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 .
DETAILED ACTION
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The presence of claim limitations that are preceded by the phrases “wherein” often raises a question as to the limiting effect of the claim limitations (see MPEP §2111.04). The Examiner has interpreted the limitations following the phrase “wherein” as positively being claimed (i.e. the claim limitations are required and/or the claim limitations following the “wherein clause” limits the structure), where “wherein” is being used as a transitional phrase.
Specification
The amendment to the specification received on January 2, 2026 is acceptable. The specification objections are hereby withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5, 7, 8, 10, 12-14, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE ‘018 (German Patent Publication DE 20 2012 003 018 U1, a machine translation is provided with the foreign reference in the PTO-892 Notice of References Cited and is utilized in the rejection below) in view of XU (Chinese Patent Publication CN-108180140 A, a machine translation was provided with the foreign patent publication in the PTO-892 Notice of References Cited and is utilized in the rejection below) in view of KIRKLAND (U.S. Patent 8,764,424 B2).
Regarding claim 1, DE ‘018 discloses: a double-flow pump (see Abstract, and Figure 1) comprising:
a housing (12) comprising:
a conveyor housing (12) comprising two or more conveyor units (52, 53), wherein at least one of the conveyor units have one or more shaft ends (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018), and wherein the one or more shaft ends are mounted in bearings (19), wherein the bearings are positioned in one or more bearing housings (13), wherein the conveyor housing is positioned at a distance from the one or more bearing housings such that a gap exists between the conveyor housing and the one or more bearing housings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018), wherein the one or more shaft ends bridge the gap and connect the conveyor housing to the one or more bearing housings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018).
PNG
media_image1.png
673
1051
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, DE ‘018 discloses the claimed invention as discussed above including that it is a double-spindle screw pump in a double flow design (see Abstract), however, fails to specifically disclose a housing comprising: one or more inlets; one or more outlets; two or more conveyor units which convey a medium from the one or more inlets to the one or more outlets, and wherein the one or more shaft ends are detachably connected to the corresponding conveyor unit of the two or more conveyor units.
Regarding claim 1, XU teaches: a double-flow pump (see Figure 1) comprising:
a housing (see Figure 1 of XU where the housing surrounds conveyor units (6, 7)) comprising:
one or more inlets (8) (see Figure 1 that shows 2 inlets one at either end of the conveyor units, bottom of Page 4 and top of Page 5);
one or more outlets (9) (see Figure 1, where the outlet is in the center of the double-flow pump); and,
a conveyor housing (see Figure 1 of XU that shows the conveyor housing surrounding (6, 7)) comprising two or more conveyor units (6, 7) which convey a medium from the one or more inlets to the one or more outlets (see Figure 1, top of Page 5).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a housing comprising: one or more inlets; one or more outlets; two or more conveyor units which convey a medium from the one or more inlets to the one or more outlets in the double flow pump of DE ‘018, since having known configurations of the inlet and outlet of a double flow pump is well-known in the art, as evidence by XU, and requires only routine skill in the art to provide the desired inlet and outlets to the housing of the pump in order for the fluid to be pumped. Furthermore, inlets and outlets are inherent in pumps in order to pump the working fluid.
The modified double-flow pump of DE ‘018/XU fails to disclose the one or more shaft ends are detachably connected to the corresponding conveyor unit of the two or more conveyor units.
Regarding claim 1, KIRKLAND teaches: the one or more shaft ends are detachably connected to the corresponding conveyor unit of the two or more conveyor units (see Figures 3-10 and Abstract that disclose that the conveyor units (40) that have screw flights (46, 48) that have the shaft ends (74) detachably connected via fasteners).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have the one or more shaft ends are detachably connected to the corresponding conveyor unit of the two or more conveyor units in the modified double-flow pump of DE ‘018/XU, in order to aid in replacement of worn conveyor units (see Column 2, lines 23-25 of KIRKLAND), in addition, the configuration of the screw flights can also be changed to meet different design criteria.
Regarding claim 2, KIRKLAND further teaches: the one or more shaft ends are detachably connected to the corresponding conveyor unit via a tapered conical connection or positive locking connection (see Figures 3-10, where the connection is considered positive locking due to the use of fasteners).
Regarding claim 3, KIRKLAND further teaches: the one or more shaft ends are screwed to the corresponding conveyor unit (see Figures 3-10).
Regarding claim 4, DE ‘018 discloses: the conveyor housing further comprises of one or more sealed shaft passage openings (see Figure 1, where the seal (141) provides sealing for one or more sealed shaft passage openings in the conveyor housing).
Regarding claim 5, DE ‘018 discloses: one or more seals are positioned inside the one or more sealed shaft passage openings (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, DE ‘018 discloses: the one or more bearing housings comprise one or more through-openings for the one or more shaft ends (see Figure 1 that shows the bearing housings have one or more through-openings for the one or more shaft ends).
Regarding claim 8, DE ‘018 discloses the claimed invention, however, fails to specifically disclose the one or more through- openings are sealed. DE ‘018 does show in Figure 2 what appears to be a seal between the shaft end (24) and the transmission/gear end).
Regarding claim 8, XU teaches: one or more through- openings are sealed (see Figures 1 and 2 that shows seals on the shaft).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have one or more through- openings are sealed in the modified double-flow pump of DE ‘018/ XU/ KIRKLAND, in order to protect the bearings and/or the transmission gears from the environment. In addition, it is well-known in the art to use seals on the shafts in order to protect migration of any fluid or debris into or out of the sealed areas, as evidence by XU.
Regarding claim 10, DE ‘018 discloses: the two or more conveyor units further comprise two or more spindles that are rotatably mounted in the conveyor housing (see Figure 1, claim 1, Abstract).
DE ‘018 fails to specifically show or disclose at least one of the spindles of the two or more spindles have two screw threads on its outer circumference that have oppositely oriented pitches and are in engagement with opposing screw threads of a different spindle of the two or more spindles and convey the medium from the one or more inlets to the one or more outlets.
Regarding claim 10, XU teaches: the two or more conveyor units further comprise two or more spindles that are rotatably mounted in the conveyor housing (see Figure 1 that shows two spindles),
wherein at least one of the spindles of the two or more spindles have two screw threads on its outer circumference that have oppositely oriented pitches and are in engagement with opposing screw threads of a different spindle of the two or more spindles and convey the medium from the one or more inlets to the one or more outlets (see Figure 1, Page 5).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have at least one of the spindles of the two or more spindles have two screw threads on its outer circumference that have oppositely oriented pitches and are in engagement with opposing screw threads of a different spindle of the two or more spindles and convey the medium from the one or more inlets to the one or more outlets in the double-flow pump of DE ‘018, since utilizing well-known spindle and screw thread configurations such as the configuration of XU in the double-flow pump with double-spindles of DE ‘018 requires only routine skill in the art and produces predictable results (i.e. a desired output of the working fluid).
Regarding claim 12, DE ‘018 discloses: the conveyor housing is sealed from an outside environment (see Figure 1, where seals (141) seal the conveyor housing from an outside environment).
Regarding claim 13, DE ‘018 discloses: the one or more bearing housings are sealed from an outside environment and are not in contact with the conveyed medium (see Figure 1, where the bearing housing are separate from the conveyor housing and are not in contact with the conveyed medium). DE ‘018 fails to specifically disclose the one or more bearing housings are sealed from an outside environment, however, in Figure 2, the bearing housing appears to be sealed at the one end that has the gears in it).
Regarding claim 13, XU teaches: the one or more bearing housings are sealed from an outside environment (see Figure 1 of XU that shows the bearings in the one or more bearing housings are sealed from an outside environment).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have the one or more bearing housings are sealed from an outside environment in the modified double-flow pump of DE ‘018/ XU/ KIRKLAND, in order to protect the bearings and/or the transmission gears from the environment. In addition, it is well-known in the art to use seals on the shafts in order to protect migration of any fluid or debris into or out of the sealed areas, as evidence by XU.
Regarding claim 14, DE ‘018 discloses: the two or more conveyor units are mounted between a first set of one or more bearings and a second set of one or more bearings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018), wherein the first set and second set of one or more bearings are in bearing housings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018).
Regarding claim 16, DE ‘018 discloses: a double-flow pump (see Abstract, and Figure 1) comprising:
a housing (12) comprising:
a first set of one or more bearings and a second set of one or more bearings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018), wherein the first set and second set of one or more bearings are in bearing housings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018), wherein the bearing housings are not in contact with a medium (see Figure 1, where the bearing housings are not in contact with a medium since they are separated from the conveyor housing); and
a conveyor housing (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018) positioned between the first set of one or more bearings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018) and the second set of one or more bearings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018), the conveyor housing comprising two conveyor units (52, 53), wherein the conveyor units comprise:
one or more shaft ends (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018), and wherein the one or more shaft ends are mounted in the corresponding bearings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018), wherein the conveyor housing is sealed from the outside environment (see Figure 1, where the conveyor housing is sealed from the outside due to seals (141)) and is positioned at a distance from the bearing housings such that a gap exists between the conveyor housing and the bearing housings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018), wherein the one or more shaft ends bridge the gap and connect the conveyor housing to the one or more bearing housings (see Marked up Figure 1 of DE ‘018); and
a spindle that is rotatably mounted in the conveyor housing, wherein the spindle has two screw threads (52, 53) on its outer circumference (see Figure 1).
DE ‘018 discloses the claimed invention, however, fails to specifically disclose a housing comprising: two inlets and an outlet; the bearing housings are sealed from an outside environment; the two conveyor units which convey a medium from the two inlets in opposite directions to the outlet; the spindle has two screw threads that have oppositely oriented pitches and are in engagement with opposing screw threads of the other spindle and convey the medium from the two inlets to the outlet; and wherein the one or more shaft ends are detachably connected to the corresponding conveyor unit.
Regarding claim 16, XU teaches: a double-flow pump (see Figure 1) comprising:
a housing (see Figure 1 of XU where the housing surrounds conveyor units (6, 7)) comprising:
two inlets (8) (see Figure 1 that shows 2 inlets one at either end of the conveyor units, bottom of Page 4 and top of Page 5);
an outlet (9) (see Figure 1, where the outlet is in the center of the double-flow pump); and,
a conveyor housing (see Figure 1 of XU that shows the conveyor housing surrounding (6, 7)) comprising two or more conveyor units (6, 7) which convey a medium from the two inlets in opposite directions to the outlet (see Figure 1, top of Page 5);
the one or more bearing housings are sealed from an outside environment (see Figure 1 of XU that shows the bearings in the one or more bearing housings are sealed from an outside environment).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a housing comprising: one or more inlets; one or more outlets; two or more conveyor units which convey a medium from the one or more inlets to the one or more outlets in the double flow pump of DE ‘018, since having known configurations of the inlet and outlet of a double flow pump is well-known in the art, as evidence by XU, and requires only routine skill in the art to provide the desired inlet and outlets to the housing of the pump in order for the fluid to be pumped. Furthermore, inlets and outlets are inherent in pumps in order to pump the working fluid.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have the one or more bearing housings are sealed from an outside environment in the double-flow pump of DE ‘018, in order to protect the bearings and/or the transmission gears from the environment. In addition, it is well-known in the art to use seals on the shafts in order to protect migration of any fluid or debris into or out of the sealed areas, as evidence by XU.
Regarding claim 16, XU further teaches: a spindle that are rotatably mounted in the conveyor housing (see Figure 1 that shows two spindles),
wherein the spindle has two screw threads on its outer circumference that have oppositely oriented pitches and are in engagement with opposing screw threads of the other spindle and convey the medium from the two inlets to the outlet (see Marked up Figure 1 of XU, Page 5).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have the spindle has two screw threads on its outer circumference that have oppositely oriented pitches and are in engagement with opposing screw threads of the other spindle and convey the medium from the two inlets to the outlet in the double-flow pump of DE ‘018, since utilizing well-known spindle and screw thread configurations such as the configuration of XU in the double-flow pump with double-spindles of DE ‘018 requires only routine skill in the art and produces predictable results (i.e. a desired output of the working fluid).
The modified double-flow pump of DE ‘018/XU fails to disclose the one or more shaft ends are detachably connected to the corresponding conveyor unit of the two or more conveyor units.
Regarding claim 16, KIRKLAND teaches: the one or more shaft ends are detachably connected to the corresponding conveyor unit (see Figures 3-10 and Abstract that disclose that the conveyor units (40) that have screw flights (46, 48) that have the shaft ends (74) detachably connected via fasteners).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have the one or more shaft ends are detachably connected to the corresponding conveyor unit in the modified double-flow screw pump of DE ‘018/XU, in order to aid in replacement of worn conveyor units (see Column 2, lines 23-25 of KIRKLAND), in addition, the configuration of the screw flights can also be changed to meet different design criteria.
Regarding claim 17, KIRKLAND further teaches: the one or more shaft ends are detachably connected to the corresponding conveyor units via a tapered conical connection or positive locking connection (see Figures 3-10, where the connection is considered positive locking due to the use of fasteners).
Claims 9, 15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified double-flow screw pump of DE ‘018 /XU/ KIRKLAND as applied to claims 1, 2, and 16 above, and further in view of FRIEDEN (German Patent Publication DE 198 20 523 A1, a machine translation is provided in the PTO-892 Notice of References Cited and is utilized in the rejection below).
Regarding claim 9, the modified double-flow screw pump of DE ‘018 /XU/ KIRKLAND discloses: the claimed invention as discussed above, however, fails to disclose one or more bearing housings comprises a lubricant reservoir.
Regarding claim 9, FRIEDEN teaches: one or more bearing housings comprises a lubricant reservoir (9) (see Figure 1 that shows the one or more bearing housings containing bearings (8) that have a lubricant reservoir (9), also see Figures 3 and 4, and Page 4 that discuss lubricant being fed to a double-flow screw pump).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have one or more bearing housings comprises a lubricant reservoir in the modified double-flow screw pump of DE ‘018 /XU/ KIRKLAND, in order to lubricate the bearings, which reduces friction and wear on the bearings.
Regarding claims 15 and 18, the modified double-flow screw pump of DE ‘018 /XU/ KIRKLAND fails to disclose tapered bores are formed in the two or more conveyor units for receiving truncated cones of the one or more shaft ends.
Regarding claims 15 and 18, FRIEDEN teaches: tapered bores (see Figures 1-4 that show tapered bores) are formed in the two or more conveyor units for receiving truncated cones of the one or more shaft ends (see Figures 1 and 2 that show truncated cones of the one or more shaft ends).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have tapered bores are formed in the two or more conveyor units for receiving truncated cones of the one or more shaft ends in the modified double-flow screw pump of DE ‘018 /XU/ KIRKLAND, in order to positively attach the shaft to the conveyor unit, as well as, provide the desired lubricant. Figures 1 and 2 are shown for a single flow pump versus a double-flow screw pump, however, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have tapered bores are formed in the two or more conveyor units for receiving truncated cones of the one or more shaft ends in the modified double-flow screw pump of DE ‘018 /XU/ KIRKLAND, since applying a known technique (i.e. attachment of the shaft to the conveyor unit), as taught by FRIEDEN in Figures 1 and 2, to a known device (i.e. the modified double-flow screw pump of DE ‘018 /XU/ KIRKLAND) would have yielded predicable results. The results are predictable and provide the improvement of positively attaching the shaft to the conveyor unit. Furthermore, KIRKLAND disclosed positive attachment of the shaft to the conveyor unit, and therefore, utilizing a different geometry of the shaft and conveyor unit requires only routine skill in the art and produces predictable results (i.e. the centering of the shaft in the conveyor unit due to the conical interface between the components).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims 1 and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection is based on the amendment that is met by a new reference (see rejection above). The arguments with regards to the amended claim limitations are moot, since DE ‘018 is used to teach these amendments.
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.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARY DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-9965. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am-4pm.
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.
/Mary A Davis/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746