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 .
The amendment filed 4/8/26 has been entered.
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) 1-3, 5-18, 21, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rabhi (KR20190117497) in view of Tejima (US Pub. No. 2003/0178781) and Charles et al. (US Patent No. 4,684,446).
Regarding claim 1, the Rabhi reference discloses a pump system (Fig. 1) for an aircraft, comprising:
a cylinder barrel (35) configured to rotate within a pump housing of a pump, and
a plurality of pistons (3) seated within a respective bore (4) defined in the cylinder barrel, wherein each piston further includes a piston ring (15) disposed at an end thereof configured to form a hydrodynamic seal with an inner surface of the respective bore (Figs. 2-10).
However, the Rabhi reference fails to explicitly disclose each respective piston ring consisting of silicon nitride and the silicon nitride comprising at least 1% glassy phase.
The Tejima reference, a piston ring (Para. [0165]), discloses making a piston seal of silicon nitride (Para. [0165]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the piston ring of silicon nitride in the Rabhi reference in view of the teachings of the Tejima reference in order to provide decrease a friction coefficient and improve durability (Tejima, Para. [0165]). The modified Rabhi reference discloses the claimed structure and is capable of having a friction coefficient between the ring and the inner surface of the bore is about 0.11 when hydrodynamically lubricated.
The Charles et al. (hereinafter Charles), a sealing ring, discloses a silicon nitride sealing ring comprised of between seventy-five and ninety-five volume percent silicon nitride (Col. 2, Lines 35-54) forming a glassy phase between one and twenty percent glassy phase (Col. 2, Lines 35-54).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a glassy phase in the claimed range to the modified Rabhi reference in view of the teachings of the Charles reference in order to provide an optimized sliding ring.
Regarding claim 2, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 1, discloses the pump (Rabhi, the 2 paragraphs preceding the description of embodiments).
Regarding claim 3, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 2, discloses the cylinder barrel comprises:
a main cylindrical body (Rabhi, main body of 35);
a center recess defined within the main cylindrical body configured to seat a drive shaft therein (Rabhi, Fig. 1); and
a plurality of bores (Rabhi, 4) defined in the main cylindrical body configured to allow fluid flow therethrough, each respective bore extending in an axial direction (Fig. 1), wherein the plurality of bores are spaced apart circumferentially relative to one another about the main cylindrical body radially outward of the center recess (Rabhi, Fig. 1), wherein the respective bore is one of the plurality of bores (Rabhi, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 2, discloses the pump is or includes a piston pump (Rabhi, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 6, discloses the piston pump is or includes a bent axis variable displacement piston pump (Rabhi, Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, the Rabhi reference discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 1.
However, the modified Rabhi reference fails to explicitly disclose the claimed number of bores.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to change the number of bores, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art and in order to provide optimal sealing pressure. St. Regis Paper Col. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 9, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 1, discloses the invention substantially as claimed.
However, the modified Rabhi reference fails to explicitly disclose the piston ring includes a chamfer or radius on either the outer or inner periphery of a leading edge of the piston ring.
The examiner takes official notice that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a chamfer or radius to the leading edge of the piston ring of the modified Rabhi reference in order to longer life to the sealing ring and to allow for scraping.
Regarding claim 10, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 1, discloses the piston ring includes a cut therethrough (e.g. definition of a piston ring) configured to allow for thermal expansion of the piston ring.
Regarding claim 11, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 1, discloses the piston ring being self-polishing (e.g. since the modified ring of Rabhi is made of silicon nitride).
Regarding claim 12, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 1, discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 12.
However, the modified Rabhi reference fails to explicitly disclose each piston ring comprised of between seventy-five and ninety-five volume percent silicon nitride, with the silicon nitride comprised of between one and twenty percent in glassy phase.
The Charles et al. (hereinafter Charles), a sealing ring, discloses a silicon nitride sealing ring comprised of between seventy-five and ninety-five volume percent silicon nitride (Col. 2, Lines 35-54) forming a glassy phase between one and twenty percent glassy phase (Col. 2, Lines 35-54).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a glassy phase in the claimed range to the modified Rabhi reference in view of the teachings of the Charles reference in order to provide an optimized sliding ring. The modified Rabhi reference discloses the claimed structure and is capable of having a friction coefficient between the ring and the inner surface of the bore is about 0.11 when hydrodynamically lubricated.
Regarding claim 13, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 12, discloses the pump (Rabhi, the 2 paragraphs preceding the description of embodiments).
Regarding claim 14, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 13, discloses the cylinder barrel comprises:
a main cylindrical body (Rabhi, main body of 35);
a center recess defined within the main cylindrical body configured to seat a drive shaft therein (Rabhi, Fig. 1); and
a plurality of bores (Rabhi, 4) defined in the main cylindrical body configured to allow fluid flow therethrough, each respective bore extending in an axial direction (Fig. 1), wherein the plurality of bores are spaced apart circumferentially relative to one another about the main cylindrical body radially outward of the center recess (Rabhi, Fig. 1), wherein the respective bore is one of the plurality of bores (Rabhi, Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 15, the Rabhi reference discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 14.
However, the modified Rabhi reference fails to explicitly disclose the claimed number of bores.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to change the number of bores, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art and in order to provide optimal sealing pressure. St. Regis Paper Col. V. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 16, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 12, discloses the invention substantially as claimed.
However, the modified Rabhi reference fails to explicitly disclose the piston ring includes a chamfer or radius on either the outer or inner periphery of a leading edge of the piston ring.
The examiner takes official notice that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a chamfer or radius to the leading edge of the piston ring of the modified Rabhi reference in order to longer life to the sealing ring and to allow for scraping.
Regarding claim 17, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 12, discloses the piston ring includes a cut therethrough (e.g. definition of a piston ring) configured to allow for thermal expansion of the piston ring.
Regarding claim 18, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 12, discloses the piston ring being self-polishing (e.g. since the modified ring of Rabhi is made of silicon nitride).
Regarding claim 21, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 12, discloses the piston ring is comprised of at least ninety volume percent silicon nitride (Charles, Col. 2, Lines 35-54).
Regarding claim 22, the Rabhi reference, as modified in claim 12, discloses the piston ring is comprised of less than ten percent silicon nitride in glassy phase (Charles, Col. 2, Lines 35-54).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/8/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With regards to the applicant’s argument of the Charles reference, the argument is not persuasive because Col. 1, Lines 5-15 of Charles specifically discloses that the invention is used in seal rings.
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 GILBERT Y LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5894. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-430pm.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at (571)272-8322. 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.
/GILBERT Y LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights