Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 17/312,811

Rotary piston engine having optimized internal cooling of intake air

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Jun 10, 2021
Examiner
NEWTON, JASON TODD
Art Unit
3673
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Poul Henrik Woelfle
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
684 granted / 829 resolved
+30.5% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
872
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§103
30.9%
-9.1% vs TC avg
§102
28.4%
-11.6% vs TC avg
§112
31.1%
-8.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 829 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . 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. Remarks This communication is in response to Application No. 17/312,811 filed on 2021.06.10. Claims 1-10 are currently pending and have been examined. The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use. Arrangement of the Specification As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading: (a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION. (b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS. (c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT. (d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT. (e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM. (f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR. (g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION. (1) Field of the Invention. (2) Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. (h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION. (i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S). (j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION. (k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet). (l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet). (m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system. The following is more detailed description of each section above: Content of Specification (a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION: See 37 CFR 1.72(a) and MPEP § 606. The title of the invention should be placed at the top of the first page of the specification unless the title is provided in an application data sheet. The title of the invention should be brief but technically accurate and descriptive, preferably from two to seven words. It may not contain more than 500 characters. (b) CROSS-REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS: See 37 CFR 1.78 and MPEP § 211 et seq. (c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT: See MPEP § 310. (d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT. See 37 CFR 1.71(g). (e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM: The specification is required to include an incorporation-by-reference of electronic documents that are to become part of the permanent United States Patent and Trademark Office records in the file of a patent application. See 37 CFR 1.77(b)(5) and MPEP § 608.05. See also the Legal Framework for Patent Electronic System posted on the USPTO website (https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019LegalFrameworkPES.pdf) and MPEP § 502.05 (f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR. See 35 U.S.C. 102(b) and 37 CFR 1.77. (g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(c). The specification should set forth the Background of the Invention in two parts: (1) Field of the Invention: A statement of the field of art to which the invention pertains. This statement may include a paraphrasing of the applicable U.S. patent classification definitions of the subject matter of the claimed invention. This item may also be titled “Technical Field.” (2) Description of the Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98: A description of the related art known to the applicant and including, if applicable, references to specific related art and problems involved in the prior art which are solved by the applicant’s invention. This item may also be titled “Background Art.” (h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(d). A brief summary or general statement of the invention as set forth in 37 CFR 1.73. The summary is separate and distinct from the abstract and is directed toward the invention rather than the disclosure as a whole. The summary may point out the advantages of the invention or how it solves problems previously existent in the prior art (and preferably indicated in the Background of the Invention). In chemical cases it should point out in general terms the utility of the invention. If possible, the nature and gist of the invention or the inventive concept should be set forth. Objects of the invention should be treated briefly and only to the extent that they contribute to an understanding of the invention. (i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S): See MPEP § 608.01(f). A reference to and brief description of the drawing(s) as set forth in 37 CFR 1.74. (j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(g). A description of the preferred embodiment(s) of the invention as required in 37 CFR 1.71. The description should be as short and specific as is necessary to describe the invention adequately and accurately. Where elements or groups of elements, compounds, and processes, which are conventional and generally widely known in the field of the invention described, and their exact nature or type is not necessary for an understanding and use of the invention by a person skilled in the art, they should not be described in detail. However, where particularly complicated subject matter is involved or where the elements, compounds, or processes may not be commonly or widely known in the field, the specification should refer to another patent or readily available publication which adequately describes the subject matter. (k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS: See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP § 608.01(m). The claim or claims must commence on a separate sheet or electronic page (37 CFR 1.52(b)(3)). Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP 608.01(i) - (p). (l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE: See 37 CFR 1.72 (b) and MPEP § 608.01(b). The abstract is a brief narrative of the disclosure as a whole, as concise as the disclosure permits, in a single paragraph preferably not exceeding 150 words, commencing on a separate sheet following the claims. In an international application which has entered the national stage (37 CFR 1.491(b)), the applicant need not submit an abstract commencing on a separate sheet if an abstract was published with the international application under PCT Article 21. The abstract that appears on the cover page of the pamphlet published by the International Bureau (IB) of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the abstract that will be used by the USPTO. See MPEP § 1893.03(e). (m) SEQUENCE LISTING: See 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825 and MPEP §§ 2421 - 2431. The requirement for a sequence listing applies to all sequences disclosed in a given application, whether the sequences are claimed or not. See MPEP § 2422.01. Drawings Figures 1-4 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 6 the specification uses conflicting terms for item (6). PNG media_image1.png 207 816 media_image1.png Greyscale On page 6 the call out (2) appears to refer to the inlet manifold and not the side plate. PNG media_image2.png 207 816 media_image2.png Greyscale Appropriate correction is required. It is noted that the items above are not exhaustive but are merely illustrative of the issues found. Claim Objections Claims 3 and 5-10 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim should refer to other claims in the alternative only (e.g. claims 3, 5, 7-10) and because cannot depend from any other multiple dependent claim (e.g. claims 5-10). See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claims have not been further treated on the merits. 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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. As to claim 1, the terms “the working area” and “components to be cooled” each lack antecedent basis. The term “components to be cooled” is indefinite because it is unclear what is being referred to therefore the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. The term “at least one inlet into the working area at least one oil separator (A) is provided” is grammatically unclear. Claims 2-10 are rejected via dependency. As to claim 2, the claim is unclear as to what is being claimed as any relationship between components is not defined. Consider the following interpretation: 2. Rotary internal combustion engine with intake air internal cooling (M) according to [[the preceding claim]] claim 1, characterized in that at least one charge air cooler is provided in the at least one connection between components to be cooled (3, 4, 5) and the at least one inlet into the working area [[ As to claim 4, the claim is indefinite because it is unclear what is being claimed by the limitation “at least one connection between components to be cooled (3, 4, 5) and at least one inlet into a working area at least one shut-off device (V) is provided” and the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. The recitation “components to be cooled” lacks antecedent basis and is indefinite. NOTE: any prior art rejection provided below is made as best understood in view of the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issues above. 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. (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. Claim 4, as best understood in view of the issues above, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2010/0313844 A1 to GARSIDE. PNG media_image3.png 655 1002 media_image3.png Greyscale As to claim 4, GARSIDE discloses a charged rotary internal combustion engine with intake air internal cooling (see fig. 1, characterized in that in at least one connection (connection provided by duct 23) between components to be cooled (19 and 17) and at least one inlet into a working area (18) at least one shut-off device (32) is provided, through which charging pressure can escape (32 is a pressure relief valve). 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 of this title, 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 1-3, as best understood in view of the issues above, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 3,967,593 to GARSIDE in view of US 2010/0313844 A1 to GARSIDE, hereinafter ‘844. PNG media_image4.png 667 742 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 286 961 media_image5.png Greyscale As to claims 1-3, GARSIDE discloses a rotary internal combustion engine with intake air internal cooling (fig. 1), characterized in that in at least one connection (16) between components to be cooled (1, 3, 4) and at least one inlet (via 25) into the working area (2) but does not explicitly disclose the following which is taught by ‘844: at least one oil separator (A) is provided. An invention is obvious where some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art would have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention. In ’844 the desirability of including an oil separator in a rotary engine is disclosed (see e.g. [0012]) and teaches using the heat exchanger 24 as an oil collector ([0056]). Because ‘844 teaches using the heat exchanger 24 as an oil collector and because the heat exchanger 24 of ‘844 is arranged in the same position as the chamber 24 of GARSIDE, both the chamber 24 and the heat exchanger 24 could operate as an oil collector as described by ‘844. Armed with this suggestion it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the teachings of ’844 to modify GARSIDE to include at least one oil separator to provide the benefits of reduced oil consumption during engine operation. As to claim 2, see explanation for claim 1. As to claim 3, see explanation for claim 1 noting that ‘844 teaches a heat exchanger 24 which also functions as an oil separator ([0057]). Conclusion An examination of this application reveals that applicant is unfamiliar with patent prosecution procedure. While an applicant may prosecute the application (except that a juristic entity must be represented by a patent practitioner, 37 CFR 1.31), lack of skill in this field usually acts as a liability in affording the maximum protection for the invention disclosed. Applicant is advised to secure the services of a registered patent attorney or agent to prosecute the application, since the value of a patent is largely dependent upon skilled preparation and prosecution. The Office cannot aid in selecting an attorney or agent. A listing of registered patent attorneys and agents is available at https://oedci.uspto.gov/OEDCI/. Applicants may also obtain a list of registered patent attorneys and agents located in their area by writing to the Mail Stop OED, Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as each further discloses a state of the art. PNG media_image6.png 1194 784 media_image6.png Greyscale PNG media_image7.png 1157 764 media_image7.png Greyscale PNG media_image8.png 1059 772 media_image8.png Greyscale PNG media_image9.png 1085 811 media_image9.png Greyscale The examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicant should consider the entire prior art as applicable as to the limitations of the claims. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the response, to consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or pointed out by the examiner. Inquiry Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to J. Todd Newton, Esq. whose telephone number is (313)446-4899. The examiner can normally be reached 0700-1500 M-F. 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, Woody LEE can be reached on (571) 272-1051. 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. J. Todd Newton, Esq. Primary Examiner Art Unit 3745 /J. Todd Newton/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745 12/15/2022
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 10, 2021
Application Filed
Dec 15, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Mar 18, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 18, 2023
Response Filed
May 24, 2023
Response Filed
May 24, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 06, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 06, 2023
Response Filed
Jun 06, 2024
Response Filed
Jun 06, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 09, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 09, 2025
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599245
WIDTH-ADJUSTABLE FOLDABLE BED
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596998
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR REFURBISHABLE FAN ASSEMBLY FOR AN INFORMATION HANDLING SYSTEM TO REDUCE CARBON DIOXIDE EMISSIONS RESULTING FROM MANUFACTURE AND DISPOSAL OF COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590564
Water Wave Energy Harvester
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583710
ELEVATOR CONTROL UNIT AND A METHOD FOR DETERMINING ENERGY AND/OR POWER CONSUMPTION OF AN ELEVATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584434
PROTECTIVE HEAT SHIELD ENCLOSURE FOR TURBOCHARGED ENGINES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.9%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 829 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