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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the profiles on the insertion hole of the stator recited in claims 19, 21 and 22 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 15-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mathewson et al. (US Patent 5,120,204).
With regards to claim 1, Mathewson et al. discloses a uniaxial eccentric pump comprising a stator 8 having an insertion hole with an inner peripheral surface being internally threaded (Fig. 4), and a rotor 22 including a shaft being externally threaded and placed through the insertion hole in the stator (Fig. 4), wherein the insertion hole is, in a cross section, an opening including a middle area and two end areas (Fig. 1A), and an interference amount (gap amount) between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and the inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas (col. 3, lines 36-41, as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand, a smaller interference/gap amount will mean a greater interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface and a greater interference amount will mean a smaller interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface since the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface will be closer to each other when the gap between them is smaller than when the gap between them is greater). Regarding the limitation of the opening in the stator having a profile expressed with a single formula as recited in the claim, Applicant should note that the recited single formula is the universally known formula of an ellipse and since the profile of the stator insertion hole of the stator of Mathewson et al. is an ellipse, it goes without saying that it will be expressed with a single formula as recited in the claim.
With regards to claim 15, Mathewson et al. discloses a uniaxial eccentric pump comprising a stator 8 having an insertion hole with an inner peripheral surface being internally threaded (Fig. 4), and a rotor 22 including a shaft being externally threaded and placed through the insertion hole in the stator (Fig. 4), wherein the insertion hole is, in a cross section, an opening including a middle area and two end areas (Fig. 1A), and an interference amount (gap amount) between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and the inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas (col. 3, lines 36-41, as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand, a smaller interference/gap amount will mean a greater interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface and a greater interference amount will mean a smaller interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface since the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface will be closer to each other when the gap between them is smaller than when the gap between them is greater). Regarding the limitation of the opening in the stator having a profile expressed with a single formula as recited in the claim, Applicant should note because the profile of the stator of Mathewson et al. has an insertion hole that satisfies the condition where in interference amount between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and an inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas, the profile of the opening in the stator will also be expressed with a single formula as claimed.
With regards to claim 16, Mathewson et al. discloses a uniaxial eccentric pump comprising a stator 8 having an insertion hole with an inner peripheral surface being internally threaded (Fig. 4), and a rotor 22 including a shaft being externally threaded and placed through the insertion hole in the stator (Fig. 4), wherein the insertion hole is, in a cross section, an opening including a middle area and two end areas (Fig. 1A), and an interference amount (gap amount) between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and the inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas (col. 3, lines 36-41, as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand, a smaller interference/gap amount will mean a greater interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface and a greater interference amount will mean a smaller interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface since the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface will be closer to each other when the gap between them is smaller than when the gap between them is greater). Regarding the limitation of the opening in the stator having a profile expressed with a single formula as recited in the claim, Applicant should note because the profile of the stator of Mathewson et al. has an insertion hole that satisfies the condition where in interference amount between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and an inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas, the profile of the opening in the stator will also be expressed with a single formula as claimed.
With regards to claim 17, Mathewson et al. discloses a uniaxial eccentric pump comprising a stator 8 having an insertion hole with an inner peripheral surface being internally threaded (Fig. 4), and a rotor 22 including a shaft being externally threaded and placed through the insertion hole in the stator (Fig. 4), wherein the insertion hole is, in a cross section, an opening including a middle area and two end areas (Fig. 1A), and an interference amount (gap amount) between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and the inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas (col. 3, lines 36-41, as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand, a smaller interference/gap amount will mean a greater interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface and a greater interference amount will mean a smaller interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface since the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface will be closer to each other when the gap between them is smaller than when the gap between them is greater). Regarding the limitation of the opening in the stator having a profile expressed with a single formula as recited in the claim, Applicant should note because the profile of the stator of Mathewson et al. has an insertion hole that satisfies the condition where in interference amount between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and an inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas, the profile of the opening in the stator will also be expressed with a single formula as claimed.
With regards to claim 20, Mathewson et al. discloses a uniaxial eccentric pump comprising a stator 8 having an insertion hole with an inner peripheral surface being internally threaded (Fig. 4), and a rotor 22 including a shaft being externally threaded and placed through the insertion hole in the stator (Fig. 4), wherein the insertion hole is, in a cross section, an opening including a middle area and two end areas (Fig. 1A), the opening in the stator has a profile including a pair of straight lines in the middle area and a pair of elliptical arcs in the two end areas respectively (Fig. 1A) and an interference amount (gap amount) between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and the inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas (col. 3, lines 36-41, as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand, a smaller interference/gap amount will mean a greater interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface and a greater interference amount will mean a smaller interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface since the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface will be closer to each other when the gap between them is smaller than when the gap between them is greater).
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) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mathewson et al. in view of Seeberger et al. (US Patent 3,499,389).
Mathewson et al. discloses a uniaxial screw pump as shown above except for the stator consisting of a stator body formed from an elastic material. However, it is know to form stators of uniaxial screw pumps consisting of stator bodies formed from an elastic material as attested by Seeberger et al., see column 2, lines 35-37 and figures 1-4. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have formed the stator of Mathewson et al. such that it consisted of a stator body formed from an elastic material, in light of the teachings of Seeberger et al., as is known in the art.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mathewson et al. in view of Furukawa (JP2016079971).
With regards to claim 18, Mathewson et al. discloses a uniaxial eccentric pump comprising a stator 8 having an insertion hole with an inner peripheral surface being internally threaded (Fig. 4), and a rotor 22 including a shaft being externally threaded and placed through the insertion hole in the stator (Fig. 4), wherein the insertion hole is, in a cross section, an opening including a middle area and two end areas (Fig. 1A), and an interference amount (gap amount) between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and the inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas (col. 3, lines 36-41, as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand, a smaller interference/gap amount will mean a greater interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface and a greater interference amount will mean a smaller interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface since the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface will be closer to each other when the gap between them is smaller than when the gap between them is greater). Mathewson et al. does not disclose that the opening in the stator has a profile including a pair of circular arcs each having a first curvature radius, in the middle area, and a second circular arc having a second curvature radius in each of the two end areas. However, Furukawa teaches a uniaxial screw pump with an opening in the stator having such a profile, see figure 9(b). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the profile of the insertion hole of the stator of Mathewson et al. such that the opening in the stator has a profile including a pair of circular arcs each having a first curvature radius, in the middle area, and a second circular arc having a second curvature radius in each of the two end areas, in light of the teachings of Furukawa, as an obvious matter of design choice as long as the requirement that an interference amount (gap amount) between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and the inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas.
Claim(s) 19, 21 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mathewson et al.
With regards to claims 19, 21 and 228, Mathewson et al. discloses a uniaxial eccentric pump comprising a stator 8 having an insertion hole with an inner peripheral surface being internally threaded (Fig. 4), and a rotor 22 including a shaft being externally threaded and placed through the insertion hole in the stator (Fig. 4), wherein the insertion hole is, in a cross section, an opening including a middle area and two end areas (Fig. 1A), and an interference amount (gap amount) between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and the inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas (col. 3, lines 36-41, as one of ordinary skill in the art would understand, a smaller interference/gap amount will mean a greater interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface and a greater interference amount will mean a smaller interference between the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface since the rotor outer surface and the stator insertion hole inner surface will be closer to each other when the gap between them is smaller than when the gap between them is greater). Mathewson et al. does not disclose that the opening in the stator has a profile as recited in the respective claims. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that having the opening in the stator of Mathewson et al. with a profile as recited in the claims is an obvious matter of design choice wherein no stated problem is solved or unexpected results obtained in having the profile of the insertion hole of the stator of Mathewson et al. with the recited profiles versus the profile disclosed by Mathewson et al., as long as the requirement that an interference amount (gap amount) between an outer peripheral surface of the rotor and the inner peripheral surface of the insertion hole in the stator is smaller in the middle area than in the two end areas.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 11 and 15-22 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ESSAMA OMGBA whose telephone number is (469)295-9278. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday from 8:00 AM to 6:00 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, Alexander Beck can be reached at 571-272-3750. 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.
/ESSAMA OMGBA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights