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 Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities, recitation “the rim portion having a downstream surface extending in a substantially radial direction” is believed to be in error for - - the rim portion having a downstream surface substantially extending in a
Appropriate correction is required.
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 23 and 26 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.
Regarding claim 23 and its dependent, recitation “a second cracker fluid undergoing a second process passing through a second channel within the cracker to thereby increase a thermal energy of the second cracker fluid without altering its chemistry and where:
the first and second channels are arranged within the combustion chamber so that none of the second cracker fluid that passes through the second channel also passes through the first channel” is indefinite because:
i) it is unclear whether recitation “none of the second cracker fluid that passes through the second channel also passes through the first channel” means a) the second cracker fluid are passing through the second channel without passing through the first channel; or a) the second cracker fluid are passing through the first channel without passing through the second channel;
ii) since recitation “a second cracker fluid undergoing a second process passing through a second channel” previously defined a second cracker fluid is a cracker fluid flowing through the second channel, and due to the ambiguity of i), it is unclear whether claim 23 requires a) two different second cracker fluid, i.e., one is passing through the second channel and another one is not passing through the second channel; or b) one second cracker fluid that only passes through the second channel without passing through the first channel.
Allowable Subject Matter
Independent claims 1 and 22 and dependent claims 3-5, 8-9, 12-18, and 27-29 are allowed.
Dependent claim 10 is objected for claim objection (see above), and dependent claims 10-11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the claim objection.
Independent claim 23 and its dependent claim 26 are rejected and would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
REASONS FOR ALLOWANCE
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance.
Regarding claims 1 and 22, Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claimed Coanda generating body having a flared portion (see pp. 13-15) are persuasive because the base reference Jorgensen teaches a fuel-rich mixture is delivered to the delivery zone defined by the Coanda generating body, and the motivation for applying Puri is to prevent flashback for a fuel-lean mixture, however, the principle of flashback for fuel-rich combustion and fuel-lean combustion are different, and thus the motivation for applying Puri is invalid, and therefore, the arts on the record themselves or in combination does not teach in combined with other limitations of claims 1 and 22, “… where the delivery zone is radially surrounded and defined by a Coanda generating body into which the first and second injection fluids are delivered, the Coanda generating body having a flared portion; …”.
Dependent claims 3-5, 8-18, and 27-29 are allowable because they depends on claim 1.
Regarding claim 23, the arts on the record themselves or in combination does not teach in combined with other limitations of claim 23, which requires a cracker located within the combustion chamber and having a first channel and a second channel, wherein a first cracker fluid passing through the first channel and having thermal contact with the combustion fluid in the combustion chamber in order to be chemically decomposed into two or more chemical species, a second cracker fluid passing through the second channel and having thermal contact with the combustion fluid in the combustion chamber in order to be heated without altering its chemistry, all of the second cracker fluid only passing through the second channel without passing through the first channel, and all of the first cracker fluid output from the first outlet of the first channel is chemically decomposed into the two or more chemical species.
Dependent claim26 is allowable because they depends on claim 23.
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
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 JINGCHEN LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-6639. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-4:30.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/JINGCHEN LIU/ /GERALD L SUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741 Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights