plate due to formation of the holes) and each hole receiving the corresponding body of the corresponding pump (as evident from figs. 2-6) with portions of the body positioned on opposite sides of the hole passing through the plate (as evident from fig. 6: top portion of the pump’s body is above the corresponding hole and bottom portion of the pump’s body is below the corresponding hole), wherein the constant section of each hole (section is shaded for each of the holes; see fig. B above) forms a circle (as evident from fig. B above), and wherein (in view of assembled state seen in fig. 7) one face of the plate (bottom face of the plate 20+70), on the contour (boundary) of each hole (22, 72), each receiving a boss (see fig. D above; “boss” = protrusion) protruding from an outer contour of the bodies of the pumps (outer contour defined by outer circumferential wall of the bodies of the pumps 10, 60).
Yilmaz does not teach the assembly, wherein the plate is formed as “a single part”.
However, Herr teaches an assembly (see figs. 1-2), comprising:
several pumps (first pump is 21 = 21m+21p and second pump is 22 = 22m+22p), each pump (21, 22) comprising a body (as evident from fig. 1: body formed by casing/housing of each of the pumps) and a rotational axis (in view of fig. 1: rotational axis of each pump being in ↨ direction), the rotational axes of the pumps being parallel to each other (as evident from fig. 1); and
a support member (25) for the pumps, wherein the support member comprises a single plate (as evident from figs. 1-2) with two parallel faces (top and bottom face in view of fig. 1) perpendicular to the rotational axes of the pumps, the plate forming a single part arranged in a plane (horizontal plane in view of fig. 1 that extends in a direction into and out of page) perpendicular to the rotational axes, and holes (35, 36) passing through a thickness (thickness being in vertical direction in view of fig. 1) of the plate with each hole formed by removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly (In accordance to MPEP 2113, with respect to the limitation “removing material from the plate and thereby reducing an overall bulk of the assembly”, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight; however, please note that it is further inherent that each of these holes are made by removing the material from the plate, thus reducing an overall bulk because of the reduction in weight of the plate due to formation of the holes) and each hole receiving the corresponding body of the corresponding pump with portions of the body positioned on opposite sides of the hole passing through the plate (as evident from figs. 1-2: top portion of the pump’s body is above the corresponding hole and bottom portion of the pump’s body is below the corresponding hole).
Yilmaz teaches a plate formed by assembling two components (20, 70) together, i.e. respective connecting means (26, 76) produces a plug-action connection (see ¶35) between the holders (20, 70). Herr teaches a plate formed as a single plate forming a single part. Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use a single piece support for the pumps of Yilmaz in light of the teaching of Herr as a matter of obvious design choice since it would have amounted to choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143 I E. Further, it has been held that “A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portion that would lead away from the claimed invention.” W.L. Gore Assoc.., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721F.2d 1540, 220 USQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). Please note that in the instant application, applicant has not disclosed any criticality of forming the plate as a single part {with respect to advantages discussed in ¶16 of pg. pub of the instant application: advantages such as reduction in number of parts, reduction in manufacturing costs and/or assembly recognized by inventor would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art}.
Yilmaz does not teach the assembly, wherein the circle “comprising regularly distributed hollows on a contour”.
However, Collmer teaches a pump holder (10, see fig. 1) wherein a hole (12, see fig. 1) forms a circle comprising regularly distributed hollows (longitudinal ribs) on a contour (ribs being located on an inner surface of the hole).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide hollows as taught by Collmer in each of the Yilmaz’s holes in the modified assembly of Yilmaz for the purpose of enhancing the grip to keep pump in place. Furthermore, such ribs/ridges further prevent the pump from sliding or rotating unintentionally within the hole.
Yilmaz, as modified above, does not teach the assembly, wherein the one face of the plate comprises, on the contour of each hole, “grooves each receiving” the boss.
However, Findeisen teaches a pump holder/plate (28/32, see figs. 1-3) wherein one face of the plate (top face 33) comprises, on a contour (boundary) of a hole (31, see fig. 3), groove (42, see figs. 2-3) receiving a boss (22, see fig. 2) protruding from an outer contour of a body (18) of a pump (12).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide grooves as taught by Findeisen on contour of each of the holes in the modified assembly of Yilmaz for the purpose of providing corresponding pump with a defined and stable rotational orientation with respect to its corresponding holder/support body, as recognized by Findeisen (see page 12 of translation, lines 29-31 and page 13 of translation, lines 1-3).
Response to Arguments
The arguments filed May 28, 2026, with respect to independents claim 1 and 11, have been fully considered but they are moot. The amendment to the independent claims changed the scope of the claim. As a result, new grounds of rejection are made over newly found reference of Herr.
Conclusion
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