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 Application
This Office action is in response to the amendment of February 21, 2025 which amended claims 1-8.
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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Ebinger et al (USPN 8,814,544).
Ebinger et al disclose a variable displacement oil pump (col. 8 line 36) comprising: a housing (1) including a pump container (the inner surface of the housing 1); a cam ring (14) movably contained in the pump container; a pump element (10,11) that is rotatably contained in an inner circumferential side (labeled in the annotated Fig. 1 below) of the cam ring, and forms pump chambers (12) in cooperation with the cam ring; a coil spring (8) that is disposed in the pump container, and biases the cam ring in a direction to increase an eccentricity of the cam ring (note the pivot and the spring being on the opposite side of the cam ring as arranged in Fig. 1) with respect to a rotational axis of the pump element; and a projection (labeled in annotated Fig. 1 below and clearly shown in Fig. 2) that is formed in the cam ring (see Fig. 2), extends in a longitudinal direction of the coil spring (labeled in the annotated figure) from a spring contact surface (labeled in the annotated figure) being in contact with the coil spring, and overlaps (labeled in the annotated figure) with a part of an outer periphery of the coil spring .
With regards to claim 2, Ebinger discloses the variable displacement oil pump as claimed in claim 1, wherein the housing includes a first restriction wall (labeled in the annotated figure) structured to restrict outward movement of the coil spring in a radial direction orthogonal to the rotational axis of the pump element.
With regards to claim 3, Ebinger discloses the variable displacement oil pump as claimed in claim 1, wherein the cam ring includes a second restriction wall (labeled in the annotated figure) structured to restrict inward movement of the coil spring in a radial direction orthogonal to the rotational axis of the pump element.
With regards to claim 4, Ebinger discloses the variable displacement oil pump as claimed in claim 1, wherein the projection is one in number (See Fig. 2).
With regards to claim 5, Ebinger discloses the variable displacement oil pump as claimed in claim 1, wherein the projection is positioned to overlap with a center of an outer diameter of the coil spring (when viewed from the viewpoint labeled in the annotated figure this would be the case).
With regards to claim 6, Ebinger discloses the variable displacement oil pump as claimed in claim 1, wherein the housing includes a third restriction wall (labeled in the annotated figure) structured to restrict movement of the coil spring to a side opposite to the projection in a radial direction of the coil spring.
PNG
media_image1.png
509
773
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebinger et al.
Ebinger et al disclose the invention as set forth in claim 1 as set forth above and additionally Ebinger discloses that both the projection and the coil spring are disposed in an oil passage (see the annotated figure above noting the suction opening and the flow direction. Ebinger et al do not disclose that the projection is positioned downstream with respect to the coil spring, in the oil passage the projection is positioned downstream with respect to the coil spring, in the oil passage.
At the time of the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to move or locate new/additional projections at locations such as downstream in order confine the spring at the initial/design location. Further, it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art; see In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. Please note that the instant applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
With regards to claim 8, Ebinger et al disclose the material of claim 1 as set forth above but does not suggest a method of producing such a pump including a cam ring installation step for disposing the cam ring in the pump container; and a coil spring installation step for disposing the coil spring in the pump container after the cam ring installation step, wherein the coil spring installation step includes: retaining the coil spring in a compressed state with use of a jig including a first retainer and a second retainer, wherein the first retainer has a bifurcated shape with a cut-out part at a middle thereof and is structured to retain a first end of the coil spring, and the second retainer is structured to retain a second end of the coil spring; and disposing the coil spring in the pump container by inserting the jig between the pump container and the cam ring in order to avoid the projection with use of the cut-out part of the first retainer.
Akatsuka et al represents the closest prior art and teaches of the cam ring installation step followed by a coil spring installation step where a jig (T in Figs. 4 and 5) is used to mount a spring into the pump. There is a slot cut in the spring contact surface instead of there being a projection and therefore the jig, which is not disclosed as having a bifurcated shape with a cut-out part, does not dispose the coil spring in the pump container by inserting the jig between the pump container and the cam ring in order to avoid the projection with use of the cut-out part of the first retainer. It is the Examiner’s opinion that modification of the available prior art in the claimed manner is neither contemplated nor foreseeable without the benefit of the disclosure of the instant application.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kang, and Akatsuka et al disclose variable displacement pumps.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES G FREAY whose telephone number is (571)272-4827. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri: 8:00 - 5:00.
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, Essama Omgba can be reached at (469)295-9278. 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.
/CHARLES G FREAY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
CGF
February 19, 2026