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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: In paragraph 0003, “heating heaters,” paragraphs [0046], [0047], and [0048] are repeats of paragraph [0043], [0044] and [0045]. Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “a fuel inflow part provided downstream of the first passage from the fuel pump to allow the fuel tank and the fuel pump to communicate with each other” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “a fuel pump provided downstream of the first passage from the discharge valve to allow the fuel to move toward the discharge valve”. A fuel pump is claimed to be downstream of the first passage. It is not clear how “from the discharge valve” modifies the positioning of these devices and if both the first passage and the fuel pump need to be downstream of the discharge valve. It is also unclear if the fuel pump is only supposed to be downstream of the discharge valve and both are located in the first passage. For examination purposes Examiner will consider either to meet the claim language.
Claim 2 recites “a fuel inflow part provided downstream of the first passage from the fuel pump to allow the fuel tank and the fuel pump to communicate with each other”. This has the same issue as claim 1 except for using the terms “fuel inflow part”, “first passage”, and “fuel pump” and will be interpreted in the same manner.
Claim 2 recites “a fuel inflow part provided downstream of the first passage from the fuel pump to allow the fuel tank and the fuel pump to communicate with each other”. The fuel inflow part is disclosed to provide fuel to the pump and the fuel discharge part is the outlet of the pump per Paragraphs 0060-0064 of the specification. If the fuel inflow part provides fuel to the pump it would not be downstream of the pump. If the fuel inflow part is fed fuel from the pump it would not connect the fuel pump and tank. Additionally claim 2 recites “a fuel discharge part provided upstream of the first passage to guide discharge of the fuel of the fuel pump, wherein the discharge valve is provided with the fuel discharge part”. It is unclear how this upstream/downstream orientation can be maintained. For examination purposes Examiner will consider any tube connecting to the inlet of the pump to be an inflow part and any tube connecting to the outlet of the pump to be a discharge part.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the passage opening process starts when a value less than a level reference value and a value greater than the level reference value are continuously measured by the first sensor part”. The term “a value” is disclosed twice, it is unclear if it refers to the same value or different values. It is also unclear if this is intended to refer to “a measured value” recited in claim 4. For examination purposes, each citation of “a value” will be interpreted as different values. It is also unclear how a sensor part can measure two different values continuously. If Applicant contends that “a value” should refer to the same value it is unclear how “a value” can be both above a reference value and below a reference value when measured continuously,
Claim 6 recites “wherein the passage opening process starts based on the input user command even when a value less than a level reference value and a value greater than the level reference value are continuously measured by the first sensor part”. The term “a value” is disclosed twice and “the input user command” lacks antecedent basis. It is also unclear if this is intended to refer to “a measured value” recited in claim 4. For examination purposes, the multiple uses of “a value” will be interpreted as different values. It is also unclear how a sensor part can measure two different values continuously. If Applicant contends that “a value” should refer to the same value it is unclear how “a value” can be both above a reference value and below a reference value when measured continuously, for examination purposes, “input user command” will be interpreted as the “user command input” as recited in claim 4.
Claim 7 recites similar language as claims 5 and 6 with regard to “a value” and should be corrected similarly.
Claim 7 recites “when a value greater than a level reference value is not measured after a value less than the level reference value is measured”. It is unclear if the value is measured or not because the claim recites that the value is “not measured” or if this simply means the value is below a level reference value. For examination purposes Examiner will interpret this as below a level reference value.
Claim 8 recites “when the fuel moving in the fuel pressing process reaches the discharge valve, a pressing termination process of stopping an operation of the fuel pump”. The claim does not claim a method step. There is a condition, it is not linked to an action. It is unclear what method step needs to be performed to meet this claim.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-2, 4, and 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (KR 100232603 B1, hereinafter Lee) in view of DE 102014210328 to Yoshioka et al (Yoshioka).
Regarding claims 1, Lee teaches a method for controlling a heating apparatus (shown in Figures 4a-4c), in which a fuel tank (61) and a fuel injection part (burner injects fuel from the passages therefor has a fuel injection part) are provided in a first passage that provides a moving path (Page 3, lines 40-50 of the translation, path through which the fuel passes during operation), and air introduced into the first passage to remain is discharged while fuel in the fuel tank is consumed and re-injected (Page 3, lines 51-57), the method comprising: a passage opening process of allowing the first passage (portions or all of 64, 65, and the tube between 63 and 66, Figure 4a) to communicate with the outside through an air bleed bundle (Fig. 4b, show element 67' of discharge valve 67) used to discharge air to the exterior, (Page 3, lines 46-48) provided in the first passage; and a fuel pressing process of operating a fuel pump (63) provided downstream of the first passage from the discharge valve to allow the fuel to moves toward the discharge (Page 3, lines 40-45). Lee is silent on a discharge valve but instead teaches an air bleed bundle.
Yoshioka, teaches the combustion device includes a bleed valve (11) provided between the evaporation cylinder and a discharge side of a pump (3), a bleed port opened and closed by the bleed valve, and a bleed line connecting from the bleed port toward a fuel tank (2). In the combustion device, the discharge valve is configured to open the discharge port at a predetermined pressure which is the pressure in the evaporation cylinder above the pressure during continuous operation, and the pressure in the evaporation cylinder is prevented from rising to an abnormal pressure when the combustion operation is stopped. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Lee with the teachings of Yoshioka to utilize a discharge valve rather than an air bleed bundle. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Lee with these aforementioned teachings of Yoshioka to provide a controllable vent and/or to allow portions of the device to be isolated as desired.
Regarding claim 2, Lee teaches a fuel inflow part (64 or port of 64, shown Figures 4a) provided downstream of the first passage from the fuel pump to allow the fuel tank and the fuel pump to communicate with each other (shown in Figure 3) and a fuel discharge part provided upstream of the first passage to guide discharge of the fuel of the fuel pump, wherein the discharge valve is provided with the fuel discharge part (the tube between 63 and 66, Figure 4a).
19. Regarding claim 4, Lee teaches wherein the heating apparatus comprises at least one of: a first sensor part configured to detect a fuel level of the fuel tank and a user command input part configured to receive a user command, wherein whether the passage opening process starts is determined based on one or more of a measured value of the first sensor part and the user command input through the user command input part (in its normal operation Lee would have an input to turn the device on and off and/or the ability to turn the pump on and off. This indicates at least an on and off button which meets the claim limitation. Additionally, the fuel injection prohibition switch reads on the first sensor part, detects the fuel tank level, and alarms if excess fuel is provided which indicates that it allows operation if excess fuel is not provided, (Page 5, Last Paragraph).
20. Regarding claim 7, Lee teaches when a value greater than a level reference value is not measured after a value less than the level reference value is measured, an alarm process of indicating an alarm in response to a user command that instructs the start of the passage opening process in the user command input thereafter (fuel injection prohibition switch reads on the first sensor part and initiates an alarm per Page 5, Last Paragraph. The user input of turning the device on initiates this process when the level is as claimed).
21. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Yoshioka and U.S. Patent 6478574 to Melcher (Melcher).
22. Regarding claim 3, Lee is silent on a hot air discharge part configured to accommodate the fuel injection part and guide hot air generated by igniting the fuel injected from the fuel injection part to the outside; and a blowing fan configured to introduce external air so as to move to the hot air discharge part, wherein, when the passage opening process is performed, the method further comprises an external air supply process of supplying the external air by the blowing fan to a second passage provided so that the air moves from the blowing fan to the outside through the hot air discharge part.
23. Melcher teaches a hot air discharge part (analogous to a blower motor 20, Figure 2) configured to accommodate the fuel injection part and guide hot air generated by igniting the fuel injected from the fuel injection part to the outside; and a blowing fan (12, Figure 2) configured to introduce external air so as to move to the hot air discharge part, wherein, when the passage opening process is performed, the method further comprises an external air supply process of supplying the external air by the blowing fan to a second passage provided so that the air moves from the blowing fan to the outside through the hot air discharge part (Column 4, Line 47-49). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Lee with the teachings of Melcher to add a blower motor and fan to pump air out of the system. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Lee with these aforementioned teachings of Melcher with the motivation of preventing shock from quick temperature changes.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and shows the general state of the art. The rejections above rely on the references for all the teachings expressed in the text of the references and/or one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably understood or implied from the texts of the references. To emphasize certain aspects of the prior art, only specific portions of the texts have been pointed out. Each reference should be reviewed in responding to the rejection, since other sections of the same reference and/or various combinations of the cited references may be relied on in future rejections in view of amendments.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH LYNNE HEARD whose telephone number is 571-272-0225. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 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, Michael Hoang can be reached at 571-272-6460. 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.
/ELIZABETH L HEARD/Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/STEVEN S ANDERSON II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights