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 5, 7, 9 and 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 7 recites the term “substantially” that renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claims 5, 9, 10 recite “preferably …” It is unclear if the preferable language is limiting or not.
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) 1-5, 7, 9, 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jensen (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2025/0059978).
As per claim 1, Jensen (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2025/0059978) discloses a liner arrangement or a centrifugal pump for processing slurries, the centrifugal pump comprising an impeller (5; figure 5) and a drive shaft (6) connected with a back portion (4) of the impeller, the liner arrangement comprising: a back liner (7) arrangeable around at least the back portion of the impeller (5) of the centrifugal pump and around a circumferential portion of the drive shaft (6), a complementary liner (rear conical portion of impeller 5 shown; see annotated figure 12 below) arrangeable at a circumferential end portion of the drive shaft (6) and at a central back portion of the impeller (5), wherein the back liner comprises an inclined back liner portion providing an inclined back liner surface and the complementary liner comprises an inclined complementary liner surface, wherein the inclined back liner surface is opposite the inclined complementary liner surface (see annotated figure 12 below), and wherein the liner arrangement is configured to provide a channel (39) between the inclined back liner surface and the inclined complementary liner surface (as shown; figure 12), and wherein the inclined back liner surface comprises one or more grooves (formed by ribs 29; figures 5E, 12).
PNG
media_image1.png
678
706
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 2, Jensen discloses the liner arrangement according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the back liner further comprises: a first back liner portion arrangeable around the circumferential portion of the drive shaft of the centrifugal pump, a second back liner portion arrangeable around at least the back portion of the impeller of the centrifugal pump, and the inclined back liner portion configured to connect the first back liner portion with the second back liner portion (see annotated figure 12 above).
As per claim 3, Jensen discloses the liner arrangement according to claim 2, and further discloses wherein the first back liner portion comprises a sealing configurable to extend from a surface portion of the first back liner portion to a circumferential surface portion of the drive shaft such to seal a space therebetween (sealing arrangement 17 having a annular seal 24 extending from a surface of the back liner portion to the sleeve portion for the shaft; figure 12).
As per claim 4, Jensen discloses the liner arrangement according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the one or more grooves extend helically along the inclined back liner surface (protrusions 29 are helical, i.e., forming helical grooves; paragraph [0104]-[106]).
As per claim 5, Jensen discloses the liner arrangement according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the one or more grooves have a groove depth of 1-13 mm (protrusions having a height of 0.5-5mm; paragraph [0098]).
As per claim 7, Jensen discloses the liner arrangement according to claim 1, and further disclose wherein the complementary liner is substantially conical (as shown; figure 12).
As per claim 9, Jensen discloses the liner arrangement according to claim 1, and further disclose wherein the inclined complementary liner surface and the inclined back liner portion each have an inclination angle (a) of between 10° and 85° (both inclinations shown to be in between 10° and 85°; figure 12), preferably between 20° and 70°, more preferably between 30° and 60°.
As per claim 11, Jensen discloses a centrifugal pump for processing slurries comprising a drive shaft (6), an impeller (5), and a liner arrangement according claim 1, wherein the back liner (7) of the liner arrangement is arranged around at least the back portion of the impeller of the centrifugal pump and around a circumferential portion of the drive shaft (as shown; figure 12), and wherein the complementary liner of the liner arrangement is arranged at a circumferential end portion of the drive shaft and at a central back portion of the impeller (see annotated figure 12 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
678
706
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 12, Jensen discloses the centrifugal pump according to claim 11, and further discloses wherein the complementary liner is releasably arranged at the circumferential end portion of the drive shaft and/or at the central back portion of the impeller (the rear portion of the impeller 50 forming the rear portion (complementary liner) can be detached from shaft 6; figure 5B).
As per claim 13, Jensen discloses the centrifugal pump according to claim 11, and further discloses wherein the complementary liner is integral with the circumferential end portion of the drive shaft or with the central back portion of the impeller (as shown; figure 12).
As per claim 14, Jensen discloses the centrifugal pump according to claim 11, and further discloses wherein the complementary liner is fixedly arranged at the circumferential end portion of the drive shaft or at the central back portion of the impeller (formed integrally as shown; figure 12).
As per claim 15, Jensen discloses the centrifugal pump according to claim 11, and further discloses wherein the centrifugal pump further comprises a sealing arranged around the drive shaft immediately adjacent the back liner (sealing arrangement 17 having a annular seal 24 extending from a surface of the back liner portion to the sleeve portion for the shaft; figure 12).
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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen.
As per claim 10, Jensen discloses the liner arrangement according to claim 1. Jensen does not explicitly teach wherein the channel (30) has a channel width (W) of up to 10 mm, preferably of up to 5 mm, more preferably of 0.1-3 mm. Jensen however teaches the annular recess 39 (channel) is intended for creating turbulence (paragraph [0087]). The person of ordinary skill is a person having a working knowledge in fluid mechanics and would recognize the fluid channel width to be a result effective variable for creating turbulence. Jensen also teaches the circulating fluid collides with the protrusion to create the turbulence (paragraph [0009]). The person of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that in order for the circulating fluid to collide with the protrusion effectively, the distance between the rotating body and the protrusion must be sufficiently small. Therefore, in order to optimize the turbulence made from the channel, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Jensen’s channel to incorporate a width less than 10mm, in order to promote fluid colliding with the protrusion in the channel and where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (see MPEP 2144.05).
Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen in view of Barrow (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2020/0370561).
As per claims 8 and 16, Jensen discloses the liner arrangement according to claim 1 and the centrifugal pump according to claim 15. Jensen does not explicitly teach wherein the back liner comprises a through-hole arranged such to allow a flow therethrough and further through the channel (claim 8) and wherein a fluid inlet is arranged at a portion of the intersection between the back liner and the sealing such to allow a flow through the inlet and further through the channel (claim 16).
Barrow is related prior art in that it deals with centrifugal pump. Barrow teaches wherein the back liner (housing 12 forming a back liner; figure 1) comprises a through-hole (30) arranged such to allow a flow therethrough and further through the channel (through gallery space 42; figures 1, 3; paragraph [0071]) and wherein a fluid inlet (30) is arranged at a portion of the intersection between the back liner (12) and the sealing (36, 38) such to allow a flow through the inlet and further through the channel (through gallery space 42; figures 1, 3; paragraph [0071]). Barrow teaches this allows to exclude abrasives from the slurry from entering and consequently reduce wear on the impeller (paragraph [0071]). Therefore, in order to reduce the wear on the impeller, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Barrow’s through-hole because as Barrow teaches, it prevents abrasive from entering and consequently reduce wear.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 6 contains allowable subject matter wherein the inclined complementary liner surface comprises a plurality of protrusions.
In the closest prior art, Loyd (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2005/0147491) teaches wherein the rear surface of the impeller comprises a plurality of protrusions (figure 3). However, Loyd’s protrusions are not on the inclined complementary liner surface.
No relevant prior art of record sufficiently teaches the allowable subject matter in such a way that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the prior arts to create the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pawlik (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2018/0163741) teaches an impeller having vanes at the rear portion.
Burgess (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2014/0341705) teaches a liner having a through-hole.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG K KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-1324. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:00 pm EST.
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, Courtney Heinle can be reached at (571)270-3508. 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.
/SANG K KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights