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 .
Status of Claims
Currently claims 1-4 and 6-10 are pending, claim 1 is amended, and claims 5 and 11 have been cancelled.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 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) 1-4, 7, and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Peters (U.S. 2013/0270369).
With respect to claim 1, Peters discloses an injection nozzle for injecting fuel under pressure (figure 5), the injection nozzle comprising:
a nozzle body (112) in which a pressure chamber (56), that is configured to be filled with fuel under pressure, is formed and in which a conical body seat (129) is formed, wherein the body seat (129) opens into a blind hole (160), forming a transition edge (edge between 129 and 160) ,wherein a plurality of injection holes (142) originate from the blind hole and a total of flow cross-sections of all of the injection holes forms a total injection hole cross-section (being the area of all of 142), and
a nozzle needle (116) which is arranged in the pressure chamber (56) so as to be longitudinally movable, and which interacts, via a conical sealing surface (at 178), with the body seat (shown in figure 5) in order to open and close a flow cross-section between the sealing surface (178) and the body seat (at 162), wherein the nozzle needle (116) has, on an end thereof facing the body seat (shown in figure 5), a needle tip (166) which protrudes into the blind hole (160) when the sealing surface (178) contacts the body seat (162), wherein a seat cross-section area (formed between the sealing surface and the edge) is formed between the sealing surface (178) and the transition edge (edge between 129 and 160) when the nozzle needle (116) is raised from the body seat (129), through which seat cross-section area fuel can flow from the pressure chamber (56) into the blind hole (160),
wherein the needle tip (166) is conical and has a constant opening angle (angle of 166 shown in figure 5) that is smaller than an opening angle (angle of 178) of the conical sealing surface (178), and the blind hole (160) has a conical portion (160s conical wall) having an opening angle (angle of 160 at 131) which adjoins the transition edge (edge above 131), wherein the needle tip (166) is arranged in a partial stroke of the nozzle needle (when the nozzle moves up) at a height of the conical portion (being the height of 131 that it moves up) of the blind hole (160),
wherein a transition cone (164) is configured on the nozzle needle (116) between the needle tip (166) and the sealing surface (178), an opening angle (angle of 164) of the transition cone (164) being constant between the needle tip (166) and the sealing surface (178), and different from the opening angle of the sealing surface and the constant opening angle of the needle tip (as shown in figure 5).
With respect to claim 2, Peters discloses the partial stroke of the nozzle needle (116) is a needle stroke region in which a ratio of the seat cross-section area (area shown in figure 6, but at the noted area of 131, and thus larger) and the total injection hole cross-section (AsL) is no more than 1.3 (As/AsL≤ 1.3) (as the noted injection can be a partial injection and the area shown is far larger then As/AsL≤1.3, an injection event that is partial or less, can then exist where the area is such that As/AsL ≤ 1.3).
With respect to claim 3, Peters discloses a flow cross- section between the needle tip (166) and a wall of the blind hole (131) as far as an injection hole upper edge (131’s edge) is at most twice the seat cross-section area (as shown in figure 5-6, where when closing and opening the first area almost goes away where the second lower area remains larger), wherein the injection hole upper edge (edge above 142/131) is an imaginary line which circulates around the blind hole (as shown in figures 5 and 6) and which is marked by an inlet edge of the injection holes (142) facing the body seat (129) in the wall of the blind hole (131).
With respect to claim 4, Peters discloses a shoulder (between 166 and 164) is formed at a transition of the sealing surface (178) to the needle tip (166).
With respect to claim 7, Peters discloses a diameter (diameter of 161 above 142) of an injection hole upper edge (above 142) is smaller than a diameter (diameter of between 131 and 162) of the transition edge (see figure 5).
With respect to claim 9, Peters discloses a cylindrical portion or a dome (shown a rounded dome in figure 5) adjoins the conical portion (166) in the blind hole (160
With respect to claim 10, Peters discloses a shoulder (between 179 and 164) is formed at a transition of the sealing surface (178) to the needle tip (166).
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.
Claim(s) 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peters in view of Sander (U.S. 2011/0180634).
With respect to claim 6, Peters discloses the opening angle, conical needle tip, opening angle, and the blind hole, but fails to disclose the constant opening angle (3) of the conical needle tip (28) and the opening angle (a) of the conical blind hole (32) are of the same size or a flow cross- section between the nozzle needle (116) and a wall of the blind hole (160) is constant between the transition edge (35) and an injection hole upper edge (33).
Sander, figure 3, discloses an opening angle that is constant, being the angle of the section 366, which is aligned parallel with the wall of 267. Sander discloses that such a fluid injector allows for reduce pollutant emissions by improving fuel introduction into the combustion chamber (paragraph 0003), such improvement being to the nozzle assembly where the nozzle tip of the nizzle needle goes into the blind hole where noted full immersion happens (paragraphs 0045-0046).
It would have bene obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the needle tip of Sanders into that of Peters, being a conical structure with a constant angle, as this would improve the fuel introduction into the combustion chamber. The rejection would also then make the cross section between the noddle tip and the blind hole constant between the noted edges when the needle is not moving, as the two sides are now aligned parallel.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soteriou (U.S. 8,919,677) in view of Sander (U.S. 2011/0180634).
With respect to claim 1, Soteriou discloses an injection nozzle for injecting fuel under pressure, the injection nozzle comprising:
a nozzle body (32) in which a pressure chamber (between 34 and 36), that is configured to be filled with fuel under pressure (being the area where fluid pressure is prior to discharge), is formed and in which a conical body seat (seat 10) is formed, wherein the body seat (the seat of 38) opens into a blind hole (42), forming a transition edge (edge from 38 into 42, see figure 2b, being the edge where D is located at), wherein a plurality of injection holes (40) originate from the blind hole (42) and a total of flow cross-sections of all of the injection holes forms a total injection hole cross-section (being the volume of all of 40 together),and
a nozzle needle (34) which is arranged in the pressure chamber (as shown in figure 1) so as to be longitudinally movable (up and down), and which interacts, via a conical sealing surface (surface 48 of 52), with the body seat (seat of 38, taken adjacent that of 48) in order to open and close a flow cross-section between the sealing surface (48) and the body seat (38), wherein the nozzle needle (34) has, on an end thereof facing the body seat, a needle tip (tip 64) which protrudes into the blind hole (42) when the sealing surface (48) contacts the body seat (38), wherein a seat cross-section area (area of the seat) is formed between the sealing surface (48) and the transition edge (edge between 30 and 42) when the nozzle needle (34) is raised from the body seat (38), through which seat cross-section area fuel can flow from the pressure chamber (about 34) into the blind hole (42),
wherein the needle tip (64) is conical and has an opening angle (noted various angles about 64) that is smaller than an opening angle (angle of 48) of the conical sealing surface (48), and the blind hole (42) has a conical portion (shown in figure 2b) having an opening angle (angle adjacent that of the edge) which adjoins the transition edge (noted edge), wherein the needle tip (52) is arranged in a partial stroke of the nozzle needle ( as shown in figures 3b and 4b) at a height of the conical portion (as shown in figure 3b and 4b) of the blind hole (of 42),wherein
a transition cone (54) is configured on the nozzle needle (34) between the needle tip (64) and the sealing surface (54), an opening angle (an angle of 54) of the transition cone (54) being constant between the needle tip (64) and the sealing surface (48/52), and different from the opening angle (a) of the sealing surface (48/52) and the opening angle (angle of 64) of the needle tip (64). Soteriou fails to disclose that their opening angle is constant.
Sander, figure 3, discloses an opening angle that is constant, being the angle of the section 366, which is aligned parallel with the wall of 267. Sander discloses that such a fluid injector allows for reduce pollutant emissions by improving fuel introduction into the combustion chamber (paragraph 0003), such improvement being to the nozzle assembly where the nozzle tip of the nizzle needle goes into the blind hole where noted full immersion happens (paragraphs 0045-0046).
It would have bene obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the needle tip of Sanders into that of Soreiour, being a conical structure with a constant angle, as this would improve the fuel introduction into the combustion chamber. The rejection referees to the needle tip as that of 64 of Soteriour will be understood be the conical structure of Sanders.
With respect to claim 2, Soteriou discloses the partial stroke of the nozzle needle (34) is a needle stroke region in which a ratio of the seat cross-section area (As) and the total injection hole cross-section (ASL) is no more than 1.3 (As/ASL < 1.3) (as the partial stroke can be taken between the full opening and that of the closed opening, where As/ASL < 1.3; as 4b shows an area vastly larger then 1.3, there exists then a partial stroke between 0 and 1.3, essentially where 70/all of 40, is larger then 1.3, as in figure 2b, its As is 0, and in figure 4b it is greater then 1.3).
With respect to claim 3, Soteriou discloses a flow cross- section between the needle tip (62, being noted modified by Sander) and a wall of the blind hole (12) as far as an injection hole upper edge (upper edge of 40) is at most twice the seat cross-section area (as shown in figure 2b and in 3b), wherein the injection hole upper edge (upper edge of 40) is an imaginary line which circulates around the blind hole (12) and which is marked by an inlet edge of the injection holes (40) facing the body seat (38) in the wall of the blind hole (42).
With respect to claim 4, Soteriou discloses a shoulder (top shoulder of 64) is formed at a transition of the sealing surface (that of 52) to the needle tip (64, modified by Sander).
With respect to claim 6, Soteriou discloses the opening angle (being that of Sander, disclosed as the angle of 366) of the conical needle tip (64, modified by that of Sander) and the opening angle (angle of 42) of the conical blind hole (42) are of the same size (which was disclosed in Sanders, where the conical needle tip and blind hole have the same angle to have full immersion).
With respect to claim 7, Soteriou discloses a diameter (diameter of 40s edge) of an injection hole upper edge (40s edge) is smaller than a diameter (diameter of the edge at the top of 42) of the transition edge (top edge of 42, noted larger in diameter than where 40 is located).
With respect to claim 10, Soteriou discloses a shoulder (shoulder between 52 and 64, being either at 54s upper or lower side) is formed at a transition of the sealing surface (52) to the needle tip (64).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soteriou in view of Kerst (U.S. 8720802).
With respect to claim 8, Soteriou discloses a flow cross- section between the nozzle needle (34) and a wall of the blind hole (42), but fails to disclose it is constant between the transition edge and an injection hole upper edge (taking the edge, of the injection hole.
Kerst, figure 2, discloses the bottom tip of 30 and the angled wall between an edge at 38 and 7 is constant, as shown the concave portion of 30 then tapers off mirrors that of 10. This minimizes the energy loss in the deflection, which yields a higher final effective injection pressure available inside the injection opening 7 (column 3 lines 45-50).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the shaping of both blind hole wall and that of the nozzle needle to be constant when open as disclosed by Kerst into the system of Soteriou, to minimize the energy loss in the deflection, which yields a higher final effective injection pressure available inside the injection opening.
With respect to claim 9, Soteriou discloses the conical portion and the blind hole, but fails to disclose a cylindrical portion or a dome adjoins the conical portion in the blind hole.
Kerst, figure 2, discloses a dome 36 which could be included to achieve a certain calming of the flow in the blind hole 10, column 3 rows 30-35.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a dome on the conical portion as disclosed by Kerst into the system of Soteriou, as this would achieve a certain calming of the flow in the blind hole.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
The Amendment filed (03/11/2026) has been entered. Currently claims 1-4 and 6-10 are pending, claim 1 is amended, and claims 5 and 11 have been cancelled. Applicants’ amendments to the claims have overcome each and every rejection previously set forth in the Office Action dated (12/18/2025). Applicant’s arguments, see Applicants Arguments, filed 03/11/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the noted 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and now 103 rejections above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH A GREENLUND whose telephone number is (571)272-0397. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm 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, Arthur Hall can be reached at 571-270-1814. 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.
/JOSEPH A GREENLUND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights