Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/749,354

Axial Piston Machine with Retraction Plate for High Rotational Speeds

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jun 20, 2024
Examiner
COLLINS, DANIEL S.
Art Unit
3745
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Robert Bosch GmbH
OA Round
2 (Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
506 granted / 596 resolved
+14.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
630
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
40.7%
+0.7% vs TC avg
§102
33.7%
-6.3% vs TC avg
§112
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 596 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, filed 1/5/26 with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant has amended claim 1 to include the previously indicated allowable subject matter of claim 7 and canceled claim 7. As a result claims 1-6 and 8-13 are now allowable. Examiner has withdrawn his rejection of these claims. However, upon review of the Newly added claims 14 and 15 it appears the prior art of record still teaches these newly added independent claims. As such, it is for this reason that the Examiner has produced the final rejection below. 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. Claim 14 is is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schnell et al., German Patent Publication DE 102015208886A1 (hereinafter “Schnell”) in view of Nordt et al., German Patent Publication DE 102014215024 (hereinafter "Nordt"). In Reference to Claim 14: Schell discloses an axial piston machine (Figure 1) comprising: a plurality of pistons (6) received in a linearly movable manner in a cylinder drum (2) such that, together with the cylinder drum, the plurality of pistons each delimit an associated cylinder chamber of variable volume; a plurality of sliding shoes (12), each of which is connected via a ball joint (not labeled but shown) to a respective piston of the plurality of pistons (6); and a retraction plate (22) comprising: an associated first aperture for each of the plurality of sliding shoes; a flat first end face against which the associated sliding shoe bears; a central second aperture that forms a corner with the flat first end face; and a second end face which faces away from the first end face and is rotationally symmetrical, a radially outward distance between the first and second end faces being smaller than a radially inward distance. See, Figure 1. Schnell fails to disclose wherein an inner circumferential surface of the first aperture is widened in the shape of a funnel at the second end face, the funnel-shaped widening is present at a radially inner edge of the first aperture, and only a circular cylindrical section is present at a radially outer edge of the first aperture. However, in the same field of endeavor, Nordt discloses an axial piston machine wherein the first aperture (aperture for the shoes) comprises a second circular cylindrical section (via the chamfered edge of the apertures) forming a funnel like shaped widening of the first aperture It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify Schnell with the teachings of Nordt, specifically to modify the retraction plate of Schnell to include a chamfer around the apertures for the piston shoes (as shown by Nordt) because such a modification as discussed in Nordt allows for a better range of motion during periods where the axial piston machine are operated at a varied displacement. Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schnell et al., German Patent Publication DE 102015208886A1 (hereinafter “Schnell”). In Reference to Claim 15: Schnell discloses an axial piston machine (Figure 1) comprising: a plurality of piston (6) received in a linearly movable manner in a cylinder drum (2) such that, together with the cylinder drum, the plurality of pistons each delimit an associated cylinder chamber of variable volume (via movement of swash plate);a plurality of sliding shoes (12), each of which is connected via a ball joint (8) to a respective piston (6) of the plurality of pistons, the plurality of sliding shoes (12) bearing against a control surface (20), which is arrangeable at an angle other than 90 inclined to a rotation axis of the cylinder drum (2), in a sliding manner, each of the plurality of sliding shoes (12) having an outer circumferential surface that is rotationally symmetrical and is composed of a web section and a joint section (See, Annotated Figure Below) , a diameter of the web section greater than a largest diameter of the joint section such that an annular surface is produced at a transition between the web section and the joint section ; PNG media_image1.png 480 428 media_image1.png Greyscale a retraction plate (22) comprising: an associated first aperture for each of the plurality of sliding shoes (See, Figure 1) ;a flat first end face against which the annular surface of the associated sliding shoe bears; a central second aperture (See, Figure 10 that forms a corner with the flat first end face; and a second end face which faces away from the first end face and is rotationally symmetrical, a radially outward distance between the first and second end faces being smaller than a radially inward distance; and a retraction ball (shown but not labeled) having a spherical outer surface section against which an inner circumferential surface of the central second aperture bears, wherein the joint section of each sliding shoe deviates from a circular cylindrical shape such that the joint section has a largest diameter which is spaced apart from the web section, and a reduced diameter between the largest diameter and the web section that is less than the largest diameter (See, Annotated Figure above) in a reference state, the joint section contacts an inner circumferential surface of the associated first aperture such that a minimum distance is obtained between the web section and the spherical outer surface section,the inner circumferential surface of the associated first aperture is adapted to the non- circular cylindrical joint section of the associated sliding shoe such that said inner circumferential surface and the joint section contact each other in the reference state away from the largest diameter of the joint section, Schneell fails to explicitly disclose wherein the axial piston machine is designed in such a way that the reference state can only be reached when at least part of the axial piston machine is dismantled and/or when the axial piston machine is not pressurized ready for operation, such that during intended operation of the axial piston machine there is always at least some clearance between each sliding shoe and the associated first aperture. As claimed and admitted in said claim by by the Applicant, Examiner notes it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to further modify Schnell in such a way that the reference state can only be reached when at least part of the axial piston machine is dismantled and/or when the axial piston machine is not pressurized ready for operation, such that during intended operation of the axial piston machine there is always at least some clearance between each sliding shoe and the associated first aperture because such a modification is a design choice. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 1-6 and 8-13 are allowed. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DANIEL S. COLLINS whose telephone number is (313)446-6535. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8:00-5:30. 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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-4648. 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. /DANIEL S COLLINS/ Examiner, Art Unit 3745 /NATHANIEL E WIEHE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 20, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 05, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601150
SAFETY SYSTEM FOR MACHINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12577968
Soft Variable Impedance Actuator Using Embedded Jamming Layer
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570393
STABILITY AND CONTROL AUGMENTATION SYSTEM ACTUATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12559075
PRODUCTION-OPTIMIZED HOUSING FOR A HYDRAULIC UNIT FOR PRODUCING BRAKE PRESSURE FOR A HYDRAULIC BRAKE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12545224
RESERVOIR TANK FOR BRAKE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
85%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+10.8%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 596 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