Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/077,623

ELECTRIC LIQUID PUMP

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 12, 2025
Examiner
DOYLE, BENJAMIN C
Art Unit
3746
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Toyoda Gosei Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
191 granted / 284 resolved
-2.7% vs TC avg
Strong +41% interview lift
Without
With
+40.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
306
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
44.3%
+4.3% vs TC avg
§102
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
§112
28.4%
-11.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 284 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 . Status of the Claims Claims 1 – 10 have been newly introduced prior to examination. 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 – 4, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0025092, “Miyagawa,” in view of US 2,337,903, “Lauck.” Regarding Claim 1: Miyagawa discloses an electric liquid pump (1) (Figures 1 – 3; [0010], “a pump that sucks and discharges oil as a rotor placed in a pump chamber of a pump housing rotates”) comprising: an electric motor (3) including a motor rotor (31, 31c, 33) that has a shaft (33) and a magnet portion (31c) (At least [0026], “a segment-like permanent magnet 31c is held in each window”) integrated with one axial end of the shaft (As shown in at least Figure 1 and as described in at least [0026]), and a stator (32) that is disposed radially outside or inside the magnet portion and rotates the motor rotor (As shown in at least Figure 1; The motor stator is shown arranged radially outside the magnet portion); a liquid pump (2, 20) including an inner rotor (21) that has an external tooth and is integrated with an other axial end of the shaft (As shown in at least Figure 1; At least [0020], “A rotor 20 is rotatably accommodated in the pump chamber 23. The rotor 20 is formed by an inner rotor 21 and an outer rotor 22. The outer rotor 22 has a plurality of internal teeth, and the inner rotor 21 is placed inward of the outer rotor 22 and has a plurality of external teeth meshing with the internal teeth of the outer rotor 22.”), and an outer rotor (22) that has an internal tooth meshing with the external tooth and forms, together with the inner rotor, a gap volume portion into which a liquid is suctioned (As shown in at least Figure 1; At least [0020] – [0021]) from a suction passage (86)) and from which the liquid is discharged toward a discharge passage (85) (At least [0030] – [0032]); a motor case (72) having a box shape (As shown in at least Figure 1; The limitation “box shape” has been provided with its broadest reasonable interpretation which reads over a container such as that shown in at least Figure 1) and including therein a first accommodation chamber that accommodates the stator and one axial part of the motor rotor including the magnet portion (As shown in at least Figure 1; The stator and the magnetic portion of the motor rotor are shown housed within a chamber of the motor case, interpreted as forming a first accommodation chamber), a second accommodation chamber (As shown in at least Figure 1; The portion of the interior of the motor case which houses the portion of the shaft which includes the plain bearing 5 is interpreted as forming a second accommodation chamber which extends to the left as shown in at least Figure 1) that communicates with the first accommodation chamber and accommodates an other axial part of the motor rotor (As shown in at least Figure 1; The motor case forms a chamber in which the shaft is arranged, this chamber is shown communicative with the first chamber, and the shaft is interpreted as forming an other axial part of the motor rotor), and a partition wall (As shown in at least Figure 1; The partition wall is interpreted as the portion of the wall of the housing 72 which forms the interface with the pump housing 8 and seal member 12) that has a hole-shaped communication portion (Shown as the hole shaped portion central to the partition wall which allows for the insertion of pump housing 8 into the interior of the motor case) allowing the first accommodation chamber and the second accommodation chamber to communicate with each other and is provided between the first accommodation chamber and the second accommodation chamber (As shown in at least Figure 1), in which the liquid circulates through the first accommodation chamber, the second accommodation chamber, and the hole-shaped communication portion (As shown in at least Figure 1 and as additionally described in at least [0028], [0029], and [0034] – [0037] with respect to at least oil supply grooves 51); and a body (8) including a centering body portion (82) inserted into the hole-shaped communication portion to be centered (As shown in at least Figure 1), a general body portion (81) being continuous with the centering body portion and accommodated in the second accommodation chamber (As shown in at least Figure 1), and a bearing portion (84) formed to penetrate the centering body portion and the general body portion and supporting an axial one portion of the shaft at a position between the magnet portion and the inner rotor (As shown in at least Figure 1; As further described in at least [0022], [0028] – [0029], [0034] – [0037] with respect to at least the plain bearing 5); however, Miyagawa is silent as to the material of which the rotor is formed such that it fails to explicitly disclose wherein the inner rotor or the outer rotor is made of a thermosetting resin. Lauck teaches a pumping mechanism (Figures 1 – 3) utilizing rotors (16) which are formed with teeth and arranged to have a close contact, to effectuate the pumping action in a similar manner to the arrangement of teeth in the rotors of Miyagawa, and further teaches wherein the rotors are made of a thermosetting resin (Pg. 2, Cl. 2, ln. 55 – Pg. 3, Cl. 1, ln. 35; “a dry air pump rotor adapted to operate in a lightweight metal housing, which method comprises first rough-machining a body composed of a phenolic resin to form teeth thereon”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have formed the rotors of Miyagawa from a thermosetting resin, as taught by Lauck, as such a material will resolve any appreciable tendency of the rotors to shrink when they are operated at elevated temperatures (Lauck, Pg. 2, Cl. 2, ln. 55 – Pg. 3, Cl. 1, ln. 35). It is further noted it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. (MPEP 2144.07) Once combined, Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, makes obvious an arrangement wherein the inner rotor or the outer rotor is made of a thermosetting resin. Regarding Claim 2: Miyagawa discloses an electric liquid pump (1) (Figures 1 – 3; [0010], “a pump that sucks and discharges oil as a rotor placed in a pump chamber of a pump housing rotates”) comprising: an electric motor (3) including a motor rotor (31, 31c, 33) that has a shaft (33) and a magnet portion (31c) (At least [0026], “a segment-like permanent magnet 31c is held in each window”) integrated with one axial end of the shaft (As shown in at least Figure 1), and a stator (32) that is disposed radially outside or inside the magnet portion and rotates the motor rotor (As shown in at least Figure 1; The motor stator is shown arranged radially outside the magnet portion); a liquid pump (2, 20) including an inner rotor (21) that has an external tooth and is integrated with an other axial end of the shaft (As shown in at least Figure 1; At least [0020], “A rotor 20 is rotatably accommodated in the pump chamber 23. The rotor 20 is formed by an inner rotor 21 and an outer rotor 22. The outer rotor 22 has a plurality of internal teeth, and the inner rotor 21 is placed inward of the outer rotor 22 and has a plurality of external teeth meshing with the internal teeth of the outer rotor 22.”), and an outer rotor (22) that has an internal tooth meshing with the external tooth and forms, together with the inner rotor, a rotor chamber into which a liquid is suctioned (As shown in at least Figure 1; At least [0020] – [0021]) from a suction passage (86) and from which the liquid is discharged toward a discharge passage (85) (At least [0030] – [0032]); and a case (72) having a box shape (As shown in at least Figure 1; The limitation “box shape” has been provided with its broadest reasonable interpretation which reads over a container such as that shown in at least Figure 1) and accommodating the liquid pump and the shaft (As shown in at least Figure 1); however, Miyagawa is silent as to the material of which the rotor is formed such that it fails to explicitly disclose wherein the inner rotor or the outer rotor is made of a thermosetting resin. Lauck teaches a pumping mechanism (Figures 1 – 3) utilizing rotors (16) which are formed with teeth and arranged to have a close contact, to effectuate the pumping action in a similar manner to the arrangement of teeth in the rotors of Miyagawa, and further teaches wherein the rotors are made of a thermosetting resin (Pg. 2, Cl. 2, ln. 55 – Pg. 3, Cl. 1, ln. 35; “a dry air pump rotor adapted to operate in a lightweight metal housing, which method comprises first rough-machining a body composed of a phenolic resin to form teeth thereon”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have formed the rotors of Miyagawa from a thermosetting resin, as taught by Lauck, as such a material will resolve any appreciable tendency of the rotors to shrink when they are operated at elevated temperatures (Lauck, Pg. 2, Cl. 2, ln. 55 – Pg. 3, Cl. 1, ln. 35). It is further noted it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. (MPEP 2144.07) Once combined, Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, makes obvious an arrangement wherein the inner rotor or the outer rotor is made of a thermosetting resin. Regarding Claims 3 and 7: Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, teaches the electric liquid pump according claims 1 and 2; once combined, Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, makes obvious an arrangement wherein the inner rotor and the outer rotor are made of the thermosetting resin (Lauck, Pg. 2, Cl. 2, ln. 55 – Pg. 3, Cl. 1, ln. 35). It is further noted it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. (MPEP 2144.07) Regarding Claims 4 and 8: Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, teaches the electric liquid pump according claims 1 and 2; once combined, Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, makes obvious an arrangement wherein the thermosetting resin includes a phenol resin (Lauck, Pg. 2, Cl. 2, ln. 55 – Pg. 3, Cl. 1, ln. 35; “a dry air pump rotor adapted to operate in a lightweight metal housing, which method comprises first rough-machining a body composed of a phenolic resin to form teeth thereon”). It is further noted it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. (MPEP 2144.07) Claim(s) 5, and 9, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0025092, “Miyagawa,” in view of US 2,337,903, “Lauck,” and US 2025/0179289, “Ito.” Regarding Claims 5 and 9: Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, teaches the electric liquid pump according claims 4 and 8; however, once combined, Lauck fails to further teach wherein the thermosetting resin contains a reinforcing fiber and/or an inorganic filler in an amount of 30% by mass or more and 90% by mass or less when a total amount of the thermosetting resin is 100% by mass. Ito teaches a thermosetting resin which contains a reinforcing fiber wherein the thermosetting resin contains a reinforcing fiber in an amount of 30% by mass or more and 90% by mass or less when a total amount of the thermosetting resin is 100% by mass (At least [0061], “The fiber mass content of the prepreg is preferably 40 to 90% by mass, and more preferably 50 to 80% by mass.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated a reinforcing fiber into the thermosetting resin used by the apparatus of Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, at a mass ratio of between 30 and 90% as such a fiber and ratio will increase the strength of the thermosetting resin without introducing impregnation voids (Ito, [0061]). It is further noted it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. (MPEP 2144.07) Claim(s) 6, and 10, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0025092, “Miyagawa,” in view of US 2,337,903, “Lauck,” and US 2012/0128513, “Sakata.” Regarding Claims 6 and 10: Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, teaches the electric liquid pump according claims 1 and 2; however, once combined, Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, fails to further teach wherein the inner rotor and the outer rotor are formed by injection molding or compression molding. Sakata teaches an electric liquid pump (Figures 1 – 15) comprising a pump portion having an inner rotor (11) and an outer rotor (10), comprising teeth ([0064]), made of a resin ([0021]) and further teaches wherein the inner rotor and the outer rotor are formed by injection molding or compression molding ([0064], “outer gear (10) and the inner gear (11) are an injection molded product of a synthetic resin”). It would have been obvious to utilize an injection molding process in the formation of the rotors of Miyagawa, in view of Lauck, as taught by Sakata, as such a process will work equally well for forming the rotors. It is further noted that such a process of making the apparatus is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. (MPEP 2113) Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2013/0202464 – Electric liquid pump having geared rotor pump element US 2014/0241917 – Electric liquid pump having geared rotor pump element Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN DOYLE whose telephone number is (571)270-5821. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 0900 - 1700. 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, Mark Laurenzi can be reached at 571-270-7878. 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. /BENJAMIN DOYLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3746 2026.01.28 /MARK A LAURENZI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3746 2/9/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 12, 2025
Application Filed
Jan 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12590577
SNAP-ON GETTER PUMP ASSEMBLY AND ITS USE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12577945
PUMP FOR TWO-PHASE MAGNETIC FLUIDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577928
PUMP ACTUATOR WITH IMPROVED FATIGUE LIFE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12571389
PISTON, COMPRESSOR, COMPRESSED-AIR SUPPLY SYSTEM, VEHICLE, AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A COMPRESSED-AIR SUPPLY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560165
PUMP ASSEMBLY USING A SHELL BEARING WITH A PARTIAL GROOVE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+40.7%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 284 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month