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
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 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because “wherein determining the pressure differential” in line 1 should be --wherein the determining the pressure differential--.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“determining the intake air pressure” in line 2 should be --the determining the intake air pressure--;
“determining the exhaust gas pressure” in line 4 should be --the determining the exhaust gas pressure--.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“determining the amount of fuel” in line 2 should be --the determining the amount of fuel--;
“the exhaust has pressure sensor” in line 4 should be --the exhaust gas pressure sensor--.
Claim 5 is objected to because “wherein determining” in line 1 should be --wherein the determining--.
Claim 6 is objected to because “wherein determining” in line 1 should be --wherein the determining--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yasuoka (U.S. 4,683,857).
Re claim 1:
Yasuoka discloses a method (Figs. 1-4) of supplying a fuel-air mixture in an engine (1, internal combustion engine - Col. 2, Line 22) of a vehicle (Fig. 1 (see Col. 1, Lines 59-61 - “…drivability of the engine…in a state of acceleration or deceleration…”))(see Col. 1, Lines 55-61), the method comprising:
determining a pressure differential (PBAC, effective intra-intake pipe absolute pressure value - Col. 4, Line 42 (see Fig. 2 at step 3 and equation 5 at Col. 4,Line 41 where PBAC is shown as a type of pressure differential between PBA and PEX)) between an intake air pressure (PBA, absolute pressure in the intake pipe - Col. 3, Line 54) of air flowing toward the engine (1) and an exhaust gas pressure (PEX, detected value of exhaust gas pressure - Col. 4, Line 66) of exhaust gas flowing out of the engine (1)(see Fig. 2 at step 3 and Col. 4, Lines 36-50);
determining, based on at least the pressure differential (PBAC), an amount of fuel (TOUT, opening time of the fuel injection valve - Col. 4, Line 65) to be injected (see Fig .1 at 6) into the engine (1)(see Fig. 2 at step 6 and Col. 4, Lines 64 - 67); and
injecting the amount of fuel into the engine (1)(see Fig. 2 at 7 and Col. 5, Lines 1-5).
Re claim 2:
Yasuoka discloses the method (Figs. 1-4) of claim 1 (as described above), wherein determining the pressure differential (PBAC) comprises:
determining the intake air pressure (PBA)(see Fig. 1 at 9, 9’, Fig. 2 at step 1 and Col. 3, Lines 26-32); and
determining the exhaust gas pressure (PEX)(see Fig. 1 at 13, Fig. 2 at step 1 and Col. 3, Lines 26-32).
Re claim 3:
Yasuoka discloses the method (Figs. 1-4) of claim 2 (as described above), wherein:
determining the intake air pressure comprises determining the intake air pressure by an air intake pressure sensor (9, 9’, absolute pressure sensors - Col. 3, Line 30) of the vehicle (Fig. 1)(see Fig. 1 at 9, 9’, Fig. 2 at step 1 and Col. 3, Lines 26-32); and
determining the exhaust gas pressure comprises determining the exhaust gas pressure by an exhaust pressure sensor (13, exhaust gas pressure sensor - Col. 3, Line 31) of the vehicle (Fig. 1)(see Fig. 1 at 13, Fig. 2 at step 1 and Col. 3, Lines 26-32).
Re claim 4:
Yasuoka discloses the method (Figs. 1-4) of claim 3 (as described above), wherein the determining the pressure differential (see Fig. 2 at step 3 and Col. 4, Lines 36-50) and determining the amount of fuel to be injected (see Fig. 2 at step 6 and Col. 4, Lines 64 - 67) are performed by a system controller (5, electronic control unit - Col. 2, Lines 28-29) of the vehicle (Fig. 1)(see Figs. 1-2 and Col. 3, Lines 21-25), the system controller (5) being communicatively connected to the air intake pressure sensor (9, 9’) and the exhaust has pressure sensor (13)(see Fig. 1).
Re claim 5:
Yasuoka discloses the method (Figs. 1-4) of claim 1 (as described above), wherein determining the amount of fuel to be injected into the engine (1)(see Fig. 2 at step 6 and Col. 4, Lines 64 - 67) comprises accessing a fuel correction dataset (K1, correction coefficient - Col. 4, Line 56; K2, correction variable - Col. 4, Lines 56-57)(see Fig. 2 at 5 and Col. 4, Lines 56-67).
Re claim 6:
Yasuoka discloses the method (Figs. 1-4) of claim 1 (as described above), wherein determining the amount of fuel to be injected into the engine comprises:
determining a base fuel injection quantity (Ti, reference valve opening time - Col. 4, Line 52) based on a dataset for fuel to be injected corresponding to a current throttle position (see Fig. 1 at 3) and a current engine speed (Ne, engine speed - Col. 4, Lines 52-53)(see Figs. 1-2, 4, and Col. 4, Lines 54-55); and
modifying the base fuel injection quantity (Ti) to arrive at the amount of fuel to be injected (see Fig. 2 at 6), the modifying being based at least on the pressure differential (PBAC)(see Fig. 2 and Col. 3, Line 21 - Col. 4, Line 67).
Re claim 7:
Yasuoka discloses the method (Figs. 1-4) of claim 1 (as described above), further comprising determining an engine speed (Ne, engine speed value - Col. 3, Lines 26-27)(see Fig. 1 at 11, Fig. 2 at 1, and Col. 3, Line 26-32); and
wherein the amount of fuel to be injected (TOUT) is further determined based on the engine speed (Ne)(see Fig. 2 and Col. 3, Line 21 - Col. 4, Line 67).
Re claim 8:
Yasuoka discloses the method (Figs. 1-4) of claim 1 (as described above), further comprising determining a throttle position (see Fig. 1 at 3 and Col. 2, Lines 22-28); and
wherein the amount of fuel to be injected (TOUT) is further determined based on the throttle position (Fig. 1 at 3)(see Figs. 1-2 and Col. 3, Line 21 - Col. 4, Line 67 (TOUT is described determined based on elements 9 and 9’ which is shown physically based on position of element 3 as shown in Fig. 1 and as would be recognized by one having ordinary skill in the art))
Re claim 9:
Yasuoka discloses the method (Figs. 1-4) of claim 1 (as described above), further comprising determining at least one vehicle operation variable (TBA, temperature in the intake pipe - Col. 3, Line 64; TEX, temperature in the exhaust pipe - Col. 3, Line 65) chosen from: an intake air temperature (TBA), an ambient barometric pressure, and an exhaust gas temperature (TEX); and
wherein the amount of fuel to be injected (TOUT) is further determined based on the at least one vehicle operation variable (see Fig. 2 and Col. 3, Line 21 - Col. 4, Line 67).
Re claim 10:
Yasuoka discloses the method (Figs. 1-4) of claim 1 (as described above), further comprising:
determining a changed pressure differential (see Fig. 2 at step 3);
determining, based on at least the changed pressure differential, a revised amount of fuel to be injected into the engine (see Fig. 2 at step 6); and
injecting the revised amount of fuel (TOUT) into the engine (1)(see Fig. 2 and Col. 3, Lines 21-26 - “…This program is executed at every generation of the TDC signal by the Ne sensor 11”).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vezina (WO2016/038419) in view of Yasuoka (U.S. 4,683,857).
Re claim 13:
Vezina discloses a vehicle (10, snowmobile - Para 63) comprising:
a frame (16, frame - Para 63);
at least one ground-engaging member (70, skis - Para 69) connected to the frame (16)(see Fig. 1 and Para 69);
an engine (26, engine - Para 64) supported by the frame (16)(see Fig. 1 and Para 64), the engine (26) having an engine air inlet (102, air inlet - Para 76) and an exhaust outlet (112, exhaust outlet - Para 79)(see Figs. 1-3, Paras 64, 76, and 79);
a plurality of fuel injectors (104, left and right fuel injectors - Para 77) operatively connected to the engine (26) for injecting fuel thereinto (see Figs. 1-3 and Para 77); and
a system controller (Para 76 - “…electronic control module…”)
Vezina fails to disclose the vehicle comprising a system controller communicatively connected to the plurality of fuel injectors, the system controller being configured to: determine a pressure differential between an intake air pressure of air flowing toward the engine and an exhaust gas pressure of exhaust gas flowing out of the engine; determine, based on at least the pressure differential, an amount of fuel to be injected into the engine; and cause the fuel injectors to inject the amount of fuel into the engine.
Yasuoka teaches a vehicle (Fig. 1 (see Col. 1, Lines 59-61 - “…drivability of the engine…in a state of acceleration or deceleration…”)) comprising an engine (1, internal combustion engine - Col. 2, Line 22); a fuel injector (6, fuel injection valve - Col. 2, Lines 29-30) operatively connected to the engine (1) for injecting fuel thereinto (see Fig. 1 and Col. 2, Line 20- Col. 2, Line 33); and a system controller (5, electronic control unit - Col. 2, Line 28) communicatively connected to the fuel injector (6)( see Fig. 1 and Col. 2, Line 20- Col. 2, Line 33), the system (5) controller being configured to: determine a pressure differential (PBAC, effective intra-intake pipe absolute pressure value - Col. 4, Line 42 (see Fig. 2 at step 3 and equation 5 at Col. 4,Line 41 where PBAC is shown as a type of pressure differential between PBA and PEX)) between an intake air pressure (PBA, absolute pressure in the intake pipe - Col. 3, Line 54) of air flowing toward the engine (1) and an exhaust gas pressure (PEX, detected value of exhaust gas pressure - Col. 4, Line 66) of exhaust gas flowing out of the engine (1)(see Fig. 2 at step 3 and Col. 4, Lines 36-50); determine, based on at least the pressure differential (PBAC), an amount of fuel (TOUT, opening time of the fuel injection valve - Col. 4, Line 65) to be injected (see Fig .1 at 6) into the engine (1)(see Fig. 2 at step 6 and Col. 4, Lines 64 - 67); and cause the fuel injector (6) to inject the amount of fuel into the engine (1)(see Fig. 2 at 7 and Col. 5, Lines 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the vehicle of Vezina after that of Yasuoka, thereby making the system controller of Vezina be communicatively connected to the plurality of fuel injectors of Vezina, the system controller being configured to: determine a pressure differential between an intake air pressure of air flowing toward the engine of Vezina and an exhaust gas pressure of exhaust gas flowing out of the engine of Vezina; determine, based on at least the pressure differential, an amount of fuel to be injected into the engine Vezina; and cause the fuel injectors of Vezina to inject the amount of fuel into the engine of Vezina, all in the way taught by Yasuoka, for the advantage of enhancing the drivability of the engine, especially when the engine is in a state of acceleration or deceleration (Yasuoka; Col. 1, Lines 57-61).
Re claim 14:
Vezina in view of Yasuoka teaches the vehicle (Vezina; 10) of claim 13 (as described above).
Vezina fails to disclose the vehicle further comprising: an air intake pressure sensor for determining the intake air pressure, the air intake pressure sensor being communicatively connected to the system controller; and an exhaust pressure sensor for determining the exhaust gas pressure, the exhaust pressure sensor being communicatively connected to the system controller.
Yasuoka teaches a vehicle (Fig. 1) further comprising: an air intake pressure sensor (9, 9’, absolute pressure sensors - Col. 3, Line 30) for determining the intake air pressure (PBA)(see Fig. 1 at 9, 9’, Fig. 2 at step 1 and Col. 3, Lines 26-32), the air intake pressure sensor (9, 9’) being communicatively connected to the system controller (5)(see Fig. 1); and an exhaust pressure sensor (13, exhaust gas pressure sensor - Col. 3, Line 31) for determining the exhaust gas pressure (PEX)(see Fig. 1 at 13, Fig. 2 at step 1 and Col. 3, Lines 26-32), the exhaust pressure sensor (13) being communicatively connected to the system controller (5)(see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the vehicle of Vezina after that of Yasuoka, thereby making the vehicle of Vezina further comprise an air intake pressure sensor for determining intake air pressure, the air intake pressure sensor being communicatively connected to the system controller of Vezina; and an exhaust pressure sensor for determining exhaust gas pressure, the exhaust pressure sensor being communicatively connected to the system controller of Vezina, all in the way taught by Yasuoka, for the advantage of enhancing the drivability of the engine, especially when the engine is in a state of acceleration or deceleration (Yasuoka; Col. 1, Lines 57-61).
Re claim 15:
Vezina in view of Yasuoka teaches the vehicle (Vezina; 10) of claim 13 (as described above).
Vezina fails to disclose wherein the system controller is further configured to determine an engine speed; and determine the amount of fuel to be injected further based on the engine speed.
Yasuoka teaches wherein the system controller (5) is further configured to determine an engine speed (Ne, engine speed - Col. 4, Lines 52-53)(see Fig. 1 at 11 and Col. 2, Lines 53-62; Fig. 2 and Col. 3, Lines 26-31); and determine the amount of fuel to be injected further based on the engine speed (Ne)(see Fig. 2 and Col. 3, Line 21 - Col. 4, Line 67).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the vehicle of Vezina after that of Yasuoka, thereby making the system controller of Vezina be further configured to determine an engine speed; and determine the amount of fuel to be injected further based on the engine speed, all in the way taught by Yasuoka, for the advantage of enhancing the drivability of the engine, especially when the engine is in a state of acceleration or deceleration (Yasuoka; Col. 1, Lines 57-61).
Re claim 16:
Vezina in view of Yasuoka teaches the vehicle (Vezina; 10) of claim 13 (as described above).
Vezina further discloses wherein the system controller (Para 76 - “…electronic control module…”) is further configured to determine a throttle position (Para 76).
Vezina fails to disclose wherein the system controller is further configured to determine the amount of fuel to be injected further based on the throttle position.
Yasuoka teaches wherein the system controller (5) is further configured to determine the amount of fuel to be injected (TOUT) based on throttle position (Fig. 1 at 3)(see Figs. 1-2 and Col. 3, Line 21 - Col. 4, Line 67 (TOUT is described determined based on elements 9 and 9’ which is shown physically based on position of element 3 as shown in Fig. 1 and as would be recognized by one having ordinary skill in the art)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modeled the vehicle of Vezina after that of Yasuoka, thereby making the system controller of Vezina be further configured to determine the amount of fuel to be injected further based on the throttle position of Vezina, all in the way taught by Yasuoka, for the advantage of enhancing the drivability of the engine, especially when the engine is in a state of acceleration or deceleration (Yasuoka; Col. 1, Lines 57-61).
Re claim 17:
Vezina in view of Yasuoka teaches the vehicle (Vezina; 10) of claim 13 (as described above).
Vezina further discloses wherein the vehicle (10) is a snowmobile (see Fig. 1 and Para 63 - “…a snowmobile 10…”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including 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:
Claims 11-12 would be allowed primarily because the prior art of record cannot anticipate Applicant’s claimed invention by a single reference nor render Applicant’s claimed invention obvious by the combination of more than one reference.
Additionally, the prior art of record does not teach “determining, based on at least the pressure differential having increased, a reduced amount of fuel to be injected into the engine; and injecting the reduced amount of fuel into the engine” as within the context of the claimed invention as disclosed and within the context of the other limitations present in claim 11.
Additionally, the prior art of record does not teach “determining, based on at least the pressure differential having decreased, a reduced amount of fuel to be injected into the engine; and injecting the reduced amount of fuel into the engine” as within the context of the claimed invention as disclosed and within the context of the other limitations present in claim 12.
Therefore, the prior art of record cannot anticipate Applicant’s claimed invention by a single reference nor render Applicant’s claimed invention obvious by one or more references.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Loren C Edwards whose telephone number is (571) 272-7133. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 6AM-430PM.
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, Mark Laurenzi can be reached at (571) 270-7878. 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.
/LOREN C EDWARDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746 7/31/26
Prosecution Insights