Ex Parte Ogasawara et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 5, 2017

12122488 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 5, 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.
12/122,488 05/16/2008 Yasuhiro Ogasawara T-7389 8943
55741 7590 09/07/2017
Michael E. Carmen, Esq.
RYAN, MASON & LEWIS, LLP
48 South Service Road
Suite 100
Melville, NY 11747
EXAMINER
COLEMAN, RYAN L
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
1714
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/07/2017 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):
ny office @ rml-law. com
mec @ rml-law.com
bmg@rml-law.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE
THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte YASUHIRO OGASAWARA,1
TOSHIO ANAMI, and YUUKI KATOH
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
Technology Center 1700
Before CATHERINE Q. TIMM, MARK NAGUMO, and
MICHAEL G. McMANUS, Administrative Patent Judges.
NAGUMO, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Yasuhiro Ogasawara, Toshio Anami, and Yuuki Katoh (“Chevron”)
timely appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Final Rejection2 of all
pending claims 1, 3, 4, and 6-11. We have jurisdiction. 35 U.S.C. § 6.
We affirm for reasons well-stated by the Examiner.
1 The real party in interest is identified as Chevron Japan Ltd. (“Chevron”).
(Appeal Brief, filed 22 December 2014 (“Br.”), 2.)
2 Office Action mailed 3 June 2014 (“Final Rejection”; cited as “FR”).
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
OPINION
A. Introduction3 4
The subject matter on appeal relates to a method of cleaning internal
parts of a gasoline engine. According to the ’488 Specification, the
detergent added to gasolines is not sufficient to remove all the deposits in a
gasoline engine, and disassembly is desirable at intervals (e.g., 100,000 km
in Example 1 (Spec. 17,1. 25); 40,000 km in Example 2 {id. at 22,1. 10)) to
ensure proper cleaning. Although effective prior art devices that do not
require engine disassembly are said to exist, careful positioning of the
manifold pipes is said to be required, and to require experience and skill.
{Id. at 1,1. 22, to 2,1. 13.) The claimed method is said to provide a simpler
way of cleaning the internal parts of the engine in situ. {Id. at 11,11. 27—31.)
The process is conducted with an apparatus as illustrated in Figures 1
and 2, reproduced on the following page. While engine 214 is running,
a standard cleaning liquid 11 {id. at 9,11. 15—10,1. 4) is forced, by gas
pressure provided by gas supply pipe 27, from storage tank 12 into
connecting tubes 22a and 22b {id. at 10,11. 6-10), entraining gas containing
at least 20 volume percent oxygen (i.e., air {id. at 12,11. 24—26)) via gas
supply port 14 {id. at para, bridging 12—13). The mixture of cleaning fluid
and air is injected into intake pipe 19 via port 18, where the cleaning fluid is
3 Application 12/122,488, Method for cleaning internal parts of gasoline
engines, filed 16 May 2008, claiming the benefit of an application filed in
Japan on 17 May 2007. We refer to the “’488 Specification,” which we cite
as “Spec.”
4 Throughout this Opinion, for clarity, labels to elements are presented in
bold font, regardless of their presentation in the original document.
2
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
broken into tiny droplets and then introduced to the interior of the engine via
intake port 17.
{Figures 1 (left) and 2 (right) are shown below}
{Fig. 1 shows an engine cleaning {Fig. 2 shows a detail of port 18 into
apparatus attached to engine 21} intake pipe 19 with throttle plate 24}
The following two terms are central to this appeal; we shall explore
their meaning in more detail infra.
First, the Specification defines the term “throttle valve-attached
position” as “any position from the center position of the throttle valve to the
position of the opposite end (opposite to the position of the engine) of the
throttle plate observed when the throttle valve is fully opened.” (Spec. 4,
11. 14—18.)
Second, the Specification teaches that “[t]he term ‘intake pipe has the
port... below a throttle valve-attached position thereof means that the
3
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
intake pipe has the port... for introducing the cleaning liquid into the intake
pipe between the throttle valve attached position and the below side end at
which the intake pipe is connected to the engine.'1'’ (Id. at 4,11. 22—28
(emphasis added).)5
Sole independent claim 1 is representative and reads:
A method for cleaning internal parts of a gasoline engine
which comprises the steps of:
(1) connecting an outlet of a cleaning liquid supply pipe of a
cleaning liquid storage tank containing a cleaning liquid airtightly
to a port of an intake pipe of the gasoline engine, said cleaning
liquid supply pipe having the outlet at its front end and a gas
supply port thereon,
said intake pipe having the port below a throttle valve-
attached position thereof,
(2) operating the engine to place the inside of the intake pipe
under reduced pressure condition;
(3) pressurizing an internal space of the cleaning liquid storage
tank containing the cleaning liquid to continuously supply the
cleaning liquid from the cleaning liquid storage tank to the
cleaning liquid supply pipe and simultaneously drawing
continuously a gas having an oxygen concentration of at
least 20 volume percent into the cleaning liquid supply pipe via
the gas supply port, wherein the step of pressurizing the internal
space of the cleaning liquid storage tank comprises introducing
a gas into the storage tank through a gas supply tube;
(4) supplying the cleaning liquid and gas having an oxygen
concentration of at least 20 volume percent from the cleaning
liquid supply pipe into the intake pipe through the port
positioned below a throttle valve-attached position thereof
wherein the gas having an oxygen concentration of at
5 The ellipses refers to “a branch pipe having the port,” an alternative
embodiment with which the claimed method may be practiced. See
Spec. 13,1. 33, to 15,1. 14, for detailed descriptions.
4
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
least 20 volume percent rapidly expands and the cleaning liquid
turns into liquid drops such that the liquid drops are carried with
the gas into the inside of the engine to bring the liquid drops of
the cleaning liquid into contact with the internal parts of the
engine to clean the internal parts with the cleaning liquid; and
(5) exhausting the cleaning liquid having been brought into contact
with the internal parts of the engine with an exhaust gas of the
engine.
(Claims App.,Br. 16—17; some indentation, paragraphing, and emphasis
added.)
The Examiner maintains the following grounds of rejection6’7:
A. Claims 1, 3, 4, 6—8, and 11 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of the combined teachings of
Sasaki,8 Inamura,9 Wells,10 and Connors.* 11
Al. Claim 9 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of
the combined teachings of Sasaki, Inamura, Wells, Connors,
Waelput,12 and Doi.13
6 Examiner’s Answer mailed 1 April 2015 (“Ans.”).
7 Because this application was filed before the 16 March 2013, effective
date of the America Invents Act, we refer to the pre-AIA version of the
statute.
8 Mark Sasaki et al., Method and apparatus for cleaning an automotive
engine, U.S. Patent No. 5,970,994 (1999).
9 Toshio Inamura, Water induction system for internal combustion engines,
U.S. Patent No. 4,125,092 (1978).
10 Jeny Lee Wells, U.S. Patent No. 6,178,977 B1 (2001).
11 David L. Connors et al., U.S. Patent No. 6,478,036 B1 (2002).
12 Erik F.M. Waelput et al., U.S. Patent No. 5,460,656 (1995).
13 Minoru Doi, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2003/0188770 Al
(2003).
5
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
A2. Claim 10 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) in view of
the combined teachings of Sasaki, Inamura, Wells, Connors,
and Waelput.
B. Discussion
The Board’s findings of fact throughout this Opinion are supported by
a preponderance of the evidence of record.
Initially, we find that Chevron does not argue for the separate
patentability of any claims. Accordingly, all claims stand or fall with
claim 1. 37C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l)(iv) (2013).
Briefly, the Examiner finds that Sasaki meets most of the limitations
of claim 1. The Examiner finds that Inamura discloses the injection of a
mixture of liquid [water] and air into fuel entering the intake manifold such
that the mixing occurs before the fuel liquid and air enter the intake
manifold. (FR 4—5,19.) The Examiner finds that Wells teaches cleaning an
internal combustion engine with a cleaning fluid and exhausting the residue
with the engine exhaust. (Id. at 5,112.) Finally, the Examiner finds that
Connors teaches methods of cleaning an engine in which cleaning liquid is
forced with pressurized air from a storage tank to a cleaning liquid hose
fitted with an atomizing nozzle. (Id. at 6,115.) The Examiner determines,
step by step, that it would have been obvious to combine these teachings,
resulting in a process that meets claim 1. (Id. at 6-7,116.)
Chevron does not dispute the Examiner’s findings that Sasaki meets
most limitations of claim 1. Rather, Chevron’s principal argument is that
Inamura’s disclosure would not have made obvious the provision of the port
of the PCV valve [corresponding to port 18 of intake pipe 19] below a
6
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
throttle-valve attached position (hereinafter, TVAP). Chevron urges that the
Examiner misinterprets the position of port 18 required by claim 1.
In Chevron’s words,
as can readily be seen, the port 18 (the “outlet of a cleaning
liquid supply pipe”) bears the required “throttle valve-
attached position” because it assumes a “position from the
center position of the throttle valve to the position of the
opposite end (opposite to the position of the engine) of the
throttle plate observed when the throttle valve is fully
opened” as instantly claimed. In other words, it is positioned
anywhere from the center of the throttle valve to the
rightmost tip of the valve when fully opened as depicted in
Figure 2.
(Br., para, bridging 8—9.)
The difficulty with Chevron’s argument, as the Examiner points out
repeatedly (FR 10-11,130; Ans. 11—15), is that Chevron does not address
adequately the requirement that “intake pipe [19] h[as] the port [18] below a
throttle valve-attached position thereof ’ (claim 1 § (1)) or the equivalent
requirement of “the port [18] positioned below a throttle valve-attached
position thereof (claim 1, § (4)). Rather, Examiner finds, “the port is
downstream (that is, below) the throttle valve” (FR 11,11. 1—2; Ans. 14, 2d
full para.)
Consistent with the Examiner’s interpretation, the Specification
explains that, “[t]he port [18] of the intake pipe [19] is a port formed in the
area below the throttle valve-attached position (on the side near to the intake
port 17 of the engine 21.)” (Spec. 7,11. 21—23.) The Specification explains
further that:
In Fig. 1, the inside of the intake pipe 19 in the area between
the intake port 17 of the engine 21 and the throttle valve-
7
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
attached position 16 is placed under a reduced pressure
condition when the engine is operated. That is because, when
the engine 21 is operated, the engine 21 sucks air through the
intake port 17 in the intake stroke, while the throttle plate 24a
in the intake pipe 19 disturbs the suction of air partly.
{Id. at 8,11. 18-25.)
In other words, downstream from TVAP 16, i.e., between TVAP 16
and engine inlet 17, intake pipe 19 is at reduced pressure during the intake
stroke of a piston.
The Specification teaches further that “[w]hen the cleaning liquid and
the gas containing at least 20 vol.% of oxygen are together introduced into
the intake pipe 19 under reduced pressure, the gas rapidly expands and the
cleaning liquid turns into small sized liquid drops (in the form of mist) in the
intake pipe 19.” {Id. at 11,11. 9-13.) According to the Specification, the
small sized liquid drops are important because, “[i]t is known that the piston
and driving parts of the engine may be damaged if a large amount of the
cleaning liquid not in the form of liquid drops is present in the combustion
chamber during the compression stroke.” {Id. at 15,11. 20-24.)
Thus, the Specification indicates that any region of low pressure in
intake pipe 19 would be an appropriate place to introduce the cleaning-
liquid:air mixture to achieve a fine mist for cleaning the internal parts of the
engine. The definition of “below” provided in the Specification, i.e., that
“the intake pipe has the port... for introducing the cleaning liquid into the
intake pipe between the throttle valve attached position and the below side
end at which the intake pipe is connected to the engine” {id. at 4,11. 24—28
(emphasis added)), does not, unlike the preceding definition of the term
“throttle vale-attached position,” specify that the “end” is the end of the
8
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
throttle plate. As indicated by the desired formation of small-sized liquid
drops, the Examiner’s interpretation that “below” means that “the port is
downstream (that is, below) the throttle valve” (FR11,11. 1—2) is well
supported by the Specification and drawings, and is thus not inconsistent
with the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language.14
Moreover, Chevron has not directed our attention to evidence of record
demonstrating the criticality of the input port position over the upper half of
the throttle plate 24 compared to the other downstream portions of input
pipe 19.
We are not persuaded of harmful error in this aspect of the appealed
rejection.
Chevron urges further that Inamura is non-analogous art with respect
to the claimed invention. In Chevron’s view, the mention of cleaner engines
by Inamura is too tangential to draw the attention of persons skilled in the art
of cleaning internal parts of the engine, the subject of the present invention.
(Br. 9-11.)
Inamura concerns introducing water vapor into the air-fuel mixture of
an internal combustion engine “at any position between the throttle and the
beginning of the intake manifold” (Inamura col. 5,11. 16—18) to improve fuel
combustion and suppress carbon formation, etc. {id. at col. 1,11. 25—31). It
has not escaped our attention that Inamura takes care to insure that “the
14 We recognize that part of the problem could lie in the translation of the
Specification from the Japanese-language priority document, but we must
adhere to the written record before us.
9
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
water vapor is instantly flashed into minute water mist like particles”
{id. at col. 4,11. 62—64) for maximum benefit {id. at col. 6,11. 20-30).
The cleaning method described by Sasaki, as well as the cleaning
method on appeal, inject an atomized liquid cleaner into the intake manifold
of a running engine (Sasaki, abstract). The introduction of water vapor into
the air-fuel mixture injected into the combustion chamber of an engine is
sufficiently similar, as the Examiner explains (Ans. 15, 1st full para.), that
the conditions encountered and the common problems solved readily
outweigh the differences in ultimate purpose. Thus, we are not persuaded of
harmful error in this issue.
Chevron also criticizes the Examiner’s reliance on Connors as not
curing the deficiencies of Sasaki and Inamura. (Br. 12.) However, we have
not found deficiencies in the way the Examiner has applied these references.
We therefore find Chevron’s arguments, which do not criticize the substance
of the Examiner’s findings that Connors would have suggested pressurizing
the cleaning liquid reservoir via a gas supply tube in order to transfer the
cleaning liquid reservoir to a nozzle assembly for atomization (FR 6,115)
persuasive of harmful error.
We have considered Chevron’s remaining arguments, including those
raised in the Reply,15 but do not find them persuasive of harmful error.
Accordingly, we affirm the appeal rejections.
15 Reply Brief filed 1 June 2015 (“Reply”).
10
Appeal 2015-006148
Application 12/122,488
C. Order
It is ORDERED that the rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, and 6—11 is
affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
AFFIRMED
11