Office Action 1: Non-Final Rejection (2025-05-30)
Rejection types: 102 - Lack of Novelty, 103 - Obviousness, 112 - Written Description/Enablement

CLAIMS:
CLAIMS

1\. An impeller for a flow device, the impeller comprising:a hub; and
a plurality of blades extending radially outwards from the hub, wherein each of the blades is at least partially attached to an outer surface of the hub such that at least a portion of a tip end, opposite to the hub, of the corresponding blades remains unattached to the outer surface of the hub,
wherein the unattached portion of the blades is free to deflect based on a rotational speed of the impeller and correspondingly adjust a backsweep angle of the corresponding blades within a predefined range.

2\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein the unattached portion of the blades extends at least partially beyond an outermost diameter of the hub.

3\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein the predefined range of the backsweep angle ranges from 15 to 60 degrees from a radial direction from the hub.

4\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein each of the blades has a substantially curved profile,extending in a predefined direction about a longitudinal axis or axis of rotation of the hub, such that a plurality of fluidic passages is formed or defined between adjacent blades in the plurality of blades to allow flow of a fluid therethrough.

5\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein the outer surface of the hub has a substantially curved profile, wherein an outer diameter of the hub increases in a direction while moving from a leading end towards a trailing end of the hub, wherein the unattached portion of the hub extends at least partially beyond the outer diameter of the trailing end of the hub.

6\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein each of the blades comprises a coupling side attached to the outer surface of the hub, a leading edge located adjacent to a leading end of the hub, a trailing edge located adjacent to a trailing end of the hub, and a curved edge
opposite to the coupling side and extending between the trailing edge and the leading edge of the corresponding blades.

7\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein a trailing edge of the plurality of blades are circumferentially offset from a corresponding leading edge of the blade.

8\. the impeller of claim 1, wherein a portion, at a leading edge, of each of the blades is substantially curved in a direction opposite to a predefined direction.

9\. The impeller of claim 6, wherein each of the blades has a variable thickness between the leading edge and the trailing edge of the corresponding blades.

10\. the impeller of claim 9, wherein the thickness of each of the blades reduces while noving in a radial direction from the coupling side towards the tip end or outer edge of the corresponding blades.

11\. The impeller of claim 6, wherein each of the blades has a variable thickness between the coupling side and the curved edge of the corresponding blades.

12\. \[he impeller of claim 6, wherein the thickness of each of the blades reduces while noving in a direction from the leading edge towards the trailing edge of the corresponding blades.

13\. The impeller of claim 6, wherein the thickness of each of the blades increases while moving from the leading edge towards a middle portion of the corresponding blades and further reduces while moving towards the trailing edge of the corresponding blades.

14\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein the impeller comprises a shroud encasing the hub and the plurality of blades, such that a first end of the shroud located adjacent to a leading edge of the blades remains open to allow inflow of a fluid therewithin, and a second end of the shroud located adjacent to a trailing edge of the plurality of blades remains open to allow outflow of the fluid therefrom.

15\. The impeller of claim 14, wherein the shroud encases the hub and the plurality of blades, such that the unattached portion of the blades remains enclosed by and unattached to the shroud.

16\. The impeller of claim14, wherein the shroud has a substantially curved profile, wherein a diameter of the shroud increases while moving in a direction from a leading end towards a trailing end of the hub.

17\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein the plurality of blades, the hub, and a shroud of the impeller are made of a non-metallic material.

18\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein the plurality of blades is made of a composite material having a predetermined flex modulus.

19\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein the impeller comprises a plurality of splitters configured in an alternating arrangement with the plurality of blades such that one of the splitters remains between the adjacent blades, wherein the splitters extend radially outwards from the hub such that at least a portion of a tip end, opposite to the hub, of the corresponding splitter remains unattached to the outer surface of the hub.

20\. The impeller of claim 1, wherein the flow device is selected from a group comprising a centrifugal compressor, a centrifugal pump, and a turbine.

OFFICE ACTION:
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 .
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.
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 1-19 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 limitations each of the blades in lines 1-2 and the “blades” in line 7.  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may amend to: “each of the plurality of blades” and “the plurality of blades” respectively.
Claim 1 recites the limitation the corresponding blades in line 5 and lines 8-9.  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2, 14-15 each recites the limitation the blades in lines 1, 3 and 2 (second occurrences).  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may amend to: “the plurality of blades”.
Claims 4, 6, 8-13 each recites the limitation each of the blades in line 1.  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may amend to “each of the plurality of blades”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation a corresponding leading edge of the blade.  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may amend to: “a corresponding leading edge of a blade of the plurality of blades”.
Claims 6, 9-13 each recites the limitation the corresponding blades.  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitations one of the splitters in lines 2-3; “the adjacent blades” in line 3 and “the splitters” in line 3.  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant may amend to: “one of the plurality of splitters”; “adjacent blades” and “the plurality of splitters” respectively.
Claim 19 recites the limitation the corresponding splitter in line 5.  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 3, 5, and 15-18 and 20 are indefinite by virtue of their dependence on claim 1.
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) 1-2, 4-13, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Young (US 5,993,158).
Regarding claim 1, Young teaches an impeller (10) for a flow device, the impeller comprising:
a hub (20); and
a plurality of blades (30) extending radially outwards from the hub, wherein each of the blades is at least partially attached to an outer surface of the hub such that at least a portion of a tip end, opposite to the hub, of the corresponding blades remains unattached to the outer surface of the hub (Fig. 1),
wherein the unattached portion of the blades is free to deflect based on a rotational speed of the impeller and correspondingly adjust a backsweep angle of the corresponding blades within a predefined range (Col. 5, lines 29-48).
Regarding claim 2, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Young further teaches the unattached portion of the blades extends at least partially beyond an outermost diameter of the hub (Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 4, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Young further teaches each of the blades has a substantially curved profile, extending in a predefined direction about a longitudinal axis or axis of rotation of the hub (during rotation of the impeller, the blades present a substantially curved profile as shown in Figs. 1-2) such that a plurality of fluidic passages is formed or defined between adjacent blades in the plurality of blades to allow flow of a fluid therethrough (Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 5, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Young further teaches the outer surface of the hub has a substantially curved profile, wherein an outer diameter of the hub increases in a direction while moving from a leading end towards a trailing end of the hub, wherein the unattached portion of the hub extends at least partially beyond the outer diameter of the trailing end of the hub (Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 6, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Young further teaches each of the blades comprises a coupling side attached to the outer surface of the hub (Figs. 1-2), a leading edge located adjacent to a leading end of the hub (Figs. 1-2), a trailing edge located adjacent to a trailing end of the hub, and a curved edge opposite to the coupling side and extending between the trailing edge and the leading edge of the corresponding blades (Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 7, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Young further teaches a trailing edge of the plurality of blades are circumferentially offset from a corresponding leading edge of the blade (during rotation of the impeller, Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 8, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 6. Young further teaches a portion, at a leading edge, of each of the blades is substantially curved in a direction opposite to a predefined direction (the blades flex and curve during rotation of the impeller; Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 9, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Young further teaches the blades has a variable thickness between the leading edge and the trailing edge of the corresponding blades (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 10, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 9. Young further teaches the thickness of each of the blades reduces while moving in a radial direction from the coupling side towards the tip end or outer edge of the corresponding blades (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 11, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 6. Young further teaches each of the blades has a variable thickness between the coupling side and the curved edge of the corresponding blades (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 12, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 6. Young further teaches the thickness of each of the blades reduces while moving in a direction from the leading edge towards the trailing edge of the corresponding blades (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 13, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 6. Young further teaches each of the blades increases while moving from the leading edge towards a middle portion of the corresponding blades and further reduces while moving towards the trailing edge of the corresponding blades (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 18, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 6. Young further teaches the plurality of blades is made of a composite material having a predetermined flex modulus (Col. 5, lines 12-28).
Regarding claim 20, Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 6. Young further teaches the flow device is selected from a group comprising a centrifugal compressor, a centrifugal pump, and a turbine (Col. 1, lines 18-42).
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-12 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuan (US 2009/0008067 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kuan teaches an impeller (10) for a flow device, the impeller comprising:
a hub (22); and
a plurality of blades (24) extending radially outwards from the hub, wherein each of the blades is at least partially attached to an outer surface of the hub such that at least a portion of a tip end, opposite to the hub, of the corresponding blades remains unattached to the outer surface of the hub (Fig. 1; para. 0016),
wherein the unattached portion (224) of the blades is free to deflect based on a rotational speed of the impeller and correspondingly adjust a backsweep angle of the corresponding blades within a predefined range (because the unattached portion is cantilevered from the hub, during operation of the impeller, rotational speed would cause the portion to deflect thus adjusting the backsweep angle of the blades).
Regarding claim 2, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Kuan further teaches the unattached portion of the blades extends at least partially beyond an outermost diameter of the hub (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Kuan further teaches each of the blades has a substantially curved profile, extending in a predefined direction about a longitudinal axis or axis of rotation of the hub, such that a plurality of fluidic passages is formed or defined between adjacent blades in the plurality of blades to allow flow of a fluid therethrough (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 5, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Kuan further teaches the outer surface of the hub has a substantially curved profile, wherein an outer diameter of the hub increases in a direction while moving from a leading end towards a trailing end of the hub, wherein the unattached portion of the hub extends at least partially beyond the outer diameter of the trailing end of the hub (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 6, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Kuan further teaches each of the blades comprises a coupling side attached to the outer surface of the hub, a leading edge located adjacent to a leading end of the hub, a trailing edge located adjacent to a trailing end of the hub, and a curved edge opposite to the coupling side and extending between the trailing edge and the leading edge of the corresponding blades (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 7, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Kuan further teaches a trailing edge of the plurality of blades are circumferentially offset from a corresponding leading edge of the blade (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 8, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Kuan further teaches a portion, at a leading edge, of each of the blades is substantially curved in a direction opposite to a predefined direction (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 9, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 6. Kuan further teaches each of the blades has a variable thickness between the leading edge and the trailing edge of the corresponding blades (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 10, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 9. Kuan further teaches the thickness of each of the blades reduces while moving in a radial direction from the coupling side towards the tip end or outer edge of the corresponding blades (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 11, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 6. Kuan further teaches each of the blades has a variable thickness between the coupling side and the curved edge of the corresponding blades (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 12, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 6. Young further teaches the thickness of each of the blades reduces while moving in a direction from the leading edge towards the trailing edge of the corresponding blades (Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 20, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Young further teaches the flow device is selected from a group comprising a centrifugal compressor, a centrifugal pump, and a turbine (para. 0015).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary.  Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Young.
Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly disclose that the backsweep angle ranges from 15 to 60 degrees from a radial direction from the hub.
However, a careful examination of the specification reveals that no criticality for the specific angle has been shown nor any reason as to why the impeller of the applicant with the claimed angles would operate any different than the impeller of Young, and Applicant has not disclosed that this design with the specific angles provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. Hence this design for the backsweep angle ranges from 15 to 60 degrees from a radial direction from the hub is considered to be a design choice by the applicant. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected the impeller of Young, and Applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with the angle taught by Young or the claimed angles, because both would perform the same function.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the claimed angle with the impeller of Young in order to achieve a desired dimension, shape, or configuration, as they are a matter of design choice. Such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuan.
Young teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly disclose that the backsweep angle ranges from 15 to 60 degrees from a radial direction from the hub.
However, a careful examination of the specification reveals that no criticality for the specific angle has been shown nor any reason as to why the impeller of the applicant with the claimed angles would operate any different than the impeller of Kuan, and Applicant has not disclosed that this design with the specific angles provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. Hence this design for the backsweep angle ranges from 15 to 60 degrees from a radial direction from the hub is considered to be a design choice by the applicant. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected the impeller of Kuan, and Applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with the angle taught by Kuan or the claimed angles, because both would perform the same function.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the claimed angle with the impeller of Kuan in order to achieve a desired dimension, shape, or configuration, as they are a matter of design choice. Such a modification would have been considered a mere design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art.
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuan in view of Iurisci et al. (US 11,041,503 B2) hereinafter Iurisci.
Regarding claim 14, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1. Kuan fails to teach the impeller comprises a shroud encasing the hub and the plurality of blades, such that a first end of the shroud located adjacent to a leading edge of the blades remains open to allow inflow of a fluid therewithin, and a second end of the shroud located adjacent to a trailing edge of the plurality of blades remains open to allow outflow of the fluid therefrom.
However, Iurisci teaches an impeller comprising a hub (3); a plurality of blades (13) extending radially from the hub (Figs. 1-2; Col. 5, lines 24-35) and a shroud (13) encasing the hub and the plurality of blades, such that a first end of the shroud located adjacent to a leading edge of the blades remains open to allow inflow of a fluid therewithin, and a second end of the shroud located adjacent to a trailing edge of the plurality of blades remains open to allow outflow of the fluid therefrom (Figs. 1-2; Col. 5, lines 24-35). Iurisci states that: “The shroud improves stiffness of the impeller blades” (Col. 1, lines 20-26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kuan by providing a shroud as taught by Iurisci in order to improve the stiffness of the impeller blades (Iurisci; Col. 1, lines 20-26).
Regarding claim 15, Kuan as modified by Iurisci teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 14. Kuan as modified by Iurisci further teaches the shroud encases the hub and the plurality of blades, such that the unattached portion of the blades remains enclosed by and unattached to the shroud (Kuan, Fig. 1 and Iurisci, Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 16, Kuan as modified by Iurisci teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 14. Kuan as modified by Iurisci further teaches the shroud has a substantially curved profile, wherein a diameter of the shroud increases while moving in a direction from a leading end towards a trailing end of the hub (Iurisci, Figs. 1-2).
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuan in view of Parry et al. (US 2012/0213632 A1) hereinafter Parry.
Regarding claim 17, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitation as stated above in claim 1 but fails to teach the plurality of blades, the hub and a shroud of the impeller are made of a non-metallic material.
However, Parry teaches an impeller (30) comprising a hub (36), a plurality of blades (48) extending from the hub and a shroud (49) covering the blades (Fig. 5A). Parry further teaches teach the plurality of blades, the hub and a shroud of the impeller are made of a non-metallic material such fiberglass reinforced to improve corrosion resistance of the impeller (para. 0007).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kuan by providing a shroud and forming the plurality of blades, the hub and the shroud of the impeller from a non-metallic material as taught by Parry in order to improve stiffness of the blades and at the same time improve corrosion resistance of the impeller.
Regarding claim 18, Kuan teaches all the claimed limitation as stated above in claim 1 but fails to teach the plurality of blades the Kuan teaches all the claimed limitation as stated above in claim 1 but fails to teach the plurality of blades is made of a composite material having a predetermined flex modulus.
However, Parry teaches an impeller (30) comprising a hub (36), a plurality of blades (48) extending from the hub and a shroud (49) covering the blades (Fig. 5A). Parry further teaches teach the plurality of blades, the hub and a shroud of the impeller are made of a non-metallic material such fiberglass reinforced which inherently has a predetermined flex modulus to improve corrosion resistance of the impeller (para. 0007).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kuan by making the plurality of blades with a composite material with a predetermined flex modulus in order to improve corrosion resistance of the blades.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuan in view of Guriev (US 2024/0401606 A1).
Kuan teaches all the claimed limitations as stated above in claim 1 but fails to teach the impeller comprises a plurality of splitters configured in an alternating arrangement with the plurality of blades such that one of the splitters remains between the adjacent blades, wherein the splitters extend radially outwards from the hub such that at least a portion of a tip end, opposite to the hub, of the corresponding splitter remains unattached to the outer surface of the hub.
However, Guriev teaches an impeller comprising a hub (26) and a plurality of blades (28) extending radially from the hub (Fig. 2). Kuan further teaches a plurality of splitters (30) configured in an alternating arrangement with the plurality of blades such that one of the splitters remains between the adjacent blades, wherein the splitters extend radially outwards from the hub such that at least a portion of a tip end, opposite to the hub, of the corresponding splitter remains unattached to the outer surface of the hub (Fig. 2 and annotated FIG. 2 below; paras. 0069-0070).
PNG
media_image1.png
475
668
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Kuan by providing on the hub a plurality of splitter as taught by Guriev in order to split the flow passing through adjacent blades and provide stiffness to the impeller.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2016/0003258 A1; US 2020/0189557 A1 are cited for disclosing impellers comprising blades having tip portions unattached to the hub and extending beyond an outermost diameter of the hub.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: REMARKSStatus of Claims Claims 1-20 are pending in the present Application. Claims 1, 2, 4-16, 19, and 20 are currently amended. Support for the amendments can be found in original figures and in paragraphs [0041], [0047], and [0049] of the as-filed Specification. Reconsideration and allowance of the claims are respectfully requested in view of the above amendments and the following remarks.Examiner Interview Applicant thanks the Examiner MAXIME M ADJAGBE for conducting the Telephonic Interview on June 30, 2025. In particular, in the Interview Summary, the Examiner cites new references, US 2022/0307520 Al (Mosiewicz), US 2021/0071681 Al (Hsu), US 2018/0128109 Al (Humes), US 2010/0189557 Al (Broom), and US 9,850,760 B1 (Crosatti) "each of which reads on the proposed amended claim 1." Applicant has further amended independent claim 1 in view of the new references cited in the Interview Summary, and submits the following remarks.Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 112 Claims 1-19 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. § 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph. See Office Action, pages 2 and 3.In response, Applicant has amended claims 1, 2, 4-16, and 19 to further clarify the claimed subject matter. Dependent claims 3, 17, and 18 depend on amended independent claim 1.Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of claims 1-19 under 35 U.S.C.§ 112(b) be withdrawn.Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 102 Claims 1, 2, 4-13, 18, and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,993,158 (Young).Applicant traverses this rejection. In particular, Applicant submits that Young does not disclose the features of claims 1, 2, 4-13, 18, and 20.Independent claim 1 Specifically, amended independent claim 1 recites "a plurality of blades, wherein each blade comprises: an attached portion, attached to an outer surface of the hub; and an unattached tip end portion, extending radially beyond and unattached to the outer surface of the hub ...wherein at least part of the attached portion is curved in a direction different from a curvature of the unattached tip end portion of the blade," which is not disclosed by Young (emphasis added).The Office Action, on page 4, alleges that Young discloses the features of original claim 1 and refers to FIG. 1 and column 5, lines 29-48 of Young for the same.Young, in the cited portions and elsewhere, describes an impeller 10 comprising a hub 20 and a plurality of impeller blades 30 connected to the hub 20. The impeller blades 30 are flexible, i.e., have a continuous flexure along the length of the impeller blade 30, or a discontinuous flexure by providing one or more joints along the length of the impeller blade 30. See FIG. 1 of Young reproduced below.f
.-.. .: .
L  k i'- FIG.1 FIG. 1 of Young Thus, Young, at best, describes that impeller blade 30 is configured to deflect, either continuously or discontinuously, along the length of the impeller blade 30. However, in Young, there is no part of the attached portion of the blade 30 that is curved in a direction different from a curvature of the unattached portion of the blade 30. In fact, Young's blade 30 is, at best, curved in a single direction. Refer FIG. lA of Applicant annotated below.102 atached ponion of the blade -cun e-d
FIG. 1A The dir-ctionz of curv: atu:re'of u". ntached ' portin of t1he ba'de Annotated FIG. 7A of Applicant In view of the above, Applicant respectfully submits that Young fails to disclose the above- mentioned features of amended independent claim 1.Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) be withdrawn.Dependent claims 2, 4-13, 18, and 20 Dependent claims 2, 4-13, 18, and 20 are also allowable at least by virtue of their dependency from amended independent claim 1, which has been shown to be allowable above, and as well as for the features they recite individually.Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of dependent claims 2, 4- 13, 18, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) be withdrawn.Claims 1, 2, 4-12, and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0008067 Al (Kuan).Applicant traverses this rejection. In particular, Applicant submits that Kuan does not disclose the features of claims 1, 2, 4-12, and 20.Independent claim 1 Specifically, amended independent claim 1 recites "a plurality of blades, wherein each blade comprises: an attached portion, attached to an outer surface of the hub; and an unattached tip end portion, extending radially beyond and unattached to the outer surface of the hub ...wherein at least part of the attached portion is curved in a direction different from a curvature of the unattached tip end portion of the blade," which is not disclosed by Kuan (emphasis added).The Office Action, on page 7, alleges that Kuan discloses the features of original claim 1 and refers to paragraph [0016] and FIG. 1 for the same.Kuan, in the cited portions and elsewhere, describes a cooling fan 10 that comprises fan blades 24 integrally formed with a hub 22. Each fan blade 24 comprises a linear first portion 240 (unattached portion) and a curved second portion 242 (attached portion). See FIG. 1 of Kuan reproduced below.10244 246 224 222 220 242 240 Y  J22
24 FIG. 1 of Kuan Thus, Kuan, at best, describes that the second portion 242 (attached portion) of the fan blade 24 forms a linear-shaped top edge 244 and a concaved side edge 246. However, Kuan nowhere discloses that a part of the second portion 242 is curved in a direction different from a curvature of the first portion 240. In fact, as shown in FIG. 1 of Kuan above, the unattached portion or the first portion 240 of Kuan is a linear portion, and does not have a curving profile or curvature.Therefore, Kuan also fails to disclose the above-mentioned features of amended independent claim 1.Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) be withdrawn.Dependent claims 2, 4-12, and 20 Dependent claims 2, 4-12, and 20 are also allowable at least by virtue of their dependency from amended independent claim 1, which has been shown to be allowable above, and as well as for the features they recite individually.Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of dependent claims 2, 4- 12, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) be withdrawn.Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103 Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Young or Kuan.Dependent claim 3 is allowable at least by virtue of its dependency from amended independent claim 1, which has been shown to be allowable above, and as well as for the features it recites individually.Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of dependent claim 3 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 be withdrawn.Claims 14-16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Kuan in view of U.S. Patent No. 11,041,503 B2 (Iurisci).Iurisci is not asserted to cure the deficiencies in the rejection of independent claim 1 above.Further, Iurisci fails to disclose "a plurality of blades, wherein each blade comprises: an attached portion, attached to an outer surface of the hub; and an unattached tip end portion, extending radially beyond and unattached to the outer surface of the hub ... wherein at least part of the attached portion is curved in a direction different from a curvature of the unattached tip end portion of the blade," as recited in amended independent claim 1.Therefore, dependent claims 14-16 are allowable at least by virtue of their dependency from amended independent claim 1, which has been shown to be allowable above, and as well as for the features they recite individually.Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of dependent claims 14-16 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 be withdrawn.Claims 17 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Kuan in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0213632 Al (Parry).Parry is not asserted to cure the deficiencies in the rejection of independent claim 1 above.Further, Parry fails to disclose "a plurality of blades, wherein each blade comprises: an attached portion, attached to an outer surface of the hub; and an unattached tip end portion, extending radially beyond and unattached to the outer surface of the hub ... wherein at least part of the attached portion is curved in a direction different from a curvature of the unattached tip end portion of the blade," as recited in amended independent claim 1.Therefore, dependent claims 17 and 18 are allowable at least by virtue of their dependency from amended independent claim 1, which has been shown to be allowable above, and as well as for the features they recite individually.Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of dependent claims 17 and 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 be withdrawn.Claim 19 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as allegedly being unpatentable over Kuan in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0401606 Al (Guriev).Guriev is not asserted to cure the deficiencies in the rejection of independent claim 1 above.Further, Guriev fails to disclose "a plurality of blades, wherein each blade comprises: an attached portion, attached to an outer surface of the hub; and an unattached tip end portion, extending radially beyond and unattached to the outer surface of the hub ... wherein at least part of the attached portion is curved in a direction different from a curvature of the unattached tip end portion of the blade," as recited in amended independent claim 1.64 48
44 Annotated FIG. 1 of Guriev from the Office Action Applicant submits that although Guriev depicts an S-shaped configuration of a blade, Guriev does not disclose that a part of an attached portion is curved in a direction different from a curvature of an unattached portion of the blade. In fact, the unattached portion (annotated by the Examiner on page 15 of the Office Action) is different from the claimed "unattached tip end portion, extending radially beyond and unattached to the outer surface of the hub." (Emphasis added). In particular, the alleged unattached portion in Guriev does not extend radially beyond the outer surface of the hub, in a manner as claimed in amended independent claim 1.Therefore, Guriev, either alone or in combination with Kuan, does not teach or suggest the above-mentioned features of amended independent claim 1.Accordingly, dependent claim 19 is also allowable at least by virtue of its dependency from amended independent claim 1, which has been shown to be allowable above, and as well as for the features it recites individually.Therefore, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of dependent claim 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 be withdrawn.It should be noted that the Applicant has not addressed each rejection of the dependent claims. Any rejection of a dependent claim not specifically addressed is not to be construed as an admission by the Applicant of the correctness of that rejection. Rather, the Applicant believes that the independent claims are patentably distinguishable over the cited references for the reasons noted above, so that the rejection of the dependent claims need not be addressed at this time.Applicant reserves the right to address the rejection of any dependent claim at a later time should that become warranted.CONCLUSIONThe Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge any fee required under 37 C.F.R. §§ 1.16 or other applicable rule to Deposit Account 030835.Date: July 15, 2025

NEXT OFFICE ACTION: 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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed.
REASONS FOR ALLOWANCE
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Applicant’s amendment defines over the applied references in that the references taken alone or in combination do not teach “wherein at least part of the attached portion is curved in a direction different from a curvature of the unattached tip end portion”. The combination of elements in the claims is not taught or fairly suggested by the prior art.
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

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US5993158A: Claims:
An aeration impeller for inducing a local flow velocity in a fluid, said apparatus comprising: (a) a hub portion for connection to a drive means for rotationally driving said aeration impeller at a rotational drive speed; (b) at least one flexible impeller blade connected to said hub portion, wherein said at least one flexible impeller blade has a stiffness allowing flexure between a first blade configuration when said aeration impeller is stationary and a second blade configuration when said aeration impeller is driven at the rotational drive speed and wherein the stiffness of said at least one flexible impeller blade is selected to maintain a substantially constant local flow velocity as the rotational drive speed varies within a range.
(a) a hub portion for connection to a drive means for rotationally driving said aeration impeller at a rotational drive speed;
(b) at least one flexible impeller blade connected to said hub portion, wherein said at least one flexible impeller blade has a stiffness allowing flexure between a first blade configuration when said aeration impeller is stationary and a second blade configuration when said aeration impeller is driven at the rotational drive speed and wherein the stiffness of said at least one flexible impeller blade is selected to maintain a substantially constant local flow velocity as the rotational drive speed varies within a range.
The apparatus of claim 1, wherein said at least one flexible impeller blade extends generally radially from said hub portion in the first blade configuration, and wherein the second blade configuration is a backward-curved blade configuration.
The apparatus of claim 2, further comprising flexure means for controlling the movement of said at least one flexible impeller blade between the first blade configuration and the second blade configuration.
The apparatus of claim 3, wherein said flexure means comprises a tapered portion in said at least one flexible impeller blade.
The apparatus of claim 3, wherein said flexure means comprises at least one groove in said at least one flexible impeller blade.
The apparatus of claim 3, wherein said flexure means comprises a laminated blade construction for said at least one flexible impeller blade.
An aeration impeller for aerating a liquid by inducing a local flow velocity in a portion of the liquid, said impeller comprising: (a) a plurality of flexible impeller blades, each having a stiffness allowing flexure between a first blade configuration and a second blade configuration, and wherein said stiffness of each of said plurality of flexible impeller blades is selected to maintain a substantially constant local flow velocity as the rotational drive speed varies within a range; (b) coupling means for connecting said plurality of flexible impeller blades to a drive means for driving said impeller at a rotational drive speed; and (c) flexure means for controlling the movement of said plurality of flexible impeller blades between the first blade configuration and the second blade configuration.
(a) a plurality of flexible impeller blades, each having a stiffness allowing flexure between a first blade configuration and a second blade configuration, and wherein said stiffness of each of said plurality of flexible impeller blades is selected to maintain a substantially constant local flow velocity as the rotational drive speed varies within a range;
(b) coupling means for connecting said plurality of flexible impeller blades to a drive means for driving said impeller at a rotational drive speed; and
(c) flexure means for controlling the movement of said plurality of flexible impeller blades between the first blade configuration and the second blade configuration.
The aeration impeller of claim 7, wherein said flexure means comprises a tapered portion in each of said plurality of flexible impeller blades.
The aeration impeller of claim 7, wherein said flexure means comprises at least one groove in each of said plurality of flexible impeller blades.
The aeration impeller of claim 7, wherein said flexure means comprises a laminated blade construction for each of said plurality of flexible impeller blades.
The aeration impeller of claim 7, wherein each of said plurality of flexible impeller blades extends generally radially from said coupling means in the first blade configuration, and wherein the second blade configuration is a backward-curved blade configuration.
A method of aerating a liquid using an impeller, said method comprising: (a) driving the impeller at a rotational drive speed adjacent a surface portion of the liquid; (b) inducing a local flow velocity in a portion of the surface of the liquid; and (c) flexing at least one blade portion of the impeller in response to the rotational drive speed to maintain the local flow velocity substantially constant as the rotational drive speed varies within a range.
(a) driving the impeller at a rotational drive speed adjacent a surface portion of the liquid;
(b) inducing a local flow velocity in a portion of the surface of the liquid; and
(c) flexing at least one blade portion of the impeller in response to the rotational drive speed to maintain the local flow velocity substantially constant as the rotational drive speed varies within a range.
The method of claim 12, wherein said flexing step comprises moving the at least one blade portion between an intermediate blade configuration corresponding to a low rotational drive speed within the range and a second blade configuration corresponding to a high rotational drive speed within the range.
The method of claim 13, wherein the intermediate blade configuration and the second blade configuration are backward-curved relative to the rotational drive speed.
The method of claim 14, wherein the second blade configuration has a greater magnitude of curvature than the intermediate blade configuration.
The method of claim 12, wherein the impeller is driven at a rotational drive speed sufficient to impart a local flow velocity from the impeller of greater than 12 feet per second.
The method of claim 16, wherein the impeller is driven at a rotational drive speed sufficient to impart a local flow velocity from the impeller of approximately 18 feet per second.
Ref US20090008067A1: Claims:
A heat dissipation device, comprising: a heat sink having a base and a plurality of fins extending upwardly from the base near an outer periphery of the base; and a cooling fan being arranged on a central portion of the base with the fins surrounding therearound, the cooling fan comprising: a frusto-conical hub having an annular-shaped peripheral wall at a bottom thereof, and a side wall extending upwardly from the peripheral wall, the side wall forming a concave-shaped outer surface; and a plurality of fan blades being arranged on and around the hub, each fan blade comprising a radial-flow first portion extending radially outwardly from the peripheral wall and a second portion extending outwardly from the side wall, the second portions of the fan blades being inclined with respect to the peripheral wall and the first portions for guiding air to the first portions of the fan blades when the fan rotates; wherein the first portion of each fan blade is located at an outer side of the peripheral wall and the second portion of the fan blade is located at an inner side of the peripheral wall, as viewed from a top of the hub.
a heat sink having a base and a plurality of fins extending upwardly from the base near an outer periphery of the base; and
a cooling fan being arranged on a central portion of the base with the fins surrounding therearound, the cooling fan comprising:
a frusto-conical hub having an annular-shaped peripheral wall at a bottom thereof, and a side wall extending upwardly from the peripheral wall, the side wall forming a concave-shaped outer surface; and
a plurality of fan blades being arranged on and around the hub, each fan blade comprising a radial-flow first portion extending radially outwardly from the peripheral wall and a second portion extending outwardly from the side wall, the second portions of the fan blades being inclined with respect to the peripheral wall and the first portions for guiding air to the first portions of the fan blades when the fan rotates;
wherein the first portion of each fan blade is located at an outer side of the peripheral wall and the second portion of the fan blade is located at an inner side of the peripheral wall, as viewed from a top of the hub.
The heat dissipation device of claim 1 , wherein each of the second portions has a curve-shaped configuration and each of the first portions has a linear configuration, as viewed from a top of the hub.
The heat dissipation device of claim 1 , wherein the first portions of the fan blades extend outwardly from outer ends of the second portions, respectively.
The heat dissipation device of claim 1 , wherein each of the second portions of the fan blades has a linear-shaped top edge parallel to and higher than a top wall of the hub.
The heat dissipation device of claim 1 , wherein each first portion of the fan blades has a height larger than that of the peripheral wall, and a topmost edge of the each first portion of the fan blades is higher than a top of the peripheral wall.
The heat dissipation device of claim 4 , wherein each second portion of the fan blades is located between the peripheral wall and the top wall of the hub.
The heat dissipation device of claim 1 , further comprising a circular-shaped top wall connected to a top of the side wall, wherein the top wall has a diameter smaller than an outer diameter of the peripheral wall.
The heat dissipation device of claim 1 , wherein the fan blades are integrally formed with the hub, and the second portions of the fan blades extend from the first portions to a top of the side wall.
The heat dissipation device of claim 1 , wherein the heat sink is an extruded heat sink, the fins being plate fins and being integrally formed with the base of the heat sink.
A cooling fan comprising a fan blade set, the fan blade set comprising: a frusto-conical hub and a plurality of fan blades arranged on and around the hub, each of the fan blades comprising: a first portion being planar-shaped and extending radially outwardly from a bottom of the hub, and a second portion for guiding air over the hub to the first portion, the second portions being arc-shaped as viewed from a top of the hub and connecting a top of the hub and the first portions of the fan blades, respectively; wherein the first portion of each fan blade is located at an outer side of an outmost edge of the hub and the second portion of the fan blade is located at an inner side of the outmost edge of the hub, as viewed from a top of the hub.
a frusto-conical hub and a plurality of fan blades arranged on and around the hub, each of the fan blades comprising:
a first portion being planar-shaped and extending radially outwardly from a bottom of the hub, and
a second portion for guiding air over the hub to the first portion, the second portions being arc-shaped as viewed from a top of the hub and connecting a top of the hub and the first portions of the fan blades, respectively;
wherein the first portion of each fan blade is located at an outer side of an outmost edge of the hub and the second portion of the fan blade is located at an inner side of the outmost edge of the hub, as viewed from a top of the hub.
The cooling fan of claim 10 , wherein the hub has a side wall and a peripheral wall depending from the side wall, the side wall forming a concave-shaped outer surface with the second portions of the blades formed thereon, the first portions of the fan blades extending radially outwardly from the peripheral wall.
The cooling fan of claim 11 , wherein a circular-shaped top wall is connected to a top of the side wall, the top wall has a diameter being smaller than an outer diameter of the peripheral wall.
The cooling fan of claim 12 , wherein the second portions of the fan blades have top edges which are higher than the top wall.
The cooling fan of in claim 13 , wherein each of the top edges of the second portions is linear-shaped and parallel to the top wall.
Ref US11041503B2: Claims:
A turbomachine impeller with a rotation axis, the turbomachine impeller comprising: a hub; a shroud; a plurality of blades arranged between the hub and the shroud; and a plurality of flow vanes defined between the hub, the shroud and neighboring blades, each of the plurality of flow vanes comprising a flow vane inlet located between respective first blade edges of two neighboring blades of the plurality of blades and a flow vane outlet located between respective second blade edges of two neighboring blades of the plurality of blades and, wherein an inlet surface is defined between the first blade edges and an outlet surface is defined between the second blade edges, wherein an inlet surface vector, orthogonal to the inlet surface and oriented outwardly with respect to each flow vane of the plurality of flow vanes, has an outwardly oriented vector component which is orthogonal to the rotation axis, and an outlet surface vector, orthogonal to the outlet surface and oriented outwardly with respect to each flow vane of the plurality of flow vanes, has an outwardly oriented vector component which is orthogonal to the rotation axis and; the hub comprises a front disk portion, a back disk portion and an intermediate hub portion extending therebetween, the intermediate hub portion defining a minimum radial dimension smaller than a respective radial dimension of the front disk portion and the back disk portion, and the plurality of blades are arranged between the front disk portion and the back disk portion.
a plurality of blades arranged between the hub and the shroud; and
a plurality of flow vanes defined between the hub, the shroud and neighboring blades, each of the plurality of flow vanes comprising a flow vane inlet located between respective first blade edges of two neighboring blades of the plurality of blades and a flow vane outlet located between respective second blade edges of two neighboring blades of the plurality of blades and, wherein an inlet surface is defined between the first blade edges and an outlet surface is defined between the second blade edges,
wherein an inlet surface vector, orthogonal to the inlet surface and oriented outwardly with respect to each flow vane of the plurality of flow vanes, has an outwardly oriented vector component which is orthogonal to the rotation axis, and an outlet surface vector, orthogonal to the outlet surface and oriented outwardly with respect to each flow vane of the plurality of flow vanes, has an outwardly oriented vector component which is orthogonal to the rotation axis and; the hub comprises a front disk portion, a back disk portion and an intermediate hub portion extending therebetween, the intermediate hub portion defining a minimum radial dimension smaller than a respective radial dimension of the front disk portion and the back disk portion, and the plurality of blades are arranged between the front disk portion and the back disk portion.
The turbomachine impeller of claim 1 , wherein each of the plurality of flow vanes is configured and arranged such that fluid flow at the flow vane inlet has a radially inwardly oriented flow speed component and fluid flow in the flow vane outlet has a radially outwardly oriented flow speed component.
The turbomachine impeller of claim 1 , wherein each of the plurality of flow vanes extends beyond the intermediate hub portion between the front disk portion and the shroud.
The turbomachine impeller of claim 1 , wherein each of the plurality of flow vanes extends beyond the intermediate hub portion between the back disk portion and the shroud.
The turbomachine impeller of claim 1 , wherein the shroud comprises a shroud portion of a minimal radial dimension, and the respective radial dimension of the back disk portion and/or the front disk portion is not larger than the minimum radial dimension of the shroud portion.
The turbomachine impeller of claim 1 , wherein the first blade edges at the flow vane inlet are oriented such that projections thereof on a meridian plane of the impeller form an angle between 0° and 60° with a direction of the rotation axis, and the second blade edges at the flow vane outlet are oriented such that projections thereof on the meridian plane form an angle between 0° and 60° with the direction of the rotation axis.
The turbomachine impeller of claim 1 , wherein each blade of the plurality of blades extends from the flow vane inlet to the flow vane outlet.
The turbomachine impeller of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of blades comprise a first set of blades and a second set of blades; each blade of the first set of blades extends from a respective first edge at the flow vane inlet to a respective intermediate second edge located in an intermediate position along a respective flow vane of the plurality of flow vanes, and each blade of the second set of blades extends from a respective intermediate first edge along a respective flow vane of the plurality of flow vanes to a second edge at the flow vane outlet.
The turbomachine impeller of claim 1 , further comprising a first impeller section and a second impeller section torsionally and axially coupled to one another, wherein one of the first impeller section and the second impeller section comprises the flow vane inlets and the other of the first impeller section and the second impeller section comprises the flow vane outlets.
A turbomachine comprising: a casing; and at least a first impeller according to claim 1 supported for rotation in the casing.
The turbomachine of claim 10 , further comprising at least a second impeller supported for rotation in the casing and arranged in series with the first impeller.
The turbomachine of claim 11 , wherein further comprising a diffuser and a return channel arranged between the first impeller and the second impeller, the return channel comprising stationary return channel blades, each stationary return channel blade having a leading edge and a trailing edge, wherein flow vane inlets of the second impeller face the trailing edges of the return channel blades.
The turbomachine of claim 11 , wherein the first impeller and the second impeller are formed by sequentially arranged impeller sections, at least one of the impeller sections forming part of the first impeller and part of the second impeller.
The turbomachine impeller of claim 6 , wherein the second blade edges at the flow vane outlet are oriented such that the projections thereof on the meridian plane form an angle between 0° and 30°, with the direction of the rotation axis.
The turbomachine impeller of claim 6 , wherein the second blade edges at the flow vane outlet are oriented such that the projections thereof on the meridian plane form an angle between about 0° and about 45° with the direction of the rotation axis.
Ref US20120213632A1: Claims:
A vertical turbine pump that is elongate along a longitudinal direction, the vertical turbine pump comprising: a motor, and a drive shaft rotatably coupled to the motor such that rotation of the motor causes the drive shaft to rotate; a casing including a mixed flow diffuser including a diffuser hub and mixed flow diffuser vanes that project out from the diffuser hub and are twisted so as to define a surface that is curved in a direction that includes a directional component in both the longitudinal direction and a direction substantially perpendicular to the longitudinal direction; and a mixed flow impeller configured to rotatably fit inside the casing, the mixed flow impeller having an impeller hub, impeller vanes, extending from the hub along a direction that includes directional components in both the longitudinal direction and a direction substant
[Truncated to input limit]