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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application EP 23202740 on 10/24/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant submits that the combination does not teach at least 30% by volume diamond. Gonzalez was referenced to teach that limitation in paragraph [0060] wherein it states “may comprise approximately 95 percent diamond by volume”. Thus, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
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) 1-5, 7, 9-10, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota US 5591016 in view of Gonzalez US 20230265884.
Regarding claim 1, Kubota discloses a rotary pump (Fig. 2A, 2B and 4) for conveying a process fluid, comprising:
a pump housing (38) with an inlet (25) configured to receive the process fluid and an outlet (Fig. 2) to discharge the process fluid;
a pump shaft (15) configured to rotate about an axial direction;
a hydraulic unit to convey and pressurize the process fluid, the hydraulic unit comprising at least one impeller (16 in Fig. 1 and 36 in Fig. 4) fixedly mounted on the pump shaft;
a balance device configured to balance an axial thrust generated by the hydraulic unit, the balance device comprising a balance disc (22, 40) fixedly connected to the pump shaft and having a rotary slide face (Figs. 1 and 4), and a stationary part (Fig. 2 and 42 in Fig. 4) fixedly connected to the pump housing and having a stationary slide face (Figs. 2 and 4), the rotary slide face and the stationary slide face facing each other (Figs. 2 and 4); and
a radial relief passage (Note flow arrow in Fig. 2B and 44 in Fig. 4) disposed between the rotary slide face and the stationary slide face.
However, Kubota does not teach that each of the rotary slide face and the stationary slide face comprising at least 30% by volume diamond.
Gonzalez teaches a thrust bearing ([0002]) with a rotary slide face and a stationary slide face (table 108) comprising at least 30% by volume diamond ([0060]). Because both Kubota and Gonzalez teach thrust bearings it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to replace the thrust bearing as taught by Kubota by simply substituting in the thrust bearing of Gonzalez in order to achieve the predictable result of a thrust bearing with wear resistance. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007), MPEP 2143 (I)(B).
Regarding claim 2, the combination further teaches that each of the rotary slide face and the stationary slide face is an annular face wherein there is only one bearing element (Gonzalez, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, the combination further teaches that each of the rotary slide face and the stationary slide face is a diamond face (Gonzalez, [0060]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination further teaches that each of the rotary slide face and the stationary slide face comprises polycrystalline diamond (Id).
Regarding claims 7, the combination further teaches that the balance disc (Kubota, 40) comprises a rotary ring (42) arranged in a first annular groove and forming the rotary slide face (Fig. 4), and the stationary part (42) comprises a stationary ring arranged in a second annular groove and forming the stationary slide face (Gonzalez, Fig. 2).
Regarding claims 9-10, the combination further teaches that the rotary and stationary rings comprise an annular notch extending along the circumference of the rotary and stationary rings, and a rotary and stationary inlays are arranged in the annular notch, the rotary and stationary inlays forming the rotary and stationary slide faces (Gonzalez, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 13, the combination further teaches that each of the rotary slide face and the stationary slide face comprises at least 50% by volume diamond (Gonzalez, [0060]).
Regarding claims 14 and 16, the combination does not teach that the radial relief passage is configured to be at most 80 or 50 micrometers during operation of the rotary pump.
It has been held, see In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955), that "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." Since applicant has not disclosed that having the gap be at most 80/50 micrometers during operation solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and Kubota teaches that the gap controls the pressure differential between 46 and 48 and it appears that the combination would perform equally well with the radial relief passage being at most 80/50 micrometers as claimed, absent persuasive evidence that the particular range is significant, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify passage as taught by Kubota by utilizing a width of at most 80/50 micrometers as claimed in order to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05 (II)(A).
Regarding claim 15, the combination further teaches that the rotary pump is configured as a multistage centrifugal pump (Kubota Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 5, 6, 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kubota US 5591016 in view of Gonzalez US 20230265884 as applied to claims 1, 7, and 10 above and further in view of Charman US 20210372474.
Regarding claims 5, 6, and 8, the combination does not teach further teaches that each of the rotary slide face and the stationary slide face comprises/consists of diamond particle reinforced silicon carbide.
Charman teaches a bearing comprising or consisting of silicon carbide-bonded diamonds ([0013]) in order to have reduced wear rates ([0007]). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the table material as taught by the combination by utilizing the diamond particle reinforced silicon carbide as taught by Charman in order to reduce wear.
Regarding claim 11, the combination further teaches having the rotary ring with the annular notch and the stationary ring with the annular notch (Gonzalez, Fig. 2).
However, it does not teach that the rotary ring and the stationary ring are made of silicon carbide.
Charman teaches a bearing comprising or consisting of silicon carbide-bonded diamonds ([0013]) in order to have reduced wear rates ([0007]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the table material as taught by the combination by utilizing the diamond particle reinforced silicon carbide as taught by Charman in order to reduce wear.
Regarding claim 12, the combination does not teach that the rotary inlay and the stationary inlay are made of diamond particle reinforced silicon carbide.
Charman teaches a bearing comprising or consisting of silicon carbide-bonded diamonds ([0013]) in order to have reduced wear rates ([0007]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the table material as taught by the combination by utilizing the diamond particle reinforced silicon carbide as taught by Charman in order to reduce wear.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BRIAN O PETERS whose telephone number is (571)272-2662. The examiner can normally be reached Tue-Sat, 12:00pm-10pm 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, 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.
BRIAN O. PETERS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3745
/BRIAN O PETERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights