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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 12 mentions removing a second throttle body from the engine. However, there is not detail within the specification or the drawings to show a second throttle body. Figure 5 of the present invention shows a single throttle body with the twin adapter (513), but not a second throttle body anywhere referenced in the specification or shown in the figures. Examiner reads this claim as if the second throttle body is referring to the first throttle body.
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) 1-5, 9-16, and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Loberger et al. (U.S. Patent 6,602,099), hereinafter “Loberger”.
Regarding claim 1, Loberger 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,
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; 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 (as mentioned above in 112 rejection, examiner refers the second throttle body as the first throttle body) from an internal combustion engine related to the intake conduit. Examiner notes that when repairing or replacing, the use may remove the throttle body from the intake system.
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; 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).
Claim(s) 6-8 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loberger 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.
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 12/15/2025