DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-19 are active.
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 .
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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/25/2025 is being considered.
The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered.
JP 2019-156107 A is recited in paragraph [0094] of the written specification, but is not listed in the IDS.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 12/27/2024. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1, 4, 7, 9-14, 16, and 19 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, “at least one of a shape or a peripheral length” in lines 24-25 should say “at least one of a shape [[or]] and a peripheral length”.
Regarding claims 4 and 16, the comma (“,”) at the end of lines 3 and 2, respectively, should be replaced with a colon (“:”).
Regarding claim 7, “the inner side” in line 2 should instead say either “the inside”, “the inner surface”, or “the inner surface side”.
Regarding claim 9, a colon (“:”) should be inserted after “including” in line 2; the word “of” should be inserted after “in the forming” in line 20; and “at least one of a shape or a peripheral length” in line 25 should say “at least one of a shape [[or]] and a peripheral length”.
Regarding claims 10-11, the word “of” should be inserted after “in the forming” in line 2.
Regarding claim 12, the word “of” should be inserted after “in the attaching” in line 2.
Regarding claim 13, the word “cress” in lines 6 and 11 (there are two instances in line 11) should instead say “cross”; and “at least one of a shape or a peripheral length” in line 14 should say “at least one of a shape [[or]] and a peripheral length”.
Regarding claim 14, “A gas generator” in line 1 should say “The [[A]] gas generator” in order to reflect the same verbiage used in the preamble of claims 15-19.
Regarding claim 19, “the inner surface side” in line 2 should instead say, for example, “the side of the inner surface”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “an opening” in line 25. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because an opening (of the gas discharge ports) on the inner surface side of the housing was already recited in line 11.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “the closing members having specifications identical to each other” in lines 3-4 is unclear as claimed because only one closing member was previously recited in the claims, thus rendering unclear what “the closing members” refers to.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “an opening” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because an opening (of the gas discharge ports) on the inner surface side of the housing was already recited in claim 1.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “an opening” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because an opening (of the gas discharge ports) on the inner surface side of the housing was already recited in claim 1.
Claim 9 recites the limitations “the inner surface side” (line 19) and “an opening” (lines 25-26). There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim because an inner surface side of the housing was not previously recited and an opening (of the gas discharge ports) on the inner surface side of the housing was already recited in line 18, respectively.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “an opening” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because an opening (of the gas discharge ports) on the inner surface side of the housing was already recited in claim 9.
Regarding claim 12, the limitation “the closing members having specifications identical to each other” in lines 4-5 is unclear as claimed because only one closing member was previously recited in the claims, thus rendering unclear what “the closing members” refers to.
Claim 13 recites the limitations “an inside” (line 4), “a first minimum flow path [cross]-sectional area” (lines 11-12), and “the inner surface” (line 15). There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim because an inside of the housing was previously recited in line 3, a first minimum flow path [cross]-sectional area was previously recited in line 6, and an inner surface of the housing was not previously recited, respectively.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “a first closing member” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because a first closing member was previously recited in claim 13.
Claim 18 recites the limitations “an inner side” in line 2 and “an opening” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim because an inner side of the housing was not previously recited (“an inside” and “a side of an inner surface” were previously recited) and an opening (of the gas discharge ports) on the side of the inner surface of the housing was already recited in claim 13, respectively.
Claim(s) 3-6, 10, 15-17, and 19 is/are rejected for depending from an indefinite claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim(s) 12 is/are 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. 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.
Regarding claim 12, the preamble of the claim is directed to “[the] method for producing a gas generator according to claim 1” (line 1). However, claim 1 is directed to a gas generator, as opposed to a method of producing a gas generator. As such, claim 12 fails to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. For examination, it was assumed that applicant intended for claim 12 to instead depend from independent claim 9.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 1-19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
A gas generator comprising at least an igniter, a gas generating agent, a housing within which the igniter and gas generating agent are accommodated, a first gas discharge port and a second gas discharge port each extending through the housing, and a closing member attached to an inner surface of the housing to close the first and second gas discharge ports prior to actuation of the igniter is known in the art. Additionally, it is known for the first and second gas discharge ports to be different either in shape or peripheral length at an opening on an inner surface side of the housing such that rupturing pressures of the closing member are different at the first and second gas discharge ports. Conversely, it is also known for the first and second gas discharge ports to comprise the same shape and peripheral length at an opening on an inner surface side of the housing such that the minimum flow path cross-sectional area of the first gas discharge port is equivalent to the minimum flow path cross-section area of the second gas discharge port. However, the prior art neither discloses, nor provides a teaching of obviousness, for the first and second gas discharge ports to be different either in shape or peripheral length at an opening on an inner surface side of the housing such that rupturing pressures of the closing member are different at the first and second gas discharge ports, and for the minimum flow path cross-sectional area of the first gas discharge port to be equivalent to the minimum flow path cross-section area of the second gas discharge port, as claimed. As detailed in paragraph [0008] of applicant’s written specification, the claimed arrangement provides the benefit of causing a gas discharge amount per unit time of the first gas discharge port and a gas discharge amount per unit time of the second gas discharge port to be equivalent to each other, while also enabling an opening timing of the first gas discharge port and an opening timing of the second gas discharge port are made different from each other. Thus, a rapid internal pressure drop of the housing can be suppressed when the igniter is activated and, as a result, combustion performance of the gas generating agent can be maintained and output performance of the gas generator can be stabilized.
Conclusion
Claims 1-19 are rejected.
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 BENJAMIN S GOMBERG whose telephone number is (571)272-4802. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM 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, Troy Chambers can be reached at (571)272-6874. 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.
/Troy Chambers/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3641
/BENJAMIN S. GOMBERG/
Examiner
Art Unit 3641