DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed August 22, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1 – 29 are pending in the application with claims 25 – 29 being newly added. The amendment to the claims has overcome the claim objections set forth in the last Non-Final Action mailed May 22, 2025.
Examiners Note
With respect to the limitations “static section” and “dynamic section”, note the following: “static section” (as stated by applicant in the instant application, see ¶249 of filed specification) = “in the static section, as defined below, pressures are always generally the same - high pressure exists once fluid passes the discharge valve and enters the discharge conduits to exit into the discharge manifold. Low pressure exists around the intermediate section of a fluid routing plug where fluid enters. These areas are well-sealed and pressure fluctuations are minor”; and “dynamic section” (as stated by applicant in the instant application, see ¶249 of filed specification) = “in the dynamic section, the retraction and extension of the plunger causes repeated, dramatic pressure changes”.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 – 29 are objected to because of the following informalities:
All claims have a period after their corresponding status identifier in parenthesis. This period should be deleted.
Claims 4, 5, 7, 12 – 19, 21, 22 have incorrect status identifier. No amendments were made to these claims. They should have correct status identified of (original).
Claim 25, lines 1-2: “the internal flow bore of the static section” should read --the at least one internal flow bore of the static section--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 26-28 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 26 recites the limitation “the dynamic internal flow bore of the dynamic section is exposed to repeated, dramatic pressure changes during operation of the high-pressure pump” in lines 1-3. The term “dramatic” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “dramatic” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 28 recites the limitation “the static section is isolated from fluid having repeated, dramatic pressure changes” in lines 1-2. The term “dramatic” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “dramatic” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 27 is rejected for being dependent on claim 26.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gable et al. (US 2019/0331245 – herein after Gable).
In reference to claim 1, Gable discloses a high-pressure pump (see fig. 3 and ¶32), comprising:
a fluid end body (1912+1704; see fig. 3 and ¶32-¶33), comprising:
a static section (1912, see fig. 3) comprising at least one internal flow bore (see fig. 3: “at least one internal flow bore” = suction bore, discharge bore, plunger bore within the asserted static section 1912) having internally-disposed threads [the asserted “at least one internal flow bore” has internal threads; for instance (in view of disclosure in ¶33), internal thread for plunger bore = threads that couples with outer threads of cylinder housing 1704]; and
a dynamic section (1704, see fig. 3) comprising a dynamic internal flow bore (1788, see fig. 3), the dynamic section having external threads (1796; see fig. 3 and ¶33) disposed about an external surface of the dynamic section (as seen in fig. 3);
wherein (in view of fig. 3 and disclosure in ¶33) the dynamic section is configured for threaded attachment to the static section such that the at least one internal flow bore (this bore can be viewed as portion of 1916 on left in the vicinity of end 1792 in view of fig. 3) and the dynamic internal flow bore (1788) are aligned.
Claims 1 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Whaley et al. (US 2015/0132157 – herein after Whaley).
In reference to claim 1, Whaley discloses a high-pressure pump (10, see fig. 1A and ¶24), comprising:
a fluid end body (12; see fig. 1A and ¶26), comprising:
a static section (labelled “s.s.” in fig. A below) comprising at least one internal flow bore (20a) having internally- disposed threads [the asserted “at least one internal flow bore” has internal threads; for instance (in view of disclosure in ¶26), internal thread for bore 20a = threads that couples with outer threads of packing housing 31]; and
a dynamic section (31, see fig. 2) comprising a dynamic internal flow bore (bore within 31 in which plunger 28 reciprocates), the dynamic section having external threads (on 31; see fig. 2 and ¶26) disposed about an external surface of the dynamic section (31);
wherein (in view of fig. 2 and disclosure in ¶26) the dynamic section (31) is configured for threaded attachment to the static section (labelled “s.s.” in fig. A below) such that the at least one internal flow bore (20a) and the dynamic internal flow bore (bore within 31) are aligned.
PNG
media_image1.png
876
894
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. A: Edited fig. 2 of Whaley to show claim interpretation.
In reference to claim 14, Whaley discloses the high-pressure pump, wherein the dynamic section (31) comprises a front section (labelled “f.s.” in fig. A above) extending (extending in ← direction in view of fig. A above) into the static section (“s.s.”) further than the external threads of the dynamic section (31).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2 – 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gable in view of Nowell et al. (US 2021/0148349 – herein after Nowell; cited by applicant on IDS dated 03/07/2025).
Gable teaches the high-pressure pump, further comprising: a plunger system (1708, see figs. 2-3) installed within the dynamic internal flow bore (1788, see fig. 3).
Gable remains silent on the high-pressure pump: “wherein the plunger system comprises: a packing; a plunger, partially disposed within the packing; and a threaded packing nut disposed about the plunger and configured to retain the packing in the dynamic internal flow bore”, as in claim 2; “comprises a retainer affixed to the dynamic section and configured to retain the threaded packing nut within the dynamic internal flow bore”, as in claim 3; “in which the retainer is affixed to the dynamic section by a plurality of studs”, as in claim 4; and “in which the threaded packing nut is threaded to an internal surface of the retainer”, as in claim 5.
However, Nowell teaches a high-pressure pump, “wherein the plunger system (see fig. 20) comprises: a packing (224, see fig. 20 and ¶241); a plunger (290), partially disposed within the packing (as seen in fig. 20); and a threaded packing nut (276, see ¶255 and fig. 20) disposed about the plunger and configured to retain the packing in the dynamic internal flow bore”, as in claim 2; “comprises a retainer (232, see ¶245 and fig. 20) affixed to the dynamic section (viewed as section 118, see fig. 21) and configured to retain the threaded packing nut within the dynamic internal flow bore (viewed as bore in which plunger reciprocates)”, as in claim 3; “in which the retainer (232) is affixed to the dynamic section by a plurality of studs (250, see figs. 20-21 and ¶248)”, as in claim 4; and “in which the threaded packing nut (276) is threaded (see figs. 20-21 and ¶256) to an internal surface of the retainer (232)”, as in claim 5.
Gable’s plunger (1708) is sealed off using a generic element/structure (shown as shaded portion in fig. B below). Nowell teaches a specific sealing assembly for sealing the plunger. Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the generic sealing arrangement of the plunger in Gable’s pump for a specific sealing arrangement as taught by Nowell above in order to obtain the predictable result of preventing the fluid from passing around the plunger as the plunger reciprocates. KSR Int’l v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1740-41, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
PNG
media_image2.png
708
1074
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. B: Edited fig. 2 of Gable to show claim interpretation.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whaley in view of Moe et al. (US 7,296,591 – herein after Moe).
Whaley remains silent on the high-pressure pump further comprising “an axial face seal disposed in the static section and contacting a front surface of the front section of the dynamic section”.
However, Moe teaches a similar high-pressure pump comprising an axial face seal (see fig. C below; in view of disclosure in col. 2, lines 13-27 and col. 4- col. 5: gaskets are shown in the form of dark thick regions in the figures) disposed in the static section (8) and contacting a front surface (see fig. C below) of the front section of the dynamic section (3).
PNG
media_image3.png
888
1030
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Fig. C: Edited fig. 1 of Moe to show claim interpretation.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide an axial face seal as taught by Moe in Whaley’s static section such that it contacts Whaley’s front surface in order to improve overall sealing performance and preventing a leakage along the axial interface between Whaley’s static section and Whaley’s dynamic section.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whaley in view of Nowell et al. (US 2021/0148349 – herein after Nowell; cited by applicant on IDS dated 03/07/2025).
Whaley remains silent on the high-pressure pump further comprising “at least one radial seal disposed in the static section and contacting an outside surface of the front section of the dynamic section”.
However, Nowell teaches a similar high-pressure pump comprising at least one radial seal (260, see fig. 20 and ¶250) disposed in the static section (labelled “s.s.” in fig. D below) and contacting an outside surface (outer circumferential surface) of the front section (212) of the dynamic section (labelled “d.s.” in fig. D below).
PNG
media_image4.png
792
1082
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fig. D: Edited fig. 20 of Nowell to show claim interpretation.
There is a bore (labelled “b” in fig. A above) present in Whaley’s static section. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a radial seal as taught by Nowell in the bore of Whaley’s static section such that it contacts Whaley’s outside surface of the front section in order to improve overall sealing performance and preventing a leakage along the radial interface between Whaley’s static section and Whaley’s dynamic section.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whaley in view of Nowell and further in view of Moe et al. (US 7,296,591 – herein after Moe).
Whaley, as modified, remains silent on the high-pressure pump further comprising “an axial face seal disposed in the static section and contacting a front surface of the front section of the dynamic section”.
However, Moe teaches a similar high-pressure pump comprising an axial face seal (see fig. C above; in view of disclosure in col. 2, lines 13-27 and col. 4- col. 5: gaskets are shown in the form of dark thick regions in the figures) disposed in the static section (8) and contacting a front surface (see fig. C above) of the front section of the dynamic section (3).
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide an axial face seal as taught by Moe in Whaley’s static section such that it contacts Whaley’s front surface in order to improve overall sealing performance and preventing a leakage along the axial interface between Whaley’s static section and Whaley’s dynamic section.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whaley in view of Barnhouse, James Anthony (US 2022/0282719 – herein after Barnhouse).
Whaley teaches the high-pressure pump wherein the front section (labelled “f.s.” in fig. A above) of the dynamic section (31) comprises a nose (labelled in fig. A above).
Whaley remains silent on the high-pressure pump wherein the nose is “chamfered”.
However, Barnhouse teaches a similar dynamic section (200, see fig. E below) with a front section comprising of a chamfered nose.
PNG
media_image5.png
944
1076
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fig. E: Edited fig. 3 of Barnhouse to show claim interpretation.
Since applicant in the instant application has not disclosed any criticality associated with “chamfered” nose, it would have an obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Whaley’s nose for providing a chamfer as taught by Barnhouse as a matter of design choice since such a modification would have involved a mere change in shape of the component. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Whaley’s pump to perform equally well with claimed taper on the nose.
Claims 1 – 6, 8 – 11, 14 and 19 – 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thomas et al. (US 2022/0099073 – herein after Thomas) in view of Gable et al. (US 2019/0331245 – herein after Gable).
In reference to claim 1, Thomas teaches a high-pressure pump (see claim 17), comprising:
a fluid end body (100, see fig. 6-7), comprising:
a static section (104, see fig. 9 or fig. 20; also labelled in fig. F below) comprising at least one internal flow bore (106, see fig. 9); and
a dynamic section (210, see fig. 25 and ¶308; also labelled in fig. F below) comprising a dynamic internal flow bore (bore within which plunger moves; viewed as bore 216 in fig. 25);
wherein the dynamic section (210) is configured for attachment to the static section (104) such that the at least one internal flow bore (106) and the dynamic internal flow bore (216) are aligned.
PNG
media_image6.png
882
1126
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Fig. F: Edited fig. 9 of Thomas to show claim interpretation.
Thomas remains silent on the high-pressure pump, wherein the at least one internal bore has “internally-disposed threads”, “the dynamic section having external threads disposed about an external surface of the dynamic section”; wherein the dynamic section is configured for “threaded” attachment to the static section such that the at least one internal flow bore and the dynamic internal flow bore are aligned.
However, Gable teaches a high-pressure pump (10, see fig. 1A and ¶24), comprising:
a fluid end body (12; see fig. 1A and ¶26), comprising:
a static section (1912, see fig. 3) comprising at least one internal flow bore (see fig. 3: “at least one internal flow bore” = suction bore, discharge bore, plunger bore within the asserted static section 1912) having internally- disposed threads [the asserted “at least one internal flow bore” has internal threads; for instance (in view of disclosure in ¶33), internal thread for plunger bore = threads that couples with outer threads of cylinder housing 1704]; and
a dynamic section (1704, see fig. 3) comprising a dynamic internal flow bore (1788, see fig. 3), the dynamic section having external threads (1796; see fig. 3 and ¶33) disposed about an external surface of the dynamic section (as seen in fig. 3);
wherein (in view of fig. 3 and disclosure in ¶33) the dynamic section is configured for threaded attachment to the static section such that the at least one internal flow bore (this bore can be viewed as portion of 1916 on left in view of fig. 3) and the dynamic internal flow bore (1788) are aligned.
In Thomas, the asserted dynamic section is secured to the static section using studs (250, see fig. 20). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the high-pressure pump of Thomas for providing a threaded connection as taught by Gable between Thomas’s dynamic and static section in the circled region (see fig. F above) for the purpose of having the threaded connection act as a secondary axial retention mechanism, backing up the studs in case of loosening, fatigue failure or stud shear.
In reference to claim 2, Thomas teaches the high-pressure pump further comprising: a plunger system (see fig. 20) installed within the dynamic internal flow bore (216, see fig. 25), comprising:
a packing (224, see fig. 20 and ¶309);
a plunger (290), partially disposed within the packing (as seen in fig. 20); and
a threaded packing nut (276, see ¶324 and fig. 20) disposed about the plunger and configured to retain the packing in the dynamic internal flow bore.
In reference to claim 3, Thomas teaches the high-pressure pump further comprising:
a retainer (232, see ¶324 and fig. 20) affixed to the dynamic section (see fig. F above) and configured to retain the threaded packing nut within the dynamic internal flow bore (viewed as bore in which plunger reciprocates; bore 216 in fig. 25).
In reference to claim 4, Thomas teaches the high-pressure pump in which the retainer (232) is affixed to the dynamic section by a plurality of studs (250, see figs. 20-21 and ¶316)”.
In reference to claim 5, Thomas teaches the high-pressure pump in which the threaded packing nut (276) is threaded (see figs. 20-21 and ¶324) to an internal surface of the retainer (232).
In reference to claim 6, Thomas teaches the high-pressure pump, further comprising:
an inlet manifold (166, see fig. 7 and ¶283), in communication with the at least one internal flow bore (106) of the static section (104);
an outlet manifold (176, see fig. 7 and ¶288), in communication with the at least one internal flow bore (106) of the static section (104); and
a fluid routing plug (116; see fig. 9 and ¶270) disposed within the at least one internal flow bore (106), the fluid routing plug (116) having a suction surface (right surface, see fig. 19G) and a discharge surface (left surface, see fig. 16G) and defining:
a first fluid flow path (see fig. 50: flow path from 170 towards inlet valve 292) from the inlet manifold, through the fluid routing plug (116), to the suction surface (right surface); and
a second fluid flow path (see fig. 50 and 19H: flow path from inlet valve to the pump chamber to the discharge valve) from the suction surface (right surface) to the discharge surface (left surface).
In reference to claim 8, Thomas teaches the high-pressure pump, further comprising: a discharge manifold (176, see fig. 7 and ¶288 OR 167, see fig. 7B and ¶285), the discharge manifold attached to the static section (viewed as 102 in fig. 7B or 112 in fig. 8) and comprising:
a first discharge conduit (174, see fig. 8 and ¶288), the first discharge conduit extending from the static section and comprising:
a first flange (171, see fig. 19);
a boss (see fig. G below: labeled “b”; “boss” = protrusion) extending from the first flange; and
a second flange (see fig. G below: labeled “f2”), disposed on the first discharge conduit (174) at an end opposite the first flange, in which:
the boss extends into a counterbore (173, see ¶291) formed on the static section (104); and
the first flange (171) is attached to the static section (104) with a plurality of bolts (186, see fig. 19 and ¶295).
PNG
media_image7.png
964
772
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Fig. G: Edited fig. 19 of Nowell to show claim interpretation.
In reference to claim 9, Thomas teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the discharge manifold further comprises:
a manifold body (176, see fig. 7) having a plurality of inlet ports (port corresponding to conduit labelled “c” in fig. H below), the manifold body comprising a plurality of third flanges [this flange being of conduit “c” that is threadably coupled to the second flange {labelled “f2” in fig. G above}], each disposed about each of the plurality of inlet ports; and
a clamp joint (labelled in fig. H below), joining one of the plurality of third flanges to the second flange of the first discharge conduit (174).
PNG
media_image8.png
797
1073
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Fig. H: Edited fig. 7 of Nowell to show claim interpretation.
In reference to claim 10, Thomas teaches the high-pressure pump, in which a first discharge conduit (174, see fig. 8 and ¶288) is located above the static section (104).
Thomas remains silent on the high-pressure pump (in embodiment shown in fig. 7) further comprising a second discharge conduit.
However, Thomas teaches (see ¶304) “Using the two discharge bores 105 and 107 instead of a single discharge bore balances the flow of fluid around the inner components of housing 103 as fluid exits the fluid routing plug 116 and flows into the bores 105 and 107”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the embodiment of high-pressure pump shown in fig. 7 of Thomas for providing a second discharge manifold (that is identical to first discharge manifold 176+174) below the static section (as shown in another embodiment in fig. 19C) since two discharge bores balances the flow of fluid around the inner components of housing as fluid exits the fluid routing plug, as recognized by Thomas above.
Thus, Thomas, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump further comprising (in the modified pump, second discharge manifold is identical to the first discharge manifold 176+174):
a second discharge conduit (discharge conduit 174 seen in fig. G above; note that this discharge conduit corresponds to lower discharge manifold 111 in fig. 19A), the second discharge conduit extending from and being located below the static section (104) and comprising:
a first flange (171, see fig. 19);
a boss (see fig. G above: labeled “b”; “boss” = protrusion) extending from the first flange; and
a second flange (see fig. G above: labeled “f2”), disposed on the second discharge conduit (174) at an end opposite the first flange, in which:
the boss extends into a counterbore (173, see ¶291) formed on the static section (104); and
the first flange (171) is attached to the static section (104) with a plurality of bolts (186, see fig. 19 and ¶295).
In reference to claim 11, Thomas, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump, in which a discharge manifold (this discharge manifold being formed by first manifold 176+174 above the static section and second manifold 176+174, identical to the first manifold, below the static section) further comprises:
a top manifold body (body of 176 corresponding to the first manifold) having a plurality of inlet ports (port corresponding to conduit labelled “c” in fig. H above; this conduit corresponding to the first manifold), the top manifold body comprising a plurality of third flanges [this flange being of conduit “c” that is threadably coupled to the second flange {labelled “f2” in fig. G above} of the first manifold], each disposed about each of the plurality of inlet ports of the top manifold body;
a bottom manifold body (body of 176 corresponding to the second manifold which is identical to the first manifold) having a plurality of inlet ports (port corresponding to conduit labelled “c” in fig. H above; this conduit corresponding to the second manifold), the bottom manifold body comprising a plurality of fourth flanges [this flange being of conduit “c” that is threadably coupled to the second flange {labelled “f2” in fig. G above} of the second manifold], each disposed about each of the plurality of inlet ports of the bottom manifold body;
a first clamp joint (labelled as “clamp joint” in fig. H above; this joint corresponding to the first manifold), joining one of the plurality of third flanges to the second flange of the first discharge conduit (174; this conduit corresponding to the first manifold); and
a second clamp joint (labelled as “clamp joint” in fig. H above; this joint corresponding to the second manifold), joining one of the plurality of fourth flanges to the second flange of the second discharge conduit (174; this conduit corresponding to the second manifold).
In reference to claim 14, Thomas, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump wherein the dynamic section comprises a front section (see fig. F above: labelled “f.s.”) extending into the static section further than the external threads of the dynamic section (in view of the proposed modification discussed above in claim 1: threads are present in the circled region shown in fig. F above).
In reference to claim 19, Thomas, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump further comprising (see Thomas):
a fluid routing plug (116, see fig. 9 and ¶270) disposed within the static section (104) and configured to route fluid from a fluid inlet (170/172, see fig. 9 and ¶286) into the dynamic internal flow bore and, thereafter, across the fluid routing plug to a fluid outlet (178, see ¶289); and
an insert (451, see fig. 19G) disposed between the fluid routing plug (116) and a shoulder (see fig. F above: labelled “s”) of the front section (see fig. F above: labelled “f.s.”) of the dynamic section.
In reference to claim 20, Thomas, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump in which (see Thomas) the at least one internal flow bore (106) is closed by a threaded front retainer (300, see fig. 20).
In reference to claim 21, Thomas, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump further comprising (see Thomas):
a suction valve (292, see fig. 50 and ¶329) configured to seal a first side (left side) of the fluid routing plug (suction valve closes/seals left side of the plug 116 when in closed state);
a discharge valve (294, see fig. 50 and ¶329) configured to seal a second side (right side) of the fluid routing plug (116), in which the discharge valve comprises a stem (474, see fig. 85 and ¶414); and
a discharge plug (298) seated in the threaded front retainer (300) (see fig. 50 and ¶327), the discharge plug (298) having a blind hole (494, see fig. 93 and ¶416) configured to receive the stem of the discharge valve.
In reference to claim 22, Thomas, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump further comprising (see Thomas) a discharge plug insert (502, see fig. 93 and ¶417) disposed within the blind hole of the discharge plug, the discharge plug insert disposed about the stem.
In reference to claim 23, Thomas, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump further comprising (see Thomas):
a plunger system (see fig. 20) installed within the dynamic internal flow bore (216), comprising:
a packing (224, see ¶309 and fig. 20);
a plunger (290, see ¶326 and fig. 20), partially disposed within the packing; and
a threaded packing nut (276, see ¶323 and fig. 20) disposed about the plunger and configured to retain the packing in the dynamic internal flow bore.
In reference to claim 24, Thomas, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump, further comprising (see Thomas) a power end (see ¶265, ¶271), wherein reciprocation of the plunger within the dynamic internal flow bore is driven by the power end.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 12, 13 and 25 – 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrison et al. (US 2025/0122866 – herein after Garrison) in view of Gable et al. (US 2019/0331245 – herein after Gable).
In reference to claim 1, Garrison teaches a high-pressure pump (100, see fig. 1), comprising:
a fluid end body (104, see fig. 1), comprising:
a static section (210, see fig. 2) comprising at least one internal flow bore (for instance, bore in which 214 is installed); and
a dynamic section (35, see fig. 2) comprising a dynamic internal flow bore (208 or 208+212);
wherein the dynamic section (35) is configured for attachment to the static section (206) such that the at least one internal flow bore and the dynamic internal flow bore are aligned.
Garrison remains silent on the high-pressure pump, wherein the at least one internal bore has “internally-disposed threads”, “the dynamic section having external threads disposed about an external surface of the dynamic section”; wherein the dynamic section is configured for “threaded” attachment to the static section such that the at least one internal flow bore and the dynamic internal flow bore are aligned.
However, Gable teaches a high-pressure pump (10, see fig. 1A and ¶24), comprising:
a fluid end body (12; see fig. 1A and ¶26), comprising:
a static section [1912, see fig. 3; “static section” (as stated by applicant in the instant application, see ¶249 of filed specification) = “in the static section, as defined below, pressures are always generally the same - high pressure exists once fluid passes the discharge valve and enters the discharge conduits to exit into the discharge manifold. Low pressure exists around the intermediate section of a fluid routing plug where fluid enters. These areas are well-sealed and pressure fluctuations are minor”] comprising at least one internal flow bore (see fig. 3: “at least one internal flow bore” = suction bore, discharge bore, plunger bore within the asserted static section 1912) having internally- disposed threads [the asserted “at least one internal flow bore” has internal threads; for instance (in view of disclosure in ¶33), internal thread for plunger bore = threads that couples with outer threads of cylinder housing 1704]; and
a dynamic section (1704, see fig. 3; “dynamic section” (as stated by applicant in the instant application, see ¶249 of filed specification) = “in the dynamic section, the retraction and extension of the plunger causes repeated, dramatic pressure changes”) comprising a dynamic internal flow bore (1788, see fig. 3), the dynamic section having external threads (1796; see fig. 3 and ¶33) disposed about an external surface of the dynamic section (as seen in fig. 3);
wherein (in view of fig. 3 and disclosure in ¶33) the dynamic section is configured for threaded attachment to the static section such that the at least one internal flow bore (this bore can be viewed as portion of 1916 on left in view of fig. 3) and the dynamic internal flow bore (1788) are aligned.
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute a generic connection between dynamic and static sections in the high-pressure pump of Garrison for a threaded connection as taught by Gable in order to obtain the predictable result of coupling/attaching the dynamic section to the static section in the fluid end. KSR Int’l v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1740-41, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
In reference to claim 2, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, further comprising:
a plunger system (see fig. 2) installed within the dynamic internal flow bore (208), comprising:
a packing (36, see ¶33);
a plunger (202), partially disposed within the packing (as seen in fig. 2); and
a threaded packing nut (37, see ¶33) disposed about the plunger and configured to retain the packing in the dynamic internal flow bore.
In reference to claim 6, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, further comprising:
an inlet manifold (in a piping system 106, see fig. 1 and ¶29), in communication with the at least one internal flow bore (bore in which 214 is installed) of the static section (210);
an outlet manifold (in a piping system 106, see fig. 1 and ¶29), in communication with the at least one internal flow bore of the static section (210); and
a fluid routing plug (214; see fig. 2, ¶4 and ¶30) disposed within the at least one internal flow bore, the fluid routing plug (214) having a suction surface (see fig. I below) and a discharge surface (see fig. I below) and defining:
a first fluid flow path (path between suction valve 51 and intake portion 2124; in view of fig. 2 and ¶30, this path is viewed as being indicated by arrow 218) from the inlet manifold, through the fluid routing plug, to the suction surface (see fig. I below); and
a second fluid flow path (in view of fig. 2 and ¶30, this path is viewed as being indicated by arrow 220) from the suction surface (see fig. I below) to the discharge surface (see fig. I below).
PNG
media_image9.png
976
1198
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Fig. I: Edited fig. 2 of Garrison to show claim interpretation.
In reference to claim 7, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, further comprising:
a suction valve (51, see fig. 2 and ¶31-¶32) disposed within the dynamic internal flow bore (portion 212 of asserted dynamic bore 208+212) and configured to cover the first fluid flow path at the suction surface; and
a discharge valve (52, see fig. 2 and ¶31-¶32) disposed within the static section (210) and configured to cover the second fluid flow path at the discharge surface.
In reference to claim 12, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the static section comprises five internal flow bores (as evident from fig. 1: the high-pressure pump is quintuplex pump, thus, there are five internal flow bores present).
In reference to claim 13, Garrison, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump, wherein five dynamic sections are threaded to the static section at corresponding internal flow bores (as evident from fig. 1: the high-pressure pump is quintuplex pump; thus, there are five dynamic sections; wherein each asserted dynamic section is threadably coupled to corresponding internal flow bore of the static section as discussed above in view of proposed modification in claim 1).
In reference to claim 25, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the at least one internal flow bore (for instance, bore in which 214 is installed) of the static section (210) is exposed to substantially constant fluid pressure during operation of the high-pressure pump.
In reference to claim 26, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the dynamic internal flow bore (208 or 208+212) of the dynamic section (235) is exposed to repeated, dramatic pressure changes during operation of the high-pressure pump.
In reference to claim 27, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the at least one internal flow bore (for instance, bore in which 214 is installed) of the static section (210) is exposed to substantially constant fluid pressure during operation of the high-pressure pump.
In reference to claim 28, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the static section (210) is isolated from fluid having repeated, dramatic pressure changes (this is the fluid in space 208+212 or 208).
In reference to claim 29, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the dynamic internal flow bore (208 or 208+212) is radially bounded by the dynamic section (35) along an entire length of the dynamic internal flow bore (208 or 208+212).
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 12, 13 and 25 – 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garrison et al. (US 2025/0122866 – herein after Garrison) in view of F.M. Leavitt (US 677,137 – herein after Leavitt).
In reference to claim 1, Garrison teaches a high-pressure pump (100, see fig. 1), comprising:
a fluid end body (104, see fig. 1), comprising:
a static section (210, see fig. 2) comprising at least one internal flow bore (for instance, bore in which 214 is installed); and
a dynamic section (35, see fig. 2) comprising a dynamic internal flow bore (208 or 208+212);
wherein the dynamic section (35) is configured for attachment to the static section (206) such that the at least one internal flow bore and the dynamic internal flow bore are aligned.
Garrison remains silent on the high-pressure pump, wherein the at least one internal bore has “internally-disposed threads”, “the dynamic section having external threads disposed about an external surface of the dynamic section”; wherein the dynamic section is configured for “threaded” attachment to the static section such that the at least one internal flow bore and the dynamic internal flow bore are aligned.
However, Leavitt teaches a high-pressure pump (see fig. 1 and lines 39-41 of disclosure), wherein a pump cylinder (B) having external threads disposed about its external surface is screwed/threaded into a bore of casing portion (b) having internally-disposed threads.
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute a generic connection between dynamic and static sections in the high-pressure pump of Garrison for a threaded connection as taught by Leavitt in order to obtain the predictable result of coupling/attaching one section (i.e. the dynamic section) to another section (i.e. the static section) in the fluid end. KSR Int’l v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1740-41, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
In reference to claim 2, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, further comprising:
a plunger system (see fig. 2) installed within the dynamic internal flow bore (208), comprising:
a packing (36, see ¶33);
a plunger (202), partially disposed within the packing (as seen in fig. 2); and
a threaded packing nut (37, see ¶33) disposed about the plunger and configured to retain the packing in the dynamic internal flow bore.
In reference to claim 6, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, further comprising:
an inlet manifold (in a piping system 106, see fig. 1 and ¶29), in communication with the at least one internal flow bore (bore in which 214 is installed) of the static section (210);
an outlet manifold (in a piping system 106, see fig. 1 and ¶29), in communication with the at least one internal flow bore of the static section (210); and
a fluid routing plug (214; see fig. 2, ¶4 and ¶30) disposed within the at least one internal flow bore, the fluid routing plug (214) having a suction surface (see fig. I above) and a discharge surface (see fig. I above) and defining:
a first fluid flow path (path between suction valve 51 and intake portion 2124; in view of fig. 2 and ¶30, this path is viewed as being indicated by arrow 218) from the inlet manifold, through the fluid routing plug, to the suction surface (see fig. I above); and
a second fluid flow path (in view of fig. 2 and ¶30, this path is viewed as being indicated by arrow 220) from the suction surface (see fig. I above) to the discharge surface (see fig. I above).
In reference to claim 7, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, further comprising:
a suction valve (51, see fig. 2 and ¶31-¶32) disposed within the dynamic internal flow bore (portion 212 of asserted dynamic bore 208+212) and configured to cover the first fluid flow path at the suction surface; and
a discharge valve (52, see fig. 2 and ¶31-¶32) disposed within the static section (210) and configured to cover the second fluid flow path at the discharge surface.
In reference to claim 12, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the static section comprises five internal flow bores (as evident from fig. 1: the high-pressure pump is quintuplex pump, thus, there are five internal flow bores present).
In reference to claim 13, Garrison, as modified, teaches the high-pressure pump, wherein five dynamic sections are threaded to the static section at corresponding internal flow bores (as evident from fig. 1: the high-pressure pump is quintuplex pump; thus, there are five dynamic sections; wherein each asserted dynamic section is threadably coupled to corresponding internal flow bore of the static section as discussed above in view of proposed modification in claim 1).
In reference to claim 25, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the at least one internal flow bore (for instance, bore in which 214 is installed) of the static section (210) is exposed to substantially constant fluid pressure during operation of the high-pressure pump.
In reference to claim 26, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the dynamic internal flow bore (208 or 208+212) of the dynamic section (235) is exposed to repeated, dramatic pressure changes during operation of the high-pressure pump.
In reference to claim 27, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the at least one internal flow bore (for instance, bore in which 214 is installed) of the static section (210) is exposed to substantially constant fluid pressure during operation of the high-pressure pump.
In reference to claim 28, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the static section (210) is isolated from fluid having repeated, dramatic pressure changes (this is the fluid in space 208+212 or 208).
In reference to claim 29, Garrison teaches the high-pressure pump, in which the dynamic internal flow bore (208 or 208+212) is radially bounded by the dynamic section (35) along an entire length of the dynamic internal flow bore (208 or 208+212).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
D. With respect to claim 1 rejection under 35 USC 102 over Gable:
As stated in this as well as last office action:
“static section” (as stated by applicant in the instant application, see ¶249 of filed specification) = “in the static section, as defined below, pressures are always generally the same - high pressure exists once fluid passes the discharge valve and enters the discharge conduits to exit into the discharge manifold. Low pressure exists around the intermediate section of a fluid routing plug where fluid enters. These areas are well-sealed and pressure fluctuations are minor”; and
“dynamic section” (as stated by applicant in the instant application, see ¶249 of filed specification) = “in the dynamic section, the retraction and extension of the plunger causes repeated, dramatic pressure changes”.
The dynamic section is where “the plunger operates”, causing “repeated, dramatic pressure changes”. The static section is where “pressures are always generally the same”.
In view of annotated figures below, both Gable’s asserted static section (1912) and applicant’s static section (105) has internal flow bore. Though the structure of this internal flow bore differs, the static section in both cases experiences similar fluid pressure conditions, i.e. Gable’s static section experiences suction fluid pressure, discharge fluid pressure as well as intermediate fluid pressure received from dynamic section, while applicant’s static section also experiences suction fluid pressure, discharge fluid pressure as well as intermediate fluid pressure received from dynamic section (this intermediate fluid pressure being present within a discharge bore that is defined within the fluid routing plug).
PNG
media_image10.png
942
1126
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
896
1118
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Applicant states that in Gable “Fluid Chamber 1916 does not meet the definition of "static section" because it is unseparated from the plunger bore 1788 ("cylinder housing lumen"). Thus, whatever pressure profile one is subjected to, the other is as well”. However, in the instant application, “static section 105” also has certain region(s) such as bore upstream of discharge valve that is subjected to whatever pressure profile that plunger bore is subjected to, thus unseparated from the plunger bore or bore of the dynamic section.
Thus, the above arguments are not found to be persuasive.
In view of the above presented arguments, it is understood that applicant is making an attempt to define “the static section” in a particular manner (such as section where the internal flow bore has a certain profile where it is not in direct communication with the plunger bore and is separated by components such as suction valve, discharge valve or fluid routing plug). However, such interpretation is neither required by the claim and neither is defined in an explicit manner in the filed specification.
E. With respect to claims 1 and 14 rejections under 35 USC 102 over Whaley:
See examiner’s response with respect to Gable above. As discussed, the argued interpretation for “static” and “dynamic section” is not required by the claim as well as such interpretation is further not defined explicitly in the filed specification. Thus, in Whaley, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, “the dynamic section” is viewed as “31” and “the static section” is viewed as “s.s.” (labeled in fig. A above).
Thus, the above argument is not found to be persuasive.
F. With respect to claims 2 – 5 rejections under 35 USC 103 over the combination of Gable and Nowell:
Applicant arguments with respect to Gable are not found to be persuasive for same reasons as discussed above for claim 1 rejected under 35 USC 102 over Gable. Since Nowell is not relied upon to teach the argued missing limitations of “static and dynamic sections” in Gable because Gable is considered to teach these limitations, the arguments presented with respect to Nowell, are therefore not found to be persuasive.
Applicant’s attempt to have “static section” be interpreted as a section without any dynamic bore(s) being within it is not found to be persuasive because such interpretation is not required by the claims and neither is defined in the filed specification in an explicit manner.
Thus, the above argument is not found to be persuasive.
G. With respect to claim 15 rejection under 35 USC 103 over the combination of Whaley and Moe:
Applicant arguments with respect to Whaley are not found to be persuasive for same reasons as discussed above for claim 1 rejected under 35 USC 102 over Whaley. Since Moe is not relied upon to teach the argued missing limitations of “static and dynamic sections” in Whaley because Whaley is considered to teach these limitations, the arguments presented with respect to Moe, are therefore not found to be persuasive.
H. With respect to claim 16 rejection under 35 USC 103 over the combination of Whaley and Nowell:
Arguments are based on discussion above in section F. For same reasons, these arguments are not found to be persuasive.
I. With respect to claim 17 rejection under 35 USC 103 over the combination of Whaley, Nowell and Moe:
Arguments are based on discussion above in section G. For same reasons, these arguments are not found to be persuasive.
J. With respect to claim 18 rejection under 35 USC 103 over the combination of Whaley and Barnhouse:
Applicant arguments with respect to Whaley are not found to be persuasive for same reasons as discussed above for claim 1 rejected under 35 USC 102 over Whaley. Since Barnhouse is not relied upon to teach the argued missing limitations of “static and dynamic sections” in Whaley because Whaley is considered to teach these limitations, the arguments presented with respect to Barnhouse, are therefore not found to be persuasive.
K. With respect to claims 1 – 6, 8 – 11, 14 and 19 – 24 rejections under 35 USC 103 over the combination of Thomas and Gable:
Both Thomas’s asserted static section (104) and applicant’s static section (105) has internal flow bore. Though the structure of this internal flow bore differs, the static section in both cases experiences similar fluid pressure conditions, i.e. Thomas’s static section expe