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 § 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 1-16 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 the limitation "the fuel flow" in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the main electromagnet” and “the secondary electromagnet.” The limitation refers back to the limitations “at least one secondary electromagnet” and “at least one main electromagnet.” The claim is unclear as to whether the limitation puts forth one main and secondary electromagnet or one or more main and secondary electromagnets with the claimed structure. The same rejection applies to additional instances of the limitation throughout the claims.
The remaining claims are rejected due to dependency from claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7 and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hohl (US 6,796,511).
Regarding claim 1, Hohl discloses an electromagnetic fuel injector comprising:
a tubular support body (4);
an injection nozzle (3) arranged at one end of the support body (4) (Figure 1);
an injection valve (14, 15) coupled to the injection nozzle (3) (Figure 1);
a plunger (13), which is movable, so as to adjust the fuel flow through the injection nozzle (3), between a closed position and an open position of the injection valve (Column 2, line 66-Column 3, line 2);
an electromagnetic actuator (2, 5, 9, 11, 6, 10) provided with at least one main electromagnet (2, 5, 9), which is configured, when it is activated, to apply a force to the plunger (13), which pushes the plunger (13) towards the open position of the injection valve (The limitation “configured to” requires that an element be capable of performing a claimed function; Limitations that include the limitation “configured to” will be treated as such, unless otherwise indicated; Column 4, lines 34-38), and with at least one secondary electromagnet (6, 10); and
a closing spring (11) configured to push the plunger (13) towards the closed position of the injection valve (14, 15);
wherein the main electromagnet (2, 5, 9) comprises a main fixed armature (2), which is integral to the support body (4) and is arranged inside the support body (4) (Figure 1), a main coil (5), which is arranged in the area of the main fixed armature (2) (Figure 1), and a main movable armature (9), which is arranged inside the support body (4) (Figure 1), is movable, is coupled to the main fixed armature (2) so as to be magnetically attracted by the main fixed armature (2) (Column 1, lines 10-11 and 8-23, a magnetic adhesion force attracts the armature to the core; Column 4, lines 18-22, the magnetic force of core 2 attracts armature 9), is integral to the plunger (13) (Column 2, line 67-Column 3, line 1) and is magnetically coupled to the main coil (5) (Column 4, lines 19-22);
wherein the secondary electromagnet (6, 10) comprises a secondary coil (6) and a secondary movable armature (10), which is arranged inside the support body (Figure 1), is movable (Column 3, lines 8-10), and is magnetically coupled to the secondary coil (6) (Column 4, lines 33-34);
wherein the secondary electromagnet (6, 10) lacks a secondary fixed armature, which is integral to the support body, is arranged inside the support body and is magnetically coupled to the secondary movable armature so as to magnetically attract the secondary movable armature (Figure 1, the secondary electromagnet does not have a secondary fixed armature), but fails to disclose that the secondary movable armature is integral to the plunger.
Hohl discloses that the armature is held on the plunger by the magnetic force of the secondary coil (Column 3, lines 26-27). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the secondary movable armature integral with the plunger since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has been formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1993). Applicant discloses no criticality as to the integral structure, and it appears the device will perform equally well and with the same function, whether the armature is connected to the plunger, or held onto the plunger. In each switch position the secondary armature moves with the plunger. In the lower switch position, the secondary armature is carried on the plunger by the stop body (Column 3, lines 5-12), and in the upper switch position, the secondary armature is held to the plunger by the secondary coil (Column 3, lines 20-22). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to make the secondary armature integral with the plunger, with no change in the function of the respective components.
Regarding claim 2, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 1, wherein the secondary electromagnet (6,10) is configured, when it is activated, to apply a force to the secondary movable armature (10), which pushes the plunger (13) towards the open position of the injection valve (14, 15) along an entire stroke of the plunger (13) from the closed position to the open position (Column 3, lines 20-31).
Regarding claim 3, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 1, wherein the secondary electromagnet (6, 10) is configured, when it is activated, to apply to the secondary movable armature (10) a first force, which pushes the plunger ( 13) towards the open position of the injection valve (14, 15) along an initial part of a stroke of the plunger (13) from the closed position to the open position (Column 3, lines 20-31), and a second force, which is contrary to the first force and pushes the plunger (13) towards the closed position of the injection valve (14, 15) along a final part of the stroke of the plunger (13) from the closed position to the open position (Column 3, lines 31-32 and 39-46).
Regarding claim 4, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 1, wherein the secondary electromagnet (6, 10) is configured, when it is activated, to apply to the secondary movable armature (10) a force, which pushes the plunger (13) towards the closed position of the injection valve (14, 15) along an entire stroke of the plunger (13) from the closed position to the open position (Column 3, lines 20-31, 31-32 and 39-46).
Regarding claim 5, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 4, wherein the secondary electromagnet (6, 10) is configured, when it is activated, to apply to the secondary movable armature (10) a zero force when the plunger (13) is in the closed position (Column 3, lines 20-22, The initial force of the electromagnet provides a holding force to the armature that results in a zero force, as it does not provide an immediate lifting of the plunger).
Regarding claim 7, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 1, wherein the secondary electromagnet (6, 10) is configured to generate a magnetic force, which pushes the plunger (13) due to the forces that attract the secondary movable armature (10) towards a position of minimum magnetic reluctance relative to the secondary coil (6) (The position and function of the electromagnet provides for the magnet to generate a force that pushes the plunger, while being attracted by the coil and primary electromagnet).
Regarding claim 11, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 1, wherein there is provided a control unit (the control unit is suggested, as the disclosure puts forth that the system is operated in various switch positions) configured to:
circulate through the electromagnets (2, 5, 9, 6, 10) an electric current (i) having an effective opening value to achieve a displacement of the plunger (13) from the closed position toward the open position (Column 3, lines 20-25);circulate through the electromagnets (2, 5, 9, 6, 10) an electric current (i) having an effective closing value to achieve a displacement of the plunger from the open position toward the closed position; and circulate through the electromagnets an electric current (i) having an effective slowing down value greater than the effective closing value to slow down the displacement of the plunger from the open position toward the closed position, without stopping it (Column 3, lines 33-49).
Regarding claim 12, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector (1) according to claim 11, wherein the effective slowing down value is equal to the effective opening value (Figure 2 shows that at the points of supply of current, the values are equal).
Regarding claim 13, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 11, wherein the effective slowing down value is circulated for a shorter time interval than a time interval for which the effective opening value is circulated (Figure 2, in each of the graphs, the period of supply of the opening current is larger than that of the slowing down).
Regarding claim 14, Modified Hohl discloses a control method for controlling the electromagnetic injector according to claim 1 and comprising the step of activating, when the plunger (13) moves from the open position to the closed position, the electromagnets such that the electromagnets generate a magnetic force that slows down the travel of the plunger (5) toward the closed position, without stopping it (Column 3, lines 33-49).
Regarding claim 15, Modified Hohl discloses the control method according to claim 14, wherein the electromagnets are deactivated before the movable armature reaches the closed position (Column 4, lines 39-42 and 52-53).
Regarding claim 16, Modified Hohl discloses the control method according to claim 14, wherein, when the plunger (13) moves from the open position to the closed position, an electric current (i) having initially a peak effective value (Ii) and subsequently a holding effective value (I lower than the peak effective value (Ii) is circulated through the electromagnets (Column 4, lines 13-22, The peak value occurs when both magnets are supplied with current; This is followed by a lower holding value that holds the secondary armature on the core, as the closing begins; This value is lower than the peak value).
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Modified Hohl in view of Ravaud (FR3017685)
Regarding claim 6, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the two coils of the two electromagnets are connected to one another in series and, hence, the same electric (i) current flows through them.
Ravaud discloses an injector device wherein two coils (3, 3a) of electromagnets (4, 4a) are connected to one another in series (Page 3, Paragraph 4, line 5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hohl with the disclosures of Ravaud, providing the two coils of the two electromagnets connected to one another in series and, hence, the same electric (i) current flowing through them, as the configuration was a known means of providing voltage in a device featuring two coils, and the modification would have yielded predictable results, including provision of voltage in a system where the means of supplying voltage is not a critical element.
Claim(s) 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Modified Hohl alone, or further in view of Parotto (US 2019/0360424).
Regarding claim 8, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 1, wherein a control unit (19) is provided (the control unit is suggested, as the disclosure puts forth that the system is operated in various switch positions), which is configured to activate, when the plunger (13) moves from the open position to the closed position, the electromagnets, so that the electromagnets generate a magnetic force that slows down the movement of the plunger towards the closed position, without stopping it (Column 4, lines 49-53, The secondary armature provides a slowing down force during closing of the valve).
Should it be found that a control unit is not suggested, Parotto discloses an injector that includes a control unit (9) configured to control circulation of voltage (Paragraph 30).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Modified Hohl with the disclosures of Parotto, providing the system to include a control unit controlling activation and deactivation of the coil, as the configuration was a known means of operating of a coil, and the modification would have yielded predictable results, including provision of voltage in a system where the means of supplying voltage is not a critical element.
Regarding claim 9, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 8, wherein the control unit (as suggested or modified by Parotto) is configured to deactivate the electromagnets before the movable armature reaches the closed position (Column 4, lines 39-42 and 52-53).
Regarding claim 10, Modified Hohl discloses the electromagnetic injector according to claim 8, wherein the control unit (as suggested or modified by Parotto) is configured, when the plunger (13) moves from the open position to the closed position, to circulate through the electromagnets an electric current (i) having initially a peak effective value (Ii) and subsequently a holding effective value (I lower than the peak effective value (Ii) (Column 4, lines 13-22, The peak value occurs when both magnets are supplied with current; This is followed by a lower holding value that holds the secondary armature on the core, as the closing begins; This value is lower than the peak value).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER R. DANDRIDGE whose telephone number is (571)270-1505. The examiner can normally be reached M-T 9am-7pm.
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 O. 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.
CHRISTOPHER R. DANDRIDGE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3752
/CHRISTOPHER R DANDRIDGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752