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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 76-82 in the reply filed on 4/3/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim(s) 76-82 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamazaki et al. (U.S. Publication Number 2015/0337765), hereinafter “Yamazaki” in view of Fukushima et al. (U.S. Publication 2006/0266330), hereinafter “Fukushima”.
Regarding claim 76, Yamazaki discloses the same invention substantially as claimed such as a hand-held power tool (paragraph 2 mentions a brush cutter or chain saw) comprising a crankcase (216) scavenged combustion engine arranged to drive a work tool (paragraph 2), and a fuel injector (202) configured to provide a controlled amount of fuel into an air and fuel intake flow of the combustion engine, the power tool comprising a throttle valve (242) arranged to control the air and fuel intake flow, arranged in series with a manually controlled throttle valve (204, inherent that the trigger of a chain saw controlled the open/close of the throttle valve), wherein the fuel injector (202 shown in figure 3) is arranged downstream from the manually controlled throttle valve and the electronically controlled throttle valve (the fuel injector in figure 3 is disposed downstream of a portion of the throttle valve 204, claim does not state that fuel injector has to be downstream of the entire valve), but is silent to disclose that one of the throttle valve is electronically controlled by the ECU. However, Fukushima teaches the use of electronically controlling one of the throttle valves by a control signal from the ECU (paragraph 8) for the purpose of providing automatic operation, smoother cold starts, and reducing error to help the engine run more efficiently. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide electronic actuation of the second throttle valve as taught by Fukushima for the purpose of providing automatic operation, smoother cold starts, and reducing error to help the engine run more efficiently.
Regarding claim 77, Yamazaki and Fukushima disclose the hand-held power tool according to claim 76, wherein the manually controlled throttle valve (Yamazaki, 204) is a mechanically controlled throttle valve operated based on a position of a trigger of the hand-held power tool (obvious for a chainsaw).
Regarding claim 78, Yamazaki and Fukushima disclose the hand-held power tool according to claim 76, wherein the manually controlled throttle valve (Yamazaki, 204) is a second electronically controlled throttle valve operated based at least in part on the position of the trigger. Examiner notes that although Yamazaki does not specifically mention that both valves are electronically controlled, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the electronically controlled throttle valve from a trigger of the power tool instead of a mechanical linkage since it is known in the art.
Regarding claim 79, Yamazaki and Fukushima disclose the hand-held power tool according to claim 76, wherein the electronically controlled throttle valve (Yamazaki, 242) and the manually controlled throttle valve (Yamazaki, 204) are each arranged to control an air flow in a main combustion air flow channel (Yamazaki, 226) and an air flow in one or more airhead channels (Yamazaki, 224).
Regarding claim 80, Yamazaki and Fukushima disclose the hand-held power tool according to claim 79, comprising a first separating wall (Yamazaki, 222) arranged in connection to the manually controlled throttle valve (Yamazaki, 204) and the electronically controlled throttle valve (Yamazaki, 242) to separate at least one airhead channel from the main combustion air flow channel (Yamazaki, shown in figure 1).
Regarding claim 81, Yamazaki and Fukushima disclose the hand-held power tool according to claim 76, wherein the fuel injector (Yamazaki, 206) is arranged upstream from and distanced from the combustion engine (Yamazaki, shown in figure 1).
Regarding claim 82, Yamazaki and Fukushima disclose the hand-held power tool according to claim 80, further comprising a second separating wall (Yamazaki, 12b) arranged in connection to and downstream from the fuel injector, between the at least one airhead channel and the main combustion air flow channel, wherein the second separating wall is arranged to prevent fuel from the fuel injector from entering into the at least one airhead channel (Yamazaki, shown in figure 4 and 5).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED O HASAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0990. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday; 11AM-7PM.
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 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.
/SYED O HASAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747 6/11/2026
Prosecution Insights