12603022 (P.T.A.B. May. 18, 2016)

Ex Parte Rapp et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardMay 18, 2016

12603022 (P.T.A.B. May. 18, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 12/603,022 10/21/2009 24972 7590 05/20/2016 NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP 666 FIFTH A VE NEW YORK, NY 10103-3198 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Bernd Rapp 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 ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 1019118863 5755 EXAMINER BRADLEY, AUDREY KLASTERKA ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3748 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 05/20/2016 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): nyipdocket@nortonrosefulbright.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte BERND RAPP, ANDREAS BEITER, and SASCHA JOOS Appeal2014-001155 Application 12/603,022 Technology Center 3700 Before: NEALE. ABRAMS, JILL D. HILL, and GORDON D. KINDER, Administrative Patent Judges. KINDER, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appeal2014-001155 Application 12/603,022 STATEMENT OF CASE Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 134 from the Examiner's Final rejection of claims 1 and 10-13. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 6(b ). We AFFIRM. THE CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER The claims are directed to procedure for operating an internal combustion engine, and a device for the execution of the procedure. Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter: A procedure for operating a combustion engine, which comprises at least one glow plug that is assigned to at least one cylinder, and in whose exhaust gas area at least one catalytic converter is arranged, wherein the glow plug is operated at least temporarily independent of a combustion engine operating status until reaching a preset measure for a conversion capability of the catalytic converter; wherein the reaching of the preset measure for the conversion capability of the catalytic converter is determined with aid of a comparison of a downstream exhaust gas lambda, measured downstream after the catalytic converter, with a downstream exhaust gas lambda threshold value. REFERENCES The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on appeal is: Yamashita Gabe us 5,727,383 JP 2005-083262 A 2 Mar. 17, 1998 Mar. 31, 2005 Appeal2014-001155 Application 12/603,022 REJECTIONS Claims 1, 10-13 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C Â§103(a) as being unpatentable over Gabe in view of Yamashita. OPINION Claims 1 and 11 are independent and Appellants make the same arguments for each as well as for the dependent claims. We select claim 1 as representative, and claims 10-13 stand or fall together with claim 1. See 37 C.F.R. Â§ 41.37 (c)(iv). The Examiner relied on Gabe for its teaching of a procedure for operating an engine which comprises at least one glow plug that is assigned to at least one cylinder in whose exhaust gas area at least one catalytic converter is arranged, wherein the glow plug is operated at least temporarily independent of a combustion engine operating status until reaching a preset measure for a conversion capability of the catalytic converter. Final Act. 2- 3. Paragraph 53 of Gabe describes the procedure in connection with step S 13 illustrated in Figure 4. It is our understanding from this paragraph that, during step S 13, the fuel injection system retards the timing of its fuel injection pulses and simultaneously the glow plug is turned on. These functions occur at the same time, but neither is dependent on the other. While the glow plug stays on, the system waits for a predetermined time, and then checks the exhaust temperature again, until the desired exhaust temperature is reached. Gabe i-f 53. This desired minimum exhaust temperature is the "oxidation catalyst active temperature", i.e., the temperature required for the catalyst to actively oxidize particulate matter in the exhaust stream. Gabe i-fi-149, 53. Short of turning the engine off, the 3 Appeal2014-001155 Application 12/603,022 glow plug will remain on until the catalyst activation temperature is reached. Gabe Fig. 4, S12-S14, i153. Appellants argue that Gabe teaches away from the claimed invention, citing instances where Gabe says the glow plug is turned off. Appeal Br. 12- 13. We find this unpersuasive in light of Gabe paragraph 53 discussed above. Appellants also argue that the routine in Figure 4 is a sub-routine, and that there might be other dependencies and interdependencies. Reply 3. This argument is based on the following sentence from the machine translation of Gabe: The flows of controls of this Fig.4 are control throw illustrated as a reproduction control flow of metal included in the main flows of control which control the whole vehicles containing the engine E, are repeatedly called from the main flows of control started with start switch-on of the engine E and repeat execution. Gabe i145. We find this sentence linguistically challenging, at best. Appellants-have not provided evidence in support of the opinion that other control signals may be concurrently running in the vehicle (id.), and we see no indication in the reference that the operation of the glow plug is anything other than at least temporarily independent of the engine's operating status until the catalytic converter reaches a preset measure, i.e. its operating temperature. From our perspective, a preponderance of the evidence supports the Examiner's conclusion that step S 13 causes the glow plug to remain on until the test at S 14 shows that the catalyst has reached operating temperature and that this operation is independent of other engine operating conditions. Final Act. 3, Ans. 2. 4 Appeal2014-001155 Application 12/603,022 Finally, Appellants argue that because the fuel is injected in increasingly large pulses as the piston moves past top dead center, the glow plug is not independently operated until the catalytic converter reaches operating temperature. Reply 4. We find no factual support for this conclusion in Gabe. As discussed above, the control sequence for the glow plug, once the routine of Figure 4 is invoked, is solely dependent on the temperature of the exhaust gas, and thus at least temporarily independent of the engine operating status. Gabe Fig. 4, S12-S14, i-f 53. DECISION For the above reasons, the Examiner's rejection of claims 1 and 11-13 is affirmed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. Â§ 1.136(a)(l )(iv) (2009). AFFIRMED 5