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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/23/25.
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 1-4, 6, 7, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gniesmer (20150047597). Gniesmer discloses (claim 1) a piston head comprising an upper portion comprising an upper wall 9, an outer wall 10 extending around a periphery of the upper wall, and an inner wall (not numbered) disposed radially inward of the outer wall, wherein a cooling gallery 7 is defined between the outer wall and the inner wall, and a lower portion extending downward from the upper portion, the lower portion comprising: an upper surface (not numbered), and a skirt (not numbered) extending from the upper surface in a direction away from the upper portion, the skirt defining a pin bore 8 configured to receive a pin, the pin bore centered around a pin bore center axis, wherein a portion of the skirt between the pin bore center axis and a skirt reference axis has a vertical profile that is substantially non-linear (curved), the skirt reference axis being orthogonal to the pin bore center axis and parallel to the upper surface.
Regarding claim 2, Gniesmer discloses that the vertical profile of the skirt at the skirt reference axis is substantially linear (Fig. 4, straight cross section of vertical profile).
Regarding claim 3, Gniesmer discloses that an average slope of the vertical profile of the portion of the skirt increases in a circumferential direction extending from the skirt reference axis to the pin bore center axis (slope inherently increases in a curve)
Regarding claim 4, Gniesmer discloses that the portion of the skirt (curved portion) extends from an angle greater than 0 degrees relative to the skirt reference axis to an angle relative to the skirt reference axis corresponding to an edge of the pin bore (the curved portion can be defined from an angle greater than 0 degrees).
Regarding claim 6, Gniesmer discloses that the inner wall (not numbered) extends from the upper wall 9 of the upper portion to the upper surface of the lower portion (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, Gniesmer discloses that a gap (not numbered) is defined between the outer wall of the upper portion and the upper surface of the lower portion (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 10, Gniesmer discloses that the piston head is a single piece piston head forged from steel (Fig. 4, paragraph [0033], “…a completed piston 6 for an internal combustion engine, consisting of steel in this aspect…”).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gniesmer, as applied to claim 1, in view of Bohm et al. (5,379,680). Gniesmer discloses all of the claimed subject matter further including that the portion of the skirt comprises an upper end proximate the upper surface, and a lower end distal from the upper surface. Gniesmer does not disclose that the lower end disposed closer to the inner wall in a radial direction than the upper end.
Bohm et al. teaches for piston head with a skirt, wherein a portion of the skirt comprises an upper end proximate an upper surface, and a lower end distal from the upper surface and that (claim 5) a lower end disposed closer (final point 16) to the inner wall in a radial direction than the upper end (curvature 9) for the purposes of reducing noise level which leads to quiet operation of the piston. See Bohm et al. col. 2, lines 60-68 and col. 4 lines 45-50.
Since Gniesmer and Bohm et al. are both in the same field of endeavor the purpose disclosed by Bohm et al. would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Gniesmer. It would have been obvious at a time before the invention was effectively filed to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the skirt of Gniesmer such that that the lower end disposed closer to the inner wall in a radial direction than the upper end for the purposes of reducing noise level which leads to quiet operation of the piston.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gniesmer, as applied to claim 1 above. Gniesmer discloses all of the claimed subject matter except for a specific design of the open volume of the cooling gallery defined by minimum and maximum open volume equations.
Since the applicant has not disclosed that having a specific design of the open volume of the cooling gallery defined by minimum and maximum open volume equations solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose above the fact that sufficient cooling is provided for the design of the piston head and it appears that the piston head of Gniesmer would perform equally well with specific design of the open volume of the cooling gallery as claimed by applicant, it would have been an obvious matter of engineering expedience to modify the cooling gallery of Gniesmer to meet the minimum and maximum open volume equations as claimed for the purposes of providing efficient cooling of the piston head.
Prior Art
Prior art made of record but not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure for showing other piston heads with cooling galleries between inner and outer walls and lower portions with skirts and piston pin bores.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Thomas Lazo whose telephone number is (571) 272-4818. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor Nathaniel Wiehe, can be reached on (571) 272-8648. The fax phone number for this Group 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.
/THOMAS E LAZO/Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 3745
February 7, 2026
Prosecution Insights