DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to the application filed on June 09, 2026. Claims 1, 3, 5-10, 12-15, 20, 23-25, 33-34, 36 are pending. Claims 3, 5-10, 12-15, 20, 23-25, 33-34 remain withdrawn.
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 .
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 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.
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.
Claims 1 and 36 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
As to Claims 1 and 36, the relative term “generally normal” renders the claim indefinite. The term generally is a subjective modifier that indicates some variance is permitted from the plain meaning of “normal”, i.e., orthogonal. Page 211 makes clear that ‘generally normal’ includes some variability from precisely orthogonal, at least up to 7 degrees from a normal of the centerline. The specification states “the spray direction 2132 is inclined at an angle of around 7° relative to a normal of the centreline 2109 such that it is generally normal to the taper angle.”
However, page 211 in the same paragraph also raises question as to whether the term ‘generally normal’ as used in the specification is to also include variability beyond 7 degrees. The specification states “However, in alternative embodiments the spray direction 2132 may be inclined up to around 15° relative to the normal of the centreline 2109”. Here, the language of the specification is ambiguous as to whether “around 15°” is still “generally normal”.
Turning to the remainder of the specification in an attempt to further inform the scope of this claim term raises further question as to what is covered by the term ‘generally normal’. The specification indicates outlet 2240 is considered “oriented generally normal” to turbine axis 2208 in the a direction facing away from the turbine wheel 2204 (pages 225-226). The specification shows that the outlet 2240 is oriented to extend nearly axially along axis 2208 but for a slight decline (Figure 38) in the direction facing away from wheel 2204 (right to the left in Figure 38). Therefore, the specification raises question as to what angle(s) (other than perhaps exactly parallel) would not fall within in the scope of “generally normal”. The metes and bounds of the term and by extension the claim are therefore not clear.
PNG
media_image1.png
576
604
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
532
584
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Prior Art Relied Upon
This action references the following issued US Patents and/or Patent Application Publications:
US PATENT or PUBLICATION NUMBER
HEREINAFTER
US-20130186074-A1
“KANBA”
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.
Claims 1 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KANBA.
PNG
media_image3.png
542
766
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
962
1156
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Re Claim 1, KANBA teaches a turbine for a turbocharger (Figs. 1-3, ¶¶0049-0083), comprising:
a turbine inlet passage [annotated in Image 1] configured to receive exhaust gas from an internal combustion engine 1 [annotated in Image 1], the exhaust gas received by the turbine inlet passage defining a turbine bulk flow (Figure 1);
a turbine wheel chamber [annotated in Image 1] configured to receive the turbine bulk flow from the turbine inlet passage, the turbine wheel chamber configured to contain a turbine wheel 5T supported for rotation;
a turbine outlet passage [passage formed within 3] (See Image 2) configured to receive the turbine bulk flow from the turbine wheel chamber (Figs. 1-2), the turbine outlet passage being at least partially defined by a side wall [annotated in Image 2] and defining a centreline [annotated in Image 2];
an auxiliary passage 3a configured to receive a portion of the turbine bulk flow, the portion of the turbine bulk flow received by the auxiliary passage defining an auxiliary flow (bypass portion of exhaust flowing through 3a); and
a dosing module 7 configured to deliver a spray of aftertreatment fluid [spray of Fuel F] into the turbine outlet passage (note Fuel F is an aftertreatment fluid, ¶¶0076-0083)
wherein the auxiliary passage is configured to direct the auxiliary flow along the side wall in an auxiliary flow layer (exhaust passing through 3A will form a flow layer along the annotated “side wall” in Image 2 since the exhaust flows through the bypass passage 3a);
wherein the dosing module comprises a nozzle 7a in fluid communication with the turbine outlet passage, the nozzle being configured to generate the spray of aftertreatment fluid and to deliver the aftertreatment fluid in a spray direction [annotated in Image 2]; and
wherein the nozzle is positioned on an opposite side of the turbine outlet passage to the auxiliary flow layer (see Image 2) such that the spray direction faces generally towards the centreline of the turbine outlet passage and generally normal to the side wall (“spray direction” in Image 2 forms an angle annotated “angle” in Image 2 that is generally normal to the side wall).
Re Claim 36, KANBA teaches method of operating a turbine for a turbocharger (Figs. 1-3, ¶¶0049-0083), comprising:
receiving exhaust gas [annotated in Image 1] from an internal combustion engine 1 into a turbine inlet passage [annotated in Image 1], the exhaust gas received by the turbine inlet passage defining a turbine bulk flow (Figure 1);
receiving the turbine bulk flow from the turbine inlet passage into a turbine wheel chamber [annotated in Image 1], the turbine wheel chamber configured to contain a turbine wheel 5T supported for rotation (Fig. 1, ¶0056);
receiving the turbine bulk flow from the turbine wheel chamber into a turbine outlet passage [passage formed within 3] (see Image 2), the turbine outlet passage being at least partially defined by a side wall [annotated in Image 2], the turbine outlet passage defining a centreline [annotated in Image 2];
receiving a portion of the turbine bulk flow into an auxiliary passage 3a, the portion of the turbine bulk flow received by the auxiliary passage defining an auxiliary flow (bypass portion of exhaust flowing through 3a);
delivering a spray of aftertreatment fluid [spray of Fuel F] into the turbine outlet passage using a dosing module 7 (¶¶0076-0083) (note Fuel F is an aftertreatment fluid, ¶¶0076-0083); and
directing the auxiliary flow along the side wall in an auxiliary flow layer (exhaust passing through 3A will form a flow layer along the annotated “side wall” in Image 2 since the exhaust flows through the bypass passage 3a),
wherein the dosing module comprises a nozzle 7a in fluid communication with the turbine outlet passage, the nozzle being configured to generate the spray of aftertreatment fluid and to deliver the aftertreatment fluid in a spray direction [annotated in Image 2]; and
wherein the nozzle is positioned on an opposite side of the turbine outlet passage to the auxiliary flow layer (see Image 2) such that the spray direction faces generally towards the centreline of the turbine outlet passage and generally normal to the side wall (“spray direction” in Image 2 forms an angle annotated “angle” in Image 2 that is generally normal to the side wall).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejections have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON H DUGER whose telephone number is (313) 446-6536. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30a to 6:30p EST Monday & Tuesday, and is OFF Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian, can be reached on (571) 270-5426. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
JASON H DUGER
PRIMARY EXAMINER, ART UNIT 3741
PHONE (313) 446 6536
FAX (571) 270 9083
DATE
August 18, 2026
/JASON H DUGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights