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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks filed 5/13/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding the prior drawing objections, 112(b) rejections, Applicant’s amendments overcome all prior objections/rejections.
Regarding the prior art rejection of claim 1, in paragraph 3 of page 14 through paragraph 4 of page 15 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant’s arguments are directed to that the prior art fails to disclose, teach, or suggest the amended limitations of amended claim 1. Applicant’s arguments are further directed to that dependent claim 20 is allowable because it depends from allowable claim 1 (paragraph 5 of page 15 through paragraph 2 of page 16 of Applicant’s Remarks).
The arguments are not persuasive because each limitation is mapped to the same prior art of the previous office action, and thus claim 1 is not allowable. Please see mapping of amended limitations to prior art below for details.
Claim Interpretation
Examiner’s note: For the purposes of examining this application, the term “height direction” within the claims is interpreted to mean a “direction parallel to or coincident with the axial direction of the first valve core 211” as identified in paragraph 0031. This note was originally made in the Non-Final rejection mailed on 2/13/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. - The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 20 line 5 recites the limitation “two fluid channels” and line 8 recites the limitation “the fluid channels” which lacks proper antecedent basis and thus renders the claim indefinite. It is suggested that the latter limitation be rewritten as -- the two fluid channels --.
Claim 20 (line 2) recites the limitation “the first side wall portion has at least two ports, which are in communication with the first valve cavity and comprises a first port and a second port” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if any of the underlined terms reference the same port previously identified (in claim 1 line 10) or if they each reference a different port.
In view of the 112(b) rejections set forth above, the claims are rejected below as best understood.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20160061092 A1 (Sprygada).
PNG
media_image1.png
692
770
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 3a
Regarding claim 1, Sprygada discloses:
A fluid assembly,
comprising a housing assembly (30; Fig 2), a valve assembly (50 combined with 52, 48, 46, 40; Fig 2) and a pump assembly (20 and directly associated components; Fig 2),
wherein the housing assembly comprises a first side wall portion, a fluid channel portion and a pump cover portion (Annotated Fig 3a shows all this),
the fluid assembly has a first valve cavity, an accommodating cavity and a fluid channel (Annotated Fig 3a shows all this),
wherein the first side wall portion forms at least part of a wall portion of the first valve cavity (Fig 3 shows this),
the fluid channel portion forms at least part of a wall portion of the fluid channel (Fig 3 shows this),
the pump cover portion forms at least part of a wall portion of the accommodating cavity (Fig 3 shows this),
and the accommodating cavity is in communication with the fluid channel (Fig 3 shows this),
the first side wall portion has a port (Annotated Fig 3a) which is in communication with the fluid channel (Fig 3 shows this),
wherein the fluid channel portion is located on an outer peripheral side (Annotated Fig 3a) of the first side wall portion,
and the fluid channel portion extends at the port in a direction intersecting with an extending direction of the first side wall portion (Fig 3 show this configuration, wherein the claimed directions and portions are broad),
and wherein the fluid channel is in communication with the first valve cavity through the port (Fig 3 shows this, wherein the fluid channel may also exist where fluid flows at the port, same as Applicant’s),
the valve assembly comprises a first valve assembly (48, 46, 40; Fig 3),
wherein the first valve assembly comprises a first valve core (40; Fig 3), at least part of which is located in the first valve cavity (Fig 3 shows this),
and the pump assembly comprises an impeller assembly (28 combined with 26; Fig 3), at least part of which is located in the accommodating cavity (Fig 3 shows this),
there is a spacing between at least part of an axis of the first valve core and an axis of the impeller assembly (para 0034 identifies that the shaft of the impeller 28 and the shaft 48 of the valve 40 “and thus the orientation of the impeller motor assembly 30 and valve activation device, and their activations, can be at any angle or position relative to each other. For example, the shafts can be positioned side-by-side, parallel to each other, extending in the same direction, at 90° to each other, etc., so long as the resultant embodiments perform substantially the same functions in similar manners and achieve similar results.”),
and in a height direction (direction of axis of rotation of shaft 26; Fig 3) of the fluid assembly, a lower end of at least one impeller assembly (Annotated Fig 3a) and an upper end of the first valve core (Annotated Fig 3a) are located at different heights (Fig 3 shows this);
wherein the lower end of at least one impeller assembly is closer to the first valve core than an upper end of the at least one impeller assembly (Annotated Fig 3a), and the upper end of the first valve core is closer to the impeller assembly than a lower end of the first valve core (Annotated Fig 3a) (Fig 3 shows all this),
and the first valve assembly further comprises a first transmission shaft (48; Fig 2, Fig 3) for driving the first valve core,
and in the height direction of the fluid assembly, the first transmission shaft and the impeller assembly are located on the same side relative to the first valve core (para 0034 identifies that the shaft of the impeller 28 and the shaft 48 of the valve 40 “can be at any angle or position relative to each other”. This is clear that the shafts, and their associated structures, may be located for example in a side-by-side manner such that the claimed/required configuration of the limitation above is satisfied).
Regarding claim 2, Sprygada discloses:
the impeller assembly located at the different height from the first valve core in the height direction of the fluid assembly is defined as a first impeller assembly (it may be defined as a first impeller assembly);
the pump cover portion comprises a first pump cover portion (inherent),
and the accommodating cavity comprises a first accommodating cavity (inherent),
wherein the first pump cover portion forms at least part of the wall portion of the first accommodating cavity (Fig 3 shows this),
and at least part of the first impeller assembly is located in the first accommodating cavity (Fig 3 shows this);
and in the height direction of the fluid assembly, at least part of the first pump cover portion and at least part of the first side wall portion are arranged at different heights (Fig 3 shows this; and this is commensurate with the “can be at any angle or position relative to each other” configuration addressed in the claim 1 rejection),
and an orthographic projection of the first pump cover portion at least partially overlaps with an orthographic projection of the first side wall portion (Fig 3 shows this, where the various portions may be defined as such; and this is commensurate with the “can be at any angle or position relative to each other” configuration addressed in the claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 3, Sprygada discloses:
in the height direction of the fluid assembly, the orthographic projection of the first impeller assembly is spaced from the orthographic projection of the first side wall portion by a preset distance (Fig 3 shows this; and this is commensurate with the “can be at any angle or position relative to each other” configuration addressed in the claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 4, Sprygada discloses:
in the height direction of the fluid assembly, the orthographic projection of the first impeller assembly at least partially overlaps with the orthographic projection of the first side wall portion (Fig 3 shows this; and this is commensurate with the “can be at any angle or position relative to each other” configuration addressed in the claim 1 rejection), and the orthographic projection of the first impeller assembly is spaced from the orthographic projection of the first valve core (Fig 3 shows this; and this is commensurate with the “can be at any angle or position relative to each other” configuration addressed in the claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 5, Sprygada discloses:
the orthographic projection of the first impeller assembly at least partially overlaps with the orthographic projection of the first valve core in the height direction of the fluid assembly (Fig 3 shows this; and this is commensurate with the “can be at any angle or position relative to each other” configuration addressed in the claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 16, Sprygada discloses:
the first pump cover portion further has a first pore passage (at the impeller inlet) and a second pore passage (at the impeller outlet), in the first pump cover portion, the first pore passage and the second pore passage are both in communication with the first accommodating cavity (Fig 3 shows this), at least part of the first pore passage is coaxially arranged with the first impeller assembly (Fig 3 shows this), and an opening at one side of the second pore passage is located at an outer peripheral edge of the first impeller assembly (Fig 3 shows this);
and one of the first pore passage and the second pore passage of the first pump cover portion is in communication with the fluid channel (Fig 3 shows this; and this is commensurate with the “can be at any angle or position relative to each other” configuration addressed in the claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 17, Sprygada discloses:
the first pump cover portion further has a first pore passage (at the impeller inlet) and a second pore passage (at the impeller outlet), in the first pump cover portion, the first pore passage and the second pore passage are both in communication with the first accommodating cavity (Fig 3 shows this), at least part of the first pore passage is coaxially arranged with the first impeller assembly (Fig 3 shows this), and an opening at one side of the second pore passage is located at an outer peripheral edge of the first impeller assembly (Fig 3 shows this);
and one of the first pore passage and the second pore passage of the first pump cover portion is in communication with the fluid channel (Fig 3 shows this; and this is commensurate with the “can be at any angle or position relative to each other” configuration addressed in the claim 1 rejection).
Regarding claim 18, Sprygada discloses:
the first pump cover portion further has a first pore passage (at the impeller inlet) and a second pore passage (at the impeller outlet), in the first pump cover portion, the first pore passage and the second pore passage are both in communication with the first accommodating cavity (Fig 3 shows this), at least part of the first pore passage is coaxially arranged with the first impeller assembly (Fig 3 shows this), and an opening at one side of the second pore passage is located at an outer peripheral edge of the first impeller assembly (Fig 3 shows this);
and one of the first pore passage and the second pore passage of the first pump cover portion is in communication with the fluid channel (Fig 3 shows this; and this is commensurate with the “can be at any angle or position relative to each other” configuration addressed in the claim 1 rejection).
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.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sprygada in view of US 4738584 A (Price).
Regarding claim 20, Sprygada discloses:
the first side wall portion has at least two ports (32, 34; Fig 3), which are in communication with the first valve cavity (Fig 3 shows this) and comprises a first port (inlet 32; Fig 3) and a second port (outlet 34; Fig 3) which are spaced from each other;
Sprygada may not explicitly disclose:
and the fluid assembly comprises at least two pump assemblies and two fluid channels,
and the number of pump cover portions is the same as the number of pump assemblies,
wherein an inlet of at least one of the pump assemblies is in communication with the first port through one of the fluid channels,
and an outlet of at least another of the pump assemblies is in communication with the second port through the other of the fluid channels.
However, Price, in the same field of endeavor, pumps, teaches:
A pump having dual motors driving dual counterrotating impellers, rather than having a single impeller, in order to increase the efficiency and flow rate of the fluid flow of the pump (col 1 lines 5-10; col 1 lines 25-28; col 1 lines 50-52).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Sprygada to include Price’s teachings as described above, having Sprygada’s design incorporate dual counterrotating impellers and associated structure, in order to increase the efficiency and flow rate of the fluid flow of the pump (col 1 lines 5-10; col 1 lines 25-28; col 1 lines 50-52). This modification results in teaching the limitations above.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Art Golik whose telephone number is (571)272-6211. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:30.
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, Courtney Heinle can be reached at 571-270-3508. 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.
/Art Golik/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/COURTNEY D HEINLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights