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
Claims 2-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As to claims 2,8, the switch 13 as a whole does not move (“moves”, line 2); only the sliding unit 32 moves. Maybe, the switch acts? This claim is not consistent with drawings.
As to claim 3, “the switch is pushed back by the first holding unit… the second pressure medium” (italics added, last 3 lines) appears as a step (i.e. an action) in an apparatus claim. Is this claim limited to an apparatus that has a part that is in the act of moving, or is the claim intended such that the switch is merely configured to be pushed as depicted in the last 3 lines? Which is Applicant’s intent?
As to claim 6, this claim calls for “a second holding unit” (italics added), when there is no mention of a first holding unit. Should this claim have read upon claim 3?
As to claim 6, “the switch approaching the open state” (italics added, last line) is not consistent with “holds the switch” (line 3). The confusion is a bit more than a lack of the term - - either - - .
As to claim 6, how is a verb (i.e. “pulls”) a limitation in an apparatus claim? Is the apparatus limited to include pulling, or is the switch merely so configured?
As to claim 8, “pulls and holds” is step in an apparatus claim. Is the claim truly so limited, or is the holding unit merely for doing such, or is the holding unit so configured? What is Applicant’s intent?
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 5’s “is kept in the closed state by the pushing force” (italics and underlining added) removes the action of pushing (“switch is pushed” (line 4, claim 3). Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Nishida 5,181,417.
As to claim 1, Nish teaches a semiconductor package for detecting a pressure of a gas flowing in engine piping (air/fuel inlet), the semiconductor package comprising:
a pressure sensor chip 5 configured to convert a pressure of a first pressure medium into an electrical signal, the pressure of the first pressure medium being the pressure of the gas to be detected;
a pressure detection chamber housing (Figure 2C’s cylinder head) the pressure sensor chip such that the pressure sensor chip detects the pressure of the first pressure medium sent thereto; and
a pressure intake part (air/fuel feed line between air filter and valve inlet; or inlet valve itself) disposed between the engine piping (air line from environment to air filter; or line between filter and valve) and the pressure detection chamber, the gas flowing into the pressure intake part from the engine piping as the first pressure medium, wherein
the pressure intake part has a switch (air/fuel valve) configured to switch between an open state and a closed state by physically receiving an external force, and
the switch:
in the open state, spatially couples the engine piping and the pressure detection chamber via the pressure intake part, and
in the closed state, spatially isolates the engine piping and the pressure detection chamber from each other.
As to claim 1, either the engine has a filter with fluid lines on inlet and outlet, or in the alternative, it is well known (and thus, official notice is hereby given) that engines employ such air filter in line to assure the engine components receive particle free air, suggest to one of ordinary skill that it is beneficial to do such in Nish.
Prior Art Cited; not applied
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kubinski 20180023431 teaches (Para 48) use of a pressure sensor in an exhaust line, which signals when it is time to regenerate a particulate filter in that line. There is not switch per last 5 lines of claim 1.
Fujita 20160115845 teach (Figure 1) air filter 22 with fluid lines on both sides of the filter, with an engine.
Hiroshi et al 2015/0198104 teach (Figure 1) a pressure sensor 32 in an exhaust line.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT R RAEVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2204. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon to Friday from 8am to 4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina DeHerrera, can be reached at telephone number 303-297-4237. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/ROBERT R RAEVIS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights