Ex Parte Wagner et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Nov 28, 2017

14002873 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 28, 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.
14/002,873 12/10/2013 Wolfgang Wagner 410001-610PUS-339583 5552
27799 7590
Cozen O'Connor
277 Park Avenue, 20th floor
NEW YORK, NY 10172
EXAMINER
TRAN, LONG T
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3747
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
11/30/2017 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):
patentsecretary @ cozen. com
patentdocket@cozen.com
patentsorter@cozen.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte WOLFGANG WAGNER and MARCUS MEIXNER
Appeal 2017-001266
Application 14/002,873
Technology Center 3700
Before EDWARD A. BROWN, MICHAEL L. WOODS, and
ANTHONY KNIGHT, Administrative Patent Judges.
BROWN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s
decision rejecting claims 11 and 13—20, which are the pending claims. We
have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
1 MAN Diesel & Turbo SE is identified as the real party in interest. Appeal
Br. 2.
Appeal 2017-001266
Application 14/002,873
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claim 11, reproduced below, is representative of the claimed subject
matter.
11. An internal combustion engine (1, la) comprising:
a plurality of combustion cylinders each of which having
an associated fuel injection device (120), each of the plurality of
combustion cylinders being provided with its own pilot unit (10,
10a—lOg) having a fuel accumulator (20) integrated therein, each
fuel accumulator (20) being connected by one of a plurality of
first fuel lines (110) to the fuel injection device (120) associated
with the respective combustion cylinder for supplying fuel to the
respective combustion cylinder; and
a fuel pump (50) configured to be connectable to a fuel
source for supplying a predetermined fuel pressure, the fuel
pump (50) being integrated in each instance of the plurality of
the pilot units (10, 10a—lOg), wherein the fuel accumulator (20)
of each pilot unit (10, 10a—lOg) is configured to ensure that fuel
delivered by the fuel pump (50) is supplied to the respective
associated fuel injection device (120) in a pressure-stable
manner, and
wherein the respective fuel accumulators (20) of the pilot
units (10,10a—lOg) are connected to one another via a plurality of
second fuel lines (100).
Appeal Br. 9 (Claims App.).
REJECTION
Claims 11 and 13—20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Knight (US 2006/0144368 Al, published July 6, 2006).2
2 Claim 12 was cancelled in the Amendment After Final Action filed
January 4, 2016. See Adv. Act. (dated Feb. 1, 2016).
2
Appeal 2017-001266
Application 14/002,873
ANALYSIS
As to claim 11, the Examiner finds that Knight discloses an internal
combustion engine comprising a plurality of combustion cylinders, each
having an associated fuel injection device (fuel injectors 14a—14f) and being
provided with its own pilot unit (unit pumps 10a—1 Of) having a fuel
accumulator (“Knight does not specify a fuel accumulator, but does teach
internal groove collecting fuel in paragraph 0050 which is recognized by the
Examiner to be obvious in the art as an equivalent structure”), and a fuel
pump (pumping element 50) integrated in each instance of the plurality of
the pilot units, wherein the fuel accumulator of each pilot unit is configured
to ensure that fuel delivered by the fuel pump is supplied to the respective
associated fuel injection device in a pressure-stable manner (“via plunger
bore 54, plunger 50 and valve spring 57”). Final Act. 3^4.
Appellants argue that each claimed pilot unit has both a fuel
accumulator integrally formed therein and a fuel pump integrated therein,
whereas Knight has a single shared accumulator assembly 16 housed in a
single accumulator housing 22. Appeal Br. 5. Appellants dispute the
Examiner’s statement that “Knight does not specify a fuel accumulator.”
Id.', Final Act. 3. Knight describes, “[t]he unit pumps lOa-lOf are integrated
with a rail assembly, referred to generally as 16, including first and second
accumulator or rail volumes defined by first and second rails 18, 20,” and
“[t]he first and second rails 18, 20 are arranged adjacent to and in parallel
with one another and are defined or integrated within a common
accumulator housing in the form of a rail housing 22.” Knight 140, Fig. 1.
Appellants contend that both rails 18, 20 are fuel accumulators, and, in
combination, constitute Knight’s fuel accumulator. Appeal Br. 5—6.
3
Appeal 2017-001266
Application 14/002,873
Appellants contend that a common fuel accumulator is different from an
individual fuel accumulator for each cylinder, as claimed. Id. at 6.
“Prior art references may be ‘indicative of what all those skilled in the
art generally believe a certain term means . . . [and] can often help to
demonstrate how a disputed term is used by those skilled in the art.’” In re
Cortright, 165 F.3d 1353, 1358 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (quoting Vitronics Corp. v.
Conceptronic, Inc., 90 F.3d 1576 1584 (Fed. Cir. 1996)). “Accordingly, the
PTO’s interpretation of claim terms should not be so broad that it conflicts
with the meaning given to identical terms in other patents from analogous
art.” Id. We agree with Appellants that Knight does, in fact, specify a fuel
accumulator. Further, Knight does not appear to describe any element(s)
other than first rail 18, second rail 20, and rail housing 22 (“common
accumulator housing”) as being an “accumulator” in its fuel system. To the
extent the Examiner has not recognized this disclosure, which is indicative
of how the term “fuel accumulator” is used by those skilled in the art, the
Examiner has not taken into account the full teachings of Knight.
Knight also discloses:
Each unit pump (e.g. 10a) has a pumping element or
plunger 50 and a pump chamber 52 in communication with one
end of the supply passage 12a. The plunger 50 is movable within
a plunger bore 54 provided in a unit pump housing (not
identified) under the influence of a cam drive arrangement (not
shown in FIG. 6) so as to pressurise fuel within the pump
chamber 52. The plunger bore 54 is provided with an internal
groove 55, or an enlarged diameter region, which serves to
collect leakage fuel from the pump chamber 52 down the plunger
bore 54 and drains to a low pressure drain, as described in
further detail later.
Knight | 50 (emphasis added), Fig. 6.
4
Appeal 2017-001266
Application 14/002,873
Appellants contend that internal groove 55 is not a “fuel
accumulator,” as claimed. Appeal Br. 6. Rather, Appellants contend,
internal groove 55 merely collects leakage fuel from pump chamber 52
down plunger bore 54 and drains to a low pressure drain. Id. (citing Knight
1 50). Appellants assert that internal groove 55 does not ensure pressure-
stable supply of fuel delivered by the fuel pump, as required in claim 11. Id.
The Examiner responds that:
The rails 16 and 18 may be additional accumulators, but
for all intents and purposes, the groove 55 collecting the fuel
adheres to the broad but reasonable interpretation [sic] claim
language in light of the specification. Furthermore, by collecting
leakage fuel draining via a low pressure drain, the groove 55
furthermore meets the limitation of ensuring a pressure stable
manner.
Ans. 8 (emphasis added). Appellants reply that one of ordinary skill in the
art would not view Knight’s groove 55 as a fuel accumulator for an internal
combustion engine. Reply Br. 2—3. Appellants also contend that the
Examiner’s finding that groove 55 “meets the limitation of ensuring a
pressure stable manner” does not meet the actual claim language. Id. at 3.
Appellants’ contentions are persuasive. The Examiner may concede
that Knight’s rails 16 and 18 are accumulators. Ans. 8 (“rails 16 and 18 may
be additional accumulators”). Rails 16 and 18 do not, however, meet the
limitations of the claimed fuel accumulators integrated in the respective
combustion cylinders.
Additionally, the Examiner directs us to no disclosure in Knight that
establishes internal grooves 55 are configured to ensure that fuel delivered
by pumping elements 50 is supplied to the associated fuel injectors 14a—14f
in a pressure-stable manner, as required by claim 11. Knight describes only
5
Appeal 2017-001266
Application 14/002,873
that each of the pumping units 10a—1 Of includes a respective internal groove
55 that “serves to collect leakage fuel.” Knight 150. The Examiner does
not identify any additional disclosure that indicates the result of internal
grooves 55 providing this leakage fuel collecting and draining function is to
ensure that fuel delivered by pumping elements 50 is supplied to the
associated fuel injectors 14a—14f in a pressure-stable manner. However,
“[t]he Patent Office has the initial duty of supplying the factual basis for its
rejection. It may not, because it may doubt that the invention is patentable,
resort to speculation, unfounded assumptions or hindsight reconstruction to
supply deficiencies in its factual basis.” In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017
(CCPA 1967) (emphasis added). Consequently, because the Examiner has
not established by a preponderance of the evidence that Knight discloses or
suggests that the unit pumps comprise an accumulator, as claimed, we do not
sustain the rejection of claim 11, or claims 13—20 depending therefrom, as
unpatentable over Knight.
DECISION
The Examiner’s decision to reject claims 11 and 13—20 is reversed.
REVERSED
6