FUEL PUMP ASSEMBLY

§102 §103 §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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Preliminary Amendments This office action is responsive to the preliminary amendment filed on 02/26/2025. As directed by the amendment: claim(s) 1-10 has/have been amended, no claim(s) has/have been cancelled, and no new claim(s) has/have been added. Thus, claims 1-10 are presently pending in this application. 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 2-3 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. Re claim 2, the recitation “the main bore” renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear as to which of the bores the Applicant is referring back to, since there are “plunger bore” and “screw-receiving bore”. For compact prosecution, the “main bore” is being interpreted as the “screw receiving bore”. Appropriate correction is required. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-2 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 & 102a2 as being anticipated by Anton (GB 2269426 A). (Provided by Applicant). Anton ‘426 discloses the invention as follows: 1. (Currently Amended) A fuel pump assembly (fig. 1) for a fuel system of an internal combustion engine, the fuel pump assembly comprising: a pump head housing (74); a main pump housing (1) provided with at least a portion of a plunger bore (5) for housing a pumping plunger (7) which is driven in use to pressurize fuel within a pump chamber (11) defined within the pump head housing (1); the pump head housing (74) and the main pump housing (1) defining a housing interface (INT; see annotated fig. 1 below) between facing surfaces thereof; and a screw-receiving bore (SRB; see annotated fig. 1 below) in the main pump housing (1) for receiving a screw (65, 66) comprising a screw shaft (65) which extends across the housing interface (INT), in use, wherein the screw-receiving bore (SRB) has a screw-threaded region (SRB-STR; fig. 1 below) of diameter, D, which interfaces with a screw-threaded region (65-STR) of the screw shaft (65) to define an axially-threaded interface (ATI), wherein the axially-extending threaded interface (AETI) is displaced axially from the housing interface (INT) by an axially-extending clearance interface (AECI) defined between the screw-receiving bore (SRB) and the screw (65), the axially-extending clearance interface (AECI) having a distance length, L, wherein a ratio of L/D is greater than or equal to 1 (as clearly shown in fig. 1). 2. (Currently Amended) The fuel pump assembly as claimed in claim 1, wherein the screw-receiving bore SRB is provided with a counter-bore region (CBR; see fig. 1 below), which opens at the housing interface (INT), to define the axially-extending clearance interface (AECI) between the main bore (i.e., SRB) and the screw shaft (65). 6. (Currently Amended) The fuel pump assembly (10) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the screw-receiving bore SRB includes an enlarged diameter region (see AECI) of length, L, proximal to the housing interface (INT), which defines the axially-extending clearance interface (AECI) with the screw shaft (65). 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. 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) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anton (‘426) in view of NORITOSHI (JPS60128969). (Provided by Applicant). Re claim 3, Anton ‘426 teaches the invention as essentially claimed, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the counter bore region (CBR) is provided with a chamfer at the housing interface. However, the patent application to NORITOSHI ‘969 teaches a very similar fuel pump assembly (see the sole figure) wherein the screw-receiving bore (of screw 3b) in the main pump housing 2 is provided with a chamfer (see annotated figure below) at the housing interface between the main pump housing 2 and the pump head housing 14. Such a chamfer for a screw-receiving bore in any housing is meant to provide for easier screw alignment during installation of the pump head housing and the main pump housing, as it is known to one skilled in the art of mechanical assemblage. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the screw-receiving bore of Anton ‘426 to further include such a chamfer at the housing interface of the screw-receiving bore, as clearly suggested and taught by NORITOSHI ‘969, in order to provide for easier screw alignment during installation of the two pump housings. Re claim 4, Anton ‘426 teaches the invention as essentially claimed, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the screw-threaded region of the screw-receiving bore includes an extended screw-threaded region which extends beyond the proximal end of the axially-extending threaded interface to the housing interface, the screw having a screw shaft of reduced diameter relative to the screw-threaded region of the screw shaft to define a clearance interface with the extended screw-threaded region. However, the patent application to NORITOSHI ‘969 teaches a very similar fuel pump assembly (see annotated figure below) wherein the screw-threaded region (152) of the screw-receiving bore includes an extended screw-threaded region (150) which extends beyond the proximal end of the axially-extending threaded interface (170) to the housing interface, the screw (3b) having a screw shaft (160a) of reduced diameter relative to the screw-threaded region (166) of the screw shaft (160a) to define a clearance interface (172) with the extended screw-threaded region (150). Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the screw-receiving bore and the screw shaft of Anton ‘426 to further include such an extended screw-threaded region and a reduced diameter, respectively, as clearly suggested and taught by NORITOSHI ‘969, in order to provide for easier screw alignment during installation of the two pump housings while allowing for reduced manufacturing times for the pump housing bores. Re claim 5, NORITOSHI ‘969 further teaches in the annotated figure below wherein the extended screw-threaded region (150) extends along the full length of the screw-receiving bore. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anton (‘426) in view of KATO (EP 3561289 A1). (Provided by Applicant). Re claim 7, Anton ‘426 teaches the invention as essentially claimed but fails to explicitly teach wherein the screw-threaded region (65-STR; see annotated figure of Anton below) of the screw shaft (65) extends beyond the axially-extending threaded interface (AETI) towards the housing interface (INT) and into the enlarged diameter region (see AECI). However, the patent application to KATO ‘289 teaches a very similar pump assembly 160 (see fig. 3) wherein the screw-threaded region of the screw shaft (of screw 180) extends beyond the axially-extending threaded interface (i.e., the entire threaded region of the screw head) towards the housing interface (see 163) and into the enlarged diameter region (e.g., where 170 is provided). In view of this teaching, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to modify the screw-threaded region of the screw shaft of Anton ‘426, such that this screw-threaded region extends beyond the axially-extending threaded interface towards the housing interface and into the enlarged diameter region of the screw-receiving bore, as clearly suggested and taught by KATO ‘289, in order to allow for the utilization of conventional and readily-available studs/bolts for the assembly of the pump housing, which would reduce manufacturing times and/or costs. Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anton (‘426). With regards to claims 8-9, Anton ‘426 discloses wherein the L/D ratio is more than 1. However, Anton ‘26 is completely silent regarding the L/D ratios being between either 1 – 1.5, or greater than or equal to 1.3. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to optimize the ratios of L to D to obtain the desired torque and/or tension for different pump applications, without any evidence to the contrary, as optimization of the dimensions of the threading of bolts/studs involves only routine skill in the art. PNG media_image1.png 980 748 media_image1.png Greyscale Annotated Figure 1 of Anton ‘426 PNG media_image2.png 788 856 media_image2.png Greyscale Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior arts teach conventional pump housing assemblies wherein the pump head housing is mounted on top of the main pump housing utilizing only two bolts/studs. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG Q NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5424. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7am-4pm (CT). 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, Lindsay Low can be reached at 571-272-1196. 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. HUNG Q. NGUYEN Primary Examiner Art Unit 3747 /HUNG Q NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747