Appeal No. 97-2806
Application No. 08/391,234
The examiner then concludes that it would have been obvious,
within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103, to modify Kizler by
surrounding a fuel injector, rather than a spark plug, with a
combustion detector as taught by Suzuki, motivated by Bullis’
teaching of a substantially sleeve-shaped electrode serving as an
ionization detector being incorporated in the structure of a fuel
injector [see page 4 of the principal answer].
First, independent claims 9 and 20 require a fuel injector
which injects fuel into the combustion chamber and around which
the sleeve-shaped electrode is arranged. Although the examiner
contends that incorporation of an ionization sensor with either a
spark plug or a fuel injector is viewed as “functionally
equivalent alternatives,” [page 5 of the principal answer], the
examiner has provided no evidence to support this allegation. As
such, for whatever Kizler teaches about ionization detectors and
sleeve-shaped electrodes, Kizler teaches it in regard to
surrounding a spark plug, not a fuel injector.
Second, Suzuki clearly shows a fuel injector but there is no
ionization sensor taught therein. Instead, Suzuki is interested
in detecting a combustion flame and transmitting the light from
the flame via a light path to a photoelectric transducer in order
to determine an actual time of combustion. Essentially, then,
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007