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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species III (Figures 3C-3E) in the reply filed on 05/19/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 5-6, 13-14, and 19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/19/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because: reference number (319) is referred to as both the engagement profile (Specification [0040]) and an engagement surface (Specification [0042]).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
NOTICE
The Examiner has reviewed the claims and objected/rejected the claims. However, as the claim objections are extensive, the Applicant is encouraged to review the claims to ensure consistency and clarity within the claims.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-4, 7, 9-12, 15-18, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 1
Line 4 recites the language “each reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –each reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Line 6 recites the language “each push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –each push rod of the push rods—
Line 7 recites the language “a respective reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –a respective reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Line 9 recites the language “retainers each independently operable”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –retainers, each independently operable— or –retainers
Line 12 recites the language “connectors each releasably coupling”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –connectors, each releasably coupling— or –connectors
Lines 12-13 recites the language “respective push rods and reciprocating elements”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –respective push rods and reciprocating elements of the push rods and the reciprocating elements—
Line 13 recites the language “a respective reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –a respective reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Line 14 recites the language “a respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –a respective push rod of the push rods—
Lines 16-17 recite the language “at least one reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –at least one reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Regarding Claim 2
Line 1 recites the limitation “at least one retainer”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –at least one retainer of the retainers—
Line 2 recites the limitation “a respective reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –a respective reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Line 3 recites the limitation “the respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Lines 3-4 recite the language “the reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Line 4 recites the language “the push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Regarding Claim 3
Line 1 recites the language “at least one connector”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –at least one connector of the connectors—
Line 2 recites the language “a reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –a reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Line 2 recites the language “a respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Line 3 recites the language “the connector”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the at least one connector of the connectors—
Regarding Claim 4
Line 1 recites the language “at least one connector”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –at least one connector of the connectors—
Line 2 recites the language “a reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –a reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Line 2 recites the language “a respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Line 3 recites the language “the connector”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the at least one connector of the connectors—
Regarding Claim 7
Line 2 recites the language “the respective reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Lines 3-4 recite the language “the reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Regarding Claim 9
Lines 3-4 recite the language “respective reciprocating elements”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –respective reciprocating elements of the reciprocating elements—
Line 6 recites the language “at least one reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –at least one reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Lines 6-7 recite the language “a respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –a respective push rod of the push rods—
Lines 8, 9-10, and 11 recite the language “the identified reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the identified at least one reciprocating element—
Lines 11-12 recite the language “the respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Regarding Claim 10
Lines 1-2 recite the limitation “the identified reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the identified at least one reciprocating element—
Line 2 recites the limitation “the respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Lines 2-3 recite the limitation “the reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the identified at least one reciprocating element—
Line 4 recites the limitation “the respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Lines 4-5 recite the limitation “the respective reciprocating element and push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the identified at least one reciprocating element and respective push rod—
Regarding Claim 11
Lines 1-2 recite the limitation “the identified reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the identified at least one reciprocating element—
Line 2 recites the limitation “the respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Lines 3-4 recites the limitation “the respective reciprocating element and push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the identified at least one reciprocating element and respective push rod—
Regarding Claim 12
Lines 1-2 recite the limitation “the identified reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the identified at least one reciprocating element—
Line 2 recites the limitation “the respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Regarding Claim 15
Line 2 recites the limitation “the respective reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the identified at least one reciprocating element—
Line 3 recites the limitation “the reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the identified at least one reciprocating element—
Regarding Claim 16
Line 4 recites the language “respective bores”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –respective bores of the bores—
Line 5 recites the language “respective push rods”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –respective push rods of the push rods—
Lines 6-7 recite the language “each reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –each reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Line 8 recites the language “each reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –each reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Line 9 recites the language “a respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –a respective push rod of the push rods—
Regarding Claim 17
Lines 1-2 recite the language “a reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –a reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Lines 2-3 recite the language “the respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Line 3 recites the language “the push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod—
Regarding Claim 18
Line 1 recites the language “at least one reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –at least one reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Line 3 recites the language “the respective push rod”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –the respective push rod of the push rods—
Regarding Claim 20
Lines 1-2 recite the language “at least one reciprocating element”. For consistency and clarity within the claims, the claim language should be amended such that it reads –at least one reciprocating element of the reciprocating elements—
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. 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.
Claims 1-4 and 7-8 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.
Regarding Claim 1
Line 15 recites the limitation "the power source". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding Claims 2-4 and 7-8
Claims 2-4 and 7-8 are rejected insofar as they are dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In the pump system of claim 1, the inclusion of:
“retainers each independently operable to selectively engage the engagement profile of a respective reciprocating element to prevent the respective reciprocating element from traveling in the return direction;
connectors each releasably coupling respective push rods and reciprocating elements and configured to allow decoupling of a reciprocating element from a respective push rod; and
wherein the power source is operable to continue to reciprocate reciprocating elements that remain coupled to push rods after at least one reciprocating element has decoupled from a respective push rod” was not found.
Hurst et al. (US 2020/0362856) teaches subject matter closest to the claimed subject matter. Hurst discloses a fluid end of a pump system that includes a reciprocating element is releasably coupled to a pushrod. However, Hurst does not disclose retainers each independently operable to selectively engage the engagement profile of a respective reciprocating element to prevent the respective reciprocating element from traveling in the return direction, connectors each releasably coupling respective push rods and reciprocating elements and configured to allow decoupling of a reciprocating element from a respective push rod, and wherein the power source is operable to continue to reciprocate reciprocating elements that remain coupled to push rods after at least one reciprocating element has decoupled from a respective push rod
In the method of operating a pump system of claim 9, the inclusion of:
“retaining the identified reciprocating element from movement in the return direction by engaging a retainer with an engagement profile of the identified reciprocating element;
selectively decoupling the identified reciprocating element from the respective push rod; and
continuing to operate the power source to reciprocate the reciprocating elements that remain coupled to respective push rods” was not found.
Hurst et al. (US 2020/0362856) teaches subject matter closest to the claimed subject matter. Hurst discloses a fluid end of a pump system that includes a reciprocating element is releasably coupled to a pushrod. However, Hurst does not disclose retaining the identified reciprocating element from movement in the return direction by engaging a retainer with an engagement profile of the identified reciprocating element, selectively decoupling the identified reciprocating element from the respective push rod, and continuing to operate the power source to reciprocate the reciprocating elements that remain coupled to respective push rods
In the fluid end for a pump system of claim 16, the inclusion of:
“reciprocating elements configured to be reciprocated within respective bores by being releasably coupled to respective push rods to move in a forward direction in a forward stroke and in a return direction in a return stroke, each reciprocating element comprising an engagement profile,
wherein each reciprocating element is configured to be prevented from moving in the return direction and decoupled from a respective push rod independently of the other reciprocating elements” was not found.
Hurst et al. (US 2020/0362856) teaches subject matter closest to the claimed subject matter. Hurst discloses a fluid end of a pump system that includes a reciprocating element is releasably coupled to a pushrod. However, Hurst does not disclose a plurality of reciprocating elements in which each reciprocating element is configured to be prevented from moving in the return direction and decoupled from a respective push rod independently of the other reciprocating elements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Foss et al. (US 12,692,862) – Fluid end of a reciprocating pump system
Beisel et al. (US 2022/0154704) – Reciprocating pump
Surjaatmadja et al. (US 11,002,120) – Packing seal for pumps
Hurst et al. (US 2020/0362856) – Easy change pump plunger
Hurst et al. (US 2020/0362971) – Pump Fluid End
Yeung (US 2019/0011051) – Fluid end for Frac Pump
Dugan (US 5,085,129) – Joint system connecting a drive member and a driven member
Maurer et al. (US 3,776,558) – Packing for a reciprocating pump
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELSEY L STANEK whose telephone number is (571)272-3565. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30am-3:00pm.
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, DEVON KRAMER can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/K.L.S/Examiner, Art Unit 3741 /DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights