DETAILED ACTION
Examiner has received and accepted the amended claims and remarks filed on 2 December 2025. These amended claims and remarks are the claims and remarks being referred to in the instant Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to Claims 1 - 16 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112(b) Rejection of Claims 1 – 16 has been withdrawn.
Regarding Claim 1, Applicant argues the combination fails to render obvious the least two fuel connector modules are removable and interchangeable and the flange is configured to removably engage either of the first or second surfaces of the housing . Examiner respectfully disagrees.
During patent examination, the pending claims must be “given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification.” See MPEP 2111. Under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. See MPEP 2111.01.
Merriam-Webster dictionary define removable as “capable of being removed, displaced, transferred, dismissed, or eradicated”. Kopera discloses at least two fuel connector modules (120, 122) that are removable and interchangeable (Col 8, lines 18 – 26), each fuel connector module comprising: a flange (124) having a mating surface configured to removably engage either of first or second surfaces of the housing (of 36’) (Figure 1). Specifically, Kopera’s removability is disclosed via the use of rivets which can inherently be removed by drilling out. As the plain meaning of removable/removably merely pertains the capability of being removed, Kopera’s use of non-permanent rivets meets the instant claim limitations. Furthermore, the claim does not recite any limitations which limit the scope and/or “ease” of the removability. As such, Examiner deems the instant claim rejections as proper.
Regarding Claim 5, Applicant argues Examiner has not provided any motivation as to why one skilled in the art would use routine experimentation and various engineering design choices could have been used in order to have arrived at the second inner diameter being larger than the flange aperture. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
One skilled in the art would have been motivated for the reason of allowing for better flow through the sensor chamber, thus providing a more efficient and effective fuel sensor arrangement. This information can be gleaned from the Continuity equation which one of ordinary skill in the art knows. As such, Examiner deems the instant claim rejections as proper.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 9, 11, 13, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zyska et al. (WO 2016/137343), in view of Kopera (US 5497753).
Regarding Claim 1, Zyska discloses a fuel sensor for a vehicle, in at least Figure 1, comprising:
a housing (6) comprising:
a first surface having a first aperture therein (left side of 6 having aperture formed by 1) (Figure 1);
a second surface opposing the first surface, the second surface having a second aperture therein (right side of 6 having aperture formed by 5) (Figure 1); and
a sensor chamber disposed between the first and second surfaces (chamber in 6 between 1 and 5) (Figure 1),
wherein the first aperture, the sensor chamber, and the second aperture are in fluid communication (Figure 1);
a fuel composition sensor element disposed within the sensor chamber (Figure 1), the fuel composition sensor element comprising:
an outer cylindrical electrode (3) having a first inner diameter D1 (Figure 1);
an inner cylindrical electrode (2) disposed within and concentric with the outer cylindrical electrode, the inner cylindrical electrode having a second inner diameter D2 (Figure 1):
a first electrical contact electrically connected to the outer cylindrical electrode (Figure 4);
a second electrical contact electrically connected to the inner cylindrical electrode (Figure 4);
an outer fluid flow channel disposed between the outer cylindrical electrode and the inner cylindrical electrode (Figure 1); and
an inner fluid flow channel disposed within the inner cylindrical electrode (Figure 1), wherein the inner flow channel and the outer flow channel form a continuous fluid flow path from the first aperture to the second aperture within the sensor chamber (Figure 1); and
at least two fuel connector modules (1, 5) (Figure 1), each fuel connector module comprising:
a fuel connector fitting (see shape of 1, 5) (Figure 1).
Zyska fails to expressly disclose the fuel connector fittings are selected from the group consisting of a 3/8-inch quick-connect fitting, an A/N fitting, a DIN fitting, a pipe fitting, and an O-ring boss fitting.
Zyska does disclose the invention is for use with modern motor vehicles with internal combustion engines (Page 1).
Examiner take Official Notice it is common knowledge in the art to use 3/8-inch quick connect and A/N fittings for fuel connections on modern motor vehicles with internal combustion engines.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify Zyska so that the fuel connector fittings are use 3/8-inch quick connectors or A/N fittings for the benefit of utilizing known fitting types found on modern motor vehicles.
Nevertheless, Zyska fails to expressly disclose the least two fuel connector modules are removable and interchangeable, each fuel connector module comprising: a flange having a mating surface configured to removably engage either of the first or second surfaces of the housing, and an outer surface opposing the mating surface; the fuel connector fitting attached to the outer surface of the flange; and a flange aperture passing through the flange, the flange aperture configured to provide fluid communication between the fuel connector fitting and the first or second aperture in the housing when the flange is engaged with the first or second surface of the housing.
Kopera teaches at least two fuel connector modules (120, 122) that are removable and interchangeable (Col 8, lines 18 – 26), each fuel connector module comprising:
a flange (124) having a mating surface configured to removably engage either of first or second surfaces of the housing (of 36’) (Figure 1), and an outer surface opposing the mating surface (Figure 1);
a fuel connector fitting attached to outer surface of the flange (Figure 1); and
a flange aperture passing through the flange (Figure 4), the flange aperture configured to provide fluid communication between the fuel the connector fitting and a first or second aperture in the housing when the flange is engaged with the first or second surface of the housing (Figure 1).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify Zyska by including the least two fuel connector modules being removable and interchangeable, each fuel connector module comprising: a flange having a mating surface configured to removably engage either of the first or second surfaces of the housing, and an outer surface opposing the mating surface; the fuel connector fitting attached to the outer surface of the flange; and a flange aperture passing through the flange, the flange aperture configured to provide fluid communication between the fuel connector fitting and the first or second aperture in the housing when the flange is engaged with the first or second surface of the housing for the benefit of allowing for a more modular and customizable fuel sensor system.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination does not expressly disclose wherein the first inner diameter is between 20% and 21% larger than the second inner diameter.
However, it is well known in the art that routine experimentation and various engineering design choices could have been used in order to have arrived at the first inner diameter being between 20% and 21% larger than the second inner diameter.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to have arrived at the first inner diameter being between 20% and 21% larger than the second inner diameter for Zyska’s fuel sensor, in order to have allowed for a more effective and efficient fuel composition sensor.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination does not expressly disclose wherein the first inner diameter ranges from 0.285 inch to 1.00 inch and the second inner diameter ranges from 0.138 inch to 0.845 inch.
However, it is well known in the art that routine experimentation and various engineering design choices could have been used in order to have arrived at the first inner diameter ranging from 0.285 inch to 1.00 inch and the second inner diameter ranging from 0.138 inch to 0.845 inch.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have arrived at the first inner diameter ranging from 0.285 inch to 1.00 inch and the second inner diameter ranging from 0.138 inch to 0.845 inch for Zyska's fuel sensor, in order to have allowed for a more effective and efficient fuel composition sensor.
Regarding Claim 4, the combination fails to expressly disclose the first inner diameter is 0.845 inch and the second inner diameter is 0.671 inch. However, it is well known in the art that routine experimentation and various engineering design choices could have been used in order to have arrived at the first inner diameter being 0.845 inch and the second inner diameter being 0.671 inch.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have arrived at the first inner diameter being 0.845 inch and the second inner diameter being 0.671 inch for Zyska’s fuel sensor, in order to have allowed for a more effective and efficient fuel composition sensor.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination fails to expressly disclose the second inner diameter is larger than the flange aperture.
However, it is well known in the art that routine experimentation and various engineering design choices could have been used in order to have arrived at the second inner diameter being larger than the flange aperture.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have arrived at the second inner diameter being larger than the flange aperture for the fuel sensor in order to have allowed for better flow through the sensor chamber, thus providing a more efficient and effective fuel sensor arrangement.
Regarding Claim 6, the combination fails to expressly disclose the outer cylindrical electrode and the inner cylindrical electrode each have a length ranging from 0.25 inch to 2.50 inch.
However, it is well known in the art that routine experimentation and various engineering design choices could have been used in order to have arrived at the outer cylindrical electrode and the inner cylindrical electrode each having a length ranging from 0.25 inch to 2.50 inch.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have arrived at the outer cylindrical electrode and the inner cylindrical electrode each having a length ranging from 0.25 inch to 2.50 inch for Zyska’s fuel sensor in order to have allowed for a more effective and efficient fuel composition sensor.
Regarding Claim 7, the combination fails to expressly disclose wherein the length of the outer cylindrical electrode and the inner cylindrical electrode is 1.0 inch.
However, it is well known in the art that routine experimentation and various engineering design choices could have been used in order to have arrived a at the length of the outer cylindrical electrode and the inner cylindrical electrode being 1.0 inch.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have arrived at the length of the outer cylindrical electrode and the inner cylindrical electrode being 1.0 inch for Zyska's fuel sensor, in order to have allowed for a more effective and efficient fuel composition sensor.
Regarding Claim 8, the combination fails to expressly disclose wherein the first inner diameter D1 ranges between 84% and 85% of the length of the outer cylindrical electrode.
However, it is well known in the art that routine experimentation and various engineering design choices could have been used in order to have arrived at the first inner diameter ranging between 84% and 85% of the length of the outer cylindrical electrode.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have arrived at the first inner diameter ranging between 84% and 85% of the length of the outer cylindrical electrode for Zyska’s fuel sensor, in order to have allowed for a more effective and efficient fuel composition sensor.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination fails to expressly disclose wherein the second inner diameter ranges between 67% and 68% of the length of the inner cylindrical electrode.
However, it is well known in the art that routine experimentation and various engineering design choices could have been used in order to have arrived at the second inner diameter ranging between 67% and 68% of the length of the inner cylindrical electrode.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have arrived at the second inner diameter ranging between 67% and 68% of the length of the inner cylindrical electrode for Zyska’s fuel sensor in order to have allowed for a more effective and efficient fuel composition sensor.
Regarding Claim 11, Kopera teaches the fuel sensor further comprising a thermistor (94) attached to a housing (36’), the thermistor operable to generate a fuel temperature signal indicative of temperature of fuel flowing through a sensor chamber (Col 8, lines 5 – 17) (Figures 1, 2)
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Zyska’s fuel sensor housing by employing Kopera’s thermistor for the benefit of a more accurate and informative sensor arrangement capable of determining the fuel temperature within the housing.
Regarding Claim 13, Kopera teaches the fuel sensor further comprising at least two O-ring connector gaskets (128), each configured to provide a fluid seal between the flange of one of the fuel connector modules and the first or second surface of the housing to which the flange is engaged (Figures 1 2, 4, 5) (Col 8, lines 18 – 26)
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Zyska’s connector fittings by employing Kopera’s removable connector fitting modules with O-ring seals for the benefit of a more modular and customizable fuel sensor system.
Regarding Claim 16, Zyska discloses a fuel sensor for a vehicle, in at least Figure 1, comprising:
a housing (6) comprising:
a first surface having a first aperture therein (left side of 6 having aperture formed by 1) (Figure 1);
a second surface opposing the first surface, the second surface having a second aperture therein (right side of 6 having aperture formed by 5) (Figure 1); and
a sensor chamber disposed between the first and second surfaces (chamber in 6 between 1 and 5) (Figure 1),
wherein the first aperture, the sensor chamber, and the second aperture are in fluid communication (Figure 1);
a fuel composition sensor element disposed within the sensor chamber (Figure 1), the fuel composition sensor element comprising:
an outer cylindrical electrode (3) having a first inner diameter D1 (Figure 1);
an inner cylindrical electrode (2) disposed within and concentric with the outer cylindrical electrode, the inner cylindrical electrode having a second inner diameter D2 (Figure 1):
a first electrical contact electrically connected to the outer cylindrical electrode (Figure 4);
a second electrical contact electrically connected to the inner cylindrical electrode (Figure 4);
an outer fluid flow channel disposed between the outer cylindrical electrode and the inner cylindrical electrode (Figure 1); and
an inner fluid flow channel disposed within the inner cylindrical electrode (Figure 1), wherein the inner flow channel and the outer flow channel form a continuous fluid flow path from the first aperture to the second aperture within the sensor chamber (Figure 1); and
at least two fuel connectors (1, 5) (Figure 1), each comprising:
a fuel connector fitting (see shape of 1, 5) (Figure 1).
Zyska fails to expressly disclose the fuel connector fittings are selected from the group consisting of a 3/8-inch quick-connect fitting, an A/N fitting, a DIN fitting, a pipe fitting, and an O-ring boss fitting.
Zyska does disclose the invention is for use with modern motor vehicles with internal combustion engines (Page 1).
Examiner take Official Notice it is common knowledge in the art to use 3/8-inch quick connect and A/N fittings for fuel connections on modern motor vehicles with internal combustion engines.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify Zyska so that the fuel connector fittings are use 3/8-inch quick connectors or A/N fittings for the benefit of utilizing known fitting types found on modern motor vehicles.
Nevertheless, Zyska fails to expressly disclose a flange having a mating surface configured to removably engage either of the first or second surfaces of the housing, and an outer surface opposing the mating surface; the fuel connector fitting attached to the outer surface of the flange; and a flange aperture passing through the flange, the flange aperture configured to provide fluid communication between the fuel connector fitting and the first or second aperture in the housing when the flange is engaged with the first or second surface of the housing, wherein the second inner diameter D2 is larger than the flange aperture.
Kopera teaches at least two fuel connectors (120, 122), each comprising:
a flange (124) having a mating surface configured to removably engage either of first or second surfaces of the housing (of 36’) (Figure 1), and an outer surface opposing the mating surface (Figure 1);
a fuel connector fitting attached to outer surface of the flange (Figure 1); and
a flange aperture passing through the flange (Figure 4), the flange aperture configured to provide fluid communication between the fuel the connector fitting and a first or second aperture in the housing when the flange is engaged with the first or second surface of the housing (Figure 1).
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify Zyska by including the least two fuel connector modules being removable and interchangeable, each fuel connector module comprising: a flange having a mating surface configured to removably engage either of the first or second surfaces of the housing, and an outer surface opposing the mating surface; the fuel connector fitting attached to the outer surface of the flange; and a flange aperture passing through the flange, the flange aperture configured to provide fluid communication between the fuel connector fitting and the first or second aperture in the housing when the flange is engaged with the first or second surface of the housing for the benefit of allowing for a more modular and customizable fuel sensor system.
Nevertheless, the combination fails to expressly disclose the second inner diameter is larger than the flange aperture.
However, it is well known in the art that routine experimentation and various engineering design choices could have been used in order to have arrived at the second inner diameter being larger than the flange aperture.
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have arrived at the second inner diameter being larger than the flange aperture for the fuel sensor in order to have allowed for better flow through the sensor chamber, thus providing a more efficient and effective fuel sensor arrangement.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zyska et al. (WO 2016/137343), in view of Kopera (US 5497753), in further view of Bock et al. (EP 2042719). Citations pertaining to Bock refer to the attached English translation.
Regarding Claim 10, the combination fails to expressly disclose a fuel pressure sensor attached to the housing, the fuel pressure sensor operable to generate a fuel pressure signal indicative of pressure fuel flowing through the sensor chamber.
Bock teaches a fuel pressure sensor (11) attached to a housing (2) [0036], the fuel pressure sensor operable to generate a fuel pressure signal indicative of pressure fuel flowing through the sensor chamber [0041]
As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify the combination by including a fuel pressure sensor attached to the housing, the fuel pressure sensor operable to generate a fuel pressure signal indicative of pressure fuel flowing through the sensor chamber for the benefit of manufacturing a fuel sensor simply and cost-effectively which allows for sensor to be accommodated in a single housing with single connector, as taught by Bock [0014].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 15 is allowed.
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 ALEXANDER MERCADO whose telephone number is (571)270-7094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9am - 4pm 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, Laura Martin can be reached at (571) 272-2160. 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.
ALEXANDER A. MERCADO
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
/ALEXANDER A MERCADO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855