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 .
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8, 16, and 20 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. For the purposes of examination, the “and/or system” portion of the claims will be excluded due to the blow explanation on its lack of clarity.
Claim limitation “coolant distribution system” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The device being claimed is a generic term (system) being used with functional language (“coolant distribution”) so that it reads as a “means for coolant distribution.” However, the only means for coolant distribution is the coolant pump which is already in the claims “a coolant distribution pump and/or system.” So clearly it is intended to be some other device than a coolant pump that facilitates coolant distribution. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-7, 9-11, 14-15, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kojima et al (US 2011/0315129).
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 17, Kojima discloses an apparatus and method for reducing or eliminating vibration of engine mounted accessories (¶ [0070]), comprising:
a coupling device 59 extending between and connected to:
at least one of a structure, body, or external housing of a first engine mounted accessory 55 and a mounting device of the first engine mounted accessory (¶ [0052] and [0078], the bracket 59 attaches to the EGR valve mounting portion 55), and
at least one of a structure, body, or external housing of a second engine mounted accessory 24 and a mounting device of the second engine mounted accessory (Fig. 9 and ¶ [0052], the EGR cooler 24 includes an upper mounting portion which is fixed to the bracket 59).
Regarding claims 2, 10, and 18, Kojima discloses the apparatus of claims 1, 9, and 17, wherein: a mounting surface of the mounting device of the first engine mounting accessory being substantially perpendicular to a mounting surface of the mounting device of the second engine mounting accessory (Fig. 5 and 9, shown bracket creating an L-shape due to the mounting portions being perpendicular).
Regarding claims 3, 11, and 19, Kojima discloses the apparatus of claims 2, 10, and 18 wherein: the coupling device further comprises a rigid coupling device (Fig. 5, the bracket is a rigid device).
Regarding claims 6 and 14s, Kojima discloses the apparatus of claim 1 and 9, wherein: one of the first engine mounted accessory and the second engine mounted accessory is an EGR cooler (¶ [0052] and Fig. 9, one of the accessories is an EGR cooler 24).
Regarding claims 7 and 15, Kojima discloses the apparatus of claims 6 and 15, wherein: the coupling device is connected the EGR cooler adjacent to a EGR cooler valve housing (Fig. 9, the egr cooler 24 is adjacent the valve housing).
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) 4-5 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kojima in view of Werner (US 3,643,320).
Regarding claims 4-5 and 12-13, Kojima discloses the apparatus of claims 2 and 10, but fails to disclose wherein: the coupling device further comprises a resonance frequency tuning device that comprises at least one of a spring, a damper, and a mass.
Werner discloses a method of mounting an engine, wherein the support bracket of Werner includes a mass 23 and damper 17 on the mounting portions such that these devices a tuned to isolate vibration frequencies on the mounting portion which provides resilient support for all components (Col. 1, Lns. 15-22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to including the tuned mass and damper components of Werner with the mounting bracket of Kojima because doing so would have lowered the vibrations the bracket and it’s associated parts in Kojima would experience to provide a more resilient and vibration-absorbing support.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 16, and 20 would be allowable if rewritten 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 and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As best understood and as examined above (i.e. the coolant distribution pump only), the closest prior art fails to disclose or make obvious an apparatus for lowering vibrations within an engine wherein the coupling device extends specifically between a mounting portion of an EGR cooler and a cooling distribution pump mounted on the engine.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN A LATHERS whose telephone number is (571)272-1050. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10a-6p.
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 5712721196. 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.
/KEVIN A LATHERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
