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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2015/0218981 to Bidner.
Regarding claim 1, Bidner discloses an internal combustion engine capable of burning a fuel containing hydrogen gas, comprising:
a cylinder block (26, fig. 2; [33]) containing at least one cylinder (34, fig. 2) and including a crankcase (28, fig. 2) which contains a crank shaft (33, fig. 2) disposed below the cylinder;
a rocker cover (fig. 2; upper part of the cylinder above intake and exhaust valves) which defines an upper space covering an upper portion of a cylinder head disposed above the cylinder block;
a ventilation gas inlet (102, fig. 2; [39]) formed in the crankcase;
a gas passage forming part (from 74 to 102 to 116, fig. 2) which forms a gas passage connecting a crank chamber (inside of crankcase, fig. 2) of the crankcase and the upper space of the rocker cover (fig. 2); and
a discharged gas outlet (towards 80 of 76, fig. 2) formed in an upper portion of the rocker cover.
Regarding claim 2, Bidner discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 1, wherein the ventilation gas inlet is formed on one side of the crankcase with respect to a vertical plane passing through a center axis of the crank shaft (fig. 2), and wherein the gas passage forming part is disposed on a side opposite to the one side with respect to the vertical plane (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 4, Bidner discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 1, wherein the discharged gas outlet is formed in an upper surface of the rocker cover (see fig. 2).
Regarding claim 10, Bidner discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 1,comprising:a valve drive device (one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that intake and exhaust valves of the engine are operated by overhead camshafts which are equivalent to the valve drive device as claimed) disposed in the upper space of the rocker cover and configured to drive an intake valve and an exhaust valve; and a power transmission device (148, fig. 2) disposed in the gas passage and configured to transmit rotational motion of the crank shaft to the valve drive device (operation of the transmission).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bidner as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of US 6,167,874 to Becker et al (Becker).
Regarding claim 3, Bidner discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 2, but does not explicitly disclose which Becker discloses:
the discharged gas outlet (45, fig. 3) is formed on the one side of the rocker cover with respect to the vertical plane.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the discharge gas outlet as taught by Becker in the device of Bidner so that exhaust emissions are significantly reduced (col. 1, lines 58-62; Becker).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bidner as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of JP 58-0234409 to Kuramochi Toshiyuki (Toshiyuki) (Machine translation provided by applicant has been used).
Regarding claim 5, Bidner discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 4, but does not explicitly disclose which Toshiyuki discloses:
the upper surface of the rocker cover includes an inclined surface (See fig. 1; machine translation), and wherein the discharged gas outlet is formed in an uppermost portion of the inclined surface (see fig. 1; 14 is formed in an uppermost portion of the inclined surface).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the upper surface of the rocker cover include an inclined surface, and wherein the discharged gas outlet is formed in an uppermost portion of the inclined surface as taught by Toshiyuki in the device of Bidner so as to provide an engine which is capable preventing the blow-out of oil, reliably recirculating only blow-by gas to the intake side, achieving clean combustion, reducing the consumption of oil, and achieving safe operation (Page 2, lines 1-3 of machine translation; Toshiyuki).
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bidner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP 2016-223314 to Suzuki et al (Suzuki) (Machine translation provided by applicant has been used for translational purposes).
Regarding claim 6, Bidner discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 1, comprising:
a ventilation gas introduction path connected to the ventilation gas inlet and capable of introducing ventilation gas to the crank chamber through the ventilation gas inlet (fig. 2).
However, Bidner does not explicitly disclose which Suzuki discloses:
a valve device (80, fig. 1; [45]) disposed in the ventilation gas introduction path ([53]) and capable of adjusting flow rate of the ventilation gas.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the valve device of Suzuki in the device of Bidner for controlling the pressure inside the engine body 10 so that it does not become a positive pressure ([45]; Suzuki).
Regarding claim 7, Bidner combined with Suzuki discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 6, further comprising a compressor device (50, fig. 2; Bidner) for producing compressed air supplied to the internal combustion engine,
wherein part of the compressed air produced by the compressor device (22, fig. 1, Suzuki) is introduced to the ventilation gas introduction path (53, fig. 1, Suzuki) as the ventilation gas.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bidner combined with Suzuki as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of JPs 52-112387 to Korematsu at al. (Korematsu) (Machine translation provided by applicant has been used for translational purposes).
Regarding claim 8, Bidner discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 6, further comprising:
a discharged gas discharge path (76, fig. 2) connected to the discharged gas outlet and capable of discharging a discharged gas containing the ventilation gas that is introduced to the upper space of the rocker cover through the gas passage.
However, Bidner does not explicitly disclose which Korematsu discloses:
a hydrogen concentration sensor (7, fig. 1; [1])) disposed in the discharged gas discharge path and configured to detect hydrogen gas concentration contained in the discharged gas.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the hydrogen sensor as taught by Korematsu in the device of Bidner combined with Suzuki so as to control the engine for preventing changes in the concentration and composition of the gas in the crankcase based on the extraction ([1]; Korematsu)
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bidner combined with Suzuki and Korematsu as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of JP 63-154849 to Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. (Mitsui) (Machine translation provided by applicant has been used for translational purposes).
Regarding claim 9, Bidner combined with Suzuki and Korematsu discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 8, but does not explicitly disclose which Mitsui discloses:
a control part configured to control opening degree of the valve device so that a detected value of the hydrogen concentration sensor is less than a lower flammability limit (See page 1 of machine translation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the control part as taught by Mitsui in the system of Bidner combined with Suzuki and Korematsu so as to prevent an explosion caused by gas leaking into the crankcase of the gas engine (page 1 of machine translation; Mitsui)
Claim(s) 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bidner as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP 09-79022 to Osaka Gas Co., Ltd. (Osaka) (Machine translation provided by applicant has been used for translational purposes).
Regarding claim 11, Bidner discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 1, comprising:
an exhaust path (60, fig. 2) through which exhaust gas from the internal combustion engine is discharged.
However, Bidner does not explicitly disclose which Osaka discloses:
an exhaust gas return path (14, fig. 1; [13]) connected to the exhaust path for supplying at least part of the exhaust gas to the ventilation gas inlet.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the exhaust gas return path as taught by Osaka in the device of Bidner so that the engine oil in the crankcase is prevented from being deteriorated by O2 and NOx ([14]; Osaka)
Regarding claim 12, Bidner combined with Osaka discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 11, comprising a heat exchanger (15, fig. 1; Osaka) for cooling the exhaust gas flowing through the exhaust gas return path.
Regarding claim 13, Bidner combined with Osaka discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 12, but does not explicitly disclose a cooling tower for cooling cooling water used as a coolant for cooling the exhaust gas in the heat exchanger,
wherein the exhaust gas is cooled with the cooling water to a temperature between 60°C and 80°C in the heat exchanger.
However, use of a radiator as a cooling tower for cooling cooling water used as a coolant for cooling the exhaust gas in the heat exchanger is well known in the art. It is also well known in the art for an internal combustion engine to be equipped with a radiator. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have a radiator as the claimed cooling tower, since it has been held that omission of an element and its function in a combination where the remaining elements perform the same functions as before involves only routine skill in the art. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184.
Furthermore, Osaka discloses in [15] that the temperature of the cooled exhaust gas is set at 50 C. As such, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the exhaust gas cooled with the cooling water to a temperature between 60°C and 80°C in the heat exchanger, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 14, Bidner combined with Osaka discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 1, comprising an exhaust gas turbine (62, fig. 2; Bidner) driven by exhaust gas discharged from the internal combustion engine,
wherein at least part of the exhaust gas discharged from the exhaust gas turbine is introduced to the ventilation gas inlet (Osaka discloses the exhaust gas return path downstream of catalyst 13. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a catalyst is placed downstream of the turbine. Therefore, once the exhaust gas return path of Osaka is added to the device of Bidner, at least part of the exhaust gas discharged from the exhaust gas turbine will be introduced to the ventilation gas inlet).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over combined with Suzuki discloses as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of JP 2013-221441 to Daihatsu Diesel Mfg. Co., Ltd. (Daihatsu) (Machine translation provided by applicant has been used for translational purposes).
Regarding claim 15, Bidner combined with Suzuki discloses the internal combustion engine according to claim 7, comprising an intake path (at C, fig. 1; Suzuki) through which the compressed air is supplied from the compressor device (22, fig. 1, Suzuki) to the internal combustion engine; an air cooler (32, fig. 1; 30]; Suzuki) disposed in the intake path but does not explicitly disclose which Daihatsu discloses:
a drain separator (40, fig. 2) disposed downstream of the air cooler (24, fig. 2) in the intake path.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the drain separator as taught by Daihatsu in the device of Bidner combined with Suzuki so that corrosion of components of the intake system of the internal combustion engine, particularly the intake manifold, can be prevented ([14]; Daihatsu).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11,220,936 to Dudar
US 11,131,223 to Nakanishi
US 10,024,251 to Pursifull et al.
US 9,410,457 to Fujiki et al.
US 8,371,279 to Doers
US 3,241,537 to O.F. Jones
US 2023/0116637 to Fenske
US 2020/0032019 to Fenske et al.
US 2015/0114369 to Tanikawa et al.
All references above describe general state of art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAPINDER SINGH whose telephone number is (571)270-1774. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 8:00 AM to 5:30 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, Mark Laurenzi can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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.
/DAPINDER SINGH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights