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 .
This Office action is in response to the remarks filed November 28, 2026.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 8, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parlman (US 4322304-appears on the PTO-1449).
Parlman teaches lubricating compositions or fuel compositions comprising a lubricating stock or hydrocarbon fuel and bis(disubstituted aminomethyl)phenol (see abstract; col. 1, lines 7-16, col. 3, lines 1-3). The phenol compounds have the following formulae:
PNG
media_image1.png
210
356
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The compounds render obvious those of the present invention when in Parlman R is H and R1 and R2 are alkyl radicals having 1 to 6 carbon atoms. R1 and R2 also may be taken together to be part of a cyclic group containing oxygen (see col. 2, lines 10-57). In the present invention m and p are each 0, n is 2, R1 and R2 are H and R3 and R4 are hydrocarbyl or part of a cyclic group. Parlman meets the limitations of the claims other than the differences that are set forth below.
Parlman does not specifically teach the method for preventing or reducing low speed pre-ignition events in a spark-ignited internal combustion engine. However, it would be reasonable to expect that Parlman would meet this limitation because he uses the lubricant or fuel or in the same environment as the present invention, i.e., lubricating oil additive for a combustion engine or fuel additive for a combustion engine. Therefore, if the present additive performs the claimed functions of preventing and reducing low speed pre-ignition events in engines then the skilled artisan would expect that Parlman also performs these functions.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fareri (US 2,755,175-appears on the PTO-892).
Fareri teaches gasoline containing 2,4,6-tri-(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol. The compound prevents or suppresses discoloration and the formation of gummy substances during storage or use (see col. 1, lines 15-19 and Table 1). The phenol may be combined with other additives that are normally added to gasolines without adversely affecting the desirable properties of the phenol (see col. 4, lines 5-10).
Fareri does not specifically teach the method for preventing or reducing low speed pre-ignition events in a spark-ignited internal combustion engine. However, it would be reasonable to expect that Fareri would meet this limitation because he teaches using the fuel, which would suggest a spark-ignited engine. Hence, the additive is used in the same environment as the present invention, i.e., fuel additive for a combustion engine. Therefore, if the present additive performs the claimed functions of preventing and reducing low speed pre-ignition events in engines then the skilled artisan would expect that Fareri would also performs these functions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Parlman is missing R5 which may be C1-C100 hydrocarbyl group, carboxyl group, ether or hydroxyl group.
It should be noted that in the structure of the present claims that p may be 0 and therefore there would be no R5. Thus, Parlman meets this limitation and also meets the limitation that p+n+m is less than 6. In the instant claim the examiner’s position is that n=2, m=0 and p=0.
Applicant argues that Fareri also lacks R5. The 2,4,6-tri(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol taught by Fareri has the following formula
PNG
media_image2.png
244
332
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In the instant claims, when n is 3, p is 0, m is 0, R1, R2, R3 and R4 are C1 (CH3), the compound is rendered obvious by Fareri.
Claims 2, 6 and 7 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 prior art does not teach or suggest a carboxyl group and the secondary additive is an acid, phenol, 1,3-dicarbonyl, hydroxyamide, antioxidant, salicylate or amidine in combination with the primary additive (phenolic amine).
Claims 11-18 are allowed. The prior art fails to teach or suggest the method as set forth in the claims wherein the phenolic amine and the secondary additive are supplied to a spark-ignited engine via the fuel composition.
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 CEPHIA D TOOMER whose telephone number is (571)272-1126. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Prem Singh can be reached at 571-272-6368. 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.
/CEPHIA D TOOMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1771 18975959/20260312