10549570 (B.P.A.I. Feb. 29, 2012)

Ex Parte Carbonne et al

Board of Patent Appeals and InterferencesFeb 29, 2012

10549570 (B.P.A.I. Feb. 29, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES ____________ Ex parte LAURE CARBONNE, ALAIN GONZALEZ, ROGER ROUPHAEL, and ROBERTUS WINGERHOEDS ____________ Appeal 2010-002395 Application 10/549,570 Technology Center 3700 ____________ Before PHILLIP J. KAUFFMAN, WILLIAM V. SAINDON, and MICHAEL C. ASTORINO, Administrative Patent Judges. ASTORINO, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner’s decision finally rejecting claims 1-19. We have jurisdiction over the appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). The Appellants’ representative presented oral argument for this appeal on February 23, 2012. We REVERSE. Appeal 2010-002395 Application 10/549,570 2 CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER The Appellants claimed subject matter pertains to the ability to start an engine, having electronic control of fuel injection, when a camshaft sensor is defective or otherwise eliminated from the control system. Spec. 1-2. Claim 1 is the sole independent claim and representative of the subject matter on appeal. Claim 1, with emphasis added, recites: 1. A method of synchronizing injection with engine phase in an engine with electronic injector control having n cylinders into which fuel is injected directly into each of the cylinders successively in a predetermined sequence, the fuel injection being synchronized with a position of a piston in the corresponding cylinder, the method comprising the following steps, performed when the engine is started: - injecting fuel into m cylinders in the predetermined injection sequence when the corresponding pistons, put into motion by means of a starter, are at an end of a compression phase, m being determined in advance as a function of n, - measuring engine speed and/or acceleration, - continuing the injection in the predetermined sequence if the engine speed and/or acceleration exceed a predetermined threshold, the injection being synchronized with the engine phase in this case, and - continuing the injection with a phase change with respect to the preceding injections and with respect to the predetermined sequence, this phase change being a function of n and m, so that the injection is synchronized with the engine phase, in the contrary case, wherein the method does not employ a camshaft sensor. Appeal 2010-002395 Application 10/549,570 3 REJECTIONS The following rejections are before us for review: claims 1-4, 6 and 8-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Morikawa (US 6,138,638, issued Oct. 31, 2000); and claims 5, 7 and 13-19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Morikawa. OPINION The Examiner finds that Morikawa discloses the claimed method steps are performed when engine 1 is started, wherein the method does not employ a camshaft sensor. Ans. 3-4. More specifically, the Examiner finds that, “Morikawa explicitly states synchronizing the fuel timing without the camshaft sensor as stated on Col. 37, Lines 29-36.” Ans. 13. The Appellants contend that Morikawa’s method includes “BOTH crankshaft information and camshaft information [from a camshaft sensor].” See Reply. Br. 7 (Emphasis omitted). Morikawa discloses when engine 1 is turned on, an engine speed calculating routine is executed. Col. 37, ll. 1-4. In Figure 3, Morikawa shows a flow chart including: a first step S1, to determine crank pulse; and a second step S2, to determine cylinder to be ignited and a cylinder to be injected. Col. 37, ll. 1-18. In the first step S1, an input from cylinder determining sensor 42 is used to determine “which crank angle θ1, θ2 or θ3 the presently inputted crank pulse corresponds to.” Col. 37, ll. 10-11. It is notable that the Examiner finds, and we agree, that cylinder determining sensor 42 is a camshaft sensor. Ans. 12; see also col. 30, ll. 62-65. Subsequently, in the second step S2, if no cylinder determining pulse is Appeal 2010-002395 Application 10/549,570 4 inputted from the cylinder determining sensor (camshaft sensor) 42 a crank pulse can still be determined. Col. 37, ll. 12-37. However, the subsequent determination of crank pulse in the second step is based on the initial inputted information from the cylinder determining sensor (camshaft sensor) 42. As such, the Examiner’s finding that Morikawa discloses a method, performed when the engine is started, that does not employ a camshaft sensor is not adequately supported. Thus the rejection of claim 1 and dependent claims 2-4, 6 and 8-14, as anticipated by Morikawa, is not sustained. Turning to the rejection of claims 5, 7 and 13-19 as unpatentable over Morikawa, the Examiner relies on the same erroneous finding regarding the Morikawa’s disclosure as discussed above. As such, this rejection is also not sustained. DECISION We REVERSE the rejections of claims 1-19. REVERSED Klh