DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendments to the claims filed on 29 May 2026. Claims 1 and 3 – 8 are pending and currently being examined.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 1, 3, 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams (PG Pub US 20210148353 A1) in view of Siegel (US Patent US 6554578 B1) and further in view of Tyson (US Patent 3,605,602 A).
In Re Claim 1, Figure 2 of Adams discloses a high-pressure diaphragm compressor (Title; Abstract), wherein the high-pressure diaphragm compressor comprises a gas-side (14) and an oil-side (23; “oil” is disclosed in paragraph [0125]) which are sequentially disposed in an axial direction; a diaphragm (13) and an oil distribution disc (22) are disposed between the gas-side (14) and the oil-side (23), and a gas-side diaphragm cavity (space inside 14) and an oil-side diaphragm cavity (space inside 23); an oil cylinder hole (space adjacent/above 32), a piston (32) is disposed in the oil cylinder hole, and a piston rod (a lower part of piston 32 is being designated the piston rod but it is not a separate part from the piston) is disposed below the piston (32), wherein the piston (32) is configured to seal high-pressure oil in the oil cylinder hole (paragraph [0177] discloses seals) and may reciprocate in the oil cylinder hole to push hydraulic oil to further drive the diaphragm (13) to make reciprocating flexural deformation; and a lower end of the piston rod is connected with a compressor crank-connecting rod mechanism (Figure 2 depicts a connecting rod, and a careful examination of Figure 2 at the lower end of the connecting rod reveals the crank mechanism); wherein the oil-side diaphragm cavity (space inside 23) is connected with a low-pressure oil pump (5) through an oil supplementing pipeline (see line above 38); the low-pressure oil pump (5) is the only oil pump used to supplement oil into the oil-side diaphragm cavity (space inside 23), and is configured such that: after the diaphragm (13) strikes the oil distribution disc and the oil pressure in the oil-side diaphragm cavity drops to near zero (paragraph [0050] states: “may be “0” value at least during some of the compression cycle”), the output pressure of the low-pressure oil pump exceeds the oil pressure in the oil-side diaphragm cavity (paragraph [00138] states that pressure potential is established when the pressure drops below 0.025 mm), thereby automatically (by controller 8; paragraph [0049]) supplementing oil into the oil-side diaphragm cavity (paragraph [0139]), and the oil supplementing amount is self-regulated along with the leakage amount (paragraphs [0034],[0045],[0047],[0048],[0121],[0168],[0177]); and a one-way valve (38; paragraphs [0116]-[0118]) is disposed on the oil supplementing pipeline, and an opening of the one-way valve faces the low- pressure oil pump (5) (since 38 is a check valve – paragraph [0118]) (paragraphs [0034],[0045],[0050],[0047],[0048],[0049],[0121],[0122],[0168],[0125],[0177]); Figure 2).
Although Adams discloses a gas side and an oil side of a head/housing, Adams does not disclose a separate gas side compressor head and oil side compressor head which clamp the diaphragm and the oil distribution disc.
However, Siegel discloses a separate gas side compressor head (1, 13, 14) and oil side compressor head (12) which clamp the diaphragm (4) and the oil distribution disc (5) (Column 5, Lines 1 – 20; Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to clamp the diaphragm and oil distribution disc of Adams between a gas side compressor head and oil side compressor head as taught by Siegel because it in only a matter of substituting the broadly disclosed assembly of the diaphragm and oil distribution disc of Adams with the specifically disclosed assembly of diaphragm and oil distribution disc of Siegel, therefore the results of the substitution are predictable (MPEP 2141, Section III, Rationale B).
Although Siegel discloses that after the diaphragm (4) strikes the oil distribution disc (5) and the oil pressure in the oil-side diaphragm cavity drops to a level insufficient to drive the piston (3), the piston continues to move downward (Column 5, Lines 6 – 16: “If an intended or unintentional leak occurs in the displacement chamber 2, a lack of hydraulic fluid occurs there. As a result, at the end of the intake stroke the diaphragm 4 reaches the rear contact position, which is arranged in the displacement chamber and through which medium can flow and which is preferably Its displacers embodied as a perforated plate 5, before the displacer 3 has reached its lower dead position”), Adams and Siegel do not disclose that the piston may be separated from the piston rod.
However, the Figure 1 embodiment of Tyson discloses a separate piston (10) and piston rod (30) such that and an upper end of the piston rod (30) abuts (at 31) onto a lower end of the piston (10) (Column 2, Lines 2 – 5, 11 – 15 and 62 – 67; Column 3, Lines 1 – 12).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate a piston rod as taught by Tyson below the piston of Adams in the apparatus of Adams / Tyson for the purpose of reducing wear on the piston (Column 3, Lines 21 – 23). Note that in the modified apparatus of Adams, after the diaphragm strikes the oil distribution disc as evidenced by Siegel, the piston may be separated from the piston rod because there is no mechanical connection between the piston rod and piston of Tyson, and it is expected that after the diaphragm strikes the oil distribution disc and the oil pressure in the oil-side diaphragm cavity drops to a level insufficient to drive the piston, the piston rod continues to move downward while the piston remains stationary and separates from the piston rod, thereby preventing negative pressure from being generated in the oil-side diaphragm cavity.
In Re Claim 3, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, and although Adams does not specifically disclose the type of pump, the claimed pumps are well known in the art.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate the well-known claimed pumps as the broadly disclosed pump of Adams in the apparatus of Adams / Siegel / Tyson because it is only a matter of substituting a broadly disclosed pump with a specifically disclosed pump, therefore the results of the substitution are predictable (MPEP 2141, Section III, Rationale B).
In Re Claim 5, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, and Tyson disclose that the piston (10) is a piston ring seal structure (16).
In Re Claim 8, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, and Figure 2 of Adams discloses an oil-side diaphragm cavity (23) that is connected to an overflow valve (34) through an oil overflow pipeline (33)(paragraphs [0112], [0124]).
Claim(s) 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams (PG Pub US 20210148353 A1) in view of Siegel (US Patent US 6554578 B1) and further in view of Tyson (US Patent 3,605,602 A) and further in view of Taite (US Patent 2,959,131 A).
In Re Claim 4, Adams, Siegel and Tyson disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, but they do not disclose an energy accumulator in the oil supplementing pipeline.
However, Taite discloses a hydraulic-side diaphragm cavity (16; Figures 1, 2) that is connected with a low-pressure oil pump (“separate feed pump”; a pump capable of pumping water is also capable of pumping oil and does not structurally distinguish over the prior art) through an fluid supplementing pipeline (the means that supplies “makeup” fluid); the low-pressure oil pump can adjust a fluid supplementing amount according to a pressure in the oil-side diaphragm cavity (one skilled in the art would appreciate that when there is leakage – the pressure goes down, when the makeup fluid is supplied – the pressure goes back up); and a one-way valve (“a non-return valve”) is disposed on the oil supplementing pipeline, and an opening (inlet to the non-return valve) of the one-way valve faces the low-pressure oil pump (since the fluid flows from the pump through the non-return valve), wherein an energy accumulator (“hydraulic accumulator operating at 2000 p.s.i.”) is further disposed on the oil supplementing pipeline; and the energy accumulator is located between the one-way valve and the low-pressure oil pump (since the fluid flows from the pump through the accumulator and the non-return valve) (Column 2, Lines 21 – 28).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to add an energy accumulator as taught by Taite to the fluid supplementing pipeline of Adams in the apparatus of Adams / Siegel / Tyson for the purpose of absorbing pressure pulses, thus improving system smoothness.
Claim(s) 6, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams (PG Pub US 20210148353 A1) in view of Siegel (US Patent US 6554578 B1) and further in view of Tyson (US Patent 3,605,602 A) and further in view of Lin (Chinese Patent CN 211777940 U, Machine Translation provided).
In Re Claim 6, Adams, Siegel and Tyson disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, but they do not disclose an oil cylinder sleeve.
PNG
media_image1.png
454
434
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 3 of Lin
However, Figure 3 (see annotated figure above) Lin discloses that an oil cylinder sleeve mounting cavity (see black shaded rectangle in the annotated figure above) is disposed in the oil-side diaphragm head (2), an oil cylinder sleeve (16) is disposed in the oil cylinder sleeve mounting cavity, and an inner hole of the oil cylinder sleeve (16) forms the oil cylinder hole (in which the piston reciprocates to move the oil – Translation, Page 8, Lines 14 – 16).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate the oil cylinder sleeve as taught by Lin into the apparatus of Adams / Siegel / Tyson for the purpose of protecting the body of the pump from wear (if the sleeve wears, it can easily be replaced as compared to replacing the entire pump body).
In Re Claim 7, Adams, Siegel and Tyson disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, but they do not disclose a gas side distribution disc.
However, Figure 3 of Lin discloses that the gas-side diaphragm head (1, 17) comprises a gas-side cylinder cover (1) and a gas distribution disc (17), the gas distribution disc (17) is located below the gas-side cylinder cover (1) as depicted, the diaphragm (15) and the gas distribution disc (17) are clamped between the gas-side cylinder cover (1) and the oil distribution disc (not labeled, it is above 2 and below 15), and the gas-side diaphragm cavity (“air cavity”) and the oil-side diaphragm cavity (“oil cavity”) are respectively formed between the diaphragm (15) and the gas distribution disc (17) as well as between the diaphragm (15) and the oil distribution disc (not labeled, it is above 2 and below 15).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to split up the gas side diaphragm head of Adams in the apparatus of Adams / Siegel / Tyson to have a separate gas side distribution disc as taught by Lin because it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements is routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.04, Section V-C).
Response to Arguments
Applicant has argued on Pages 10 – 11 of Applicant’s Response that “This is completely different from the standard solutions in the prior art (including Adams cited in the present application). In existing high-pressure diaphragm compressors, in order to achieve oil supplementing to a high-pressure oil cavity, a two-stage oil supplementing structure is typically required: a primary low-pressure gear pump and a secondary plunger-type oil supplementing pump (see Background of the present application, paragraph [0005]). The oil supplementing amount of the plunger oil supplementing pump per stroke is fixed, cannot adapt to the leakage amount, and the high-pressure plunger pump itself is structurally complex, costly, and difficult to seal”.
Examiner’s Response: Adams clearly discloses that pump (5) is the sole oil supplementing pump, the oil supplementing amount is self-regulated (via feedback from pressure sensor 7) along with the leakage amount (paragraphs [0034],[0045],[0047],[0048],[0121],[0168],[0177]).
The rest of Applicant’s arguments are moot in view of new grounds of rejection presented in this office action.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DNYANESH G KASTURE whose telephone number is (571)270-3928. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu, 7:30 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, 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.
/D.G.K/Examiner, Art Unit 3746
/ESSAMA OMGBA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights