Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/552,857

ELECTRONIC OIL PUMP

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Sep 27, 2023
Examiner
HERRMANN, JOSEPH S
Art Unit
3746
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Zhejiang Sanhua Automotive Components Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allow Rate
303 granted / 482 resolved
-7.1% vs TC avg
Strong +41% interview lift
Without
With
+41.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
518
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
42.1%
+2.1% vs TC avg
§102
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
§112
31.2%
-8.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 482 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Election/Restrictions Applicant's previous election of Species 1 (Figs 1-5) is noted. Response to Amendment Applicant’s amendments to claims 3 & 5, filed 02/17/2026, have made the claim objections moot. The claim objections of 11/17/2025 have been withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-4 & 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hoshiko US 2019/0277294. Regarding Claim 1: An electronic oil pump (the oil pump is defined by the sum of its parts), comprising a stator assembly (12,13,14,15, ¶0020-¶0021, Fig 1), a circuit board assembly (5,51, ¶0022, ¶0026, Fig 1), a conduction member (26, ¶0018, Fig 1) and a pump housing (1,2,7,8,41,42,43, E, ¶0017-¶0018, ¶0024-¶0025), wherein at least a part of the pump housing (at least a part of the pump housing = 1,2,E, ¶0018, Fig 1) is conductive to electricity (aluminum is known to conduct electricity thus elements 1,2 are conductive, further, since elements 1,2 are electrically connected to ground via bolt 26 and transmission E (¶0028), the transmission E & bolt 26 are inherently conductive to electricity), and a reference ground layer 51 of the circuit board assembly is electrically connected to the conduction 26 member via the conductive part of the pump housing (it is, 51 is electrically connected to 26 via elements 33,32,31,46,1,2 - ¶0027-¶0028); wherein the conduction member 26 is fixedly connected to the pump housing (as seen in Fig 1, element 26 is threaded into element E of the pump housing, thus the conduction member 26 is fixedly connected to the pump housing as claimed); and wherein a part of the conduction member (part of the conduction member = threaded shaft of element 26 OR upper half of the threaded shaft of element 26) is electrically connected to the conductive part of the pump housing (since the articulated part of the conduction member is used to ground the pump it would inherently be electrically connected to the conductive part of the pump housing (1,2,E) as claimed), and at least a part of an outer surface of the rest portion of the conduction member (a part of an outer surface of the rest portion of the conductive member = flat upward facing surface of the head of bolt 26 in Fig 1) forms a part of the outer surface of the electronic oil pump (as seen in Fig 1 the flat upward facing surface of the head of bolt 26 in Fig 1 forms a part of the outer surface of the electronic oil pump illustrated in Fig 1, as claimed). PNG media_image1.png 624 982 media_image1.png Greyscale Annotated Figure 1 of Hoshiko US 2019/0277294 (Attached Figure A) Regarding Claim 2: wherein the pump housing (1,2,7,8,41,42,43, E) comprises a first housing (first housing = 1,2,7,E) configured as the conductive part of the pump housing (the first housing 1,2,7,E includes the conductive part of the pump housing 1,2,E; thus the first housing is configured as the conductive part of the housing as claimed), wherein the first housing (1,2,7,E) has a first housing chamber (see Annotated Figure 1 of Hoshiko US 2019/0277294 (Attached Figure A) above), in which the stator assembly is at least partially located (as seen in Attached Figure A the stator assembly (12,13,14,15) is at least partially located in the first housing chamber as claimed), and a stator core (13, ¶0021) of the stator assembly is electrical-conductively connected (i.e. electrical-conductively connected via 46) to a corresponding side wall of the first housing chamber (corresponding side wall of the first housing chamber = see Attached Figure A, electrically connected as explained in ¶0027-¶0028), and the conduction member 26 is fixed to the first housing (as seen in Attached Figure A, ¶0017-¶0018). Regarding Claim 3: wherein a central axis of the conduction member (Attached Figure A) is arranged in parallel with a height direction of the first housing (Attached Figure A); a second part of the conduction member (Attached Figure A) extends out of the first housing (i.e. extends out of element 2 of the first housing 1,2,7,E as seen in Attached Figure A) along the height direction of the electronic oil pump (Attached Figure A), and wherein the outer surface of the conduction member extending out of the first housing (i.e. the outer surface of the identified 2nd part of the conduction member in Attached Figure A) forms the part of the outer surface of the electronic oil pump (Attached Figure A). Regarding Claim 4: wherein the conduction member comprises a connecting part (Attached Figure A), where at least a part of an outer peripheral surface of the connecting part is formed with external threads (as seen in Attached Figure A – the outer peripheral surface of the articulated connecting part is formed with external threads as claimed), and wherein the first housing has a threaded hole (Attached Figure A), and the external threads of the connecting part are fitted with internal threads of the threaded hole (Attached Figure A). Regarding Claim 17: wherein a stator core (13, ¶0021) of the stator assembly is electrically connected to the conduction member 26 via the conductive part of the pump housing (the stator core 13 is electrically connected to element 26 via elements 1,2,E (e.g. the conductive part of the pump housing)). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5-6 and 13-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding Claim 6:The prior art of record either alone or in combination does not teach or suggest the device recited in claim 6 including “wherein the pump housing further comprises a pump cover, which is non-conductive and is supported on and fixedly connected with the first housing; the electronic oil pump Page 3 of 12 further comprises a first rotor assembly, and the pump cover at least partially covers the first rotor assembly; the pump cover is provided with a through hole, and the conduction member passes through the through hole; and wherein the conduction member is arranged in the radial extension direction of the first rotor assembly” in combination with all the limitations of claims 1-3. It is the Examiner’s opinion that modification of the available prior art in the claimed manner is neither contemplated nor foreseeable without the benefit of the disclosure of the instant invention. Regarding Claim 13:The prior art of record either alone or in combination does not teach or suggest the device recited in claim 13 including “wherein the pump housing further comprises a pump cover, which is non-conductive and is supported on and fixedly connected with the first housing; the electronic oil pump further comprises a first rotor assembly, and the pump cover at least partially covers the first rotor assembly; the pump cover is provided with a through hole, and the conduction member passes through the through hole; and wherein the conduction member is arranged in the radial extension direction of the first rotor assembly” in combination with all the limitations of claims 1-4. It is the Examiner’s opinion that modification of the available prior art in the claimed manner is neither contemplated nor foreseeable without the benefit of the disclosure of the instant invention. Regarding Claim 5:The prior art of record either alone or in combination does not teach or suggest the device recited in claim 5 including “wherein the connecting part has an accommodating chamber, and the conduction member further comprises a contact part, an elastic part and a cover part, where a part of the contact part, the elastic part and at least a part of the cover part are located in the accommodating chamber; the cover part is connected with the connecting part; in the height direction of the conduction member, a part of the contact part extends out of the connecting part, and the outer surface of the contact part extending out of the connecting part forms the part of the outer surface of the electronic oil pump; at least a part of the elastic part is located between the contact part and the cover part along the height direction of the conduction member; one end of the elastic part abuts against the contact part, and the other end of the elastic part abuts against the cover part; and wherein when an external force is applied on the contact part, the contact part can move along a compression direction of the elastic part, and when the external force applied on the contact part is removed, the contact part can move along the extension direction of the elastic part”. It is the Examiner’s opinion that modification of the available prior art in the claimed manner is neither contemplated nor foreseeable without the benefit of the disclosure of the instant invention. Additionally, claim 14 is allowable based on its dependency on allowable claim 5. Examiner's Note: The Examiner respectfully requests of the Applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the entirety of the references as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention. It is noted, REFERENCES ARE RELEVANT AS PRIOR ART FOR ALL THEY CONTAIN. “The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain.” In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill the art, including nonpreferred embodiments (see MPEP § 2123). Additionally the origin of the drawing is immaterial. For instance, drawings in a design patent can anticipate or make obvious the claimed invention, as can drawings in utility patents. When the reference is a utility patent, it does not matter that the feature shown is unintended or unexplained in the specification. The drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979). (See MPEP § 2125). The Examiner has cited particular locations in the reference(s) as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claims, typically other passages and figures will apply as well. Furthermore: with respect to the prior art and the determination of obviousness, it has been held that Prior art is not limited just to the references being applied, but includes the understanding of one of ordinary skill in the art. The "mere existence of differences (i.e. a gap) between the prior art and an invention DOES NOT ESTABLISH the inventions nonobviousness." Dann v. Johnston, 425 U.S. 219, 230, 189 USPQ 257, 261 (1976). Rather, in determining obviousness the proper analysis is whether the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art after consideration of all the facts. And factors other than the disclosures of the cited prior art may provide a basis for concluding that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to bridge the gap. (See MPEP § 2141). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments (Page 8 ¶2-Page 12 ¶1) with respect to claim(s) 1 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. 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 JOSEPH S HERRMANN whose telephone number is (571)270-3291. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, 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. /CHARLES G FREAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746 /JOSEPH S. HERRMANN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 27, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Feb 17, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 09, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12577959
AXIAL FAN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571393
VACUUM PUMPING SYSTEM HAVING AN OIL-LUBRICATED VACUUM PUMP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12546311
PUMP-MOTOR UNIT COMPRISING A CENTRED STATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12535068
DURABLE VALVES FOR DISPLACEMENT PUMPS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12523230
INFLATABLE PUMP, INFLATABLE ASSEMBLY, AND INFLATABLE PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+41.4%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 482 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month