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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 3/19/2026. These drawings are not approved because the symbol 16 appears to be the same as that commonly used for a “valve” and easily confused. Accordingly, the drawings are objected to under 37 CR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the pressure wave charger of claim 15 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 17 requires “wherein said second eccentric input flow has a ratio e/r of at least 0.1 and at most 0.3, where e is a distance between a centre of the first combustion chamber and a line of alignment of the second input channel, and where r is a distance between the centre of the first combustion chamber and an inner surface of an exterior wall of the first combustion chamber.” These ranges are only disclosed in Fig. 4 where the inputs are in the same plane thus do not have both the first and second components of flow required in claim 1. However, claim 17 is dependent on claims 4 “wherein said first eccentric input flow has a ratio e/r of at least 0.1 and at most 0.3, where e is a distance between a centre of the first combustion chamber and a line of alignment of the first input channel, and where r is a distance between the centre of the first combustion chamber and an inner surface of an exterior wall of the first combustion chamber” and claim 1. Note that claim 1 describes first and second eccentric flows 91, 92. Applicant’s specification does not teach that the first and second eccentric flows are formed by the claimed ratios of claim 17 and claim 4, except for the 5th input flow 43 and 6th input flow which do not form both the first and second eccentric flows of Fig. 4. In other words, applicant did not possess both the first and second flows having the claimed relationship / ranges of claim 17 in combination with claims 4 and 1.
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 3, 8, 16, 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 3 is rejected because it depends on a canceled claim and its scope is unclear.
Claim 8 “an air input channel controlled by an air valve and having an eccentric alignment, the air input channel being configured to supply air or fuel- air mixture into the first combustion chamber for maintaining the first flow component and the second flow component within the first combustion chamber” is indefinite because it is not clear how a single air input channel can maintain both the first flow component and the second flow component within the first combustion chamber.
Claim 9 “a fuel-air mixture” is unclear whether it is referring to the same “fuel-air mixture” of claim 8 or of claim 1. Since claim 1 does not use a dash and already defines a “first fuel and air mixture”, it is unclear whether that is what is being referenced or something different.
Claims 1, 3-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted structural cooperative relationships are: there is no structural connection of “an output channel” to any other element in claim 1 and it is unclear what this is an outlet of.
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(s) 1, 3-9, 13-14, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kemmer et al (2523308) in view of Tegner (2005/0138933) and either Huber (4260361) or Yuzuriha (5,603,299) . Kemmer et al teach (1) A pistonless pressure gain combustor comprising. a first combustion chamber 2; an output channel 6 or 5; a first input channel 23 for a first air mixture, the first input channel communicating with the first combustion chamber-through a first inlet controlled by a first valve 25, 26, wherein the first input channel and the first inlet direct the first air mixture into the first combustion chamber in a first eccentric input flow defining a first flow component; a second input channel [different 23, see annotations, note these are exemplary and can be reversed] for a second air mixture, the second input channel communicating with the first combustion chamber through a second inlet controlled by a second valve 25, 26, the second inlet directing the second air and fuel mixture into the first combustion chamber in a second eccentric input flow defining a second flow component, wherein the second inlet is positioned and aligned asymmetrically to the first inlet so that the first flow component and the second flow component are in a non-parallel relation and create a self- preserving flow pattern of the first air and fuel mixture and the second air and fuel mixture within the first combustion chamber, the self-preserving flow pattern increasing the speed of combustion propagation [inherent]. (3) wherein geometry of the first combustion chamber facilitates maintaining of the first flow component and the second flow component by means of the first combustion chamber having an internal shape that is substantially one of the following: toroidal, spherical and cylindrical. (4) wherein said first eccentric input flow has a ratio e/r of at least 0.1 and at most 0.3 [appears to be so near the centerline of 2. Alternately, it is obvious as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges in the art], where e is a distance between a centre of the first combustion chamber and a line of alignment of the first input channel ,and where r is a distance between the centre of the first combustion chamber and an inner surface of an exterior wall of the first combustion chamber. (5) wherein geometry of the first combustion chamber 2 facilitates maintaining of the first flow component and the second flow component by means of the first combustion chamber having an internal shape that is substantially one of the following: toroidal, spherical and cylindrical (17) wherein said second eccentric input flow has a ratio e/r of at least 0.1 and at most 0.3 [appears to be so. Alternately, it is obvious as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges in the art], where e is a distance between a centre of the first combustion chamber and a line of alignment of the second input channel, and where r is a distance between the centre of the first combustion chamber and an inner surface of an exterior wall of the first combustion chamber.(6) wherein the output channel is constantly open to the first combustion chamber. (7) wherein the pistonless combustor is a deflagration combustor. (8) further comprising an air input channel [another 23] controlled by an air valve 25, 26 and having an eccentric alignment, the air input channel being configured to supply air or fuel- air mixture into the first combustion chamber for maintaining the first flow component and the second flow component within the first combustion chamber 2. (13) wherein a passage 9 connects the first combustion chamber 2 to a second combustion chamber 3 and the second combustion chamber is connected to the output channel 6 or 5. (14) wherein the second combustion chamber has a volume larger than a quarter of the volume of the first combustion chamber but smaller than three times the volume of the first combustion chamber [same volume].
PNG
media_image1.png
482
870
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
451
338
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kemmer et al teach the first input channel and second input channel input flows of first air mixture and second air mixture but do not teach they each have mixtures of fuel and air nor (9) wherein fuel is mixed with air within the first input channel to produce a fuel-air mixture. The fuel 29 of Kemmer et al is injected adjacent the air input channels 23. Tegner teaches A pistonless pressure gain combustor comprising. a first combustion chamber with a first input channel 5 for a first air and fuel mixture 6, the first input channel 5 communicating with the first combustion chamber-through a first inlet controlled by a first valve 5, wherein the first input channel and the first inlet direct the first air and fuel mixture into the first combustion chamber; a second input channel for a second air and fuel mixture, the second input channel communicating with the first combustion chamber through a second inlet [different 5] controlled by a second valve 5, the second inlet directing the second air and fuel mixture 6 into the first combustion chamber; and (9) wherein fuel is mixed with air within the first input channel 5 to produce a fuel-air mixture 6. Tegner teaches each valved inlet 5 directs mixtures of fuel and air 6 into the first combustion chamber [¶ 0020] to facilitate the necessary injection of the fuel and air and facilitate combustion by mixing them before injection rather than relying on the mixing of the fuel and air within the first combustion chamber as is done in Kemmer et al. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a first mixture of air and fuel in the first input channel and a second mixture of air and fuel in the second input channel, rather than only air, as taught by Tegner, to facilitate combustion by mixing the fuel and air prior to injection rather than after to ensure good combustion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to (9) wherein fuel is mixed with air within the first input channel to produce a fuel-air mixture, as taught by Tegner, to facilitate combustion by mixing the fuel and air prior to injection rather than after to ensure good combustion. Previously, in Kemmer et al, a first eccentric input flow defining a first flow component and a second eccentric input flow defining a second flow component, wherein the second inlet is positioned and aligned asymmetrically to the first inlet so that the first flow component and the second flow component are in a non-parallel relation and create a self- preserving flow pattern of the first air and fuel mixture and the second air and fuel mixture within the first combustion chamber, the self-preserving flow pattern increasing the speed of combustion propagation [inherent]. Alternately, Huber teaches each flow input into the combustor may produce a first eccentric input flow (e.g. radially inward from 1) as well as vortices adjacent an exit of 1. Accordingly, for multiple first and second input channels of Huber, they would also produce an axial first eccentric flow and a recirculating vortices [second eccentric flow] within the first combustor that is non-parallel to the first eccentric flow so that the first flow component and the second flow component are in a non-parallel relation and create a self- preserving flow pattern of the first air and fuel mixture and the second air and fuel mixture within the first combustion chamber, the self-preserving flow pattern increasing the speed of combustion propagation. Alternately, Yuzuriha teaches the first input channel 5 and the first inlet direct the first air and fuel mixture into the first combustion chamber in a first eccentric input flow defining a first flow component [swirl flow]; a second input channel 4 for a second air and fuel mixture, the second input channel 4 communicating with the first combustion chamber through a second inlet controlled by a second valve 4, the second inlet directing the second air and fuel mixture into the first combustion chamber in a second eccentric input flow defining a second flow component [tumble flow], wherein the second inlet is positioned and aligned asymmetrically to the first inlet so that the first flow component and the second flow component are in a non-parallel relation and create a self- preserving flow pattern of the first air and fuel mixture and the second air and fuel mixture within the first combustion chamber, the self-preserving flow pattern increasing the speed of combustion propagation [see col. 2, lines 57+]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to operate the first and second input channels with respective valves to create second eccentric input flow defining a second flow component, wherein the second inlet is positioned and aligned asymmetrically to the first inlet so that the first flow component and the second flow component are in a non-parallel relation and create a self- preserving flow pattern of the first air and fuel mixture and the second air and fuel mixture within the first combustion chamber, the self-preserving flow pattern increasing the speed of combustion propagation, as taught by either Huber or Yuzuriha, in order to facilitate non-parallel eccentric flows within the combustor, which have analogous shapes to that of Kemmer et al. The prior art teach (9) wherein fuel is mixed with air within the first input channel to produce a fuel-air mixture. Alternately, Huber teaches wherein fuel 2 is mixed with air 50 within the first input channel to produce a fuel-air mixture for the input channel. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have fuel is mixed with air within the first input channel to produce a fuel-air mixture, as taught by Huber, in order to create the fuel-air mixture.
PNG
media_image3.png
452
938
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over any of the above prior art, as applied above, and further in view of Yokoyama et al (4863370) and for claim 11 further in view of Khnikis (5158445). Kemmer et al do not teach (10) a pre-combustion chamber having smaller volume than the first combustion chamber, wherein the pre-combustion chamber forms a cavity on the periphery of the first combustion chamber; (11) wherein the volume of the pre-combustion chamber is at most 10 % of the volume of the first combustion chamber; (12) wherein the pre-combustion chamber has a semi-open configuration in which there is a line of sight to each point in an inner wall of the pre-combustion chamber from an opening connecting the pre-combustion chamber to the first combustion chamber. Yokoyama et al teach (10) wherein the pistonless combustor comprises a pre-combustion chamber 3/5c having smaller volume than the first combustion chamber 2, wherein the pre-combustion chamber forms a cavity on the periphery of the first combustion chamber; (12) wherein the pre-combustion chamber 5c has a semi-open configuration in which there is a line of sight to each point in an inner wall of the pre-combustion chamber from an opening [end of 5c] connecting the pre-combustion chamber to the first combustion chamber. Yokoyama et al teach the use of the pre-combustion chamber facilitates complete burner and self-ignition as well as the eccentric flows within the combustor. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ (10) a pre-combustion chamber having smaller volume than the first combustion chamber, wherein the pre-combustion chamber forms a cavity on the periphery of the first combustion chamber; (12) wherein the pre-combustion chamber has a semi-open configuration in which there is a line of sight to each point in an inner wall of the pre-combustion chamber from an opening connecting the pre-combustion chamber to the first combustion chamber, as taught by Yokoyama et al, to facilitate combustion of the fuel and promote self-ignition within the combustor as well the generation of eccentric flows. The prior art do no teach wherein the volume of the pre-combustion chamber is at most 10% of the volume of the first combustion chamber. Alternately, Khnikis teach (11) wherein the volume of the pre-combustion chamber 10 is at most 10% of the volume of the first combustion chamber 30 [volume of 10 is as low as 1% of the volume of 10 and 30 combined] as a typical sizing ratio utilized in the art (col. 5, lines 47-55).
“The cross-sectional area of the primary combustion chamber [10] is about 4 percent to about 30 percent of the cross-sectional area of the secondary combustion chamber [30]. The volume of the primary combustion chamber [10] is about 1 percent to about 20 percent of the total combined volume of the primary and secondary combustion chambers [30]. The volume of the dilution chamber [50] is about 50 percent to about 250 percent of the volume of the secondary combustion chamber [30]. (col. 5, lines 47-55, bracketed numbering added)”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the volume of the pre-combustion chamber at most 10% of the volume of the first combustion chamber, as taught by Khnikis, as a typical sizing ratio utilized in the art.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over any of the above prior art, as applied above, and further in view of Seippel (2399394). The above prior art all teach a pistonless combustor with output channel but do not teach wherein the output channel connects the first combustion chamber to a pressure wave charger. Seippel teaches using [Fig. 10] wherein the output channel 11 connects the first combustion chamber 43 to a pressure wave 40 charger [e.g. page 4, 1st ¶; page 1, 1st ¶] that is useable for many different applications and effectively pressurizes gases. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ wherein the output channel connects the first combustion chamber to a pressure wave charger, as taught by Seippel, as a pressure boosting device used in many different applications and which effectively pressurizes gases.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over any of the above prior art, as applied above, and further in view of Harris (20040216463). The prior art teach wherein the pistonless combustor comprises at least one air input channel configured to input air jets but do not teach input air jets having initial air velocity at least Mach 0.2. Harris teaches using pistonless combustor 20 comprises at least one air input channel 70 or 68 configured to input air jets having initial air velocity at least Mach 0.2 [¶ 0027] as a typical range utilize in the art for the air velocity in to the combustor and teaches the air input channel aids in the self-preserving flow pattern of a fuel/air mixture with the combustion chamber. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ input air jets having initial air velocity at least Mach 0.2, as taught by Harris, as a typical range utilized in the art for the air velocity into the combustor such that the air input channel aids in the self-preserving flow pattern of a fuel/air mixture with the combustion chamber.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over any of the above prior art, as applied above to claim 4, and further in view of the ordinary skill in the art. As applied above, various prior art appear to teach wherein said [first and second] eccentric input flow has a ratio e/r of at least 0.1 and at most 0.3, where e is a distance between a centre of the first combustion chamber and a line of alignment of the one or more of the at least one input channel, and where r is a distance between the centre of the first combustion chamber and an inner surface of an exterior wall of the first combustion chamber. Alternately, using this eccentric input flow has a ratio e/r of at least 0.1 and at most 0.3 is regarded as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the eccentric input flow has a ratio e/r of at least 0.1 and at most 0.3, as an obvious matter of using the workable ranges in the art. Note claim 5 has already been treated by the individual references and will not be repeated.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over any of the above prior art, as applied above to claim 14, and further in view of Khnikis (5158445). The prior art applied to claim 14 appear to have (14) wherein the second combustion chamber has a volume larger than a quarter of the volume of the first combustion chamber but smaller than three times the volume of the first combustion chamber. Alternately, Khnikis teach (14) wherein the second combustion chamber 50 has a volume larger than a quarter of the volume of the first combustion chamber 30 but smaller than three times the volume of the first combustion chamber 30 [volume of 50 is 50% to 250% times of secondary chamber 30 is completely within the claimed range] as a typical sizing ratio utilized in the art (col. 5, lines 47-55).
“The cross-sectional area of the primary combustion chamber [10] is about 4 percent to about 30 percent of the cross-sectional area of the secondary combustion chamber [30]. The volume of the primary combustion chamber [10] is about 1 percent to about 20 percent of the total combined volume of the primary and secondary combustion chambers [30]. The volume of the dilution chamber [50] is about 50 percent to about 250 percent of the volume of the secondary combustion chamber [30]. (col. 5, lines 47-55, bracketed numbering added)”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to employ the claimed range for wherein the second combustion chamber has a volume larger than a quarter of the volume of the first combustion chamber but smaller than three times the volume of the first combustion chamber, as taught by Khingis, as a typical sizing ratio utilized in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/19/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s argument concerning the output channel are not persuasive as they argue enablement whereas the claim was rejected under indefiniteness / lack of clarity.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to TED KIM whose telephone number is 571-272-4829. The Examiner can be reached on regular business hours before 5:00 pm, Monday to Thursday and every other Friday.
The fax number for the organization where this application is assigned is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Devon Kramer, can be reached at 571-272-7118 Alternate inquiries to Technology Center 3700 can be made via 571-272-3700.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center. Should you have questions on Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). General inquiries can also be directed to the Inventors Assistance Center whose telephone number is 800-786-9199. Furthermore, a variety of online resources are available at https://www.uspto.gov/patent
/Ted Kim/
Telephone
571-272-4829
Primary Examiner
Fax
571-273-8300
June 10, 2026
Prosecution Insights