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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s amendment filed on May 27, 2026. Claims 1, 3, 7, and 8 have been amended. Claim 9 has been canceled. Claims 21-29 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because a new interpretation has been applied in the rejection of record that overcomes the arguments.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 21-29 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
Inventions I (claims 1-8 and 10-12) and II (claims 21-29) are directed to related products. The related inventions are distinct if: (1) the inventions as claimed are either not capable of use together or can have a materially different design, mode of operation, function, or effect; (2) the inventions do not overlap in scope, i.e., are mutually exclusive; and (3) the inventions as claimed are not obvious variants. See MPEP § 806.05(j). In the instant case, the inventions as claimed: (1) Have a materially different design, mode of operation, function, or effect. Specifically the second valve of Group I is designed, operated and function to control combustion gas flow from the combustion chamber into the fuel passage through the gas outlet end; the second valve of Group II is designed, operated and function to axially spaced from the first valve along the gaseous fuel passage, the second valve including a second valve seat and a second plunger biased into engagement with the second valve seat, wherein the second plunger is disengaged from the second valve seat by gaseous fuel flow through the first valve when the first valve is in the open position. (2) The particular structures recited in each of the respective inventions of Groups I and II do not overlap in scope, they are mutually exclusive at the term relates to restriction practice. (3) The invention of one Group would not render the invention of the other Group obvious. Furthermore, the inventions as claimed do not encompass overlapping subject matter and there is nothing of record to show them to be obvious variants.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 21-29 have been withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “elastomeric sealing member” in claims 6 and 11 are interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation uses a generic placeholder “member” that is coupled with functional language “sealing” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
In light of the specification, the limitation “elastomeric sealing member” is interpreted to cover the corresponding structure “ring-shaped or annular sealing member”” as described in paragraphs [0038-0039].
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-6, 8, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bosse et al. (WO 2021/151941 A1).
With regard to claim 1, Bosse discloses a fuel injector (Fig. 1) for providing gaseous fuel to a combustion chamber, the fuel injector comprising:
an elongated injector body (1) defining a longitudinally extending fuel passage therein (Fig. 1), the fuel passage extending from a gas inlet end (5) to a gas outlet end (7) of the injector body;
a valve assembly (8/9 and 25) in the fuel passage (Fig. 1), the valve assembly including:
a first valve (4/8) that includes an inner seat member (9) and an outer seat member (4) defining a seat passage therebetween (at valve seat 11 as seen in Fig. 1) that is selectively opened and closed to control gaseous fuel flow through the fuel passage to the combustion chamber (a valve element 8 is arranged to be longitudinally movable, which has a valve sealing surface 10 on its end face facing the inlet opening 5, which is formed on a sealing element 9 which is part of the valve element 8 as shown in Fig. 1); and
a second valve (25) configured to control combustion gas flow from the combustion chamber into the fuel passage through the gas outlet end (6, when second valve 25 is closed, the fluid communication between combustion chamber and fuel passage is blocked), wherein: the second valve (25) is spaced longitudinally from the first valve (8/9) toward the gas outlet end (7, Fig. 1); the second valve (25) is biased to a closed position (biased by spring 29); and the second valve (25) is moved from the closed position to an open position by the gaseous fuel flow through the opened first valve (“The shut-off valve 25 therefore only opens when the gas pressure between the closing element 26 and the valve element 8 is greater than the gas pressure on the opposite side of the closing element 26 and can thereby overcome the force of the closing spring 29.").
With regard to claim 2, Bosse discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 1 above. Bosse further discloses that a nozzle (6) on the gas outlet end (7) of the injector body, wherein the nozzle (6) is configured to divert gaseous fuel flow through the gas outlet end into the combustion chamber (nozzle 6 has an divergent structure as shown in Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 3, Bosse discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 1 above. Bosse further discloses that the first valve (8/9) includes: a first valve seat (11) in the fuel passage, the first valve seat (11) formed by the inner seat member (9) and the outer seat member (4), the first valve seat supported in the injector body (1); a first plunger (9) biased into contact with the first valve seat (11) to close the first valve (Fig. 2); and an actuator (16) that is actuated to lift the first plunger (9) from the first valve seat (11) to open the first valve (Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 4, Bosse discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Bosse further discloses that the actuator is a solenoid (“electromagnet” 16) coupled to the first plunger (9, Fig. 1).
With regard to claim 5, Bosse discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Bosse further discloses that a first valve spring (17) that biases the first plunger (9) into contact with the first valve seat (11).
With regard to claim 6, Bosse discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Bosse further discloses that the first plunger (9) includes an end face (14) that contacts the first valve seat (11) with the first valve in the closed position (Fig. 2), the end face (14) including an elastomeric sealing member (12) that is engaged by the first valve seat (11) in the closed position of the first valve (Fig. 2).
With regard to claim 8, Bosse discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Bosse further discloses that the second valve (25) includes: a second valve seat (23) in the fuel passage, wherein the second valve seat (23) is supported by the injector body (1); and a second plunger (26) and a second valve spring (29) that biases the second plunger into contact with the second valve seat (23) to close the second valve (25).
With regard to claim 11, Bosse discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 10 above. Bosse further discloses that the first plunger of the first valve (8/9) includes an elastomeric sealing member (12) that contacts the first seat (11) of the first valve (8/9) with the first valve in the closed position.
Claims 1-6, 8, and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Strohl et al. (DE 10 2013 222 030 A1).
With regard to claim 1, Strohl discloses a fuel injector (Fig. 8) for providing gaseous fuel to a combustion chamber, the fuel injector comprising:
an elongated injector body (1) defining a longitudinally extending fuel passage therein (Fig. 8), the fuel passage extending from a gas inlet end (5) to a gas outlet end (7) of the injector body;
a valve assembly (2/3) in the fuel passage (Fig. 8), the valve assembly including: a first valve (2) that includes an inner seat member (53) and an outer seat member (22) defining a seat passage therebetween (as seen in Fig. 8) that that is selectively opened and closed to control gaseous fuel flow through the fuel passage to the combustion chamber (Fig. 9 and 11) ; and
a second valve (3) configured to control combustion gas flow from the combustion chamber into the fuel passage through the gas outlet end (7), wherein: the second valve (3) is spaced longitudinally from the first valve (2) toward the gas outlet end (Fig. 8); the second valve (3) is biased to a closed position (biased by spring 38); and the second valve (3) is moved from the closed position to an open position by the gaseous fuel flow through the opened first valve (“The pilot valve 3 , which by the pressure force of the second return element 38 is kept in the closed state, is now by the in space 7 rising fluid pressure opened” and shown in Fig. 8).
With regard to claim 2, Strohl discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 1 above. Strohl further discloses that a nozzle (41) on the gas outlet end (7) of the injector body, wherein the nozzle (41) is configured to divert gaseous fuel flow through the gas outlet end into the combustion chamber (Fig. 6).
With regard to claim 3, Strohl discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 1 above. Strohl further discloses that the first valve (2) includes: a first valve seat (51) in the fuel passage, the first valve seat (51) formed by the inner seat member (53) and the outer seat member (22), the first valve seat (51) supported in the injector body (1); a first plunger (29) biased into contact with the first valve seat (51) to close the first valve (Fig. 9); and an actuator (23) that is actuated to lift the first plunger (29) from the first valve seat (51) to open the first valve (Fig. 11).
With regard to claim 4, Strohl discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Strohl further discloses that the actuator is a solenoid (“actuator 23 with an anchor 24, a coil 25, an inner pole 26 and a magnetic return element 27”) coupled to the first plunger (29).
With regard to claim 5, Strohl discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Strohl further discloses that a first valve spring (28) that biases the first plunger (29) into contact with the first valve seat (51).
With regard to claim 6, Strohl discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Strohl further discloses that the first plunger (29) includes an end face (50) that contacts the first valve seat (51) with the first valve in the closed position (Fig. 9), the end face (50) including an elastomeric sealing member (“a soft elastomer or silicone”) that is engaged by the first valve seat (51) in the closed position of the first valve (Fig. 9).
With regard to claim 8, Strohl discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Strohl further discloses that the second valve (3) includes: a second valve seat (31) in the fuel passage, wherein the second valve seat (31) is supported by the injector body (1); and a second plunger (39) and a second valve spring (38) that biases the second plunger contact with the second valve seat (31) to close the second valve (3).
With regard to claim 10, Strohl discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 8 above. Strohl further discloses that the second plunger (39) includes a head (32) at one end thereof and a stem (39) extending from the head (Fig. 6), and the head (32) and the second valve seat (31) contacted by the head with the second valve (3) in the closed position are both metal (“between the second sealing seat 31 and the flange 32 an annular metallic seal may be formed”).
With regard to claim 11, Strohl discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 10 above. Strohl further discloses that the first plunger of the first valve (2) includes an elastomeric sealing member (50, “a soft elastomer or silicone”) that contacts the first seat (51) of the first valve (2) with the first valve in the closed position (Fig. 9).
With regard to claim 12, Strohl discloses the fuel injector as disclosed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Strohl further discloses that the first plunger of the first valve (29) is displaced toward the gas inlet end to open the first valve (arrow A direction shown in Fig. 8); and the second plunger of the second valve (39) is displaced toward the gas outlet end to open the second valve (arrow B direction shown in Fig. 6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 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.
the combination of the cited references fails to teach elements: “the outer seat member includes an outer inlet end in contact with the sealing member; and the inner seat member includes an inner inlet end in contact with the sealing member, wherein the inner inlet end is spaced inwardly from the outer inlet end to admit gaseous fuel flow from around the first plunger into the seat passage between the outer inlet end and the inner inlet end in response to the first plunger being lifted from the first valve seat to open the first valve” in claim 7.
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 JOEL ZHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-1163. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9AM-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 5712701814. 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.
JOEL . ZHOU
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3752
/QINGZHANG ZHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights