DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 4, 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4, applicant did not positively claim what dimensions are being compared, and what distances in comparison have a ratio.
Claim 4 recites: “wherein a ratio between a height offset of the circular contour, on which the second fuel injection orifices are arranged, and the pitch circle contour, in which the first fuel injection orifices are arranged.” The particular wherein clause does not provide a complete understanding what the ratio is, and how the height offset and the pitch circle contour are compared. Further claim 4 recites: “wherein the distance between the centre point of the pitch circle contour and the centre point of the circular contour is between 0.1 and 0.4.” This particular wherein clause provides a distance, and not a ratio. If the applicant is to claim a distance, then a measuring unit (i.e. millimeter, centimeter, inch) should be applied.
Regarding claim 7, applicant recites: “An internal combustion engine, comprising: cylinders configured to ignite with help of a second fuel a first fuel for combusting the first fuel in the cylinders.” It is unclear how a cylinder is configured to ignite the two fuels.
Claim 10 recites: “the distance between the centre point of the pitch circle contour and the centre point of the circular contour is between 0.17 and 0.29.” It appears that the applicant intended to claim a ratio. As claimed, the limitation recites a distance for what a measuring unit (i.e. millimeter, centimeter, inch) should be applied.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. (US 9,605,635 B2), hereafter Park.
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Park discloses a fuel injector (Fig. 1) of an internal combustion engine configured to supply fuel to an internal combustion chamber of a cylinder of the internal combustion engine (column 2, line 41-47), comprising: a first nozzle needle (506) moveably guided in a first needle guide, which interacts with first fuel injection orifices such that the first nozzle needle, depending on its position either opens or blocks a first fuel flow of a first fuel (shown in Fig. 1), which is a relatively less ignitable fuel (column 5, line 13-23), through the first fuel injection orifices; a second nozzle needle (143) moveably guided in a second needle guide, which interacts with second fuel injection orifices (161) such that the second nozzle needle, depending on its position, either opens or blocks a second fuel flow of a second fuel, which is a relatively ignitable fuel for igniting the first fuel (column 5, line 13-23), through the second fuel injection orifices; wherein the first fuel injection orifices are arranged along a pitch circle contour and the second fuel injection orifices are arranged along a circular contour such that a distance between a centre point of the pitch circle contour and a centre point of the circular contour is greater than a sum of a radius of the pitch circle contour and a radius of the circular contour, and wherein in an installed state of the fuel injector the second fuel injection orifices project deeper or further into the internal combustion chamber of the cylinder than the first fuel injection orifices (Fig. 4 – Fig. 6).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 9,605,635 B2).
Regarding claims 7 and 10, Park discloses the fuel injector according to claim 1, wherein a ratio between a height offset between the contours, and the distance between the centre point of the pitch circle contour and the centre point of the circular contour is between 0.1 and 0.4 (or a ration between 0.17 and 0.29), (i.e. Fig. 3 depicts an injector with having an offset and distance between needle axis that would meet the claimed ratio).
Park does not explicitly disclose the rations being in a range between 0.1 and 0.4 (or 0.17 and 0.29). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the claimed ratio range, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. In this instance the size of the injector and the two needle housings as well as the tip design of the nozzles would affect the ratio.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 9,605,635 B2), in view of Kelenborn (US 2016/0319754 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Park is silent to the fuel injector according to Claim 1, wherein the circular contour, on which the second fuel injection orifices are arranged, covers an angular range of 360°. Kelenborn teaches a fuel injector wherein the central nozzle that protrudes further into the combustion chamber and configure to discharge a liquid fuel with an angular range of 360° (Fig. 4 and Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a liquid nozzle of Kelenborn in the injector of Park, in order to achieve a desired combustion.
Claims 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 9,605,635 B2), in view of Cafari et al. (WO 2019/145593 A1), hereafter Cafari.
Regarding claims 3, 8 and 9, Park is silent to the fuel injector according to Claim 1, wherein the pitch circle contour, on which the first fuel injection orifices are arranged, covers an angular range of 360°-δ, wherein δ is between 15° and 60°, wherein a residual pitch circle contour defined by δ, on which no first fuel injection orifices are arranged, faces the circular contour, on which the second fuel injection orifices are arranged; or, wherein δ is between 20° and 60°; or, wherein δ is between 20° and 45°.
Cafari discloses a fuel injector (1) wherein the pitch circle contour, on which the first fuel injection orifices are arranged (Fig. 9), covers an angular range of 360°-δ, wherein δ is between 15° and 60°, or, wherein δ is between 20° and 60°; or, wherein δ is between 20° and 45°. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a first nozzle of Cafari in the injector of Park, in order to reduce structural stresses on the injector.
Regarding claims 5, 6, 11 and 12, Park is silent to the fuel injector according to Claim 1, wherein the first fuel injection orifices are configured to inject the first fuel in a first spray cone with a first cone angle into a combustion space, and wherein the second fuel injection orifices are configured to inject the second fuel in a second spray cone with a second cone angle into the combustion space, wherein the first cone angle is smaller than the second cone angle; wherein the first cone angle is between 66° and 88°, and wherein the second cone angle is between 70° and 92°, or wherein the first cone angle is between 70° and 84°, or wherein the second cone angle is between 74° and 88°.
Cafari discloses that the alpha angle (Fig. 5) for each of the nozzle holes 4a of the second nozzle 4 does not need to be the same (pg. 10, in lines 17-20). Hence based on the Cafari’s teaching one of the nozzles would have smaller cone angle than the other nozzle. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the teaching of Cafari in the injector of Park in order to achieve desired combustion temperatures and locations. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to provide the claimed range, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TEUTA B HOLBROOK whose telephone number is (571)270-3276. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am-4:30pm EST.
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.
/TEUTA HOLBROOK/
Examiner
Art Unit 3747
/GEORGE C JIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747