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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 18 recites, “the drive pinion (14, fig. 1) is part of an at least two-stage gear mechanism” which is already claimed in claim 9. Claim 18 depends from claim 10 which in turn depends from claim 9. As such, claim 18 does not add any limitations to further limit claim 10. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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(s) 9-10, 12-14, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 4,185,717 to Ford, Jr. et al (Ford).
Regarding claim 9, Ford discloses a fluid pump (fig. 1) comprising a housing (10, fig. 1), an internal rotor (22, fig. 1) located in the housing, and an external rotor (20, fig. 1) which surrounds the internal rotor (fig. 1), which is rotatably mounted in the housing and, together with the internal rotor, forms an internal gear ring pump, wherein the external rotor is provided with a toothing (24, fig. 1) with which a drive pinion (teeth of gear 14, fig. 1) meshes, wherein the toothing of the external rotor is an external toothing (fig. 1) , and wherein the drive pinion (14, fig. 1) is part of an at least two-stage gear mechanism (12, 14, fig. 1; drive pinion 12 is clearly shown with another internal gear that connects to 14 which in turn rotates the external rotor 20 effectively making it a two stage gear system).
Regarding claim 10, Ford discloses a fluid pump (10) according to claim 9, wherein a drive shaft (12, fig. 1) extends through the housing and the internal rotor is floatingly mounted on the drive shaft (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Ford discloses a fluid pump (10) according to claim 11, wherein the drive pinion has a first toothing (outer toothing meshed with 20, fig. 1)) and a second toothing (inner toothing meshed with 12, fig. 1) axially offset from the first toothing, wherein the first toothing and the second toothing have different numbers of teeth (fig. 1; outer toothing will have more teeth by virtue of its bigger circumference).
Regarding claim 13, Ford discloses a fluid pump (10) according to claim 12, wherein the second toothing of the drive pinion extends into the housing (fig. 1).
Regarding claims 14 and 19, Ford discloses a fluid pump (10) according to claims 9 and 10, respectively, wherein moulded on the drive pinion is a bearing journal (bearing of shaft 12, fig. 1), which is radially mounted in the housing.
(Note: moulding journal bearing on drive pinion is a product by process limitation. As such, this is a product by process claim. "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product 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." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Regarding claim 18, Ford discloses a fluid pump (10) according to claim 10, wherein the drive pinion (14, fig. 1) is part of an at least two-stage gear mechanism (12, 14, fig. 1; drive pinion 12 is clearly shown with another internal gear that connects to 14 which in turn rotates the external rotor 20 effectively making it a two stage gear system).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1,3-8,15-17 and 20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, the closest prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious the combination including:
“the toothing of the external rotor is an internal toothing.”
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 4/15/2026, with respect to 102 rejection of claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 102 rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 4/15/2026 with respect to 102 rejection of amended claim 9 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Ford does not disclose that the drive pinion is part of an at least two-stage gear mechanism as required by amended claim 9. However, the office respectfully disagrees. In fig. 1 of Ford, drive pinion 12 is clearly shown with another internal gear that connects to 14 which in turn rotates the external rotor 20 effectively making it a two stage gear system. This reads on the limitation.
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 DAPINDER SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-1774. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
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.
/DAPINDER SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights