DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Application Status
This office action is in response to amendments/arguments filed on January 5, 2026. Applicant has amended Claims 1, 8, 40, 41, 46, and 49. Claims 1 – 10 and 40 – 49 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered.
Previous title objections are withdrawn due to applicant’s amendment.
Previous claim objections are withdrawn due to applicant’s amendment. New claim objections are presented below, necessitated by amendment.
Previous 112b rejections are withdrawn due to applicant’s amendment. New 112 rejections are presented below, necessitated by amendment.
With regards to Claim 1, applicant amended the claim by adding the features of wherein the recess port defines a continuously maintained leak path extending from the first longitudinal side of one of the lobes, around the end face of said lobe, and to the second longitudinal side of said lobe. This feature overcomes the previous grounds of rejection over Crisenbery.
With regards to Claim 41, applicant amended the claim be adding the features of wherein the first recessed area extends from a first region adjacent to the pair of cavities to a second region extending to an outer edge of the main body, arguing that the recesses 66,68 of Crisenbery are entirely defined on all sides by the bearing plate and do not extend to any outer edge. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims do not recite that the recessed area extends radially outwards to a radial outer edge of the main body – they just recite an outer edge, i.e. any outer edge. Figure 10 of Crisenbery clearly shows the recesses 66, 68, and 64 all extend to an axial outer edge of the main body. Even if applicant were to amend to a radial outer edge, references such as Hopkins (WO 2016/201171, see inset portion 106 in Figures 3, 4) and Swartzlander (US 2016/0003129, see portion 152 in Figure 2), both already references of record, would anticipate the claim.
For the sake of compact prosecution, examiner suggests applicant further amend Claim 41 by adopting the radial language above, rolling up Claim 44 and further amending the second recessed area features of Claim 44 to incorporate the radial extension language as well. Such an amendment would overcome the proposed grounds of rejection above.
With regards to Claim 45, applicant argues that the amended claim 45 requires the V-shape to be part of a continuous recessed area extending across both cavity regions. However, Claim 45 as currently filed, has no amendment of record. As such, the previous grounds of rejection over Crisenbery stand. Nevertheless, the proposed amendment would not overcome the Hopkins or Swartzlander references discussed in the claim 41 arguments above.
With regards to Claim 46, applicant amended the claim by adding the features of wherein a continuously maintained leak path extends from the inlet nozzle [structure] to the second opening via the first opening. This feature overcomes the previous grounds of rejection over Swartzlander.
Claim Objections
Claim 46 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 46, second to last line: the inlet nozzle should be corrected to the inlet nozzle structure for consistency.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 43 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 43 recites the first recessed area extends to an outer edge of the main body. Claim 41, upon which Claim 43 depends, already recites such a feature, making the language of Claim 43 not further limiting.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 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)(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.
(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 41 – 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crisenbery et al. (hereafter “Crisenbery” – US 5118268)
With regards to Claim 41:
Crisenbery discloses a bearing plate (bearing plate 16, Figures 1 – 6, 9, and 10) for a Roots-type device, the bearing plate comprising:
a) a main body (bearing plate 16) extending along a longitudinal axis (axes 22a, 24a) from a first side (right side from perspective of Figure 10) to a second side (left side from perspective of Figure 10);
b) a pair of cavities (bores 16, 16c, Figure 5) for supporting bearing and seal assemblies, the cavities extending between the first and second sides of the main body;
c) a primary surface at least partially defining the first side and being orthogonal to the longitudinal axis (see Figure 10, surface on right side upon which recesses 66, 68 are located); and
d) a first recessed area (recesses 66, 68, 70) at least partially defining the first side and being axially recessed from the primary surface in a direction towards the second side, the recessed area being configured to provide a leak path for the Roots-type device (Col. 7, Lines 4 – 68), wherein the first recessed area extends from a first region adjacent to the pair of cavities to a second region extending to an outer edge of the main body (see Figure 10, recesses 66, 68 extend to an axial outer edge of plate bearing 16).
With regards to Claim 42:
Crisenbery discloses the first recessed area is located entirely on a first side of a plane extending centrally through the pair of cavities and parallel to the longitudinal axis (see Figure 10, recesses 66, 68 located above plane 32).
With regards to Claim 43:
Crisenbery discloses the first recessed area extends to an outer edge of the main body (see Figure 10, recesses 66, 68 extend to an axial outer edge of plate bearing 16).
With regards to Claim 44:
Crisenbery discloses the main body includes a second recessed area (recess 64, Figures 9, 10) at least partially defining the first side and being axially recessed from the primary surface in a direction towards the second side, the second recessed area being located entirely on a second side of the plane (see Figure 10, recess 64 located under plane 32).
With regards to Claim 45:
Crisenbery discloses the first recessed area has a V-shape (see Figure 9, recesses 66, 68 form a V-shape under BRI).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 – 10, 40, and 46 – 49 are allowed.
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.
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAERT DOUNIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2146. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon. - Thurs: 10a - 4:30p.
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 on (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.
/Laert Dounis/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Wednesday, January 21, 2026