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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 7/1/24 and 9/10/25 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 13-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasashima et al., EP 3089290.
Regarding claim 13, Kasashima teaches a spark plug resistor element (see at least Figure 1) arrangement comprising, in the following order: an electrically conductive combustion-chamber-side end portion (60, 60d); a resistor element including a resistance material (70, 200, 200b, 200d); and an electrically conductive connection-side end portion (75, 75b). Kasashima further teaches the porosity of the resistor element is from 0-5%.
Although Kasashima fails to specifically teach the resistor has a porosity of less than 0.3%, or at least 0.05%, or between 0.05% and .3%, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that a low porosity resistor would extend the useful life of the spark plug. Therefore, lacking criticality and unexpected results, it is the position of the examiner that it would have been an obvious matter of routine optimization to determine a smaller range of optimum porosities within that which was taught by Kasashima.
Regarding claim 14, Kasashima teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 13, and further although Kasashima fails to specifically teach the resistor has a porosity of less than 0.3%, or at least 0.05%, or between 0.05% and .3%, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that a low porosity resistor would extend the useful life of the spark plug. Therefore, lacking criticality and unexpected results, it is the position of the examiner that it would have been an obvious matter of routine optimization to determine a smaller range of optimum porosities within that which was taught by Kasashima.
Regarding claim 15, Kasashima teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 13, and further although Kasashima fails to specifically teach the resistor has a porosity of less than 0.3%, or at least 0.05%, or between 0.05% and .3%, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that a low porosity resistor would extend the useful life of the spark plug. Therefore, lacking criticality and unexpected results, it is the position of the examiner that it would have been an obvious matter of routine optimization to determine a smaller range of optimum porosities within that which was taught by Kasashima.
Regarding claim 16, Kasashima teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 13 and further teaches (i) the electrically conductive combustion-chamber-side end portion includes a contact paste, and/or (ii) the electrically conductive connection-side end portion includes a contact paste ([0159] describes paste composition).
Regarding claim 17, Kasashima teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 13 and further teaches the electrically conductive connection-side end portion includes a contact pin (Figure 4, contact pin 43 and 25).
Regarding claim 18, Kasashima teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 16 and further teaches a contact pin adjoins the connection-side contact paste on the connection side (Figure 4, contact pins 43 and 25, contact compound 60d, 75d, 80d).
Regarding claim 19, Kasashima teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 16 and further it is the position of the examiner that based on the teaching of Kasashima that reducing the particle size of the resistor material would optimize the porosity, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to optimize the particle size to within a given range, lacking criticality and unexpected results.
Regarding claim 20, Kasashima teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 16 and further it is the position of the examiner that based on the teaching of Kasashima that reducing the particle size of the resistor material would optimize the porosity, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to optimize the particle size to within a given range, lacking criticality and unexpected results.
Regarding claim 21, Kasashima teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 16 and further it is the position of the examiner that based on the teaching of Kasashima that reducing the particle size of the resistor material would optimize the porosity, it would have been an obvious matter of routine experimentation to optimize the particle size to within a given range, lacking criticality and unexpected results.
Regarding claim 22, Kasashima teaches the invention as explained above regarding claim 13 and further teaches the resistance material includes a borosilicate glass and ZrO2 ([0076]).
Regarding claim 23, Kasashima teaches a method for producing a spark plug resistor element arrangement including, in the following order: an electrically conductive combustion-chamber-side end portion (60, 60d); a resistor element including a resistance material (70, 200, 200b, 200d); and an electrically conductive connection-side end portion (75, 75b), wherein the method comprises: comminuting the resistance material to a primary particle size that is very small ([0159]). Kasashima further teaches the porosity of the resistor element is from 0-5%.
Although Kasashima fails to specifically teach the resistor has a porosity of less than 0.3%, or at least 0.05%, or between 0.05% and .3%, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that a low porosity resistor would extend the useful life of the spark plug. Therefore, lacking criticality and unexpected results, it is the position of the examiner that it would have been an obvious matter of routine optimization to determine a smaller range of optimum porosities within that which was taught by Kasashima. Further, although Kasashima fails to specifically teach the particle size, it is the position of the examiner that lacking criticality and unexpected results, it would have been an ordinary matter of routine experimentation to determine an optimal particle size to achieve the desired result of decreasing porosity, based on the teaching of Kasashima.
Regarding claim 24, Kasashima teaches a spark plug for an internal combustion engine ([0002]), comprising: a spark plug resistor element (see at least Figure 1) arrangement comprising, in the following order: an electrically conductive combustion-chamber-side end portion (60, 60d); a resistor element including a resistance material (70, 200, 200b, 200d); and an electrically conductive connection-side end portion (75, 75b). Kasashima further teaches the porosity of the resistor element is from 0-5%.
Although Kasashima fails to specifically teach the resistor has a porosity of less than 0.3%, or at least 0.05%, or between 0.05% and .3%, it was well known to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that a low porosity resistor would extend the useful life of the spark plug. Therefore, lacking criticality and unexpected results, it is the position of the examiner that it would have been an obvious matter of routine optimization to determine a smaller range of optimum porosities within that which was taught by Kasashima.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yoshida et al., US 9160147 teaches a spark plug comprising a resistor with a porosity of less than 1.2%.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARY-ELLEN BOWMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5383. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday; 7:00 am-5:00 pm.
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, James Greece can be reached at (571) 272-3711. 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.
MARY ELLEN BOWMAN
Examiner
Art Unit 2875
/MARY ELLEN BOWMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights