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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 20 November 2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Applicant is advised to supply a copy of any foreign references that may be relevant to the present application, lest such omissions later affect the validity of any patent issued from the pending application.
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 at least one sliding surface of the stationary seal ring and the rotary seal ring is provided with a supply hole (claim 1 lines 5-6) and the at least one sliding surface of the stationary seal ring and the rotary seal ring is provided with an introduction groove (claim 1 lines 7-8) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Specifically the case where the each sliding surface has a supply hole and the case where the supply hole is on the same sliding surface as the introduction groove must be shown as the claims allow for such. No new matter should be entered. Additionally see the 112(a) rejection below as overcoming such should obviate this objection.
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: there should be a comma after the first “and” in line 7, and “both” in line 10 should read “two”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the both ends” should read “both ends”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the both ends” should read “both ends”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the both ends” should read “both ends”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites that “at least one sliding surface of the stationary seal ring and the rotary seal ring is provided with a supply hole” in lines 5-6 and “at least one sliding surface of the stationary seal ring and the rotary seal ring is provided with an introduction groove” in lines 7-8. These limitations allow for a supply hole to be on both of the sliding surfaces and for the supply hole and the introduction groove to be on the same sliding surface, which are not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Specifically while these limitations have literal antecedent basis in the claims, the disclosure (i.e. the specification, drawing, etc.) make clear that the supply hole is on only one sliding surface and the introduction groove is on the other sliding surface (i.e. one is on the stationary seal ring and one is on the rotary seal ring). It is also unclear if such would even function per the disclosure being on the same sliding surface. Appropriate clarification and correction is required. Examiner recommends claiming “one of a sliding surface of the stationary seal ring and a sliding surface of the rotary seal ring” in lines 5-6 and “the other of the one of the sliding surface of the stationary seal ring and a sliding surface of the rotary seal ring”.
Additionally see the related 112(b) rejection below.
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 recites the preamble “a mechanical seal disposed between a housing and a rotating shaft rotating relative to the housing, comprising…”. This preamble is indefinite as it is unclear if Applicant is claiming a mechanical seal that is capable of such disposition, or a mechanical seal assembly including the housing and shaft. Appropriate clarification and correction is required. For examination purposes Examiner assumes Applicant intended to claim “A mechanical seal assembly comprising a mechanical seal disposed between a housing and a rotating shaft rotating relative to the housing, the mechanical seal comprising…”.
Claim 1 recites “the sliding surfaces” in lines 6-7. This recitation is indefinite as Applicant only previously requires that at least one of the stationary seal ring and the rotary seal ring have a sliding surface. Appropriate clarification and correction is required. For examination purposes Examiner assumes Applicant intended to claim “one of a sliding surface of the stationary seal ring and a sliding surface of the rotary seal ring” in lines 5-6, as such would correct the issue in lines 6-7.
Claims 2-10 are indefinite at least by virtue of depending on indefinite claim 1 (see above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Though no claims are currently in condition for allowance, the claims should be in condition for allowance upon overcoming the above 112a and 112b rejections, drawing objections, and claim objections in the manner as suggested by Examiner.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record fails to show a mechanical seal (assembly) having the details, as set forth in claims that include elements such as a mechanical seal disposed between a housing and a rotating shaft rotating relative to the housing, comprising a stationary seal ring fixed to a housing side and a rotary seal ring fixed to a rotating shaft side, and defining a sealed fluid space and a leakage space by relative rotation of the stationary seal ring and the rotary seal ring, wherein at least one sliding surface of the stationary seal ring and the rotary seal ring is provided with a supply hole configured to supply a barrier fluid between the sliding surfaces and at least one sliding surface of the stationary seal ring and the rotary seal ring is provided with an introduction groove which is formed to overlap with the supply hole in an axial view and extend in a circumferential direction, and wherein a bypass groove having both circumferential ends extending toward the introduction groove is formed on a leakage side of the introduction groove. Relevant references, such as Takahashi et al. (US 2016/0003361) disclose a similar mechanical seal assembly with one sliding surface having a supply hole overlapping an introduction groove on the other sliding surface, but fail to disclose a bypass groove (i.e. as interpreted by Applicant’s specification a groove that can route flow around part of the introduction groove) formed on the leakage side of the introduction groove (i.e. on the same sliding surface thereof) with two circumferential ends extending towards the introduction groove. Other references such as WO2022224673 disclose a similar mechanical seal with a sliding surface having an introduction groove and a bypass groove having two circumferential ends extending toward the introduction groove.
Based on the prior art of record it would not have been considered obvious, at the time the invention was filed, to have modified any of the cited prior art to arrive at the invention as claimed absent using applicant’s own disclosure as a guide and involving impermissible hindsight. Specifically adding an overlapping supply hole would clearly change the hydrodynamic properties of the WO ‘673 reference and it may not be suitable for the specific benefits/intended purpose listed in the WO ‘673 reference. Similarly adding a bypass groove to the Takahashi reference would clearly change the hydrodynamic properties of the Takahashi reference and may not be suitable for the specific benefits/intended purpose listed in the Takahashi reference.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure that disclose similar mechanical seal assemblies.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS L FOSTER whose telephone number is (571)270-5354. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571) 272-7376. 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.
/NICHOLAS L FOSTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights