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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 15 June 2026 has been entered.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9-10, 13, 15-18, and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oohashi et al. (US 2012/0180463) in view of Swoish et al. (US 2014/0033678).
In Reference to Claim 1
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
Oohashi et al. (Ooh) discloses:
An aftertreatment catalyst monitor, comprising:
one or more processors (8) to:
receive, from a sensor (64), a temperature of an exhaust gas entering an aftertreatment system (See Ooh, Paragraph [0070]);
determine a filter loading of a filter (62) of the aftertreatment system (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0091]-[0098]);
determine, based on the filter loading and an amount of time relating to the filter loading, that a health notification threshold for the filter is met (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0020] & [0111]-[0113]); and
output a notification indicative of the health notification threshold being met. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0140] & [0142]).
Ooh discloses the claimed invention except:
Wherein the filter loading based on the temperature and wherein the filter includes a catalyst.
Swoish et al. (Swoish) discloses an exhaust gas aftertreatment system including a particulate filter. (See Swoish, Abstract). Swoish discloses determining a soot mass estimate additionally using exhaust gas temperature. (See Swoish, Paragraphs [0006]-[0007]). Swoish additionally discloses the filter including precious metals (i.e.-a catalyst). (See Swoish, Paragraph [0003]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used soot calculation to correct and determine the amount of soot of Ooh and to have added precious metals to the particulate filter of Ooh, as both references are directed towards exhaust gas aftertreatment systems including a particulate filter. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that utilizing the soot calculation of Swoish would for correction of soot would have prevented inaccuracies with other correction models improving the fuel efficiency. (See Swoish, Paragraph [0005]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added precious metals to the particulate filter of Ooh as the precious metals would improve oxidation of soot and hydrocarbons. (See Swoish, Paragraph [0003]).
In Reference to Claim 2
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
wherein the one or more processors (8) are to generate the notification for output as at least one of a graphical display (7) or an audible alarm instruction. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0142] & [0180]).
In Reference to Claim 4
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
wherein the health notification threshold comprises a threshold temperature, and the one or more processors (8) are to determine that the health notification threshold is met based at least on comparing the temperature with the threshold temperature. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0138]-[0139]).
In Reference to Claim 6
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
wherein the one or more processors (8) are to determine that the health notification threshold is met based on determining that at least one of an alarm threshold value or a warning threshold value is met. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0142] & [0180]).
In Reference to Claim 7
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
wherein: responsive to the catalyst loading being equal to the alarm threshold value, the one or more processors (8) are to generate the notification for output as an audible alarm; and responsive to the catalyst loading being equal to the warning threshold value, the one or more processors (8) are to generate the notification for output as a warning. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0142] & [0180]).
In Reference to Claim 9
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
Wherein the one or more processors are to determine that the health notification threshold is met further based on a mass flow of exhaust gas. (See Swoish, Paragraphs [0006]-[0008] w/respect to flow rate).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used soot calculation to correct and determine the amount of soot of Ooh and to have added precious metals to the particulate filter of Ooh, as both references are directed towards exhaust gas aftertreatment systems including a particulate filter. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that utilizing the soot calculation of Swoish would for correction of soot would have prevented inaccuracies with other correction models improving the fuel efficiency. (See Swoish, Paragraph [0005]).
In Reference to Claim 10
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
Wherein the one or more processors are to increment or decrement a catalyst health indicator based on the temperature. (See Swoish, Paragraphs [0006]-[0008] w/respect to soot estimation and temperature).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used soot calculation to correct and determine the amount of soot of Ooh and to have added precious metals to the particulate filter of Ooh, as both references are directed towards exhaust gas aftertreatment systems including a particulate filter. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that utilizing the soot calculation of Swoish would for correction of soot would have prevented inaccuracies with other correction models improving the fuel efficiency. (See Swoish, Paragraph [0005]).
The Examiner notes the use of “or” and that the Ooh-Swoish combination at least increments a soot estimate based on temperature.
In Reference to Claim 13
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
Ooh discloses:
An aftertreatment catalyst monitor system, comprising:
an aftertreatment system comprising a filter (62);
a sensor (64) configured to detect a temperature of an exhaust gas entering the aftertreatment system (See Ooh, Paragraph [0070]); and
one or more processors (8) to:
receive, from the sensor (64), the temperature;
determine a filter loading of a filter (62) of the aftertreatment system (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0091]-[0098]);
determine, based on the filter loading and an amount of time relating to the filter loading, that a health notification threshold for the filter is met (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0020] & [0111]-[0113]); and
output a notification indicative of the health notification threshold being met. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0140] & [0142]).
Ooh discloses the claimed invention except:
Wherein the filter loading based on the temperature and wherein the filter includes a catalyst.
Swoish et al. (Swoish) discloses an exhaust gas aftertreatment system including a particulate filter. (See Swoish, Abstract). Swoish discloses determining a soot mass estimate additionally using exhaust gas temperature. (See Swoish, Paragraphs [0006]-[0007]). Swoish additionally discloses the filter including precious metals (i.e.-a catalyst). (See Swoish, Paragraph [0003]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used soot calculation to correct and determine the amount of soot of Ooh and to have added precious metals to the particulate filter of Ooh, as both references are directed towards exhaust gas aftertreatment systems including a particulate filter. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that utilizing the soot calculation of Swoish would for correction of soot would have prevented inaccuracies with other correction models improving the fuel efficiency. (See Swoish, Paragraph [0005]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added precious metals to the particulate filter of Ooh as the precious metals would improve oxidation of soot and hydrocarbons. (See Swoish, Paragraph [0003]).
In Reference to Claim 15
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
wherein the one or more processors are to provide the notification to an input/output device when a catalyst health indicator is less than or equal to a health warning threshold value. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0072] & [0086]).
In Reference to Claim 16
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
Ooh discloses:
A method, comprising:
receiving, from a sensor (64), a temperature of an exhaust gas entering an aftertreatment system (See Ooh, Paragraph [0070]);
determining a filter loading of a filter (62) of the aftertreatment system (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0091]-[0098]);
determining, based on the filter loading and an amount of time relating to the filter loading, that at least one threshold for the filter loading is met (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0020] & [0111]-[0113]); and
outputting a notification responsive to the at least one threshold being met. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0140] & [0142]).
Ooh discloses the claimed invention except:
wherein the filter loading based on the temperature and wherein the filter includes a catalyst.
Swoish et al. (Swoish) discloses an exhaust gas aftertreatment system including a particulate filter. (See Swoish, Abstract). Swoish discloses determining a soot mass estimate additionally using exhaust gas temperature. (See Swoish, Paragraphs [0006]-[0007]). Swoish additionally discloses the filter including precious metals (i.e.-a catalyst). (See Swoish, Paragraph [0003]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used soot calculation to correct and determine the amount of soot of Ooh and to have added precious metals to the particulate filter of Ooh, as both references are directed towards exhaust gas aftertreatment systems including a particulate filter. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that utilizing the soot calculation of Swoish would for correction of soot would have prevented inaccuracies with other correction models improving the fuel efficiency. (See Swoish, Paragraph [0005]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added precious metals to the particulate filter of Ooh as the precious metals would improve oxidation of soot and hydrocarbons. (See Swoish, Paragraph [0003]).
In Reference to Claim 17
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
wherein the at least one threshold comprises a warning threshold and an alarm threshold less than the warning threshold, the method comprising outputting the notification to include a warning responsive to an indicator of the catalyst loading being less than the warning threshold and outputting the notification to include an alarm responsive to the indicator of the catalyst loading being less than the alarm threshold. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0142] & [0180]).
In Reference to Claim 18
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
wherein outputting the notification comprises wherein providing at least one of a graphical display or an audible alarm instruction. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0142] & [0180]).
In Reference to Claim 20
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
further comprising determining whether the at least one threshold is met based on comparing the temperature with at least one temperature threshold. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0138]-[0139]).
In Reference to Claim 21
(See Oohashi, Figures 1-7)
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses:
wherein:
the at least one threshold for the catalyst loading comprises at least one of an alarm threshold time or a warning threshold time (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0146] & [0172]); and
determining that at least one threshold for the catalyst loading is met comprises:
comparing the amount of time relating to the catalyst loading to at least one of the alarm threshold time or the warning threshold time (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0146] & [0172]); and
responsive to the amount of time relating to the catalyst loading exceeding at least one of the alarm threshold time or the warning threshold time, determining that at least one of the alarm threshold time or the warning threshold time is met. (See Ooh, Paragraphs [0143], [0146], [0167] & [0172]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oohashi et al. (US 2012/0180463) in view of Swoish et al. (US 2014/0033678), further in view of Picton et al. (US 2009/0136387).
In Reference to Claim 8
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses the claimed invention except:
Wherein the one or more processors are to log a fault code responsive to determining that the health notification threshold is met.
Picton et al. (Pic) discloses an engine exhaust system with a DPF regeneration. (See Pic, Abstract). Pic discloses logging regeneration events (i.e.-codes). (See Pic, Paragraphs [0053]-[0054]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have logged the regeneration events as codes within the ECU, as both references are directed towards exhaust systems with a DPF regeneration. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that logging codes corresponding to regeneration events would allow for monitoring of regeneration and diagnosis of filter issues preventing major problems and thus improving efficiency and reducing repair costs. (See Pic, paragraph [0054]).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oohashi et al. (US 2012/0180463) in view of Swoish et al. (US 2014/0033678), further in view of Shiomi et al. (US 2017/0009634).
In Reference to Claim 19
The Ooh-Swoish combination discloses the claimed invention except:
Further comprising automatically controlling an engine to increase engine loading in response to determining that the at least one threshold is met.
Shiomi et al. (Shi) discloses an exhaust gas filter regeneration system. (See Shi, Abstract). Shi discloses using automatic engine load increasing in addition to fuel injection during reset regeneration. (See Shi, Paragraphs [0125]-[0126]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have increased the engine load of during the reset regeneration of Ooh as both references are directed towards exhaust gas filter regeneration systems. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the automatic engine load increase would have improved the reset regeneration and ensure effective temperature rise to adequately remove particulate matter during the reset regeneration improving the efficiency of reset regeneration. (See Shi, Paragraph [0126]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 11-12, and 14 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest “wherein the one or more processors are to determine a catalyst health indicator based on an increment rate corresponding to the catalyst loading or a decrement rate corresponding to the catalyst loading.” in claim 3; “wherein the one or more processors are to determine that the health notification threshold is met responsive to the temperature being greater than approximately 290 degrees Celsius and the time being greater than or equal to approximately one hour.” in claim 5; “wherein the one or more processors are to increment or decrement a catalyst health indicator according to rates of absorption and adsorption on the catalyst, respectively, of a predefined exhaust gas species.” in claim 11; “wherein the one or more processors are to determine that the health notification threshold is met further based on a time at idle of an engine coupled with the aftertreatment system.” in claim 12; and “wherein the one or more processors are to: decrement a catalyst health indicator when the temperature is at or below a decrement threshold temperature (T1);increment the catalyst health indicator when the temperature is at or above an increment threshold temperature (T2); and hold the catalyst health indicator constant while the temperature is between the decrement threshold temperature (T1) and the increment threshold temperature (T2).” in claim 14.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW THOMAS LARGI whose telephone number is (571)270-3512. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 4:00 M-F.
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, Essama Omgba can be reached at (469) 295-9278. 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.
/MATTHEW T LARGI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights