DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 29 May 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2 and 5 under 35 USC 102 or 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Uemura et al – hereafter Uemura – (US 20200200073 A1; also US 11,255,257 B2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Uemura et al – hereafter Uemura – (US 20200200073 A1; also US 11,255,257 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Uemura teaches a rotary device (Fig.5) comprising:
an impeller (13);
a plurality of vanes (50) that is located radially outside the impeller and that is arranged along a circumferential direction (Fig.5);
a housing body (30) that encloses the impeller;
a shroud piece (52) that is discrete from the housing body, the shroud piece including at least a part of a shroud that faces blade surfaces of the impeller and being in contact with or fixed to at least a part of each of the plurality of vanes (surface of 52 adjacent to 13 and 50);
a surface that faces the shroud piece across the plurality of vanes (surface of 51 adjacent to 50); and
an elastic body (55) that is arranged between the housing body and the shroud piece and that presses the shroud piece and the plurality of vanes toward the surface (Fig.5),
wherein the plurality of vanes are fixed to one of the shroud piece and the surface, and are not fixed to the other of the shroud piece and the surface (¶141, note “nozzle vanes 50 may be fixed vanes fixed to the first plate 51 or the second plate 52 … When the nozzle vanes 50 are fixed vanes, one of the plates 51, 52 that does not support the fixed vanes”).
Regarding claim 5, Uemura further teaches the shroud piece is in contact with or fixed to the whole each of the plurality of vanes (Fig.5; ¶141, note “nozzle vanes 50 may be fixed vanes fixed to the first plate 51 or the second plate 52”, emphasis added).
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uemura.
Regarding claim 2, Uemura teaches all the limitations of claim 1, see above, and further teaches the elastic body includes a disc spring (55) that is arranged around a central axis of the impeller (Fig.5, central axis unlabeled but shown in a dashed line), and the disc spring is arranged radially outside a radially-outermost part of the impeller (Fig.5), however, does not explicitly teach and an inner edge of the disc spring presses the shroud piece.
However, it has been held that if shifting the position of a component in a device would not have modified the operation of said device, said position shift of said component is unpatentable, additionally, a particular placement of a component in a device has been held to be an obvious matter of design choice. In the current instance, there is no evidence that having an inner edge of the disc spring pressing the shroud piece instead of an outer edge of the disc spring pressing the shroud piece, would change the operation of the propulsion assembly, therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the rotary device of Uemura by shifting the position/placement of the inner edge of the disc spring to be disposed pressing the shroud piece as an obvious matter of design choice (MPEP 2144.04 VI C).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUAN G FLORES whose telephone number is (571)272-3486. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30am - 5:30pm Pacific Time.
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, Nathan E Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-8648. 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.
/JUAN G FLORES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights