Ex Parte Takeishi et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 18, 2017

13027577 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 18, 2017)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O.Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
13/027,577 02/15/2011 Hiroaki Takeishi GPK-2018-2648 7064
23117 7590 08/22/2017
NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC
901 NORTH GLEBE ROAD, 11TH FLOOR
ARLINGTON, VA 22203
EXAMINER
LAGUARDA, GONZALO
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3747
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
08/22/2017 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
PTOMAIL@nixonvan.com
pair_nixon @ firsttofile. com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte HIROAKI TAKEISHI, TAKASHI SEND A, MITSUO HARA, and
TAKANOBU KAWANO
Appeal 2015-008261
Application 13/027,5771
Technology Center 3700
Before ANTON W. FETTING, BRADLEY B. BAYAT, and
ROBERT J. SILVERMAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
SILVERMAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s
decision rejecting claims 1 and 3—6. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b).
We REVERSE.
1 The Appellants identify Denso Corporation as the real party in interest.
Appeal Br. 3.
Appeal 2015-008261
Application 13/027,577
ILLUSTRATIVE CLAIM
1. A waste heat controller controlling a waste heat
quantity of an engine, waste heat being a combustion energy
other than kinetic energy, based on a required heat quantity in
response to a heat-utilize requirement, comprising:
an intake valve control means for controlling an opening
period of an intake valve of the engine based on an engine
driving condition, wherein the intake valve control means
controls the valve opening period of the intake valve by
advancing or retarding the valve close timing and the valve
open timing of the intake valve while the valve opening period
of the intake valve is kept constant;
an ignition control means for controlling an ignition
timing of the engine based on a minimum advance for best
torque (MBT) timing at which a highest fuel economy is
obtained in a current engine driving condition;
a margin determination means for determining, based on
the current engine driving condition, whether there is an
ignition advance margin relative to the minimum advance for
best torque (MBT) timing; and
a waste heat control means for executing
an actual compression ratio decreasing control in which
an actual compression ratio of the engine is decreased by
advancing or retarding a valve close timing of the intake valve
by the intake valve control means, wherein the actual
compression ratio decreasing control is a retard control in
which the valve close timing of the intake valve is retarded to
decrease the actual compression ratio, and
an ignition timing advance control in which the ignition
timing is advanced relative to the minimum advance for best
torque (MBT) timing by the ignition control means in order to
increase the waste heat quantity, when the margin
determination means determines that there is no ignition
advance margin relative to the minimum advance for best
torque (MBT) timing;
2
Appeal 2015-008261
Application 13/027,577
the waste heat controller further comprising
a valve overlap control means for controlling a valve
overlap period during which a valve opening period of the
intake valve and a valve opening period of the exhaust valve
overlap with each other, wherein
based on the engine driving condition, the margin
determination means determines whether there is an ignition
advance margin relative to the minimum advance for best
torque (MBT) timing at a time after the valve overlap period is
varied in a case that the valve overlap period is increased by
varying a valve opening period of the intake valve, wherein
when a heat-utilize requirement is generated, when the
required waste heat quantity is insufficient at the minimum
advance for best torque (MBT) timing it is determined whether
an ignition advance margin exists, and wherein
when the ignition advance margin does not exist, the
actual compression ratio is decreased and the ignition advance
margin is ensured and the ignition timing is advanced relative
to the MBT timing to increase the waste heat quantity.
REJECTIONS
I. Claims 1 and 3—5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable overUle (US 4,009,695, iss. Mar. 1, 1977).
II. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Ule and Barker (US 1,903,803, iss. Apr. 18, 1933).
FINDINGS OF FACT
The findings of fact relied upon, which are supported by a
preponderance of the evidence, appear in the following Analysis.
ANALYSIS
Among the arguments presented, the Appellants contend that the
rejection does not identify any portion of Ule’s disclosure that performs the
3
Appeal 2015-008261
Application 13/027,577
function of the “margin determination means” of independent claim 1. See
Appeal Br. 23—28; see also Reply Br. 5—7.
Claim 1 recites, in relevant part:
a margin determination means for determining, based on
the current engine driving condition, whether there is an
ignition advance margin relative to the minimum advance for
best torque (MBT) timing.
Appeal Br. 31 (Claims App.)
According to the Final Office Action, Ule teaches a “margin
determination means” at column 8, lines 1—5 and column 2, lines 50—60.
Final Action 5. See also Answer 7 (citing Ule, col. 2,11. 28^49).
We are persuaded that independent claim 1 was rejected in error. The
cited passages of Ule, in column 2, refer primarily to intake and exhaust
valve timing, although also stating that the “pressure of the ignited charge
during the power stroke,” in a cylinder, “may be controlled by ignition
timing, by mixture ratio and by compression ratio, but the principal means of
control is the quantity of charge itself.” Ule, col. 2,11. 52—57. The identified
portion of Ule’s column 8 refers to “[cjomputer controlled operation of
engine valve opening and closure.” Ule, col. 8,11. 1—6. Yet, none of these
identified passages in Ule mention determining any amount or limit of
advancing ignition timing, let alone the claimed “determining . . . whether
there is an ignition advance margin relative to the minimum advance for best
torque (MBT) timing.”
Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
of claim 1 and dependent claims 3—5, as well as claim 6 (as no identified
disclosure of Barker overcomes the deficiency of Ule discussed above).
4
Appeal 2015-008261
Application 13/027,577
DECISION
We REVERSE the Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1 and 3—6
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
REVERSED
5