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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 3-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 9, the term “through at least one outlet” should be corrected to “through the at least one outlet”;
Claim 3, line 2, the term “the upper end surface” should be corrected to “an upper end surface”;
Claim 4, line 2, the term “the rate” should be corrected to “a rate”; and
Claim 5, line 3, the term “the first actuator” should be corrected to “the first actuator arrangement”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a first actuator arrangement, and a second actuator in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 2 and 7-16 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 2 recites the limitation "the seat diameter" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "an internal flow path" in line 2. This limitation renders the claim indefinite since it is unclear if it’s the same already recited “internal flow path” in claim 1 or not. For purpose of compact prosecution, the two paths are considered to be the same. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “a second coupling member”. This recitation renders the claims indefinite since claim 1 has not positively recited a first coupling member. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “a second pull tube”. This recitation renders the claims indefinite since claims 9 and 1 have not positively recited a first pull tube. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "an internal flow path" in line 2. This limitation renders the claim indefinite since it is unclear if it’s the same already recited “internal flow path” in claim 1 or not. For purpose of compact prosecution, the two paths are considered to be the same. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the coupling member" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the second coupling member” in lines 1-2. This recitation renders the claim indefinite since claims 13 and 1 have not positively recited a first coupling member. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the engagement distance” in lines 4-5. This recitation renders the claim indefinite since it is unclear to the Examiner if this is referring back to the already recited “a separation distance” or not. For purposes of compact prosecution, they are interpreted to be the same distance.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “the engagement distance” in lines 5-6. This recitation renders the claim indefinite since it is unclear to the Examiner if this is referring back to the already recited “a separation distance” or not. For purposes of compact prosecution, they are interpreted to be the same distance.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 9, 13 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 & 102a2 as being anticipated by Jaegle et al. (US 20150267659 A1).
Jaegle ‘659 discloses as follows:
1. (Currently Amended) A fuel injector 1 (fig. 2) for delivering gaseous fuel to an internal combustion engine (par. 0006), the fuel injector 1 comprising:
a nozzle body (2) provided with a nozzle bore (21);
a first valve needle (outer needle valve 3) received within the nozzle bore (21) and engageable with a first valve seat (first sealing seat 5) to control gaseous fuel delivery through at least one outlet (fig. 2) of an injection nozzle (of valve body 2) at a first injection rate (implicit);
a first actuator arrangement (actuator 72; fig. 2; par. 0027) for controlling movement of the first valve needle (3);
a second valve needle (inner needle valve 4; fig. 2) which is engageable with a second valve seat (6; see par. 0025) to control gaseous fuel delivery through the at least one outlet of the injection nozzle (of 2) at a second injection rate (implicit); and
a second actuator (71; fig. 2; par. 0027) for controlling movement of the second valve needle (4);
wherein the second valve seat (6) is defined by the first valve needle (3; see fig. 2 and par. 0025), the first valve needle (3) defining an internal flow path (hollow region 30; see fig. 2; par. 0028) for gaseous fuel flow when the second valve needle (4) is lifted from the second valve seat (6) and the first valve needle (3) is lifted from the first valve seat (5).
2. (Currently Amended) The fuel injector (1) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first valve seat (5) has a seat diameter which is greater than the seat diameter of the second valve seat (6). See fig. 2.
4. (Currently Amended) The fuel injector (1) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the internal flow path 30 defines a restriction (e.g., the uppermost and narrowest region of the path 30 (fig. 2) defines the claimed “restriction”) to restrict a rate of flow of fuel therethrough.
5. (Currently Amended) The fuel injector (1) as claimed in claim 1 including a first coupling member (e.g., plate-shaped end region for needle 3; see fig. 2; par. 0028) for the first valve needle (3), the first coupling member (plate-shaped end region for needle 3) being coupled to an armature (e.g., also part of this plate-shaped end region for needle 3) of the first actuator arrangement (72) so that actuation of the first actuator arrangement (72) causes movement of the first coupling member and the first valve needle (3).
9. (Currently Amended) The fuel injector (1) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the second valve needle 4 is provided with a second coupling member (e.g., plate-shaped end region for needle 4; see fig. 2; par. 0028) which is coupled to an armature (e.g., also part of this plate-shaped end region for needle 4) of the second actuator (71) so that actuation of the second actuator arrangement (71) causes movement of the second coupling member and the second valve needle (4).
13. (Currently Amended) The fuel injector as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the first and second valve needles (3, 4) has an associated lift member (e.g., restoring spring elements that are not shown; see par. 0026), the associated lift member being actionable via the associated one of the first and second actuator arrangements, wherein the coupling member (plate-shaped end regions for needles 3, 4) associated with the first or second valve needle (3, 4) is coupled to the associated lift member so that movement of the associated lift member results in movement of the associated coupling member to lift the associated one of the first and second valve needles (3, 4) away from respective valve seat (5, 6).
16. (Currently Amended) The fuel injector (1) as claimed in claim 13, further comprising an associated lift member (e.g., restoring spring elements that are not shown; see par. 0026) for the first valve needle (3) which is actuated via the first actuator arrangement (72), wherein the first coupling member (plate-shaped end region for needle 3) is coupled to the associated lift member of the first valve needle (3) so that movement of said the associated lift member results in movement of the first coupling member (plate-shaped end region for needle 3) to lift the first valve needle (3) away from the first valve seat (5).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 7-8, 10-12 and 14-15 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.
The various prior arts made of record teach very similar gas injector with first and second needle valves wherein the first needle is a hollow-type.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG Q NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5424. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 7am-pm (CT).
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 at 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 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.
HUNG Q. NGUYEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3747
/HUNG Q NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747