Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 16/325,721

Engine’s efficiency by heat preservation, and engines employing this invent

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Feb 15, 2019
Examiner
KWON, JOHN
Art Unit
3747
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
6 (Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
7-8
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
679 granted / 792 resolved
+15.7% vs TC avg
Minimal -4% lift
Without
With
+-4.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
10 currently pending
Career history
802
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
43.3%
+3.3% vs TC avg
§102
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
§112
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 792 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. 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 105, 106, 109 and 110 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the best mode contemplated by the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s) has not been disclosed. Evidence of concealment of the best mode is based upon the thermal shock resistance of the discrete section of the insulation. It is unclear how to reduce the thermal shock with the same insulation material. Does it possible due to the gap, gap size, filler, or size of the discrete insulation material? It is also not clear how to increase the thermal shock resistance of the discrete section? 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. Claims105, 106 and 109 and 110 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. It is unclear what “the multiple said discrete sections comprise part or all of the thermal insulation material, with said discrete sections of material bonded to each other, wherein some part of the materials between two of said discrete section are bonded together, while materials in other parts of the two said discrete sections are not bonded, leaving gaps” is meant. The use of the term “lower tensile strength” (in claim 110) is relative term. It is unclear what “said material being configured to (i) fracture under thermal stress internally generated and present within each said partition of the thermal shock to form cracks, and (ii) reduce the gap width by filling the gaps” (in claim110) is meant. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 105, 106, 109 and 110 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tomita (US 2014/0290617) in view of Vance (US 2010/0260960). Tomita discloses a piston engine comprising a heat- resistant material with: (1) multiple discrete sections made of thermal insulation material that cover a surface of a piston, a cylinder, a cylinder head, or a combustion chamber that is in contact with high-temperature gas in the cylinder, forming a thermal insulation layer to reduce heat dissipation from the high-temperature gas in the cylinder. (See the reference numeral 1 in Fig. 2, Abstract, [0001] [0033] [0038] [0051] [0062]). The insulation can be manufactured a thin plate (See [0067]). Vance teaches the use of the thermal insulation material are separated by gaps rather than being directly joined together, wherein the gaps are configured to segment the thermal insulation material, reduce the thermal stress internally generated by and present with each said discrete section of the thermal insulation material, and improve the thermal shock resistance of the thermal insulation layer (See [0020] and Fig. 5). Since the prior art references art from the same field of endeavor, the purpose disclosed by Vance would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Tomita. Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Tomita with the insulation materials between the gaps as taught by Vance. Regarding claim 106, Vance teaches that the multiple said discrete sections comprise part or all of the thermal insulation material, with said discrete sections of material bonded (60) to each other, wherein some part of the materials between two of said discrete section are bonded together, while materials in other parts of the two said discrete sections are not bonded, leaving gaps (38), wherein the bonded parts increase the strength of the thermal insulation layer, and the gaps are configured to segment the thermal insulation material, reduce the thermal stress internally generated by and present within each said discrete section of the thermal insulation material, and improve thermal shock resistance of the thermal insulation layer (See Fig.4-8). Regarding claim 109. Tomita as modified with Vance (US 2010/0260960) shows the reciprocating piston engine comprising a heat- resistant thermal insulation material layer for a piston, cylinder, cylinder head, or combustion chamber (See Fig. 2 in Tomita), wherein the thermal insulation layer includes one or more gaps (See Fig.4-8 in Vance) and the function of the gaps is to reduce the thermal stress internally generated and present within each partition of the thermal material, and improve thermal shock resistance of the thermal insulation layer when the temperature changes as explained supra. Regarding claim 110, the claimed the use of a lower tensile strength material for gaps, the selection of a particular material is considered within the skill of an average artisan in the art as a matter of obvious engineering design choice. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed October 16, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant’s representative argues that the insulation layer in the present invention is horizontal while the prior art reference is vertical. The examiner could not understand how the applicant’s representative get the sense of the direction of the insulation layers. The applicant’s representative is required how to get the direction of the insulation layers as alleged. The issue in this application is whether the combination of the prior art references could reduce the thermal stress/increase the thermal shock. Since both references are to protect the engine parts from the heat explosion, protect the engine parts by blocking the thermal transmitting, reducing the thermal stress/shock of the engine parts would be natural. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOHN KWON whose telephone number is (571)272-4846. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 9A-5P. EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Phuttiwat Wongwian can be reached on 571-270-5426. 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. /JOHN KWON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747 January 23, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 15, 2019
Application Filed
Jul 28, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Jan 02, 2024
Response Filed
Jan 27, 2024
Final Rejection — §103, §112
May 31, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 03, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 07, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 12, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 08, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
May 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 30, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 04, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Oct 16, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583427
METHOD AND ELECTRONIC CONTROL UNIT FOR CONTROLLING A BRAKE SYSTEM OF A MOTOR VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12565852
OIL PAN FOR INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12546616
ENERGY CONSUMPTION PREDICTIONS, FEEDBACK, AND COACHING FOR OFF-ROAD ACTIVITIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12540038
Automatic Tuning and Control of a Linear Drive Based Independent Cart System with Initial Value Compensation
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12491769
SPINNING AND SLIDING DETECTION DEVICE AND SPINNING AND SLIDING DETECTION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 09, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (-4.2%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 792 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month