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 June 20, 2025 which amended the specification, the abstract and claims 1-14.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “clamping segments” (cl. 6) and the “partial shells” (claim 7) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 20 “iteratively chaning the clamping (w)” should be “iteratively changing the clamping (w) of the stator”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 22 after “and/or” “iteratively changed” should be “interatively changing the clamping (w)”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 5 after “iteratively changes” “the clamping (w) of the stator” should be inserted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 8 after “iteratively changes” “the clamping (w) of the stator as a function of the pulsation amplitude
PNG
media_image1.png
22
60
media_image1.png
Greyscale
” should be inserted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 2 and 3 “wherein the operating parameter is made available by means of measurements” should be “measuring the operating parameter and providing the measurement to the “control apparatus”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2 “is set up for carrying out” should be “is configured to carry out”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: the “stator clamping apparatus” and the “control apparatus” of claims 1, 12 and 13.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-14 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 is vague and indefinite because in lines 8, 12 and 20 a “clamping (w)” is referred to which is confusing, especially at line 20 where “iteratively changing the clamping (w)” is set forth. It is noted that “clamping is a process of holding or squeezing an object and “clamping” itself does not have units commonly used in the art or defined by the disclosure. Therefore, it is unclear if “clamping (w) makes reference to a clamping force, a distance that a clamp is displaced or squeezed in the clamping process or a clamp setting. Because of this it is unclear what exactly “clamping (w)” represents especially when the “iterative changing of the clamping (w)” is set forth in the claims.
In claim 2 line 3 in the phrase “in or at the pump” is confusing”. In particular it is unclear how “in” and “at” differ from one another. Pressure between an inlet and an outlet of the pump would be pressures “in” the pump and also seem to be pressures “at” the pump. It would seem that a pressure in a line leading to or away from either of the inlet or the outlet would be a pressure near the pump but not at the pump. Therefore it is unclear how “at” and “in” are intended to further define the claim. For purposes of examination it will be assumed that a pressure “of the pump” is being claimed.
Claim 9 is vague and indefinite since it is unclear what is considered “suitable” as the structure set forth in the means for carrying out the method according to claim 1 (a 35 USC 112(f) limitation). The last few lines of page 23 sets forth:
PNG
media_image2.png
174
796
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It is unclear if any hardware or computer with software would be “suitable” or if a particular structure is required.
Claims 13 and 14 are vague and indefinite because in line 7 after “control apparatus,” it is unclear what “or is connected to a control apparatus” means. It makes it unclear if the material of line 7 requires the control apparatus or makes the control apparatus optional. Furthermore, in lines 8 and 9 there is no antecedent basis for “the clamping apparatus”. Claim 13 is also vague and indefinite because lines 9 and 10 sets forth that it is the “clamping apparatus” that is configured to perfrom the method but as disclosed the clamping apparatus only clamps the stator and it is the control apparatus that performs the method of claim 1. The confusion is compounded because in claim 14 it is set forth that the control apparatus is “set up for carrying out the method”.
Claims not specifically mentioned are indefinite since they depend from one of the above claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art neither discloses nor makes obvious a method of controlling an eccentric screw pump, a control apparatus, a software program and a pump for operating under the control method. Wherein the method comprises the steps of: selecting an operating parameter that pulsates periodically at the pump frequency or a multiple of the pump frequency, determining from the operating parameter an average value that is averaged over at least one period and the pulsation amplitude and iteratively changing the clamping (w) of the stator using the stator clamping apparatus as a function of the average value, until a maximum value of the average value has been reached and/or iteratively changing the clamping of the stator, as a function of the pulsation amplitude, until a minimum value of the pulsation amplitude (Appp) has been reached. As described at page 8 of the specification the determinations that the maximum and the minimum values have been reached is decided when the iterative changing of the clamping does not result in the average or the pulsation amplitude changing anymore.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Krampe et al, Voit et al, Gunter et al, Hulley et al; and Streicher disclose arrangement for clamping the stator of a screw pump.
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
June 12, 2026
Prosecution Insights