Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/932,970

FUEL SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 31, 2024
Examiner
MANLEY, SHERMAN D
Art Unit
3747
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
CUMMINS INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
484 granted / 577 resolved
+13.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
607
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
§103
33.9%
-6.1% vs TC avg
§102
44.6%
+4.6% vs TC avg
§112
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 577 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION This Non-Final Office action is in response to the claims filed on 10/31/2024. Claims 22-31 and 33-42 are currently pending. 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 Objections Claim 38 objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2 the word “wherein” is repeated. Appropriate correction is required. 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) 22-27, 33, 34 and 36-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Gutscher et al. (US 2014/0034015). As to claim 22 Gutscher discloses a fuel system (figure 2), comprising: an intake port (9); a first runner (11) in fluid communication with the intake port (10); a second runner (21) in fluid communication with the intake port (20); a cylinder (2) defining a combustion chamber (2), the first runner (11) allowing the combustion chamber (2) to be placed in fluid communication with the intake port (9), the second runner (21) allowing the combustion chamber (2) to be placed in fluid communication with the intake port (9), the first runner (11) positioned downstream from the intake port (9) and upstream from the combustion cylinder (2), the second runner (21) positioned downstream from the intake port (9) and upstream from the combustion cylinder (2), whereby fluid (4) in the intake port (9) must choose one of the first and the second runner (11 and 21) to travel from the intake port (9) to the combustion chamber (2); and a high flow fuel injector (3) in fluid communication with the intake port (9) upstream of the first runner (11) and upstream of the second runner (21), whereby a high flow of fuel from the high flow fuel injector (3) can reach the combustion chamber (2) through one of: the first runner (11) alone, the second runner (21) alone, and a combination of the first runner and the second runner (11 and 21). As to claim 23 Gutscher discloses the fuel system (figure 2) of claim 22, further comprising: a first low flow fuel injector (5) in selective fluid communication with the combustion chamber (2). As to claim 24 Gutscher discloses the fuel system (figure 2) of claim 23, wherein the first low flow fuel injector (5) is in fluid communication with the first runner (11) downstream of the intake port (9) and upstream of the combustion chamber (2). As to claim 25 Gutscher discloses the fuel system (figure 2) of claim 23, further comprising: a second low flow fuel injector (5’) in selective fluid communication with the combustion chamber (2). As to claim 26 Gutscher discloses the fuel system (figure 2) of claim 25, wherein the first low flow fuel injector (5) is in fluid communication with the first runner (11) downstream of the intake port (11) and upstream of the combustion chamber (2), and the second low flow fuel injector (5’) is in fluid communication with the second runner (21) downstream of the intake port (9) and upstream of the combustion chamber (2). As to claim 27 Gutscher discloses the fuel system (figure 2) of claim 25 and further comprising: a single controller (paragraph 0029) configured to respond to a fuel demand by activating the high flow fuel injector (3), the first low flow fuel injector (5) and the second low flow fuel injector (5’), each for a substantially equal period of time. (Paragraph 0029 and shown in figure 2). As to claim 33 Gutscher discloses a fuel system (figure 1), comprising: a cylinder defining a combustion chamber (2); an intake port (9) upstream of the combustion chamber (2), the intake port selectively supplying air to the combustion chamber; a first runner (11) extending downstream from the intake port (9) to the combustion chamber (2) and a first intake valve (10’) that controls fluid communication of the intake port (9) to the combustion chamber through the first runner (11); a second runner (21) extending downstream from the intake port (9) to the combustion chamber (2) and a second intake valve (20’) that controls fluid communication of the intake port to the combustion chamber through the second runner (21); and a high flow fuel injector (3) in fluid communication with the intake port (9) upstream of a fork (shown in figure 2) defined by the first runner (11) and the second runner (21), whereby a high flow of fuel from the high flow fuel injector (3) reaches the combustion chamber (2) through the first runner alone while the first intake valve (10’) is open and the second intake valve is closed (20’), the second runner alone (21) when the second intake valve (20’) is open and the first intake valve (10’) is closed, and a combination of the first runner (11) and the second runner (21) when both the first intake valve (10’) and the second intake valve (20’) are open. As to claim 34 Gutscher discloses the fuel system of claim 33, further comprising: a low flow fuel injector (5) in fluid communication with the intake port (9) upstream of the fork defined by the first runner (11) and the second runner (21), wherein a low flow of fuel from the low flow fuel injector reaches the combustion chamber through the first runner (shown in figure 2) alone while the first intake valve is open and the second intake valve is closed, the second runner (21) alone when the second intake valve is open and the first intake valve is closed, and a combination of the first runner (11) and the second runner (21) when both the first intake valve and the second intake valve are open. As to claim 36 Gutscher discloses the fuel system of claim 34, wherein: wherein the high flow of fuel from the high flow fuel injector and the low flow of fuel from the low flow fuel injector are controlled to selectively supply the high flow of fuel and the low flow of fuel to the combustion chamber based on an on-time fuel command (paragraph 0029). As to claim 37 Gutscher discloses the fuel system of claim 33, further comprising: a first low flow fuel injector (5) and a second low flow fuel injector (5), each of the first low flow fuel injector and the second low flow fuel injector in fluid communication with the intake port upstream of the fork (shown in figure 1) defined by the first runner (11) and the second runner (21), wherein a low flow of fuel from the first and second low flow fuel injectors (2) reaches the combustion chamber (2) through the first runner (11) alone while the first intake valve (10) is open and the second intake valve (20) is closed, the second runner alone (21) when the second intake valve (20) is open and the first intake valve (10) is closed, and a combination of the first runner (11) and the second runner (21) when both the first intake valve (10) and the second intake valve (20) are open As to claim 38 Gutscher discloses the fuel system of claim 37, wherein: wherein the high flow of fuel from the high flow fuel injector (3) and the low flow of fuel from the first and second low flow fuel injectors (5) are controlled to selectively supply the high flow of fuel and the low flow of fuel to the combustion chamber based on an on-time fuel command (paragraph 0029). 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutscher et al. (US 2014/0034015) in further view of Nishimura (US 2014/0069389). As to claim 28 Gutscher discloses the fuel system (figure 2) of claim 27, with a single controller (not shown see paragraph 0029) that selectively controls the fuel injectors. But is silent to the voltage. Nishimura discloses that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to use a single controller figure 5) to selectively provides a first voltage to the high flow fuel injector and the single controller selectively provides a second voltage to the first low flow fuel injector and to the second low flow fuel injector, the first voltage higher than the second voltage. As Nishimura discloses in (paragraph 0020) that each injector is capable of using both a high and low voltage depending on the needed injector speed. So the controller of Gutscher would have the option of selectable voltage to each injector based on the needed injector speed as this combination would destroy neither invention and enhance the operation of Gutscher. Claim(s) 29-31, 35, 39 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutscher et al. (US 2014/0034015) in further view of Kern (US 2016/0265449). As to claim 29 and 39 Gutscher discloses the fuel system of claim 25, further comprising: a single controller configured to respond to a fuel demand (paragraph 0029). But is silent to how the controls execute the injection instructions Kern discloses (paragraph 0015 and figure 4) a single controller configured to respond to a fuel demand exceeding a threshold value by activating the high flow fuel injector, the first low flow fuel injector and the second low flow fuel injector, each for a substantially equal period of time, the single controller further configured to respond to a fuel demand being less than the threshold by activating the first low flow fuel injector and the second low flow fuel injector without activating the high flow fuel injector. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to use the programing of Kern with the apparatus of Gutscher as it Kerns program is intended to be used with a dual port fuel injection system such as Gutscher. As to claims 30 and 40 Gutscher discloses the fuel system (figure 2) of claim 29, wherein the single controller comprises an engine control unit. (the controller controls the fuel injectors which controls the engine, Paragraph 0029) As to claim 31 Gutscher discloses the fuel system (figure 2) of claim 25, however is silent to the system having a fuel rail arranged to supply fuel to all of the high flow fuel injectors, the first low flow fuel injector, and the second low flow fuel injector. Kern discloses that it is known to have a single fuel rail (150) arranged to supply fuel to all of the high flow fuel injector (148B), the first low flow fuel injector (148A), and the second low flow fuel injector (148B). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to use the fuel rail taught by Kern with the apparatus of Gutscher as it Kerns fuel rail is intended to be used with a dual port fuel injection system such as Gutscher. As to claim 35 Kerns discloses the fuel system of claim 34, wherein: the high flow fuel injector supplies a higher flow rate: and the low flow fuel injector supplies the lower flow of fuel (paragraph 0014). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to provide the high flow fuel injector supplies the high flow of fuel at a rate of 20 kilograms per hour or more: and the low flow fuel injector supplies the low flow of fuel at a rate of 19 kilograms per hour or less. , 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. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In this case the high flow is for condition above idle requiring a higher flow and the low flow was designed to make the engine idle at low loads (see paragraph h0014) Claim(s) 41 and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gutscher et al. (US 2014/0034015) in further view of Guglielmo et al. (US 6,371,092). As to claim 41 Gutscher discloses the fuel system of claim 33, further comprising: a source of fuel, but is silent to the fuel delivery apparatus; and a fuel rail in fluid communication with the source of fuel, the fuel rail storing a quantity of fuel at a fuel rail pressure. Guglielmo discloses a source of fuel (figure 1 #14), and a fuel rail (24) in fluid communication with the source of fuel, the fuel rail storing a quantity of fuel at a fuel rail pressure. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to use the fuel rail taught by Guglielmo with the apparatus of Gutscher as the fuel system of Guglielmo is intended to be used with a dual port fuel injection system such as Gutscher. As to claim 42 Guglielmo also discloses the fuel system of claim 41, further comprising: a pressure regulator (figure 1 #18) in fluid communication with the source (14) of the fuel and the fuel rail (24), the source of the fuel maintaining a fuel source pressure greater than the fuel rail pressure (the cylinder is designed to be a compressed gas cylinder, column 4 lines 20-35). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHERMAN D MANLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-5539. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 7-5:30 est. 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. SHERMAN D. MANLEY Examiner Art Unit 3747 /SHERMAN D MANLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3747 /LOGAN M KRAFT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 31, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601316
Method And Device For Diagnosing A Leak In An Evaporation System And In A Tank Ventilation Line Of An Internal Combustion Engine
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576867
DETERMINATION METHOD FOR DRIVE FORCE TO BE REQUESTED FOR HYBRID VEHICLE, AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12576857
ROBUST VEHICLE SPEED OVER GROUND ESTIMATION USING WHEEL SPEED SENSORS AND INERTIAL MEASUREMENT UNITS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570295
FAST FREE-ROLLING OF WHEELS FOR ROBUST VEHICLE SPEED OVER GROUND DETERMINATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12552453
Method for Operating a Steering Device, Steering Device, Motor Vehicle
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+12.3%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 577 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month