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 .
Acknowledgments
This office action is in response to the reply filed on 8/11/26. In the reply, the applicant amended claims 1,4,11,14; canceled claims 2-3,9-10; added new claims 21-24.
Terminal disclaimer filed 8/11/26 is approved. Double patenting rejection withdraw.
Claim 14 is rejoined.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4-8, 11-20 are allowed.
Claim 22 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 23 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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.
Claims 21, 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tysver et al. (US 2010/0037961) (“Tysver”).
(claim 21) Tysver discloses a system comprising a variable displacement pump VDP (114,18) in fluid communication with an inlet line (Fig. 1, note inlet lines associated with 16) and with an outlet line (48), wherein the VDP includes a variable displacement mechanism (24) configured to vary pressure to the outlet line; and an electromechanical actuator (EMA) 122, 22 operatively connected to actuate the variable displacement mechanism [0035]. (the EMA does not include a hydraulic component—servo-controlled [0035]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the EMA of Tysver is a hydraulic actuator and not an electromechanical actuator. Applicant admits that “Tysver only teaches one sentence regarding electronic control 22: “[b]etween the variable displacement pump 18 and the combustion chamber 14 is a servo-controlled fuel metering valve 20, which may be positioned by appropriate position feedback and an electronic control 22.” (Paragraph [0018]). This is important because in [0035] Tysver further discloses that the VDP 114 provides a metered output to a combustion chamber 120. The fuel metering valve 116 can also be servo-controlled with an appropriate electrical actuation and electrical control as similar to the previous embodiment. (emphasis added). Thus providing further evidence that the actuator 122, 22 is an electromechanical actuator which is servo-controlled with an appropriate electrical actuation and electrical control; not a hydraulic component (claim 24).
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 DEANNA K HALL whose telephone number is (571)272-2819. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am- 4:30pm 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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at 571-272-4965. 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.
/DEANNA K HALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights