Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/850,924

VACUUM PUMP

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 25, 2024
Examiner
HANSEN, KENNETH J
Art Unit
3746
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Edwards Japan Limited
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
490 granted / 606 resolved
+10.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
639
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.0%
-39.0% vs TC avg
§103
45.4%
+5.4% vs TC avg
§102
21.8%
-18.2% vs TC avg
§112
25.4%
-14.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 606 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 25 February 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9 are pending in the application. Claims 1, 2 and 9 have been amended. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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)(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. Claims 1, 4-6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Miwata et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0412369). Regarding claim 1, Miwata et al. discloses a vacuum pump (FIG.’s 1-3, Abstract) comprising: a casing 1 (FIG. 2, para. 0016); a rotating shaft 3b, 4 (para. 0016) enclosed in the casing 1 and rotatably supported (as shown and described in para. 0019); an accommodating portion 13, 13a (para. 0020, formed by shaft portion 13 and base portion 13a) accommodating an electric component portion 6 (para. 0016, motor portion 16) making the rotating shaft 4 rotatable; a rotor 11 (para. 0016) disposed on an outer side of the accommodating portion 13 and constituted integrally with the rotating shaft 3b, 4 (cylinder portion 3b integral with rotor 11); a stator 21 (para. 0025) disposed on an outer peripheral side of the rotor 11; a rotor disc portion 3a (para. 0016, refer to an Annotated copy of Miwata FIG. 1, attached below, as shown and indicated, recited rotor disc portion formed in part by rotor blades 3a and indicated structure(a) on the Annotation) extended in a radial direction from an outer peripheral surface of the rotor 11 (shown); and an exhausted gas being flowing on an outside of the rotor 11 by rotation of the rotor 11 (para. 0024, as described), and a non-contact seal structure (detailed below) preventing flow-in of the gas into the accommodating portion 13, 13a (para. 0026, “[t]he shielding portion 24 is provided in order to suppress contact of the exhaust gas with the shaft portion 13 in a channel 31 of the exhaust gas from the thread-groove pump portion 10b on the last stage to the outlet port 9”, thereby preventing flow-in of the gas in the manner claimed), wherein the non-contact seal structure includes: a first set of opposing surfaces 11a, 24, 24a1 (FIG. 2, para. 0028) creating a first gap that is axially located between the rotor disc portion (shown) and the stator 21 (as shown) and a second set of opposing surfaces creating a second gap that is radially located between the rotor and the stator 21 (refer to an Annotated copy of Miwata FIG. 2 attached below, as shown and indicated, note that two sets of surfaces can be construed to meet the claimed part of second opposed surfaces within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the terms). PNG media_image1.png 772 711 media_image1.png Greyscale Annotated Miwata FIG. 1 PNG media_image2.png 825 669 media_image2.png Greyscale Annotated Miwata FIG. 2 As to claim 4, Miwata further discloses the stator 21 further includes a stator disc portion 2 (para. 0016, stator blade 2 forms stator disc portion) opposed to an upstream side of the gas of the rotor disc portion in the axial direction; a first spiral groove 8 (para. 0016, thread groove 8 form recited spiral groove) for constituting an exhaust mechanism is provided on at least one of a third opposed surfaces of the rotor disc portion and the stator disc portion (Annotated Miwata FIG. 2, as shown and indicated, due to proximity of thread groove 8 to rotor and stator disc portions). As to claim 5, Miwata further discloses the rotor disc portion constitutes a lowest stage of the exhaust mechanism (Annotated Miwata FIG. 1, as shown and indicated, since it is downstream proximate outlet port 9, __a lowest stage of the exhaust mechanism). As to claim 6, Miwata further discloses a rectifying portion having a fourth opposed surface opposed, in an axial direction, to a rear surface, which is a downstream side of the gas of the rotor disc portion 3a (Annotated Miwata FIG. 2, as shown and indicated). As to claim 9, Miwata further discloses the stator 21 includes a channel defining portion 31 (para. 0028) which is heated by a heating means 22 (para. 0025) and defines a channel of the gas (para. 0032, as shown); and the non-contact seal structure is constituted by the first set of opposing surfaces of the rotor disc portion and the channel defining portion opposed in the axial direction (Annotated Miwata FIG. 1, as shown and indicated, the recited portions are arranged as claimed under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the terms). 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 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miwata et al. (U. S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0412369). As to claims 2 and 3, Miwata is discussed above but is silent as to a first set of opposing surfaces of the rotor disc portion and the stator is formed as an inclined surface, as recited in claim 2; and wherein both the first set of opposing surfaces of the rotor disc portion and the stator are formed as inclined surfaces, and inclination angles of the inclined surfaces are the same, as recited in claim 3. Since applicant has not disclosed that having the inclined surfaces configured as claimed solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose above and it appears that the surfaces of Miwata would perform equally well being configured as claimed by applicant, absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed limitation is significant, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice, before the filing of the claimed invention, to modify the surfaces to be inclined in the manner claimed for the purpose of configuring the surfaces in an orientation associated with the direction of gas flow or simply easing manufacturing by allowing angled surfaces vice the squared surfaces shown in Miwata. See MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(B). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7 and 8 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With respect to claim 7 and dependents, the prior art of record either alone or in combination does not teach or fairly suggest a vacuum pump with each of the limitations recited in combination wherein the vacuum pump further comprising: a rectifying portion having an opposed surface opposed, in an axial direction, to a rear surface, which is a downstream side of the rotor disc portion, wherein: the rectifying portion is a spiral groove portion, which has a disc shape and has a second spiral groove provided on an opposed surface to the rotor disc portion. In the Examiner’s view, modifying Miwata in the manner claimed is neither contemplated nor reasonably foreseeable without the benefit of the disclosure of the instant invention. Claim 7 recites features of the embodiment(s) discussed at para.’s 0078-0080 of the specification. Response to Arguments Applicant's remarks with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections over Miwata have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, on pp. 6-7 of the response, that “Miwata does not disclose or suggest "a non-contact seal structure preventing flow-in of the gas into the accommodating portion, wherein the non-contact seal structure includes: a first set of opposing surfaces creating a first gap that is axially located between the rotor disc portion [e.g., blue portion below] and the stator [e.g., a gap G1 between 109c and 141d] and a second set of opposing surfaces creating a second gap that is radially located between the rotor [e.g., green portion below] and the stator [e.g., a gap located between 103 and 141c]," as recited in amended claim 1 (emphasis added).” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, Applicant’s amendments to claim 1 change the terms “first opposed surfaces” to “first set of opposing surfaces” and “second opposed surfaces” to “second set of opposed surfaces” further reciting first and second gaps. However, the amendments do not substantially change the scope of the claims previously presented __failing to distinguish over Miwata. In other words, the claimed surface structures are the same. Applicant should carefully review the statement of the rejection and the updated Annotated copy of Miwata FIG. 2, supra. Miwata fully anticipates the claimed non-contact seal structure formed by the first and second opposed surfaces within the broadest reasonable interpretation of the terms because the claimed opposing surfaces and gaps are clearly present as indicated in the Annotated figure. This argument is unpersuasive. Applicant has not presented any substantive arguments with regard to the rejections of the dependent claims over the art of record including the combinations of proposed modification, rationale, or motivations to make those combinations. Applicant simply asserts that they are allowable for the same reasons made for the independent claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH J HANSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6780. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM (MT). 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, Mark Laurenzi can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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. /KENNETH J HANSEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 25, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Oct 08, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 12, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 12, 2026
Interview Requested
Jan 29, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 29, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 25, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601360
ELECTRIC PUMP ASSEMBLY, MANUFACTURING METHOD FOR INSTALLING SUCH A PUMP ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12583002
COATING AGENT PUMP, COATING INSTALLATION AND ASSOCIATED OPERATING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12571395
COMPRESSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571402
RADIALLY COMPRESSIBLE AND EXPANDABLE ROTOR FOR A PUMP HAVING AN IMPELLER BLADE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569667
CONTROL UNIT FOR OPERATING A BLOOD PUMP IN DIFFERENT CONVEYING MODES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
81%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+7.9%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 606 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