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 .
Status of the Claims
Examiner acknowledges receipt of Applicant’s amendments and arguments filed with the Office on May 6th, 2026 in response to the Non-Final Office Action mailed on February 11th, 2026. Per Applicant's response, Claims 18, 21-24, & 29 have been amended. Claims 36-37 have been newly-added. All other claims have been left in their previously-presented form. Consequently, Claims 18-37 now remain pending in the instant application. The Examiner has carefully considered each of Applicant’s amendments and/or arguments, and they will be addressed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-11, filed May 6th, 2026, with respect to the previous rejections using Wang and Tang have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the claim amendments filed May 5th, 2026 define over the teachings of Wang and Tang. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response, the Examiner respectfully directs Applicant to the updated prior art rejections below, which detail new claim mappings (and updated figure annotations) that show precisely how Wang and Tang continue to read upon Applicant’s amended Claim 18 and newly added Claims 36-37.
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)(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) 18-21, 23-25, & 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 106704213 to Wang (attached to previous office action with machine translation).
PNG
media_image1.png
1081
1056
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to independent Claim 18, and with particular reference to Figures 1-5 (Figure 1 shown immediately above and annotated by the examiner for clarity), Wang discloses:
18. A fluid pump assembly (Fig. 1) comprising: a fluid pump (2, 4-6, 18-25; paras. 66-71; Figs. 1-2) including: a pipe connection structure (21-25; Fig. 2) at an end portion (i.e. left end) of the fluid pump (i.e. pump portion 5; see Fig. 1); and a first positioning structure (i.e. the outer edge of pump portion 5); and a fixation shell (1, 7) accommodating the fluid pump (Figs. 1 & 5); wherein: the fixation shell has a closed end (i.e. bottom end of shell 7; Fig. 1) and an open end (top end of shell 7; Fig. 1) opposite (i.e. axially opposite) to the closed end along an axial direction of the fluid pump (apparent in Fig. 1); the fixation shell includes a second positioning structure (the groove of shell 7, as annotated by the examiner in Fig. 1 above, for clarity) engaged with (i.e. coupled to) the first positioning structure to position the pipe connection structure to correspond to the open end of the fixation shell (as shown in Fig. 5); the fixation shell includes a first shell (1) and a second shell (7) that are opposite to each other in a radial direction of the fluid pump perpendicular to the axial direction (Fig. 1 clearly shows how the lateral ends of shell 7 and the lateral ends of shell 1 are opposite to each other along the radial direction of the fluid pump), the first shell and the second shell are connected with each other along the radial direction to form an accommodation space for accommodating the fluid pump (Fig. 1 clearly shows how shell 1 and shell 7 are connected (via pump portion 5) along the radial direction to form an accommodation space for the pump axially therebetween); and the pipe connection structure (21-25) extends out from the open end of the fixation shell along a direction parallel to the radial direction of the fluid pump (Figs. 1-2 clearly show how portion 24 extends both axially and radially out of the open end of fixation shell portion 7).
In regards to Claim 19, a cross section of the end portion of the fluid pump is constructed in a non-circular shape and has at least one corner (a rectangular end portion with corners is apparent in Fig. 1); and the end portion of the fluid pump is formed as the first positioning structure (as noted in Claim 18 above).
In regards to Claim 20, the second positioning structure is formed as a positioning groove (as noted in Claim 18 and annotated Fig. 1 above); and the second positioning structure is shaped to match the first positioning structure (apparent in Fig. 1).
In regards to Claim 21, the second positioning structure is formed at the first shell and/or the second shell (as shown in annotated Fig. 1 above).
In regards to Claim 23, the first shell and the second shell are fit with each other (at least indirectly) by a positioning assembly (8, 9, 10, 12, 15; paras. 67, 69).
In regards to Claim 24, the first shell and the second shell are fixedly connected to each other (at least indirectly) by a threaded connector (“screw fasteners”; para. 69).
In regards to Claim 25, the fixation shell is provided with a support rib (14, 15, 16) configured to support the fluid pump.
In regards to Claim 27, the fixation shell (i.e. shell half/portion 1) has a heat dissipation region (“exhaust vent”; “ventilation holes”; paras. 35, 58, 63, 70).
Claim(s) 18-20, 25-27, & 36-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 210118289 to Tang (attached to previous office action with machine translation).
PNG
media_image2.png
1008
964
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to independent Claim 18, and with particular reference to Figures 1-9 (Figure 4 shown immediately above and annotated by the examiner for clarity), Tang discloses:
18. A fluid pump assembly (4; Fig. 4) comprising: a fluid pump (42, 43, 45) including: a pipe connection structure (annotated by the examiner in Fig. 4 above, for clarity) at an end portion (i.e. the right and lower end portions 42/45) of the fluid pump (Fig. 4); and a first positioning structure (45); and a fixation shell (41, 44) accommodating the fluid pump (see Figs. 2-3); wherein: the fixation shell has a closed end (i.e. top end wall; Fig. 4) and an open end (bottom open end; Fig. 4) opposite (i.e. axially opposite) to the closed end along an axial direction of the fluid pump (apparent in Fig. 4); the fixation shell (41, 44) includes a second positioning structure (“first hole 442”) engaged with (i.e. coupled to) the first positioning structure (45) to position the pipe connection structure to correspond to the open end of the fixation shell (Figs. 3-4 & 8); the fixation shell includes a first shell (41) and a second shell (44) that are opposite to each other in a radial direction of the fluid pump perpendicular to the axial direction (Figs. 3-4 & 6 clearly show how 41 and 44 are radially adjacent/opposite to one another), the first shell and the second shell are connected with each other along the radial direction to form an accommodation space for accommodating the fluid pump (as clearly shown in Figs. 4 & 6); and the pipe connection structure extends out from the open end of the fixation shell along a direction parallel to the radial direction of the fluid pump (it is apparent from Fig. 4 that the pipe connection structure extends radially in all directions, including outward from the open end of the fixation shell).
37. A fluid pump assembly (4; Fig. 4) comprising: a fluid pump (42, 43, 45) including: a pipe connection structure (annotated by the examiner in Fig. 4 previously above, for clarity) at an end portion (i.e. the right and lower end portions 42/45) of the fluid pump (Fig. 4); and a first positioning structure (451); a fixation shell (41, 44) accommodating the fluid pump (see Figs. 2-3); and a buffer member (452), the fluid pump having a cylindrical structure (a mounting “bolt” or “screw” fixing the pump to the fixation shell; see paras. 59, 61, 66, 80), and the buffer member being sleeved (at “buffer tube 452c”; see Figs. 4 & 8-9) on an outer surface of the cylindrical structure of the fluid pump (paras. 63-64 & 89) and accommodated in the fixation shell (Figs. 4 & 8-9); wherein: the fixation shell has a closed end (i.e. top end wall; Fig. 4) and an open end (bottom open end; Fig. 4) opposite (i.e. axially opposite) to the closed end (Fig. 4); and the fixation shell includes a second positioning structure (“first hole 442”) engaged with (i.e. coupled to) the first positioning structure (451) to position the pipe connection structure to correspond to the open end of the fixation shell (Figs. 3-4 & 8).
In regards to Claim 19, a cross section of the end portion (42, 45) of the fluid pump is constructed in a non-circular shape and has at least one corner (polygonal shapes with corners are apparent in Fig. 4); and the end portion (i.e. portion 45) of the fluid pump is formed as the first positioning structure (as noted in Claim 18 above).
In regards to Claim 20, the second positioning structure (442) is formed as a positioning groove (i.e. slot/hole 442; Fig. 4; para. 72); and the second positioning structure is shaped to match (i.e. wrap, surround, enclose, etc.) t he first positioning structure (Fig. 4).
In regards to Claim 25, the fixation shell (portion 44) is provided with a support rib (annotated by the examiner in Fig. 4 above, for clarity) configured to support the fluid pump.
In regards to Claim 26, Tang further discloses a buffer member (452) arranged around the fluid pump (“on both sides”; para. 89) and accommodated in the fixation shell (Figs. 4 & 8-9).
In regards to Claim 27, the fixation shell has a heat dissipation region (the open sections of layer 44 implicitly form heat dissipation regions).
In regards to Claim 36, refer to Claim 37 above.
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.
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(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (applied above) in view of US 6,322,326 to Davis et al.
In regards to Claim 22, Wang discloses the invention of Claim 21, wherein the accommodation space is formed between a first surface of the first shell and a second surface of the second shell (Figs. 1 & 5 clearly shows how the accommodation space for the fluid pump is formed between opposing surfaces of the two shells 7 & 1). However, Wang is silent towards a wiring clip being provided on the first surface and/or the second surface, as claimed.
However, Davis et al. (Davis) discloses yet another fluid pump for pumping condensation in the filed of heating and air conditioning (col. 1, lines 10-24), wherein opposing surfaces of the two shells (16, 12) form an accommodation space that contains a fluid pump (40) therein. Davis goes on to disclose the use of a wiring clip (83) (Fig. 5) formed on the surface of the second shell for preventing displacement of a power harness/wire 80 out of its designated path on the pump assembly (col. 4, lines 4-15). Davis makes clear that through use of such a wire clip, the power cable 80 cannot be accidentally disengaged from the pump, thereby enhancing reliability. Therefore, to one of ordinary skill desiring a fluid pump with improved reliability, it would have been obvious to utilize the techniques disclosed in Davis in combination with those seen in Wang in order to obtain such a result. Consequently, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wang’s pump shell (1, 7) with at least one wiring clip for restraining the pump’s power cable (as taught in Davis) in order to obtain predictable results; those results being an improved fluid pump that ensures the power cable is not accidentally disconnected from the pump during operation.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (applied above)
In regards to Claim 28, Wang discloses the fluid pump assembly according to claim 27, wherein: the heat dissipation region (“exhaust vent”; “ventilation holes”; paras. 35, 58, 63, 70) is formed by a heat dissipation grille (an exhaust vent/grille is apparent in Fig. 1 and is clearly described at paras. 35, 58, 63, & 70). However, Wang does not disclose that a distance between adjacent grille bars of the heat dissipation grille is smaller than or equal to 6 mm, as claimed.
However, the courts have held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is the recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device, the device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device and is therefore not patentably distinct (See MPEP § 2144.04 - Paragraph IV.A). In this case, Wang clearly discloses an exhaust vent/grille having a plurality of ventilation holes that “allow the motor 4 to cool down quickly, thereby ensuring the safe operation of the motor 4” (para. 70 of Wang). As such, Wang’s grille performs in exactly the same manner (and for the same purpose) as Applicant’s disclosed/claimed grille, and as such, the claimed invention does not perform any differently than Wang. Furthermore, it has been held by the courts that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges (see In re AIler, 105 USPQ 233) or an optimum value of a result effective variable (see In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)) involves only routine skill in the art. Please note that in while a grille spacing of 6mm is disclosed in paragraphs 17 & 68-69 of the instant application, applicant has failed to disclose any criticality for the claimed limitations, and in fact, makes clear that an optimum grille spacing is “experimental” in nature. Therefore, because the device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed invention is not patentably distinct from the fluid pump assembly disclosed in Wang (See MPEP § 2144.04 - Paragraph IV.A).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendments have 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER BRYANT COMLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3772. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-6PM CST.
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.
/ALEXANDER B COMLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
ABC
Prosecution Insights