DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is in response to applicant's amendment received on 6/11/2026. Amended claims 1, 10, and 21, and new claim 23 are acknowledged and the following new grounds of rejection below are formulated.
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 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) 1-5, 9-16, and 20-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loberger et al. (U.S. Patent 6,602,099), hereinafter “Loberger” in view of Kawai et al. (U.S. Publication 2004/0123835), hereinafter “Kawai”.
Regarding claim 1, Loberger discloses the same invention substantially as claimed such as discloses the same invention substantially as claimed such as an intake adapter (50, 60, 70, 80 shown in figure 4) for a vehicle intake system, the intake adapter comprising: an adapter body structured to be disposed between a throttle body (18) and an intake conduit 16, shown in figure 2); a first interface (interface of 60 connecting to throttle body 18), disposed at a first opening of the adapter body (shown in figure 4), including a radial groove (groove formed by 64 and 68) structured to house a seal device (80) at a first interface (column 4, lines 32-37), and a second interface (interface of 60 connecting to 50), disposed at a second opening of the adapter body and fluidly opposite the first opening, structured to be coupled to the intake conduit (shown in figure 4), wherein: the first interface is structured to be inserted into a receiving bore (66 goes into 19, column 6, lines 12-26) of a third interface (interface of throttle body 18 connecting to 80 and 64) of the throttle body, but is silent to disclose a seal device disposed within the receiving bore. However, Kawai teaches the use of an O-ring seal (70) provided between the interior of the throttle body main body (20) and the intake portion (51) for the purpose of providing an air-tight seal to avoid leakage. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Loberger by incorporating an additional seal in between the throttle body interior and the intake adapter exterior when the intake portion is inserted into the throttle body as taught by Kawai for the purpose of providing an air-tight seal to avoid leakage. Examiner notes that providing an additional seal between Loberger’s portions 66 and 19 will only add additional sealing means and would not teach away.
Regarding claims 2-5 and 9, Loberger discloses the seal device being an O-ring and gasket (80) and the first interface (interface of 60 connecting to 18) mounted onto the throttle body using 4 screws (shown in figure 4), and the adapter being substantially straight (shown in figure 4).
Regarding claim 10, Loberger discloses a method comprising: sealingly coupling, via a seal device, a first interface of an intake adapter to a second interface of a throttle body, the first interface disposed at a first opening of an adapter body of the intake adapter and including a radial groove housing the seal device; the second interface including a receiving bore, wherein, when the first interface is inserted into the receiving bore, the seal device is disposed within the receiving bore; and coupling a third interface of the intake adapter to an intake conduit, the third interface disposed at a second opening of the adapter body fluidly opposite the first opening. Refer to rejection of claim 1 for further details since the limitations are similar.
Regarding claim 11, Loberger discloses the method of claim 10, wherein sealingly coupling the first interface to the second interface comprises: seating the seal device (80) in the radial groove (groove in between 64 and 68).
Regarding claim 12, Loberger discloses method of claim 10 further comprising: removing a second throttle body from an internal combustion engine related to the intake conduit. Examiner notes that when repairing or replacing, the use may remove a second throttle body from the intake system for a V-type or twin adapter engine. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the same adapter configuration for a two throttle body engine configuration.
Regarding claims 13-16 and 20, Loberger discloses the method of the seal device being an O-ring and gasket (80, can be classified an O-ring since it is circular in shape as shown in figure 4) and the first interface (interface of 60 connecting to 18) mounted onto the throttle body using 4 screws (shown in figure 4), and the adapter being substantially straight (shown in figure 4).
Regarding claim 21, Loberger discloses the internal combustion engine comprising: an intake adapter for a vehicle intake system, the intake adapter disposed between an intake conduit and a throttle body and comprising: an adapter body; a first interface; and a second interface; wherein: the first interface is disposed at a first opening of the adapter body, includes a radial groove structured to house a seal device, and is inserted into a receiving bore of a third interface of the throttle body, wherein when the first interface is inserted into the receiving bore, the seal device is disposed within the receiving bore; and the second interface is disposed at a second opening of the adapter body, fluidly opposite the first opening, and is coupled to the intake conduit. Refer to rejection of claim 1 for further details since the limitations are similar.
Regarding claim 22, Loberger discloses the internal combustion engine of claim 21, wherein the adapter body has at least one of: a y-shape ;an elbow shape; or a substantially straight shape (the adapter in Loberger has a substantially straight shape).
Regarding claim 23, Loberger and Kawai disclose the intake adapter of claim 1, wherein when the first interface (Loberger, interface of 60 connecting to throttle body 18) is fully inserted into the receiving bore (Loberger, where 66 goes into 19), the seal device (Kawai, 70) forms a seal for air flow between the intake adapter and the throttle body (Kawai, shown in figure 2).
Claim(s) 6-8 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loberger and Kawai in view of Storz (U.S. Publication 2002/0185106), hereinafter “Storz”.
Regarding claim 6-8 and 17-19, Loberger disclose the same invention substantially as claimed but is silent to disclose the adapter having a y-shape or elbow shape and having a 90 degree bend. However, Storz teaches the use of y-shaped pipe (16) that has a 90 degree bend (shown in figure 1) for the purpose of providing an intake adapter for V-type engines (paragraph 14) with a simpler fastening means (paragraphs 4-5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Loberger to have a y-shaped adapter with a 90 degree bend as taught by Storz for the purpose of providing an intake adapter for a V-type engine as well with a simpler fastening means.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 10, and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the new Kawai reference.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
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 8/20/2026
Prosecution Insights