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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues on pp. 5-7 of the remarks that the examiner’s motivation to combine Irwin and Alber is inappropriate because Irwin discloses a ceramic component and Alber teaches a precision casting process for metal components that is superior to manufacturing the same components from sheet metal. Therefore, the motivation that “[t]he longitudinal slots can be manufactured in a markedly simpler manner than hole-like openings in the pipe wall according to the precision casting technology" [see column 2 lines 55-58 of Alber and pp. 3 of the Non-Final rejection dated 02/24/2026] cannot be applied to Irwin. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The motivation relied on in the rejection does not compare slots versus holes in a cast versus sheet metal component but rather states that longitudinal slots are simpler to cast in a pipe wall than holes. Irwin discloses that the air guide dome is formed from a silicon carbide ceramic material [column 2 lines 42-44]; a person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the lost wax process is used to form silicon carbide components1 and therefore the teachings of Alber regarding precision casting are applicable to Irwin. For this reason, the rejections are maintained.
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 § 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irwin (US 3,886,735) in view of Alber et. al (US 5,993,197).
With respect to claim 1 Irwin discloses a burner unit for combusting an air-fuel mixture, comprising: a combustion space [the interior of reference character 3]; a combustion air guide dome [reference character 4]; and a fuel inlet [reference character 15], wherein the fuel inlet opens into the combustion space, wherein the combustion air guide dome is located in the combustion space and has recesses [reference character 28 in Fig. 2], wherein the recesses have a larger width [see annotated Fig. below] on an inside of the combustion air guide dome than on an outside of the combustion air guide dome [see annotated Fig. below], wherein the recesses decrease in width in a radial direction extending outward from the longitudinal axis of the combustion air guide dome [see Fig. 2].
Irwin does not disclose that the recesses are axially oriented slots that extend along a longitudinal axis of the combustion air guide dome.
Alber discloses a burner unit for combusting an air fuel mixture, comprising a combustion space [the interior of housing 8, see flame holder 22], a combustion air guide dome [reference character 10], and a fuel inlet [reference character 34], wherein the combustion air guide dome is located in the combustion space and has recesses [reference character 40]. Alber further discloses that the recesses are axially oriented slots that extend along a longitudinal axis of the combustion air guide dome [see Fig. 13].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing date of the invention to modify the burner unit taught by Irwin by forming the recesses as longitudinal slots, as taught by Alber, because “[t]he longitudinal slots can be manufactured in a markedly simpler manner than hole-like openings in the pipe wall according to the precision casting technology” [column 2 lines 55-58 of Alber].
PNG
media_image1.png
255
692
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2 Irwin discloses that the recesses taper from the inside to the outside [see Fig. 2].
With respect to claim 3 Irwin discloses that such that the recesses produce a nozzle effect for air directed out of the combustion air guide dome [see column 3 lines 46-62 of Irwin].
With respect to claim 4 the combination of Irwin and Alber disclose that the recesses have a constant profile along the longitudinal axis of the combustion air guide dome [see Fig. 13 of Alber].
With respect to claim 5 Irwin discloses that the combustion air guide dome has a circular cylindrical shape [see Fig. 1].
With respect to claim 6 the combination of Irwin and Alber disclose that the recesses have a common height along the longitudinal axis of the combustion air guide dome [see Fig. 13 of Alber].
With respect to claim 8 the combination of Irwin and Alber disclose that sidewalls of the recesses have an even profile with a constant slope2 [see annotated Fig. of Irwin, below].
PNG
media_image2.png
253
662
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
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 VIVEK K SHIRSAT whose telephone number is (571)272-3722. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:20AM.
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, Steven B McAllister can be reached at 571-272-6785. 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.
/VIVEK K SHIRSAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
1 See Prochazka (US 3,852,099) column 2 line 45 to column 3 line 10.
2 The examiner notes that the claim only requires that the sidewall of the recesses have an even profile with a constant slope, it does not preclude other profiles and does not require that the even profile with a constant slope extends from the inside of the combustion air guide dome to the outside of the combustion air guide dome.
Prosecution Insights