Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/101,479

CONVEYING DEVICE AND MECHANICAL SEAL ASSEMBLY COMPRISING SUCH A CONVEYING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Feb 05, 2025
Priority
Sep 22, 2022 — DE 10 2022 122 319.1 +1 more
Examiner
PATEL, VISHAL A
Art Unit
3675
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Eagleburgmann Germany GmbH & Co. Kg
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
59%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 4m
Est. Remaining
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 59% of resolved cases
59%
Career Allowance Rate
493 granted / 834 resolved
+7.1% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
894
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
38.6%
-1.4% vs TC avg
§102
31.3%
-8.7% vs TC avg
§112
26.3%
-13.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 834 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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(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 1-10 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 1, “Tesla valve-like”, unclear what this means? The conveying device is either a Tesla Vale or not? Claim 6, “a plurality of conveying channels”, unclear what this mean in view of claim 1 (e.g. claim 1 provides limitation “Tesla valve-like conveying channel”). Claim 8, “all the conveying channels”, unclear what this mean in view of claim 1 (e.g. claim 1 provides limitation “Tesla valve-like conveying channel”). Claim 8, “configured to be geometrically identical”, unclear what applicant is trying to claim (e.g. are the channels geometrically identical?). It is noted that configured to is an intended use and/or capability limitation. Claim 9, “the conveying channel of the rotatable part and the conveying channel of the stationary part, unclear what this mean in view of claim 1 (e.g. claim 1 provides limitation “Tesla valve-like conveying channel” and “and/or”). 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(s) 1-4, 6-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ledig (US20140308112A1). Ledig discloses conveying device for conveying a liquid, comprising a rotatable part (e.g. 81), a stationary part (e.g. 5), wherein a conveying gap (e.g. gap between outer surface of 81 and inner surface of 5) is present between the rotatable part and the stationary part, and wherein a Tesla valve-like conveying channel is formed on the rotatable part and/or on the stationary part, wherein the conveying channel has a greater flow resistance in one flow direction than in the other flow direction (e.g. this is the function of the Tesla Valve). Regarding claim 2: Wherein the conveying channel comprises a plurality of alternately arranged narrowing regions and widening regions (e.g. this would be the case due to the plurality of groove that are oblique). Regarding claim 3: Wherein the widening regions are curved (e.g. see curved region of 71) and are arranged alternately along a flow direction through the conveying channel, on a conveying channel axis (e.g. see figure 5). Regarding claim 4: Wherein the conveying channel is arranged at an acute angle (e.g. acute angle of 71 relative to longitudinal axis) to the axial direction (X-X). Regarding claim 6: The conveying device comprising a plurality of conveying channels (e.g. each of channel 71) arranged in parallel with one another. Regarding claim 7: Wherein the rotatable part is a ring (e.g. 9), on the outer periphery of which the conveying channel is arranged, and/or wherein the stationary part (e.g. 22) is a ring, on the inner periphery of which the conveying channel is arranged. Regarding claim 8: wherein all the conveying channels (e.g. each of channel 7) are configured to be geometrically identical. Regarding claim 10: Ledig discloses mechanical seal assembly comprising a mechanical seal comprising a rotating slide ring (e.g. 21) and a stationary slide ring (e.g. 22) which define a sealing gap between their sliding surfaces, and the conveying device. Claim(s) 1 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Van Herpt (US3558238). Herpt discloses conveying device for conveying a liquid, comprising a rotatable part (e.g. 26), a stationary part (e.g. 23), wherein a conveying gap (e.g. gap between outer surface 26 and inner surface of 26) is present between the rotatable part and the stationary part, and wherein a Tesla valve-like conveying channel (e.g. channels are made of smaller and larger sections) is formed on the rotatable part and/or on the stationary part, wherein the conveying channel has a greater flow resistance in one flow direction than in the other flow direction (e.g. this is the function of the Tesla Valve). Regarding claim 9: Wherein the conveying channel (e.g. channel formed by 27 and 28) of the rotatable part (e.g. 26) and the conveying channel (e.g. channel formed by 25 to 26) of the stationary part (e.g. 23) are arranged at the same angle (e.g. angles of channels). Claim(s) 1 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bothien et al (US.6164655). Bothien discloses conveying device for conveying a liquid, comprising a rotatable part (e.g. 8), a stationary part (e.g. 15), wherein a conveying gap (e.g. gap between surface 8 and surface of 15) is present between the rotatable part and the stationary part, and wherein a Tesla valve-like conveying channel (e.g. channels are made of smaller and larger sections, see 29, 22 and 23) is formed on the rotatable part and/or on the stationary part, wherein the conveying channel has a greater flow resistance in one flow direction than in the other flow direction (e.g. this is the function of the Tesla Valve). Regarding claim 4: Wherein the conveying channel is arranged at an acute angle (e.g. angle of 45 degrees + 20 degrees, see claim 6) to the axial direction (X-X). Regarding claim 5: Wherein the acute angle (α) is in a range of 60° to 89° (e.g. the angle is possible to be 25 to 65 degrees). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. It is noted that no claims are allow individually or in combination, see reference of US-20240003424 which is same as CN115076374 which also teaches Tesla structure, Uth US-6494458 which teach 16 having 44 and 32 having 42, Baker US-4243230 teaches gap having 40, Ludwig US-4084825 teaches gap 46, Mayer US-3968969 teaches gap formed by 22 and 23, Mayer US-3843140 teaches gap formed by 23 and 24, Mayer US-3746350 teaches gap formed by 17 and 15, and Nikola US-1329559 teaches in figure 1 valvular conduit that is Tesla valve. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VISHAL A PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-7060. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am to 4:00pm. 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, Christine Mills can be reached at 571-272-8322. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /VISHAL A PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 05, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12768449
SEALING STRUCTURE
1y 4m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12729706
Hollow Wall Fastener
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12716490
SEAL ASSEMBLY WITH ANTI-ROTATION FEATURE
3y 8m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12716444
Hollow Wall Fastener
2y 9m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12710068
Hollow Wall Object Mounting Device
2y 6m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
59%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+22.6%)
3y 1m (~1y 4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 834 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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