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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
1. Claim(s) 1, 6, 8-10, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Edwards (US 20210220637 A1)
In regards to claim 1, Edwards discloses a driving device (Abstract), comprising:
a housing assembly provided with a through hole (Par. 0047 and Fig 1 teach a housing [104] with the through hole)
a rotating shaft comprising a shaft portion and a spherical head portion fixedly connected to an end of the shaft portion, an end of the shaft portion away from the spherical head portion rotatably extending through the through hole (Par. 0048 teaches a rotating drive shaft and Par. 0055 teach there being a ball, i.e. spherical head, at the end of the shaft to fix the it. Fig 1 shows the shaft [110/120] extending through the through hole); and
a first shaft sleeve mounted to the housing assembly, wherein the first shaft sleeve is provided with a receiving cavity and a shaft hole, the receiving cavity is adapted to the spherical head portion, and the shaft hole is in communication with the receiving cavity (Fig 1 and Par. 0051 teach a bearing assembly [122], i.e. sleeve (see Applicant’s reference number [500]) with a receiving cavity for the head portion [132]) ;
wherein the spherical head portion is rotatably received in the receiving cavity (Par. 0052 teaches that the receiving cavity can receive the rotatable shaft); the shaft portion rotatably extends through the shaft hole (Fig 1 shows the rotatable shaft [110] extending through a shaft hole); and
a diameter of the shaft hole is less than a diameter of the spherical head portion, so as to limit the spherical head portion in the receiving cavity (Fig 1 show the spherical head portion inside of the cavity [132], this figure shows that the diameter of this head is larger than the diameter of the shaft hole. See also Par. 0052 that teaches the retaining/limited movement of the head).
In regards to claim 6, Edwards discloses the driving device according to claim 1, wherein the first shaft sleeve comprises a first fixing portion and a second fixing portion (Par. 0052 and Fig 1 show the first fixing portion [130] and second fixing portion [128]);
a side of the first fixing portion is recessed to form a first half-hole and a first hemispherical groove that are in communication with each other, a side of second fixing portion is recessed to form a second half-hole and a second hemispherical groove that are in communication with each other; a concave side of the first fixing portion and a concave side of the second fixing portion face each other; the first half-hole and the second half-hole cooperatively form the shaft hole; and the first hemispherical groove and the second hemispherical groove cooperatively form the receiving cavity (Fig 1 shows the first and second fixing portions having half circle indents and being in communication with one another, where the concave side face one another to form the shaft hole); or, the first fixing portion is provided with a first hemispherical groove and a shaft hole in communication with the first hemispherical groove, the second fixing portion has a second hemispherical groove; and the first hemispherical groove and the second hemispherical groove cooperatively form the receiving cavity.
In regards to claim 8, Edwards discloses the driving device according to claim 1, wherein the housing assembly comprises an outer housing and a second shaft sleeve; the second shaft sleeve and the first shaft sleeve are both fixed in the outer housing, and the through hole is formed on the second shaft sleeve (Fig 1 shows there being a second shaft sleeve, [106] that the through hole is formed in).
In regards to claim 9, Edwards discloses the driving device according to claim 8, wherein one end of the rotating shaft is the spherical head portion, the spherical head portion is rotatably supported on the first shaft sleeve, another end of the rotating shaft is the end of the shaft portion away from the spherical head portion and is rotatably supported on the second shaft sleeve (Fig 1 shows the upper portion of the shaft [110] being supported in the second shaft sleeve [106] and the end portion of the shaft with the spherical attachment being in the first shaft sleeve [122]).
In regards to claim 10, Edwards discloses the driving device according to claim 1, wherein the shaft hole has a first opening and a second opening; the first opening is in communication with the receiving cavity, the second opening is away from the receiving cavity; an edge of at least one of the first opening and the second opening is provided with a rounded corner; and the shaft portion extends through the first opening and the second opening (Fig 1 shows the shaft [110] being in communication with a receiving cavity at the upper portion of the shaft).
In regards to claim 17, Edwards discloses the driving device according to claim 1, wherein a central axis of the shaft portion passes through a center of a sphere of the spherical head portion (Fig 1 shows the central axis of the shaft [110] being in the center of the sphere).
In regards to claim 18, Edwards discloses the driving device according to claim 1, wherein the spherical head portion comprises a ball body and a diamond coating provided on a surface of the ball body, or the spherical head portion is made of metal or ceramic (Par. 0048 teaches the shaft and its components being made of ceramics)
In regards to claim 19, Edwards discloses a blood pump comprising an impeller and a driving device (Abstract and Par. 0045 teach a blood pump assembly with a driver and impeller), the driving device comprising:
a housing assembly provided with a through hole (Par. 0047 and Fig 1 teach a housing [104] with the through hole);
a rotating shaft comprising a shaft portion and a spherical head portion fixedly connected to an end of the shaft portion, an end of the shaft portion away from the spherical head portion rotatably extending through the through hole (Par. 0048 teaches a rotating drive shaft and Par. 0055 teach there being a ball, i.e. spherical head, at the end of the shaft to fix the it. Fig 1 shows the shaft [110/120] extending through the through hole); and
a first shaft sleeve mounted to the housing assembly, wherein the first shaft sleeve is provided with a receiving cavity and a shaft hole; the receiving cavity is adapted to the spherical head portion; the shaft hole is in communication with the receiving cavity (Fig 1 and Par. 0051 teach a bearing assembly [122], i.e. sleeve (see Applicant’s reference number [500]) with a receiving cavity for the head portion [132]);
(Par. 0052 teaches that the receiving cavity can receive the rotatable shaft); the shaft portion rotatably extends through the shaft hole (Fig 1 shows the rotatable shaft [110] extending through a shaft hole); and
a diameter of the shaft hole is less than a diameter of the spherical head portion, so as to limit the spherical head portion in the receiving cavity; and the end of the shaft portion away from the spherical head portion is connected to the impeller (Fig 1 show the spherical head portion inside of the cavity [132], this figure shows that the diameter of this head is larger than the diameter of the shaft hole. See also Par. 0052 that teaches the retaining/limited movement of the head).
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.
2. Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edwards (US 20210220637 A1).
In regards to claims 2-3, Edwards teaches the driving device according to claim 1, wherein the diameter of the spherical head portion is greater than or equal to twice a diameter of an end of the shaft portion adjacent to the spherical head portion and wherein the receiving cavity is spherical, and a ratio of a diameter of the receiving cavity to the diameter of the spherical head portion is in a range of 1.005 to 1.015 (Edwards shows in Fig 1 that the diameter of the spherical head [132] is larger than the diameter of the end of the shaft [110]). .
While Edwards shows the diameter being larger than that of the shaft, they do not explicitly teach a ratio of a diameter of the receiving cavity to the diameter of the spherical head portion is in a range of 1.005 to 1.015. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use this ratio, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
In regards to claim 4, Edwards teaches the driving device according to claim 1, wherein the receiving cavity is spherical, a difference between a diameter of the receiving cavity and the diameter of the spherical head portion is defined as dl, a difference between the diameter of the shaft hole and a diameter of an end of the shaft portion adjacent to the spherical head portion is defined as d2,and d2 is greater than dl (See Figure 1).
While Edwards shows the diameter being larger than that of the shaft, they do not explicitly teach this diameter breakdown where d2 is greater than dl. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use this ratio, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
In regards to claim 5, Edwards teaches the driving device according to claim 1, wherein a ratio of the diameter of the shaft hole to a diameter of an end of the shaft portion adjacent to the spherical head portion is in a range of 1.15 to 1.35 (Edwards shows in Fig 1 that the diameter of the spherical head [132] is larger than the diameter of the end of the shaft [110]).
While Edwards shows the diameter being larger than that of the shaft, they do not explicitly teach a ratio of a diameter of the receiving cavity to the diameter of the spherical head portion is in a range of 1.15 to 1.35. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use this ratio, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
3. Claim(s) 7 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edwards in view of Frankowski (US 20100331767 A1).
In regards to claims 7 and 14, Edwards discloses the driving device according to claim 1, except for wherein the first shaft sleeve is further provided with a flushing liquid hole through which flushing liquid flows; the flushing liquid hole is in communication with the receiving cavity; and a central axis of the flushing liquid hole coincides with a central axis of the receiving cavity and a diameter of the flushing liquid hole is less than the diameter of the spherical head portion.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Frankowski discloses a rotatable shaft system for air and blood flow assistance (Abstract and Par. 0013) wherein there is a sealed portion of the shaft that allows for flushing liquid to be passed through (Par. 0133) in order to minimize or eliminate contact between blood and rotating components that cause thrombus and blood damage by heat or friction generated at the interface of a rotating shaft and the seal (Par. 0133).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have taken the teachings of Edwards and modified them by having the system comprise a flushing liquid hole, as taught and suggested by Frankowski, in order to minimize or eliminate contact between blood and rotating components that cause thrombus and blood damage by heat or friction generated at the interface of a rotating shaft and the seal (Par. 0133 of Frankowski).
While the combined teachings of Edwards and Frankowaki teach there being a flushing liquid hole, they do not explicitly teach the diameter of the flushing liquid hole is less than the diameter of the spherical head portion. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have this diameter difference, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
In regards to claim 15, the combined teachings of Edwards and Frankowski as applied to claim 14 disclose the driving device according to claim 14, wherein the flushing liquid hole has a third opening in communication with the receiving cavity; the receiving cavity is spherical; a central axis of the third opening passes through a center of a sphere where the receiving cavity is located; and the central axis of the third opening coincides with a central axis of the shaft hole (Frankowski as applied above shows there being a fluid flushing opening)
Frankowski dies not explicitly teach there being a third opening within the flushing liquid hole It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include three opening instead of two, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
In regards to claim 16, the combined teachings of Edwards and Frankowski as applied to claim 15 disclose the driving device according to claim 15, wherein the third opening of the flushing liquid hole is 1/9 to 1/3 of the diameter of the spherical head portion. Frankowski discloses the claimed invention except for this third opening having this exact diameter. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use this diameter size, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
4. Claim(s) 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edwards in view of Spanier (US 20150051436 A1).
In regards to claim 11, Edwards discloses the driving device according to claim 1, except for the device further comprising a rotor and a stator arranged along an axis of the shaft portion, wherein the rotor and the stator are located between the first shaft sleeve and the through hole, the rotor is fixedly connected to the shaft portion, and the stator is capable of driving the rotor to rotate.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Spanier discloses a blood pump driving system (Abstract) wherein there is a rotor and stator attached the shaft portion of the device (Par. 0035) in order to motorize the blood pump assembly (Par. 0035).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have taken the teachings of Edwards and modified them by having the system comprise a rotor and stator, as taught and suggested by Spanier, in order to motorize the blood pump assembly (Par. 0035 of Spanier).
In regards to claim 13, the combined teachings of Edwards and Spanier as applied to claim 11 disclose the driving device according to claim 11, wherein the rotor comprises a first rotor unit and a second rotor unit that are arranged along the axis of the shaft portion; the stator comprises a first stator unit and a second stator unit that are arranged along the axis of the shaft portion; the first stator unit and the second stator unit are both located between the first rotor unit and the second rotor unit; the first stator unit is capable of driving the first rotor unit to rotate; and the second stator unit is capable of driving the second rotor unit to rotate (Par. 0035 of Spanier teaches there being a rotor and stator unit); and
the first stator unit and the second stator unit each comprises a magnetic core (Par. 0035 Spanier teaches there being magnet portion of the stator unit);
the driving device further comprises a magnetic conduction member fixedly connected to the housing assembly; the magnetic core of the first stator unit and the magnetic core of the second stator unit are both fixedly connected to the magnetic conduction member; and the shaft portion rotatably extends through the first stator unit, the second stator unit, and the magnetic conduction member (Par. 0035 of Spanier teaches there being permanent magnets on the stator portion and the shaft being connected to this)
5. Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edwards and Spanier, and in further view of Moeller (US 20170323713 A1).
In regards to claim 12, the combined teachings of Edwards and Spanier as applied to claim 11 disclose the driving device according to claim 11, except for wherein the rotor comprises a flywheel and a magnet; the flywheel is fixedly connected to the shaft portion; the magnet is fixedly connected to the flywheel; the stator is capable of generating a rotating magnetic field that drives the magnet to rotate; the flywheel comprises a disc-shaped portion, an inner tube, and an outer tube; an end of the inner tube and an end of the outer tube are both fixedly connected to the disc-shaped portion; the inner tube and the outer tube are located on a same side of the disc- shaped portion and are coaxially arranged; an inner diameter of the outer tube is greater than an outer diameter of the inner tube; the inner tube is at least partially accommodated in the outer tube; and an annular cavity accommodating the magnet is formed between the outer tube and the inner tube.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Moeller discloses an electric machine that can be used as a blood pump (Abstract and Par 0072) wherein the machine comprises a rotor, stator, flywheel, and magnet connected to rings/disks and tubes (Par. 0057, Par. 0070, and Par. 0141) in order to power the rotation of the electrical machine (Par. 0055).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have taken the teachings of Edwards and Spanier and modified them by having the system comprise a rotor, stator, flywheel, and magnet, as taught and suggested by Moeller, in order to power the rotation of the electrical machine (Par. 0055 of Moeller).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SKYLAR LINDSEY CHRISTIANSON whose telephone number is (571)272-0533. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30-5:30 EST.
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, Niketa Patel can be reached at (571) 272-4156. 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.
/S.L.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/LYNSEY C Eiseman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights