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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo et al. (2019/0368457) in view of Scintilla (CH 204340 A).
Regarding claim 1, Endo et al shows a fuel injector for controlling delivery of gaseous fuel into an intake passage of an internal combustion engine (Endo et al. is capable of this), said fuel injector comprising: a fuel injector body (fig 1) defining a fuel flow passage (91, the central flow passage) extending in a direction of fuel flow from an inlet to an outlet; an actuator (3); an annular valve seat (22) in a valve chamber (fig 1), said valve seat having a valve seat surface inclined relative to the direction of fuel flow (fig 1); an outflow passage (91) surrounded by the annular valve seat (fig 1), the outflow passage having a first diameter D1 immediately downstream of the valve seat surface (fig 1) and a second diameter the smaller section after 91) downstream of the first diameter D1, said second diameter D2 being smaller than the first diameter D1 (fig 1), a valve member (21) having a valve member surface (211) complementary to the valve seat surface (fig 1), wherein said valve member reciprocates between a closed position where said valve member surface is mated to said valve seat surface and an open position where said valve surface is separated from said valve seat surface allowing gaseous fuel to flow past the valve seat surface and into said outflow passage, said valve member moved from said closed position to said open position by said actuator (valve member 21 goes up and down to allow and restrict flow), pressure of gaseous fuel in the valve chamber acting to bias said valve member toward the valve seat when said valve member is in the closed position (fuel pushed on 211) and the inclination of said valve seat surface causing gaseous fuel to flow against the direction of fuel flow (fig 1) and act on the valve member in an opening direction when said valve member is in the open position,
But fails to disclose said valve member including an extension projecting into the outflow passage, said extension having an outside surface comprising a plurality of helical ribs defining a plurality of helical channels, said helical ribs bearing on an inside surface of the outflow passage to guide movement of the valve member and said helical channels imparting a centripetal acceleration to said gaseous fuel as it flows through the outflow passage.
Scintilla teaches a fuel injector that includes a valve member (4) including an extension (13, 15) projecting into the outflow passage (12), said extension having an outside surface comprising a plurality of helical ribs (14) defining a plurality of helical channels, said helical ribs bearing on an inside surface of the outflow passage to guide movement of the valve member and said helical channels imparting a centripetal acceleration to said gaseous fuel as it flows through the outflow passage (fig 1, 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to add a projection to the bottom of the valve member of Endo et al. and have it pass through the valve seat into an outflow passage as shown in Scintilla, in order to provide helical flow of fuel downstream of the valve seat.
One of ordinary skill in the art would know how to construct a valve with the angled valve seat of Endo et al. and the helical extension of Scintilla.
Regarding claim 3, wherein said valve seat surface is a conical surface oriented at an acute angle relative to a longitudinal axis of the fuel injector, said acute angle measured in the direction of fuel flow (fig 1).
Regarding claim 13, wherein the valve member defines a fuel flow passage (fig 1) concentric with an axial passage defined by the inlet, said fuel flow passage including radial openings (10) allowing gaseous fuel to flow radially outward from the axial passage into the valve chamber (fig 1), said fuel flow passage in the valve member ending upstream of the valve member surface, so all gaseous fuel flowing through the fuel injector flows through said radial openings (fig 1)
Claim(s) 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo et al. (2019/0368457) as modified by Scintilla (CH 204340 A) above, further in view of Holmes et al. (2012/0018656).
Regarding claim 4, Endo et al. as modified above shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1,including wherein said actuator is a solenoid comprising a coil (3) but fails to disclose flux washers surrounding an inlet of the fuel injector and said valve member includes an upper portion configured as an armature acted on by a magnetic field generated when electric current is applied to the coil.
Holmes et al. shows a fuel injector that includes an actuator (fig 1b), wherein said actuator is a solenoid comprising a coil (90) and flux washers (112, 106) surrounding an inlet of the fuel injector and said valve member includes an upper portion (120) configured as an armature acted on by a magnetic field generated when electric current is applied to the coil.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to use the solenoid actuator of Holmes and make the top portion of 11 the armature, in order to have the valve member move up and down with use of electricity.
Regarding claim 5, the above combination teaches the valve member upper portion defines a fuel flow passage (fig 1) upstream of the valve surface allowing pressurized gaseous fuel to flow from the inlet to fill the valve chamber upstream of the valve seat surface when the valve member is in the closed position (fig 1), and all gaseous fuel passing through the fuel injector must flow radially outward around the valve member and then between the valve member surface and the valve seat surface to enter the outflow passage (fig 1)
Regarding claim 6, comprising an inlet (inlet to 5) receiving pressurized gaseous fuel, wherein said inlet also serves as a pole (11) of the solenoid.
Regarding claim 7, wherein the coil surrounds an axial gap between an end of the inlet facing the armature and the armature when the valve member is in the closed position (fig 1), said flux washers including a cup-shaped magnetic upper flux washer (112) surrounding the coil (fig 1b) and a cylindrical, non-magnetic, wear resistant liner (99, 96) radially between the coil and the inlet and armature (fig 1b), said liner spanning the axial gap and guiding axial movement of the upper portion of the valve member between the closed and open positions (fig 1b).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endo et al. (2019/0368457) in view of Scintilla (CH 204340 A) above, further in view of Moser et al. (2017/0328309).
Regarding claim 2, Endo as modified above shows all aspects of the applicant’s invention as in claim 1, including wherein said valve seat surface is a conical surface (fig 1) but fails to show and said valve member surface is a conical surface concentric with said valve seat surface (fig 2).
Moser et al teaches a tapered valve seat (34, 4) and a taped valve member (20) that matches the valve seat (fig 1, 2)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to make the valve member tapered at the same angle as the valve seat, in order to increase the area of the sealing surfaces.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 JASON J BOECKMANN whose telephone number is (571)272-2708. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm.
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.
/JASON J BOECKMANN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752 10/13/2026
