DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This is the initial office action based on the 18/852,745 application filed September 30, 2024. Claims 1-16 are pending and have been fully considered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) dated September 30, 2024 is noted. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: within the paragraph spanning pages 19 and 20, the Specification provides “the control device 110”. Examiner suggests amending this to read --the control device 10-- for consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 6, and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Concerning Claim 4, to avoid antecedent basis issues, Examiner suggests amending “the sensor values” to read --the first sensor value and the second sensor value--;
Similarly concerning Claim 6, Examiner suggests amending “the sensor values” to read --the first sensor value, the second sensor value, and the third sensor value--;. Appropriate correction is required.
Concerning Claim 12, Examiner suggests amending “overrun cutoff” in line 4 to read --overrun cutoff mode-- for consistency.
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 5, 9, 10, 12, and 13 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 5 recites the limitation "the second time" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Specifically, the second time is initially introduced in Claim 4, and it is therefore unclear if Claim 5 should instead depend from Claim 4.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the fifth time" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Specifically, the fifth time is initially introduced in Claim 6, and it is therefore unclear if Claim 9 should instead depend from Claim 6.
Similarly, Claim 10 recites the limitation "the fifth time" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Specifically, the fifth time is initially introduced in Claim 6, and it is therefore unclear if Claim 10 should instead depend from Claim 6.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the ending of the overrun cutoff [mode]" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Specifically, the ending of the overrun cutoff mode is initially introduced in Claims 9 and 10, and it is unclear if Claim 12 should instead depend from Claim 9 or Claim 10.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the fifth time" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Specifically, the fifth time is initially introduced in Claim 6, and it is therefore unclear if Claim 13 should instead depend from Claim 6.
Examiner requests Applicant’s assistance in ensuring all antecedent basis issues are resolved.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4, 6-8, 11, 14, and 15 are allowed.
Claims 5, 9, 10, 12, and 13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Specifically, various references are cited that provide detail of relevant exhaust gas sensor controls.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES G MOUBRY whose telephone number is (571)270-5658. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10AM - 6:30PM.
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, Lindsay M. Low can be reached at 571-272-1196. 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.
/GRANT MOUBRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights