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 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: “a locking structure” in claim 1.
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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: change “an inner surface of an upper side of an impeller accommodating space” to “an inner surface of an upper side of [[an]] the impeller accommodating space” to fix the antecedent basis issue. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: change “an medium-pressure space” to “[[an]] a medium-pressure space”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 1-6 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is directed to a water pump and hence it is an apparatus type claim. Claim 1 also recites first and second pressure spaces P1 and P2. Then claim 1 recites a function to be performed by the water pump as “as the impeller ascends and the impeller end approaches the locking structure part, the pressure in the first pressure space (P1) increases.” Firstly, it is not clear how the impeller ascends because there are no limitations in the claim that correspond to this function. Furthermore, it is not clear what structure should the recited apparatus have in order to perform the recites function of “as the impeller ascends and the impeller end approaches the locking structure part, the pressure in the first pressure space (P1) increases.” Based on the specification, it seems that by mere existence of the locking structure part, as the impeller ascends and the impeller end approaches the locking structure part, the pressure in the first pressure space (P1) increases. However, the claim and the specification are not clear if this function is merely the result of the existence of the locking structure part, or if other elements are needed in the recited apparatus of “A water pump” to perform the recited functions. For examination, it is interpreted that the recited function is merely the result of the recited locking structure part.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the radially outermost position". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3 and 4 recite “depending on the gap” followed by certain limitations, but do not recite any specific condition or characteristic for the gap. It is unclear how the gap should be in claims 3 and 4. In other words, it is not clear exactly what depends on what. Hence, the metes and bounds of the claims are indefinite and unclear.
Claim 3-5, which are apparatus type claims, recite functional limitations. It is not clear if they are the result of the structures that are recited in claim 1 or if there are other elements that are needed for the water pump of claims 3-5 to perform the recited functions, and if other elements are needed, what they are. For examination, it is interpreted that the recited functions are merely the result of the recited water pump.
Claims 3 and 4 recite the limitation "the gap". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Any and all claims rejected herein under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, if rejected with art below under sections 35 U.S.C. 102 and/or 35 U.S.C. 103, are rejected as best understood.
Claim 6 is rejected due to their dependency from a previously rejected claim.
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 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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Eguchi (US 2013/0136630).
With regard to claim 1, Eguchi discloses a water pump, comprising: an upper casing and a lower casing that are coupled to each other to form an impeller accommodating space therein (Fig. 1), and have an inlet formed above a central portion of the impeller accommodating space to communicate with the impeller accommodating space and to allow fluid to flow in (Fig. 1), a discharge channel formed radially outside the impeller accommodating space to communicate with the impeller accommodating space (Fig. 1), and an outlet connected to the discharge channel to discharge the fluid to an outside (Fig. 1); and an impeller (16) that is rotatably accommodated in the impeller accommodating space (Fig. 1), wherein, in the upper casing, a locking structure part (Fig. 1) is formed at a position corresponding to the impeller end which is an end of an upper side of a central portion of the impeller (note that in the absence of any specificity regarding the end being a specific surface or point or section, an end is considered a region), and when a space between an upper surface of an accommodating part, which is an inner surface of an upper side of an impeller accommodating space and an upper surface of the impeller is defined as a first pressure space (P1) (Fig. 1), and a space between a lower surface of the accommodating part, which is an inner surface of a lower side of the impeller accommodating space, and a lower surface of the impeller is defined as a second pressure space (P2) (Fig. 1), as the impeller ascends and the impeller end approaches the locking structure part, the pressure in the first pressure space (P1) increases (Fig. 1. See the 112(b) section above and the interpretation regarding the performing the function of “as the impeller ascends and the impeller end approaches the locking structure part, the pressure in the first pressure space (P1) increases” being merely performed by the existence of the locking structure part, which Eguchi discloses in Fig. 1).
Note that claims, such as claim 1, do not define a specific plane of reference for terms such as upper, lower, inner, above, central, outer, ascend, high, medium, low, ...
PNG
media_image1.png
392
563
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1 of Eguchi
With regard to claim 2, Eguchi further discloses that when a gap between the upper surface of the accommodating part and the upper surface of the impeller at the radially outermost position of the impeller is referred to as a first gap (DimA) (Fig. 1), and a gap between a lower surface of the locking structure part and an upper surface of the impeller end is referred to as a second gap (DimB) (Fig. 1), wherein the first gap (DimA) is formed greater than the second gap (DimB) (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 3, Eguchi further discloses that when the impeller operates, an inside of the inlet is formed as a low-pressure space (L), an inside of the discharge channel is formed as a high-pressure space (H), a lower periphery of the impeller is formed as an medium-pressure space (M), and the impeller ascends or descends according to the surrounding pressure, and depending on the gap between the impeller end and the locking structure part, when the first pressure space (P1) and the low-pressure space (L) communicate with each other and share pressure, and the second pressure space (P2) and the intermediate-pressure space (M) communicate with each other and share pressure, the pressure of the second pressure space (P2) is formed to be higher than the pressure of the first pressure space (P1), such that the impeller ascends (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 4, Eguchi further discloses that depending on the gap between the impeller end and the locking structure part, when a state is formed in which the first pressure space (P1) does not share pressure with the low-pressure space (L) but shares pressure with the high-pressure space (H), the pressure of the first pressure space (P1) is higher than the pressure of the second pressure space (P2), such that the impeller is configured to descend (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 5, Eguchi further discloses that the ascending and descending operations of the impeller alternately occur, and the impeller is configured to converge to a specific fixed position, which is a thrust-neutral position (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 6, Eguchi further discloses that the impeller is a centrifugal type impeller ([0013], Fig. 1).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim (KR 101284670).
With regard to claim 1, Kim discloses a water pump, comprising: an upper casing and a lower casing that are coupled to each other to form an impeller accommodating space therein (see 110, 121, and 131 in Fig. 1), and have an inlet (111) formed above a central portion of the impeller accommodating space to communicate with the impeller accommodating space and to allow fluid to flow in (Fig. 1), a discharge channel formed radially outside the impeller accommodating space to communicate with the impeller accommodating space (Fig. 1), and an outlet (112) connected to the discharge channel to discharge the fluid to an outside (Fig. 1); and an impeller (115) that is rotatably accommodated in the impeller accommodating space (Fig. 1), wherein, in the upper casing, a locking structure part (Fig. 1) is formed at a position corresponding to the impeller end which is an end of an upper side of a central portion of the impeller (note that in the absence of any specificity regarding the end being a specific surface or point or section, an end is considered a region), and when a space between an upper surface of an accommodating part, which is an inner surface of an upper side of an impeller accommodating space and an upper surface of the impeller is defined as a first pressure space (P1) (Fig. 1), and a space between a lower surface of the accommodating part, which is an inner surface of a lower side of the impeller accommodating space, and a lower surface of the impeller is defined as a second pressure space (P2) (Fig. 1), as the impeller ascends and the impeller end approaches the locking structure part, the pressure in the first pressure space (P1) increases (Fig. 1. See the 112(b) section above and the interpretation regarding the performing the function of “as the impeller ascends and the impeller end approaches the locking structure part, the pressure in the first pressure space (P1) increases” being merely performed by the existence of the locking structure part, which Kim discloses in Fig. 1).
Note that claims, such as claim 1, do not define a specific plane of reference for directional terms such as upper, lower, inner, above, central, outer, ascend.
With regard to claim 2, Kim further discloses that when a gap between the upper surface of the accommodating part and the upper surface of the impeller at the radially outermost position of the impeller is referred to as a first gap (DimA) (Fig. 1), and a gap between a lower surface of the locking structure part and an upper surface of the impeller end is referred to as a second gap (DimB) (Fig. 1), wherein the first gap (DimA) is formed greater than the second gap (DimB) (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 3, Kim further discloses that when the impeller operates, an inside of the inlet is formed as a low-pressure space (L), an inside of the discharge channel is formed as a high-pressure space (H), a lower periphery of the impeller is formed as an medium-pressure space (M), and the impeller ascends or descends according to the surrounding pressure, and depending on the gap between the impeller end and the locking structure part, when the first pressure space (P1) and the low-pressure space (L) communicate with each other and share pressure, and the second pressure space (P2) and the intermediate-pressure space (M) communicate with each other and share pressure, the pressure of the second pressure space (P2) is formed to be higher than the pressure of the first pressure space (P1), such that the impeller ascends (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 4, Kim further discloses that depending on the gap between the impeller end and the locking structure part, when a state is formed in which the first pressure space (P1) does not share pressure with the low-pressure space (L) but shares pressure with the high-pressure space (H), the pressure of the first pressure space (P1) is higher than the pressure of the second pressure space (P2), such that the impeller is configured to descend (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 5, Kim further discloses that the ascending and descending operations of the impeller alternately occur, and the impeller is configured to converge to a specific fixed position, which is a thrust-neutral position (Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 6, Kim further discloses that the impeller is a centrifugal type impeller ([0013], Fig. 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to the attached form PTO-892 for pertinent prior art disclosing similar water pumps such as Riel et al. (WO 8606799).
PNG
media_image2.png
874
514
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BEHNOUSH HAGHIGHIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7558. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 7:00am-15:00pm.
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 D 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.
/BEHNOUSH HAGHIGHIAN/
Examiner
Art Unit 3745
/COURTNEY D HEINLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights