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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/6/2025 has been entered.
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, the asymmetric distribution of the minor segments (Claim 22) 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 Objections
Claim 22 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein minor segments of the plurality of minor segments are circumferentially distributed about the axis to form an asymmetric distribution of minor segments” should be - -wherein the plurality of minor segments are circumferentially distributed about the axis to form an asymmetric distribution of the plurality of minor segments.- -. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1-2, 5-10, 12-14, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 and 23 recite “uninterrupted” which is considered a negative limitation and does not have basis in the original disclosure, so that this claim limitation is considered new matter, see MPEP 2173.05(i).
Claims dependent thereon are rejected for the same reasons.
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.
Claim 1-2, 5-10, 12-14, 21, 22 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 and 23 recite “uninterrupted” which render the term indefinite because it is unclear what “uninterrupted” means. Figure 2; 54 of the instant application is in the spill passage and interrupts the spill passage, see Paragraph 0032 of the instant application, so that it is unclear what the term “uninterrupted” means.
Claims dependent thereon are rejected for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Walter et al (US 2781638 as referenced in OA dated 4/24/2025).
PNG
media_image1.png
454
668
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1 of Walter
Regarding claim 23, Walter discloses a fuel system (Figure 3) for a gas turbine engine (The gas turbine of Column 1, lines 42-44), the fuel system comprising:
a fuel source (Figure 3; 39);
a main supply line (Figure 3; 38) fluidly connected to the fuel source;
a fuel injector (The fuel injector comprising the components below) comprising:
comprising:
a manifold (The manifold formed by Figure 3; 44) fluidly connected to the main supply line; and
a nozzle (Figure 1; 10, 14, 27) extending along an axis (The central axis of the nozzle), the nozzle comprising:
an annular fuel passage (Figure 1; 11) extending through the nozzle and fluidly communicating with the manifold;
a swirl chamber (Annotated Figure 1; labeled cylindrical and frustoconical section) concentric to the axis within the nozzle;
a plurality of fuel ports (Figure 1; 22) fluidly connecting the annular fuel passage to the swirl chamber, each fuel port tangent to a peripheral wall (The wall of the swirl chamber that Figure 1; 22 is tangent to. Column 3, lines 15, 19 labels 22 as a tangential inlet) of the swirl chamber;
a discharge passage (Figure 1; 15) fluidly connecting the swirl chamber to an outlet of the nozzle, wherein the discharge passage is concentric to the axis and opposite the plurality of fuel ports;
a spill passage (Figure 1; 21 to Figure 3; 39) fluidly connecting and uninterrupted (The flow flows from Figure 3; 1 to 44 through 48 without being stopped) between the swirl chamber to the manifold upstream of the annular fuel passage, wherein the spill passage is opposite the discharge passage; and
a valve (Figure 1; 25) disposed along the spill passage comprising a valve element (The valve element of Figure 1; 25 that varies the resistance, Column 3, lines 20-31) variable between a closed position and an open position (Functional Language, the most closed (or most resistance) position and the most open (or least resistance) position. The valve element is movable between the closed and open position) to vary a flow area (The flow area through Figure 1; 25) through the spill passage and thereby vary a flow division (Functional Language, The flow division between the discharge passage and spill passage) between the discharge passage and the spill passage
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, 9-10, 12, 15-18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter et al (US 2781638 as referenced in OA dated 4/24/2025) in view of Bathina (US 20100300102 as referenced in OA dated 9/8/2025).
Regarding claim 1, Walter discloses a fuel injector (The fuel injector comprising the components below) comprising:
a nozzle (Figure 1; 10, 12, 14, 27) extending along an axis (The central axis of the nozzle), the nozzle comprising:
an annular fuel passage (Figure 1; 11) extending through the nozzle and forming a portion (The portion of the fuel path formed by the annular fuel passage) of a fuel path (The fuel path from Figure 3; 30 to the outlet of 1 which is Figure 1; 15);
a swirl chamber (Annotated Figure 1; labeled cylindrical and frustoconical section) concentric to the axis within the nozzle, wherein the swirl chamber includes a cylindrical section (Annotated Figure 1; labeled cylindrical section) contiguous with a frustoconical section (Annotated Figure 1; labeled frustoconical section);
a plurality of fuel ports (Figure 1; 22) fluidly connecting the annular fuel passage to the cylindrical section of the swirl chamber, each fuel port tangent to a peripheral wall (The wall of the swirl chamber that Figure 1; 22 is tangent to. Column 3, lines 15, 19 labels 22 as a tangential inlet) of the swirl chamber;
a discharge passage (Figure 1; 15) fluidly connecting a minor diameter (The minor diameter of the frustoconical section) of the frustoconical section of the swirl chamber to an outlet (The outlet of Figure 1; 15) of the nozzle, wherein the discharge passage is concentric to the axis; and
a spill passage (The passage from Figure 1; 21 to Figure 3; 39) fluidly connecting and uninterrupted (The fuel flows from Figure 1; 21 to Figure 3; 39 without being stopped) between the swirl chamber and the fuel path at a location (Figure 3; 39) upstream of the annular fuel passage,
wherein the spill passage comprises a minor segment (The segment in Figure 1; 12) forming a minimum spill passage area (The area of Figure 1; 12) of the spill passage and a major segment (Figure 1; 12) contiguous with the minor segment, and wherein the minor segment of the spill passage fluidly connects to the cylindrical section of the swirl chamber opposite the discharge passage
Walter does not disclose wherein the annular fuel passage includes a convergent section with a monotonically decreasing area and a minimum area at the downstream end, and
wherein the plurality of fuel ports fluidly communicates with the convergent section at a location upstream from the minimum area.
However, Bathina teaches wherein an annular fuel passage (The fuel passage for Figure 5; 68 formed by 96, 84, 66) includes a convergent section (Figure 5; 64) with a monotonically decreasing area (The monotonically decreasing area of Figure 5; 64) and a minimum area (The topmost area formed by Figure 5; 64) at a downstream end (The area of the annular flow passage above Figure 5; 62)), and
wherein a plurality of fuel ports (Figure 5; 62) fluidly communicates with the convergent section at a location (The location of Figure 5; 62) upstream from the minimum area.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter wherein the annular fuel passage includes a convergent section with a monotonically decreasing area and a minimum area at the downstream end, and wherein the plurality of fuel ports fluidly communicates with the convergent section at a location upstream from the minimum area as taught by and suggested by Bathina because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Bathina’ss providing fuel according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Walter’s fuel injector, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case providing swirling fuel, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification has the annular fuel passage having a convergent section with the fuel ports being upstream of the minimum area at the downstream end of the annular fuel passage).
Regarding claim 5, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter further discloses wherein the minor segment is concentric with the axis.
Regarding claim 9, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter further discloses a valve (Figure 1; 25) disposed along the spill passage comprising a valve element (The valve element of Figure 1; 25 that varies the resistance, Column 3, lines 20-31) variable between a closed position and an open position (Functional Language, the most closed (or most resistance) position and the most open (or least resistance) position. The valve element is movable between the closed and open position) to change a flow area (The flow area through Figure 1; 25) through the spill passage and thereby vary a flow division (Functional Language, The flow division between the discharge passage and spill passage) between the discharge passage and the spill passage.
Regarding claim 10, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter further discloses wherein the swirl chamber is radially inward from the annular fuel passage relative to the axis.
Regarding claim 12, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter further discloses wherein the minor segment and the major segment of the spill passage are concentric with the axis.
Regarding claim 15, Walter discloses a fuel system (Figure 3) for a gas turbine engine (The gas turbine of Column 1, lines 42-44), the fuel system comprising:
a fuel source (Figure 3; 39);
a main supply line (Figure 3; 38) fluidly connected to the fuel source;
a fuel injector (The fuel injector comprising the components below) comprising:
a manifold (Figure 3; 46) fluidly connected to the main supply line; and
a nozzle (Figure 1; 10, 14, 27) extending along an axis (The central axis of the nozzle), the nozzle comprising:
an annular fuel passage (Figure 1; 11) extending through the nozzle and fluidly communicating with the manifold;
a swirl chamber (Annotated Figure 1; labeled cylindrical and frustoconical section) concentric to the axis within the nozzle;
a plurality of fuel ports (Figure 1; 22) fluidly connecting the annular fuel passage to the swirl chamber, each fuel port tangent to a peripheral wall (The wall of the swirl chamber that Figure 1; 22 is tangent to. Column 3, lines 15, 19 labels 22 as a tangential inlet) of the swirl chamber;
a discharge passage (Figure 1; 15) fluidly connecting the swirl chamber to an outlet of the nozzle, wherein the discharge passage is concentric to the axis and opposite the plurality of fuel ports; and
a spill passage (Figure 1; 21 to 39) fluidly connecting the swirl chamber to the manifold (The fuel from Figure 3; 39 goes to 46, so that the spill passage connects the swirl chamber to the manifold) upstream of the annular fuel passage, wherein the spill passage is opposite the discharge passage.
Walter does not disclose wherein the annular fuel passage includes a convergent section with a monotonically decreasing area and a minimum area at the downstream end, and
wherein the plurality of fuel ports fluidly communicates with the convergent section at a location upstream from the minimum area.
However, Bathina teaches wherein an annular fuel passage (The fuel passage for Figure 5; 68 formed by 96, 84, 66) includes a convergent section (Figure 5; 64) with a monotonically decreasing area (The monotonically decreasing area of Figure 5; 64) and a minimum area (The topmost area formed by Figure 5; 64) at a downstream end (The area of the annular flow passage above Figure 5; 62), and
wherein a plurality of fuel ports (Figure 5; 62) fluidly communicates with the convergent section at a location (The location of Figure 5; 62) upstream from the minimum area.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter wherein the annular fuel passage includes a convergent section with a monotonically decreasing area and a minimum area at the downstream end, and wherein the plurality of fuel ports fluidly communicates with the convergent section at a location upstream from the minimum area as taught by and suggested by Bathina because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Bathina’s providing fuel according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Walter’s fuel injector, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case providing swirling fuel, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification has the annular fuel passage having a convergent section with the fuel ports being upstream of the minimum area at the downstream end of the annular fuel passage).
Regarding claim 16, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter further discloses wherein the swirl chamber includes a cylindrical section (The cylindrical portion of Figure 1; 20) contiguous with a frustoconical section (The frustoconical portion of Figure 1; 20), and wherein the plurality of fuel ports is equally spaced along the peripheral wall of the swirl chamber and fluidly connects the annular fuel passage to the cylindrical section, and wherein the discharge passage fluidly connects a minor diameter (The minor of the frustoconical section) of the frustoconical section to the outlet, and wherein the spill passage fluidly connects the cylindrical section to the fuel path upstream of the annular fuel passage.
Regarding claim 17, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter further discloses wherein the spill passage includes a minor segment (Figure 1; 21 is a minor segment) forming a minimum spill passage area (Figure 1; 21 forms a minimum spill passage area) of the spill passage.
Regarding claim 18, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter further discloses wherein the minor segment is concentric with the axis.
Regarding claim 20, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter further discloses valve (Figure 1; 25) disposed along the spill passage comprising a valve element (The valve element of Figure 1; 25 that varies the resistance, Column 3, lines 20-31) variable between a closed position and an open position (Functional Language, the most closed (or most resistance) position and the most open (or least resistance) position. The valve element is movable between the closed and open position) to change a flow area (The flow area through Figure 1; 25) through the spill passage and thereby vary a flow division (Functional Language, The flow division between the discharge passage and spill passage) between the discharge passage and the spill passage.
Claim(s) 2, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter in view of Bathina as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Francis et al (US 20220163205 as referenced in OA dated 4/24/2025).
Regarding claim 2, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter in view of Bathina does not teach wherein the plurality of fuel ports is equally spaced along the peripheral wall of the swirl chamber with respect to the axis.
However, Francis teaches wherein a plurality of fuel ports (Figure 4; 29) is equally spaced along a peripheral wall (Figure 2; 26) of a swirl chamber (The swirl chamber where Figure 2; 29 outlets) with respect to an axis (Figure 2; L).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter in view of Bathina wherein the plurality of fuel ports is equally spaced along the peripheral wall of the swirl chamber with respect to the axis as taught by and suggested by Francis because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Francis’s equally spaced fuel ports according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Walter’s fuel injector, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case circumferentially distributing the fuel, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification has the fuel ports being equally spaced circumferentially).
Regarding claim 8, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter in view of Bathina does not teach wherein each fuel port includes a square cross-section with a diagonal aligned with a circumferential direction about the axis.
However, Francis teaches wherein each fuel port of a plurality of fuel ports (Figure 4; 29) includes a square cross-section (Paragraph 0020) with a diagonal (The diagonal of Figure 4; 29) aligned with a circumferential direction about an axis (The circumferential diction of Figure 2; L that align with each diagonal of Figure 4; 29).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter in view of Bathina wherein each fuel port includes a square cross-section with a diagonal aligned with a circumferential direction about the axis as taught by and suggested by Francis because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Francis’s square fuel ports according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Walter in view of Bathina’s fuel injector, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case providing fuel through fuel ports, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification has the fuel ports being square).
Claim(s) 6, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter in view of Bathina as applied to claim 1, above, and further in view of Yen et al (US 5647536).
Regarding claim 6, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter in view of Bathina does not teach wherein the minor segment is radially offset with respect to the axis.
However, Yen teaches wherein a minor segment (Figure 1A; 94) is radially offset with respect to an axis (The central axis of Figure 1A; 66).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter in view of Bathina wherein the minor segment is radially offset with respect to the axis as taught by and suggested by Ball because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Yen’s orientation of the minor segment according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Walter in view of Bathina’s fuel injector, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case providing fuel, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification has the minor segment offset of the axis).
Regarding claim 21, Walter in view of Bathina and Yen teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter further discloses wherein the minor segment is the sole minor segment of the spill passage.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter in view of Bathina as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Herbert et al (US 20060096291 as referenced in OA dated 4/24/2025).
Regarding claim 7, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter in view of Bathina does not teach wherein the discharge passage includes a minor segment contiguous with a tapered section that diverges towards the outlet.
However, Herbert teaches wherein a discharge passage (Figure 2; 30o) includes a minor segment (The throat of Figure 2; 30o) contiguous with a tapered section (The tapered section of Figure 2; 30o) that diverges towards an outlet (The outlet of Figure 2; 30o).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter in view of Bathina wherein the discharge passage includes a minor segment contiguous with a tapered section that diverges towards the outlet as taught by and suggested by Herbert in order to form fuel spray cones (Paragraph 0024, The modification uses the discharge passage of Herbert in Walter).
Claim(s) 13-14, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter in view of Bathina as applied to claim 1, 17 above, and further in view of Ball (US 2613997as referenced in OA dated 4/24/2025).
Regarding claim 13, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter in view of Bathina does not teach wherein the minor segment is one of a plurality of minor segments fluidly connecting the swirl chamber to the major segment of the spill passage.
However, Ball teaches wherein a minor segment (An instance of Figure 1; 64) is one of a plurality of minor segments (Figure 1; 64) fluidly connecting a swirl chamber (Figure 1; 54) to a major segment (Figure 1; 72) of a spill passage (Figure 1; 64, 72).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter in view of Bathina wherein the minor segment is one of a plurality of minor segments fluidly connecting the swirl chamber to the major segment of the spill passageas taught by and suggested by Ball because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Balls’s plurality of minor segments according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Walter in view of Bathina’s fuel injector, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case providing alternate paths in case one of the minor segments fails, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification has a plurality of minor segments).
Regarding claim 14, Walter in view of Bathina and Ball teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter in view of Bathina does not teach wherein the plurality of minor segments of the spill passage is circumferentially distributed about the axis.
However, Ball teaches wherein the plurality of minor segments of the spill passage is circumferentially distributed about an axis (The central axis of the fuel nozzle in Figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter in view of Bathina wherein the plurality of minor segments of the spill passage is circumferentially distributed about the axis as taught by and suggested by Ball because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Balls’s plurality of minor segments according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Walter in view of Bathina’s fuel injector, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case providing alternate paths in case one of the minor segments fails, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (This is the same modification as claim 13).
Regarding claim 19, Walter in view of Bathina teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter in view of Bathina does not teach wherein the minor segment is radially offset with respect to the axis.
However, Ball teaches wherein a minor segment (Figure 1; 64) is radially offset with respect to an axis (The central axis of the fuel nozzle in Figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter in view of Bathina wherein the minor segment is radially offset with respect to the axis as taught by and suggested by Ball because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Balls’s plurality of minor segments according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Walter in view of Bathina’s fuel injector, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case providing alternate paths in case one of the minor segments fails, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (The modification has a plurality of minor segments which are offset of the axis).
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walter in view of Bathina and Ball as applied to claim 13, above, and further in view of Young et al (US 20090217669)
Regarding claim 19, Walter in view of Bathina and Ball teaches the invention as claimed.
Walter in view of Bathina does not teach wherein the plurality of minor segments are circumferentially distributed about the axis to form an asymmetric distribution of the plurality of minor segments.
However, Ball teaches wherein the plurality of minor segments are circumferentially distributed about an axis (The central axis of the fuel nozzle in Figure 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter in view of Bathina wherein the plurality of minor segments are circumferentially distributed about an axis as taught by and suggested by Ball because it has been held that applying a known technique, in this case Balls’s plurality of minor segments according to the steps described immediately above, to a known device, in this case, Walter in view of Bathina’s fuel injector, ready for improvement to yield predictable results, in this case providing alternate paths in case one of the minor segments fails, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings, KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143(D) (This is the same modification as claim 13).
Walter in view of Bathina and Ball does not teach forming an asymmetric distribution of the plurality of minor segments.
However, Young teaches forming an asymmetric distribution (The distribution of Figure 5; 42, see claim 1) of a plurality of minor segments (Figure 5; 42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Walter in view of Bathina and Young to form an asymmetric distribution of the plurality of minor segments as taught by and suggested by Young in order to distribute fuel to higher pressure areas (Paragraph 0006, The modification puts more minor segments near the high pressure areas of Figure 1; 12 of Walter).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts Walter does not disclose “a spill passage fluidly connecting and uninterrupted between the swirl chamber and the fuel path at a location upstream of the annular fuel passage” and “a minimum spill passage area of the spill passage”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, these arguments are conclusory and thus, not persuasive. Furthermore, as shown in this OA, Walter does disclose these claim limitations. Furthermore, the diameter of Figure 1; 21 of Walter is smaller than the diameter of 12 and 24 and Figure 3 of Walter shows 23 and 24 (The pipes with fuel leaving from 1) being smaller than the other pipes.
Applicant asserts that Walter does not disclose “a spill passage fluidly connecting the swirl chamber to the manifold”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Under this new interpretation of Walter presented in this OA, Walter discloses this claim limitation.
Applicant asserts that Walter does not disclose claim 23. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Walter discloses claim 23.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Loprinzo et al (US 6123273 as referenced in OA dated 9/8/2025) shows an annular fuel passage with a convergent section with a minimum area and fuel ports that are upstream of the minimum area
Vinson et al (US 4653278 as referenced in OA dated 9/8/2025) shows a fuel passage with a convergent section with a minimum area and fuel ports that are upstream of the minimum area
Niemeyer et al (US 12092331 as referenced in OA dated 9/8/2025) shows a fuel passage with a convergent section with a minimum area and fuel ports that are upstream of the minimum area
Pal et al (US 20180355792) states in Paragraph 0053 that fuel conduits can be symmetric or asymmetric
Pal et al (US 20230228424) states in Paragraph 0051 that fuel conduits can be symmetric or asymmetric
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN G KANG whose telephone number is (571)272-9814. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 PM EST.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/EDWIN KANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights