Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/163,438

DIRECT INJECTION-TYPE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 09, 2025
Priority
Mar 24, 2023 — nonprovisional of PCTJP2023012054
Examiner
JIN, GEORGE C.
Art Unit
3747
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Mitsubishi Jidosha Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 0m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allowance Rate
415 granted / 493 resolved
+14.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
516
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.4%
-36.6% vs TC avg
§103
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§102
33.2%
-6.8% vs TC avg
§112
13.7%
-26.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 493 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 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) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Floch (EP0997622). Regarding claim 6, Floch teaches An in-cylinder injection type internal combustion engine comprising: a cylinder (10 figure 1) formed by a cylinder block (12 figure 1); a cylinder head covering one end of the cylinder; (18 figure 1) a piston having a top surface facing the cylinder head and configured to reciprocate in the cylinder; (22 figure 1) an ignition plug disposed in a central portion of the cylinder head in a combustion chamber formed between the cylinder, the cylinder head, and the piston; (38 figure 1) a fuel injection nozzle disposed in the combustion chamber; and (42 figure 1) an intake port (24) and an exhaust port (28) provided in the cylinder head with the ignition plug sandwiched therebetween, wherein the fuel injection nozzle is disposed on one side in an intake and exhaust direction connecting the intake port to the exhaust port, and is configured to inject fuel toward the ignition plug, (24 figure 1) an inclined surface (50 figure 3-5) extending along the intake and exhaust direction and inclined toward a cylinder head as going to the one side, and a pair of side guide portions (58 figure 4-5) disposed to sandwich the inclined surface in a crankshaft direction orthogonal to the intake and exhaust direction and a cylinder axial direction that is a reciprocating direction of the cylinder, are formed on the top surface of the piston, (figure 3-5) a width of the inclined surface (50 figure 3-5) in the crankshaft direction is formed to be narrowed toward the one side by inner sides of the side guide portions being inclined in the crankshaft direction so as to approach each other toward the one side, and (figure 5 50 narrows across top of piston) a top portion of an end portion of the inclined surface on the one side extends in the crankshaft direction. (see left of 50 figure 3 incline up) Regarding claim 7, Floch teaches wherein the inclined surface (50 figure 3) is formed such that an inclination angle toward the cylinder head increases stepwise toward the one side. Regarding claim 8, Floch teaches wherein each of the side guide portions (58 figure 4-5) has a side guide surface inclined toward the cylinder head as going to the one side, the top surface is formed with a descending surface inclined toward the cylinder head from a top portion of the inclined surface toward the one side (50 figure 3 see incline), and a side extension surface extending from a top portion of the side guide surface toward the one side, (dashed areas on top of 58 figure 5) the inclined surface (50 figure 3) is formed such that an angle formed between an extension line of the inclined surface and the descending surface is larger than an angle formed between an extension line of the side guide surface and the side extension surface, and (figure 4 and 5) a position where the extension line of the side guide surface intersects a wall surface of the cylinder is on a side of the piston with respect to a position where the extension line of the incline surface intersects the wall surface of the cylinder. (figure 5) Regarding claim 9, Floch teaches wherein a width (58 figure 4 and 5) of each of the side guide portions in the crankshaft direction is formed to be widest at a portion corresponding to a central portion of the piston in the intake and exhaust direction and to be substantially constant on the one side from the widest portion. (58 width is constant to right of dashed A1 axis in figure 4 and 5) Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Floch (EP0997622) in view of Blankmeister et al (US PG Pub No. 2023/0235695). Regarding claim 10, Floch does not explicitly teach however Blankmeister teaches wherein a sub-chamber (2 figure 11 paragraph 19) accommodating the ignition plug is provided in the combustion chamber, an injection port (8 figure 1) making the combustion chamber and the sub-chamber communicate with each other and configured to inject flame from the sub-chamber to the combustion chamber, is formed in the sub-chamber, (80 conical spray figure 1 paragraph 31) a passage portion (30 figure 1 holes paragraph 25) extending in the crankshaft direction and making an inner surface (paragraph 25 inner and outer surface of holes) and an outer surface of each of the side guide portions communicate with each other, is formed in each of the side guide portions, and the passage portion is formed on an extension line of the injection port. (paragraph 31 and 32 conical spray 80 and holes 30 common plane E) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE C. JIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9898. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM. 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. /GEORGE C JIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 09, 2025
Application Filed
Oct 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12767136
METHOD FOR STABILIZING A VEHICLE IN A START-UP SITUATION FROM A STANDSTILL
2y 1m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12767150
VEHICLE PREDICTIVE CONTROL METHOD WITH IMPROVED COMPUTATIONAL PROCESSING AND VEHICLE DRIVING CONTROL SYSTEM USING THE SAME
1y 6m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12752754
VEHICLE BRAKING CONTROL DEVICE
1y 9m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12746901
BRAKE CONTROL DEVICE AND BRAKE CONTROL METHOD
1y 8m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12735045
RADAR-BASED WHEEL END MODULES FOR DETERMINING WHEEL FORCE GENERATING CAPABILITY
2y 4m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+13.3%)
2y 1m (~1y 0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 493 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month