Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/998,924

PLUNGER PUMP PACKING ASSEMBLY

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jan 27, 2025
Examiner
LEE, GILBERT Y
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
1081 granted / 1376 resolved
+26.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
44 currently pending
Career history
1420
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
44.3%
+4.3% vs TC avg
§102
36.9%
-3.1% vs TC avg
§112
13.7%
-26.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1376 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 1/14/26 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) 23-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shek (US Patent No. 9,845,801) in view of Boggs (US Patent No. 2004/0173976). Regarding claim 23, the Shek reference discloses a header ring (10) for use in a packing assembly (Fig. 5), comprising: a first side (left side of Fig. 5); a second side (right side of Fig. 5); a radially protruding edge (60) configured to abut an inner surface of a static component (Fig 5); and a contour (e.g. at 35) on a portion of an inner diameter (Fig. 5), the contour positioned radially opposite the radially protruding edge and in the same axial plane (Fig. 5); wherein when the header ring is coupled to a dynamic component, the contour is configured to form a channel (e.g. channel above lead line 35) between the portion of the inner diameter of the header ring and the outer surface of the dynamic component (Fig. 5). However, the Shek reference fails to explicitly disclose a plurality of protrusions and apertures forming a vented portion. The Boggs reference, a seal, discloses providing venting (128) to a seal. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide a vent portion to the Shek reference in view of the teachings of the Boggs reference in order to allow for easier installation of the seal. Regarding claim 24, the Shek reference, as modified in claim 23, discloses the radially protruding edge comprises a substantially perpendicular face (Shek, face at end of lead line 60) on a first side and a sloped face (Shek, face between 56 and 58) on a second side (Shek, Fig. 5). Regarding claim 25, the modified Shek reference discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 23. However, the modified Shek reference fails to explicitly disclose the apertures comprise a volume of at least 10 percent of the vented portion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to make the apertures at least 10 percent of the vented portion, 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 and in order to reduce manufacturing costs. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 4-10, and 12-22 allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the modified Shek reference fails to explicitly disclose the claimed channel and corresponding structure/placement. Response to Arguments It is to be noted that the rejection of claims 25-27 in the previous office action correspond to the claims 23-25 of the amended claims. Applicant's arguments filed 1/14/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With regards to the applicant’s argument of the vented portion, the argument is not persuasive because the combination discloses the claimed structure and would be capable of performing the same function. Additionally Fig 5 of the Shek reference clearly shows the contour positioned radially opposite the radially protruding edge and in the same axial plane. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 27, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 04, 2025
Interview Requested
Nov 18, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Nov 28, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Jan 14, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595747
METHOD OF MITIGATING VIBRATIONS IN A SEAL COMPONENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590545
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SEAL RING, METHOD FOR ASSEMBLING TURBINE, AND TURBINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12553520
METAL SEAL FOR DYNAMIC DOWNHOLE ENVIRONMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12546395
SLIDE RING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12535013
GAS TURBINE ENGINE WITH CARBON/CARBON COMPOSITE PISTON SEAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+10.4%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1376 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month