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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 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.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 5/11/26 has been entered. Claims 26-28 have been added. Claims 1, 13, 24, and 25 have been amended. Claims 1-28 remain pending in the application.
Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 11/10/25.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, and 24-25 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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-9, 13, 15-16, 18, 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niizuma (U.S. 2013/0098034) in view of Xiao et al. (U.S. 2017/0335755).
Re claims 1, 26, and 27:
Niizuma discloses a turbocharger (Fig. 1 (person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize a type of turbocharger is shown in Fig. 1 as shown and as described in Paras 65-66)) comprising:
a compressor (8, compressor - Para 39) configured to compress intake air for an engine (Para 52 and Para 66 - "...the compressor 8 of the same shaft as the electric motor 7 also rotates, and the air to be fed to the heat engine is compressed."), wherein the compressor (8) is operated, by varying a rotations per minutes (RPM) of the compressor (8)(Paras 65-67)
an electric motor (7, electric motor - Para 39) configured to power the compressor (8)(see Fig. 1 and Para 52);
a turbine (1, turbine - Para 39) configured to receive exhaust air from the engine (see Fig. 1, Para 40, and Paras 65-66); and
an electric generator (2, generator - Para 39) configured to be driven by the turbine (1) to generate electric power (see Fig. 1 and Paras 40-42).
Niizuma fails to disclose wherein the compressor is operated, based on at least altitude, to approach a target intake air pressure for the engine (claim 1); nor including an altimeter configured to measure the altitude (claim 26); nor wherein the RPM is reduced in response to a reduction in the altitude and the RPM is increased in response to an increase in the altitude (claim 27).
Xiao teaches wherein a compressor (110, compressor driven by electric motor 108 - Para 15) is operated, based on at least altitude (Para 6 - “…at higher altitudes, the electric supercharger may be operated to improve boost pressure control…”, and see Fig. 2 at 213-214 and Paras 38 and 40), to approach a target intake air pressure (see Fig. 2 at steps 206, 213, and 214 and Para 34 - “… the controller may send a signal to an electric motor coupled to the first, upstream compressor to accelerate the compressor and thereby increase a boost pressure…”) for an engine (10, engine - Para 14)(see Figs. 1-2, Paras 6, 34, 38, and 40); including an altimeter (54, barometric pressure sensor - Para 21) configured to measure the altitude (Para 21 - “…the output of the barometric pressure sensor may reflect the altitude of vehicle operation..”); wherein an RPM of the compressor is reduced in response to a reduction in the altitude and the RPM is increased in response to an increase in the altitude (Para 40 - “…adjusting may include operating the first compressor with a higher than default gain tuning when the altitude is higher (e.g., higher than a threshold altitude), and with the default tuning when the altitude is lower (e.g., lower than the threshold altitude)…”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the operation of the compressor of Niizuma after that of Xiao, by including an altimeter in the system of Niizuma to measure altitude, operating the compressor of Niizuma based on the measured altitude to approach a target intake air pressure in the engine of Niizuma such that the RPM of the compressor of Niizuma is reduced in response to a reduction in the altitude and the RPM is increased in response to an increase in the altitude, all in the way taught by Xiao, for the advantage of improving engine performance at higher altitudes (Xiao; Para 7) and for the advantage of improving boost pressure tracking (Xiao; Para 7).
Re claim 2:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein there is no shaft connecting the compressor (8) and the turbine (1)(see Fig. 1, and Para 67 - "...Therefore, when the heat engine (not shown) operates, the operation becomes similar to that of a conventional turbo charger in which the turbine is directly connected to the compressor via the shaft." (also see Paras 5-9))
Re claim 3:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein a first shaft (8a, shaft - Para 39) of the compressor (8) rotates independent of a second shaft (1a, shaft - Para 39) of the turbine (1)(see Fig. 1 and Paras 64-68 (especially para 68)).
Re claim 4:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 3 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the first shaft (8a) of the compressor (8) is driven by the electric motor (7)(see Fig. 1 and Para 52).
Re claim 5:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 3 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the second shaft (1a) of the turbine (1) drives the electric generator (2)(see Fig. 1 and Para 40).
Re claim 6:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the electric motor (7) is configured to receive the electric power from a power bus (5, direct current bus - Para 39)(see Fig. 1 and Paras 39-49 (especially Para 47)).
Re claim 7:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 6 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the power bus (5) is a direct current (DC) bus (Paras 39 and 48) and the electric power is DC power (see Fig. 1 and Paras 43-48).
Re claim 8:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the electric generator (2) is configured to output electric power (see Fig. 1 at "+" and "-" exiting element 4) to a power bus (5, direct current bus - Para 39)(See Fig. 1 and Paras 39-49 (especially Para 47)).
Re claim 9:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 8 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the power bus (5) is a direct current (DC) bus (Paras 39 and 48) and the electric power is DC power (see Fig. 1 and Paras 43-48).
Re claim 13:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the turbine (1) is configured to operate without receiving any indication of charge pressure present at the compressor (8)(see Fig. 1 and Para 39 - "... the turbine 1 rotated by an exhaust gas from a heat engine (not shown) via the shaft 1a...."), the turbine is configured to operate without receiving any indication of charge pressure present at a charge air cooler, or the turbine is configured to operate without receiving any indication of charge pressure present at any fluid connection between the compressor and the charge air cooler.
Re claim 15:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein during operation of the turbocharger (Fig. 1), the electric power generated by the electric generator is greater than the power generated by the electric motor to power the compressor (see Fig. 1 and Paras 60-67 (especially Para 63; structure of Fig. 1 is described capable of performing claimed function)).
Re claim 16:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the electric power generated by the electric generator (2) is converted from alternating current (AC) power to direct current (DC) power for output to a DC bus (5, direct current bus - Para 39)(See Fig. 1 and Paras 39-49 (especially Para 43)).
Re claim 18:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 16 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the DC bus (5) supplies power to the electric motor (7)( see Fig. 1 and Paras 39-49 (especially Para 47)).
Re claim 21:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses the turbocharger (Fig. 1) comprising a controller (13, rotation speed command unit - Para 39) or a processor configured to control an amount of electric power delivered by the electric generator (2) to the electric motor (7)(see Fig. 1 and Para 49 (detail of Para 49 described in Paras 57-62)).
Re claim 22:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 21 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the controller (13) or the processor is configured to control the amount of electric power to maintain or set a desired rotation per minute RPM of the compressor (2)(see Fig. 1 and Paras 57-68 (see especially Paras 63 and 68)).
Re claim 23:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 21 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the controller (13) or the processor is configured to control the amount of electric power to maintain or set a desired manifold air pressure at an air outlet (see Fig. 1 at element 8 and Para 52 - "...the compressor 8 which compresses air to be fed to the heat engine..." (for element 8 to compress air to be fed to the engine requires an air outlet)) of the compressor (8)(see Fig. 1 and Paras 57-68 (see especially Para 66 - "...Then, the compressor 8...rotates, and the air to be fed to the heat engine is compressed.")).
Re claim 24:
Niizuma discloses a method of using a turbocharger (Fig. 1 (person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize a type of turbocharger is shown in Fig. 1 as shown and as described in Paras 65-66)) having a split shaft configuration (see Fig. 1 at elements 1a and 8a and Para 39) comprising:
powering a compressor (8, compressor - Para 39) of the turbocharger (Fig. 1) with an electric motor (7, electric motor - Para 39)(see Fig. 1 and Para 52);
receiving intake air at the compressor (8)(see Fig. 1 and Para 52 - "...compressor 8 which compresses air to be fed to the heat engine (not shown)..."), wherein the compressor (8) is operated, by varying a rotations per minutes (RPM) of the compressor (8)( Paras 65-67)
outputting compressed air from the compressor to an engine (Para 52 - "...heat engine...")(see Fig. 1 and Para 52);
receiving exhaust air from the engine at a turbine (1, turbine - Para 39) of the turbocharger (Fig. 1)(see Fig. 1 and Para 40 - "...the turbine 1 rotated by an exhaust gas from a heat engine..."); and
generating electric power at an electric generator (2, generator - Para 39)(see Fig. 1 and Para 40), wherein a shaft (1a, shaft - Para 39) of the electric generator (2) is driven by the turbine (1)(see Fig. 1 and Para 40).
Niizuma fails to disclose wherein the compressor is operated, based on at least altitude, to adjust the intake air to approach a target intake air pressure.
Xiao teaches wherein a compressor (110, compressor driven by electric motor 108 - Para 15) is operated, based on at least altitude (Para 6 - “…at higher altitudes, the electric supercharger may be operated to improve boost pressure control…”, and see Fig. 2 at 213-214 and Paras 38 and 40), to adjust an intake air (see Fig. 1 at arrow labeled “Intake”) to approach a target intake air pressure (see Fig. 2 at steps 206, 213, and 214 and Para 34 - “… the controller may send a signal to an electric motor coupled to the first, upstream compressor to accelerate the compressor and thereby increase a boost pressure…”) for an engine (10, engine - Para 14)(see Figs. 1-2, Paras 6, 34, 38, and 40).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the operation of the compressor of Niizuma after that of Xiao, thereby operating the compressor of Niizuma based on at least altitude to approach a target intake air pressure in the engine of Niizuma, all in the way taught by Xiao, for the advantage of improving engine performance at higher altitudes (Xiao; Para 7).
Re claim 25:
Niizuma discloses an apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising:
a compressor (8, compressor - Para 39) configured to compress intake air for an engine (Para 52 - "...heat engine...")(see Fig. 1 and Para 52), wherein the compressor (8) is operated, by varying a rotations per minutes (RPM) of the compressor (8)(Paras 65-67)
an electric motor (7, electric motor - Para 39) configured to power the compressor (8)(see Fig. 1 and Para 52);
a turbine (1, turbine - Para 39) configured to receive exhaust air from the engine (see Fig. 1 and Para 40 - "...the turbine 1 rotated by an exhaust gas from a heat engine..."); and
an electric generator (2, generator - Para 39) connected by a shaft (1a, shaft - Para 39) to the turbine (1)(see Fig. 1 and Para 40),
wherein the turbine (1) and the compressor (8) are not connected by a shaft (see Fig. 1, and Para 67 - "...Therefore, when the heat engine (not shown) operates, the operation becomes similar to that of a conventional turbo charger in which the turbine is directly connected to the compressor via the shaft." (also see Paras 5-9)).
Niizuma fails to disclose wherein the compressor is operated, based on at least altitude, to approach a target intake air pressure.
Xiao teaches wherein a compressor (110, compressor driven by electric motor 108 - Para 15) is operated, based on at least altitude (Para 6 - “…at higher altitudes, the electric supercharger may be operated to improve boost pressure control…”, and see Fig. 2 at 213-214 and Paras 38 and 40), to approach a target intake air pressure (see Fig. 2 at steps 206, 213, and 214 and Para 34 - “… the controller may send a signal to an electric motor coupled to the first, upstream compressor to accelerate the compressor and thereby increase a boost pressure…”) for an engine (10, engine - Para 14)(see Figs. 1-2, Paras 6, 34, 38, and 40).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the operation of the compressor of Niizuma after that of Xiao, thereby operating the compressor of Niizuma based on at least altitude to approach a target intake air pressure in the engine of Niizuma, all in the way taught by Xiao, for the advantage of improving engine performance at higher altitudes (Xiao; Para 7)
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niizuma (U.S. 2013/0098034) in view of Xiao et al. (U.S. 2017/0335755), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Crever (U.S. 2,454,038).
Re claim 10:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma further discloses wherein the compressor (8) is configured to compress air and output the compressed air (see Fig. 1 and Para 52).
Niizuma fails to disclose wherein the compressor is configured to compress air and output the compressed air to a charge air cooler.
Crever teaches a turbocharger (17, exhaust gas-driven supercharger - Col. 1, Lines 47-48) wherein a compressor (19, compressor - Col. 1, Lines 55-56) is configured to compress air and output the compressed air to a charge air cooler (see Fig. and Col. 2, Lines 1-7).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the turbocharger of Niizuma/Xiao after that of Crever (thereby configuring the compressor of Niizuma to output the compressed air of Niizuma to a charge air cooler in the way taught by Crever) for the advantage of being able to maintain temperature of air for best airplane performance (Crever; Col. 2, Lines 1-7).
Re claim 20:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma fails to disclose wherein the turbocharger is used with an aircraft engine.
Crever teaches wherein a turbocharger (17, exhaust gas-driven supercharger - Col. 1, Lines 47-48) is used with an aircraft engine (10, aircraft internal combustion engine - Col. 1, Lines 40-41).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the engine of Niizuma/Xiao after that of Crever (thereby making the engine of Niizuma an aircraft engine as taught by Crever such that the turbocharger of Niizuma is used with an aircraft engine as taught by Crever) for the advantage of providing best airplane performance (Crever; Col. 2, Lines 1-7).
Claims 11-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niizuma (U.S. 2013/0098034) in view of Xiao et al. (U.S. 2017/0335755), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Aori et al. (U.S. 2021/0199044).
Re claim 11:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma fails to disclose wherein the turbine does not have a wastegate valve or wastegate bypass.
Aori teaches a turbocharger (2, electrified exhaust gas turbocharger - Para 40) wherein a turbine (7, exhaust gas turbine - Para 38) does not have a wastegate valve or wastegate bypass (see Figs. 1-2 and Para 40 - "... FIG. 2 differs from that in FIG. 1 in that the boost pressure control device 12 is formed by a variable turbine geometry 14..." and Para 15 - "...The electrified exhaust gas turbocharger further comprises a boost pressure control device, which expediently can be a wastegate valve, and/or a variable turbine geometry...").
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the turbocharger of Niizuma/Xiao after that of Aori (thereby including no wastegate valve as taught by Aori) for the advantage a reduction in number of components and reduced footprint (see Aori Figs. 1-2).
Re claim 12:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma fails to disclose wherein the turbine is configured to operate without actuation of a wastegate.
Aori teaches a turbocharger (2, electrified exhaust gas turbocharger - Para 40) wherein a turbine (7, exhaust gas turbine - Para 38) is configured to operate without actuation of a wastegate (see Figs. 1-2 and Para 40 - "... FIG. 2 differs from that in FIG. 1 in that the boost pressure control device 12 is formed by a variable turbine geometry 14..." and Para 15 - "...The electrified exhaust gas turbocharger further comprises a boost pressure control device, which expediently can be a wastegate valve, and/or a variable turbine geometry...").
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the turbocharger of Niizuma/Xiao after that of Aori (thereby configuring the turbine of Niizuma to operate without actuation of a wastegate as taught by Aori) for the advantage a reduction in number of components and reduced footprint (see Aori Figs. 1-2).
Re claim 14:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above).
Niizuma fails to disclose wherein the compressor does not have a charge pressure outlet for indicating charge pressure to a wastegate of the turbine.
Aori teaches a turbocharger (2, electrified exhaust gas turbocharger - Para 40) wherein compressor (9, compressor - Para 38) does not have a charge pressure outlet for indicating charge pressure to a wastegate of a turbine (7, exhaust gas turbine - Para 38)(see Figs. 1-2 and Para 40 - "... FIG. 2 differs from that in FIG. 1 in that the boost pressure control device 12 is formed by a variable turbine geometry 14..." and Para 15 - "...The electrified exhaust gas turbocharger further comprises a boost pressure control device, which expediently can be a wastegate valve, and/or a variable turbine geometry..." (evidence that turbine 7 does not have a wastegate and thereby compressor 9 cannot have a charge pressure outlet for indicating charge pressure to a non existent wastegate)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the turbocharger of Niizuma/Xiao after that of Aori (thereby including no wastegate as taught by Aori) for the advantage a reduction in number of components and reduced footprint (see Aori Figs. 1-2).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niizuma (U.S. 2013/0098034) in view of Xiao et al. (U.S. 2017/0335755), as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Solodovnik et al. (U.S. 11,128,251).
Re claim 17:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 16 (as described above).
Niizuma fails to disclose wherein the DC bus supplies power to components of an aircraft propulsion system.
Solodovnik teaches wherein a DC bus (38, DC bus - Col. 8, Line 59) supplies power to components of an aircraft propulsion system (15, propulsor - Col. 8, Line 38)(see Fig. 2 and Col. 8, Lines 37-67).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the DC bus of Niizuma/Xiao after that of Solodovnik (thereby suppling components of an aircraft propulsion system with the DC bus of Niizuma in the way taught by Solodovnik) for the advantage of being able to provide electric propulsion (Col. 8, Lines 30-37).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niizuma (U.S. 2013/0098034) in view of Xiao et al. (U.S. 2017/0335755), as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Stahlhut et al. (U.S. 7,047,743).
Re claim 19:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 16 (as described above).
Niizuma fails to disclose wherein the engine is configured to supply rotational power to a second electric generator, and the second electric generator is configured to output power to the DC bus.
Stahlhut teaches wherein an engine (12, internal combustion engine - Col. 1, Line 56) is configured to supply rotational power to a second electric generator (14, electric generator - Col. 1, Lines 56-57)(see Fig. 2, Col. 1, Lines 55-56, and Col. 2, Lines 23-31), and the second electric generator (14) is configured to output power to a DC bus (54, DC bus - Col. 2, Lines 34-35)(see Fig. 2, Col. 1, Lines 55-56, and Col. 2, Lines 23-31).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the engine of Niizuma/Xiao after that of Stahlhut (thereby configuring the engine of Niizuma to supply rotational power to a second electric generator and configuring the second electric generator to output power to the DC bus in Niizuma in the way taught by Stahlhut) for the advantage of permitting maximization of power output for a given engine size, and optimization of total system efficiency (Stahlhut; Col. 2, Lines 51-55).
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niizuma (U.S. 2013/0098034) in view of Xiao et al. (U.S. 2017/0335755), as applied to claim 1 above, and as evidenced by Gertz (U.S. 4,439,983).
Re claim 28:
Niizuma in view of Xiao teaches the turbocharger (Niizuma; Fig. 1) of claim 1 (as described above), wherein the compressor (Niizuma; 8) is configured to approach the target intake air pressure for the engine (Niizuma; Para 66 - “…the heat engine…”) for at least an altitude (Xiao; Para 6 - “…at higher altitudes, the electric supercharger may be operated to improve boost pressure control…”, and see Fig. 2 at 213-214 and Paras 38 and 40)(the compressor of Niizuma has been configured to approach the tarket intake pressure for the engine of Niizuma for an altitude in the way taught by Xiao as described in the combination of Niizuma/Xiao as detailed above)) .
Niizuma/Xiao fails to disclose an altitude of 35,000 feet.
Gertz teaches that altitude which an engine is operated at is a results effective variable that determines fuel consumption (Gertz; Col. 2, Line 58 - Col. 3, Line 38). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the turbocharger of Niizuma/Xiao such that the compressor of Niizuma is configured to approach the target intake air pressure for the engine for at least an altitude of 35,000 feet as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
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 Loren C Edwards whose telephone number is (571)272-7133. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 6AM-430PM.
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, Mark Laurenzi can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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.
/LOREN C EDWARDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746 6/5/26
Prosecution Insights