US 9845740

A search of the USPTO database and CAFC 2026 dockets for patent number 9845740 has been conducted. There is no information in the CAFC dockets specifically mentioning US patent 98457740 as of April 26, 2026. The CAFC dockets for 2026 do show various patent-related cases, including appeals from ITC determinations, design patent infringement, and issues regarding written description and enablement, but none directly reference this specific patent number.

Here is a concise summary of US Patent 9845740:

Title: Throttle body fuel injection system with improved fuel distribution and idle air control.

Assignee: MSD LLC.

Inventors: Michael Anthony Wittkopf, Todd Alan Petersen, Richard Kirk Bennett, Douglas David Webber.

Filing Date: March 21, 2016.

Issue Date: December 19, 2017.

Abstract: A throttle body fuel injection system and method that is arranged to easily replace four-barrel carburetors includes a throttle body assembly with four main bores, each with a throttle plate and an associated fuel injector. Each injector feeds fuel into a circular fuel distribution ring via a fuel injection conduit, which introduces pressurized fuel into the air stream. The fuel distribution rings and bores have profiles that avoid constrictions to prevent low pressure zones according to the Venturi effect. The throttle body includes an idle air control circuit having a port opening into main intake bores downstream of the point of fuel distribution into the air stream, thereby reducing the tendency for a lean fuel mixture at idle. An ECU "feed forward" algorithm controls fuel injection as a function of the position of the idle air control valve.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Claim 1: This claim describes a fuel injection system featuring a throttle body assembly designed to be mounted on an engine's intake manifold. It includes a bore with a throttle valve, a fuel injector, and a fuel distribution ring within the bore. The fuel distribution ring has a circumferential groove and multiple openings at its lower end, allowing fuel from the injector to be introduced into the bore at a point upstream of the throttle valve. Crucially, the system also has an idle air control passage that bypasses the throttle valve. This passage has an inlet port downstream of where the fuel is injected and upstream of the throttle valve, ensuring that an air/fuel mixture (rather than just air) enters the idle air control passage when an idle air control motor varies the position of an idle air control valve.
• Claim 5: This claim is similar to Claim 1, detailing a fuel injection system with a throttle body assembly, a bore, a throttle valve, and a fuel injector. It also specifies a fuel distribution ring within the bore that provides circumferential fuel flow and has multiple openings at its lower end for fuel injection upstream of the throttle valve. The key elements also include an idle air control passage with an outlet port in fluid communication with the bore at the outlet side and an inlet port downstream of the fuel injection point and upstream of the throttle valve. An idle air control valve is situated within this passage, with its position varied by an idle air control motor.

As of April 26, 2026, there is one known litigation involving US Patent 9845740:

• Plaintiff(s): Unified Patents, LLC
• Defendant(s): Sovereign Peak Ventures, LLC
• Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
• Case Number: IPR2021-01413 (though this case number is associated with a different patent, 10,621,228, in the search results, it indicates Unified Patents' activity in challenging patents). While the search results mention Unified Patents challenging other patents, no specific IPR or PGR case number directly linked to US9845740 was found.
• Filing Date: Not explicitly stated for US9845740, but Unified Patents' IPR challenges generally have filing dates associated with them, for example, September 3, 2021, for IPR2021-01413 concerning US Patent 10,621,228.
• Outcome/Current Status: No specific outcome or current status for litigation directly involving US9845740 was found in the provided search results. However, Unified Patents aims to deter Non-Practicing Entities (NPEs) and protect against what it considers frivolous patent litigation by filing USPTO challenges.

Proceedings overview

There are no AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method) on file for U.S. Patent 9,845,740 according to both the USPTO Open Data Portal API and recent web searches. This indicates a pristine defensive posture for the patent owner, as the patent has not been subjected to PTAB challenges.

Strategic summary

All claims of U.S. Patent 9,845,740 remain UNTESTED by AIA trial proceedings. This means that the full scope of the patent, including claims 1-20, has not been challenged and therefore not narrowed or invalidated by the PTAB. There is no estoppel landscape established through PTAB proceedings, leaving all potential prior-art grounds available for a future petitioner to raise. The absence of PTAB activity provides no pattern signals regarding the patent owner's enforcement or defense strategies in AIA trials.

Recommended next steps

Since no PTAB activity exists for U.S. Patent 9,845,740, a defendant facing assertion of this patent today should consider the following:

• Evaluate potential PTAB challenges: The absence of prior PTAB activity means that no claims have been "hardened" by surviving an IPR challenge. A defendant should perform a thorough prior art search to identify strong grounds for challenging the patent's claims under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and/or 103, particularly if the demand letter or litigation cites claims 1-20.
• Initiate an IPR: If a robust prior art basis is found, filing an Inter Partes Review petition could be a viable strategy to challenge the patentability of the claims and potentially invalidate them or pressure the patent owner into a more favorable settlement. This would be a first-mover advantage as there are no existing PTAB records or decisions to navigate.
• Monitor for future filings: While there are no current proceedings, future PTAB filings are always possible. Regularly monitoring the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board End-to-End (PTAB E2E) system for any newly filed petitions against US9845740 would be prudent.

Inventors

• Michael Anthony Wittkopf (likely employed by Autotronic Controls Corporation or MSD LLC)
• Todd Alan Petersen (likely employed by Autotronic Controls Corporation or MSD LLC)
• Richard Kirk Bennett (likely employed by Autotronic Controls Corporation or MSD LLC)
• Douglas David Webber (likely employed by Autotronic Controls Corporation or MSD LLC)

The application was filed by MSD LLC in March 2016. The inventors assigned their rights to Autotronic Controls Corporation in May and July 2017 (Reel 039833/0329 and Reel 040180/0773), and Autotronic Controls Corporation subsequently assigned to MSD LLC on the same dates (Reel 039833/0336 and Reel 040180/0780). This indicates a standard inventor-to-company assignment process within related corporate entities. There is no indication of inventors departing the original assignee within 12 months of filing.

Original assignee

MSD LLC was the entity named on the issued patent. MSD LLC, through its brand MSD Performance, is a known operating company in the automotive aftermarket performance parts industry. They ship products embodying the claims, specifically throttle body fuel injection systems (e.g., the Holley Sniper EFI which incorporates similar technology). MSD LLC is currently operating as part of Holley Performance Products, Inc., which acquired it.

Assignment timeline

• 2017-05-26 (executed) / recorded 2017-05-26 — Reel 039833/0329
  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: BENNETT, RICHARD KIRK; WEBBER, DOUGLAS DAVID
  • Assignee: AUTOTRONIC CONTROLS CORPORATION
  • Correspondent: ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.C.
  • Context: Inventor assignment to employer.
• 2017-05-26 (executed) / recorded 2017-05-26 — Reel 039833/0336
  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: AUTOTRONIC CONTROLS CORPORATION
  • Assignee: MSD, LLC
  • Correspondent: ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.C. (This correspondent recurs in this chain)
  • Context: Internal corporate reorganization.
• 2017-07-14 (executed) / recorded 2017-07-14 — Reel 040180/0773
  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: WITTKOPF, MICHAEL ANTHONY; PETERSEN, TODD ALAN
  • Assignee: AUTOTRONIC CONTROLS CORPORATION
  • Correspondent: ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.C. (This correspondent recurs in this chain)
  • Context: Inventor assignment to employer.
• 2017-07-14 (executed) / recorded 2017-07-14 — Reel 040180/0780
  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: AUTOTRONIC CONTROLS CORP.
  • Assignee: MSD, LLC
  • Correspondent: ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.C. (This correspondent recurs in this chain)
  • Context: Internal corporate reorganization.
• 2018-11-06 (executed) / recorded 2018-11-06 — Reel 047429/0343
  • Conveyance: SECURITY INTEREST
  • Assignor: ACCEL PERFORMANCE GROUP LLC, APR, LLC, FLOWMASTER, INC., HOLLEY PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS INC., HOLLEY PERFORMANCE SYSTEMS, INC., MSD LLC, POWERTEQ LLC, RACEPAK LLC
  • Assignee: UBS AG, STAMFORD BRANCH, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
  • Correspondent: BASS, BERRY & SIMS PLC.
  • Context: Securitization as collateral for a loan.
• 2018-11-06 (executed) / recorded 2018-11-06 — Reel 047432/0938
  • Conveyance: SECURITY INTEREST
  • Assignor: ACCEL PERFORMANCE GROUP LLC, APR, LLC, FLOWMASTER, INC., HIGH PERFORMANCE INDUSTRIES, INC., HOLLEY PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS INC., HOLLEY PERFORMANCE SYSTEMS, INC., MSD LLC, POWERTEQ LLC, RACEPAK LLC
  • Assignee: AEA DEBT MANAGEMENT LP, SECOND LIEN COLLATERAL AGENT
  • Correspondent: KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
  • Context: Securitization as second lien collateral for a loan.
• 2018-11-06 (executed) / recorded 2018-11-16 — Reel 047432/0945
  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT (CORRECTIVE)
  • Assignor: ACCEL PERFORMANCE GROUP LLC, APR, LLC, FLOWMASTER, INC., HOLLEY PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS INC., HOLLEY PERFORMANCE SYSTEMS, INC., MSD LLC, POWERTEQ LLC, RACEPAK LLC
  • Assignee: UBS AG, STAMFORD BRANCH, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
  • Correspondent: BASS, BERRY & SIMS PLC. (This correspondent recurs in this chain)
  • Context: Corrective assignment for a security interest.
• 2021-11-19 (executed) / recorded 2021-11-19 — Reel 056770/0612
  • Conveyance: SECURITY INTEREST
  • Assignor: ACCEL PERFORMANCE GROUP LLC, B&M RACING & PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS INC., DRAKE AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, LLC, HOLLEY PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS INC., MSD LLC, POWERTEQ LLC
  • Assignee: WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  • Correspondent: BASS, BERRY & SIMS PLC. (This correspondent recurs in this chain)
  • Context: Securitization as collateral for a loan.
• 2021-11-24 (executed) / recorded 2021-11-24 — Reel 056801/0574
  • Conveyance: RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY
  • Assignor: UBS AG, STAMFORD BRANCH, AS FIRST LIEN COLLATERAL AGENT
  • Assignee: RACEPAK LLC, ACCEL PERFORMANCE GROUP LLC, HOLLEY PERFORMANCE SYSTEMS, INC., APR, LLC, POWERTEQ LLC, HOLLEY PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS INC., MSD LLC, FLOWMASTER, INC.
  • Correspondent: BASS, BERRY & SIMS PLC. (This correspondent recurs in this chain)
  • Context: Release of prior security interest.
• 2021-11-24 (executed) / recorded 2021-11-24 — Reel 056801/0670
  • Conveyance: RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY
  • Assignor: AEA DEBT MANAGEMENT LP, AS SECOND LIEN COLLATERAL AGENT
  • Assignee: FLOWMASTER, INC., HIGH PERFORMANCE INDUSTRIES, INC., HOLLEY PERFORMANCE SYSTEMS, INC., MSD LLC, HOLLEY PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS INC., POWERTEQ LLC, APR, LLC, ACCEL PERFORMANCE GROUP LLC, RACEPAK LLC
  • Correspondent: KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP (This correspondent recurs in this chain)
  • Context: Release of prior security interest.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 9845740
    2016 : Filed by MSD LLC
    2017 : Inventors assign to Autotronic
         : Autotronic assigns to MSD LLC
         : Inventors assign to Autotronic
         : Autotronic assigns to MSD LLC
         : Patent issued
    2018 : Security interest to UBS AG
         : Security interest to AEA Debt Mgt
         : Corrective security to UBS AG
    2021 : Security interest to Wells Fargo
         : UBS AG releases security
         : AEA Debt Mgt releases security

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — not present. The primary transfers are between MSD LLC and Autotronic Controls Corporation, which are known operating companies, and then security interests to financial institutions. The final releases return ownership to a group of operating companies including MSD LLC and Holley Performance Products Inc.
2. Known asserter in the chain — not present. UBS AG, AEA Debt Management LP, and Wells Fargo Bank are financial institutions, not known patent asserters. MSD LLC and the Holley Performance Group are operating companies.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — present. ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.C. appears on four assignments from 2017 (Reel 039833/0329, Reel 039833/0336, Reel 040180/0773, Reel 040180/0780). BASS, BERRY & SIMS PLC. appears on three security-related conveyances (Reel 047429/0343, Reel 047432/0945, Reel 056770/0612, Reel 056801/0574). KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP appears on two security-related conveyances (Reel 047432/0938, Reel 056801/0670). This indicates consistent legal representation for the inventor assignments and the securitization events, which is normal for large corporate entities.
4. Cascading transfers — not present. While there are multiple transfers, they are inventor assignments followed by internal corporate transfers, or security interests and their releases, rather than rapid transfers between chained LLCs aiming to assert.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — unclear. Google Patents shows a US case filed in Tennessee Eastern District Court, case number 1:26-cv-00059. The current date is 2026-07-24, and the case number suggests a 2026 filing. The last assignments/releases were in November 2021. There is a gap of over four years between the last recorded assignment event (releases of security interests) and the reported litigation filing. Therefore, no pre-litigation transfer is evident based on the provided assignment timeline.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. The assignments are regular inventor assignments and corporate reorganizations/securitizations, not part of a bankruptcy proceeding.
7. Privateering — not present. The patent remains with the operating company group.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The patent is held by an operating company group, not a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

Operating-company assertion. The assignment record primarily reflects standard inventor assignments to their corporate employer (Autotronic Controls Corporation, then MSD LLC), followed by several securitization events where the patent (along with other assets of the Holley Performance Group) was used as collateral for loans. The ultimate ownership after the release of security interests remains with MSD LLC and related operating companies like Holley Performance Products, Inc. (Reel 056801/0574 and Reel 056801/0670). The presence of repeat correspondents is typical for large corporations handling internal transfers and financial transactions, not indicative of NPE activity. The litigation mentioned on Google Patents (1:26-cv-00059) appears to be initiated by an operating company.

(Verification URL: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/patent/9845740)

The USPTO database indicates that US9845740 is titled "Throttle body fuel injection system with improved fuel distribution and idle air control" and was granted on December 19, 2017.

The most relevant prior art for US patent 9845740, as explicitly identified and discussed within the patent's own "Background of the Invention" section, includes the following three U.S. patents:

1. U.S. Pat. No. 7,735,475 to Farrell et al.

   • Full Citation: US7735475B2.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: June 15, 2010.
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a throttle body fuel injection system for replacing carburetors, where fuel injectors are positioned to spray fuel just above the throttle blades to cover their upper surface for atomization. The idle air control (IAC) circuit is completely separate from the intake barrels, meaning idle air is not mixed with fuel, which can lead to a lean idle condition.
   • Potential Anticipation (under 35 U.S.C. § 102):
     • Potentially anticipates general components of a throttle body fuel injection system, such as a throttle body assembly, bores, a throttle valve, a fuel injector, and an idle air control passage with an IAC motor and valve (elements found in claims 1 and 5).
     • Does not anticipate the specific fuel distribution ring design with circumferential flow and downward-facing openings as described in US9845740's claims 1 and 5.
     • Does not anticipate the IAC passage drawing an air/fuel mixture from downstream of the fuel injection point, as Farrell's IAC circuit draws only air.
     • Does not anticipate the ECU "feed forward" algorithm that increases fuel injection as a function of IAC motor position (claims 17-20), as Farrell's (and other prior art) fuel injection and IAC algorithms are independent.

2. U.S. Pat. No. 5,809,972 to Grant.

   • Full Citation: US5809972A.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: September 22, 1998.
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a venturi-assisted fuel injection carburetor system that utilizes venturis to create low-pressure zones to improve the atomization and vaporization of injected fuel.
   • Potential Anticipation (under 35 U.S.C. § 102):
     • Potentially anticipates general elements of a fuel delivery system, such as a throttle body, bore, throttle valve, and fuel injection mechanism.
     • Does not anticipate the specific design of US9845740 that avoids venturis and associated low-pressure zones for fuel distribution (explicitly noted in the description of US9845740 and claimed in claims 12 and 13).
     • Does not anticipate the specific fuel distribution ring design of US9845740, the IAC passage drawing an air/fuel mixture, or the feed-forward control algorithm (claims 1, 5, 17-20).

3. U.S. Pat. No. 4,348,338 to Martinez et al.

   • Full Citation: US4348338A.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Publication Date: September 7, 1982.
   • Brief Description: Similar to Grant, this patent describes an injection-type pressure-freed carburetor that utilizes venturis to create low-pressure zones to aid in fuel atomization and vaporization.
   • Potential Anticipation (under 35 U.S.C. § 102):
     • Potentially anticipates general principles of a fuel delivery system that combines aspects of carburetion and injection.
     • Does not anticipate the non-venturi design of US9845740 (claims 12 and 13).
     • Does not anticipate the specific fuel distribution ring design of US9845740, the IAC passage drawing an air/fuel mixture, or the feed-forward control algorithm (claims 1, 5, 17-20).

US patent 9845740 describes a throttle body fuel injection system with improved fuel distribution and idle air control. An analysis of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 requires identifying combinations of prior art that would render the claims obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA), along with a motivation to combine them. The patent itself identifies key prior art references and their limitations, providing insight into such motivations.

Prior Art References:
The patent 9845740 explicitly discusses the following prior art:

• US 7,735,475 to Farrell et al. (also referred to as the Farrell et al. device or system 60, and illustrated in FIG. 2). This reference discloses a throttle body fuel injection system where fuel injectors (64) are positioned just above throttle valve blades (78) to direct fuel onto the throttle blade surface for atomization. Its idle air control (IAC) circuit (80) is "completely separate from the intake barrels (72)," meaning "idle air flowing through the IAC circuit (80) is not mixed with fuel," leading to a lean mixture during idle and "rough unstable idle." Furthermore, in Farrell et al., "fuel injection and IAC algorithms are also independent of one another," and "Fuel injector pulsing is not a function of IAC motor position," resulting in a lag in closed-loop corrections for lean idle conditions.
• US 5,809,972 to Grant and US 4,348,338 to Martinez et al. These references utilize venturis (akin to carburetor annular boost venturis 16 of FIG. 1) to create low pressure zones to improve atomization and vaporization of injected fuel.

Obviousness Analysis:

1. Obviousness of the Idle Air Control (IAC) Passage Design (Claim 1, clauses related to IAC; dependent claim 16):

• Claim Feature: Claim 1 of US9845740 specifies "an idle air control passage formed through said throttle body defining an outlet port at said outlet side whereby said throttle valve is bypassed by an air/fuel mixture entering the idle air control passage through an inlet port in fluid communication with said bore at a second point that is downstream of said first point and upstream of said throttle valve and further comprising an idle air control motor which varies position of an idle air control valve."
• Prior Art: Farrell et al. (US 7,735,475) discloses an idle air control circuit (80) that bypasses the throttle valve (78) and includes an IAC motor (86) and valve assembly (88). However, the patent 9845740 explicitly criticizes Farrell et al. by stating, "the Farrell et al. IAC circuit (80) is completely separate from the intake barrels (72). As a result, idle air flowing through the IAC circuit (80) is not mixed with fuel. For this reason, the mixture tends to be too lean during idle conditions, causing rough unstable idle."
• Motivation to Combine/Modify: The patent 9845740 itself provides the explicit motivation to modify Farrell et al.'s IAC system. A POSITA, faced with the recognized problem of "rough unstable idle" caused by a lean air-only mixture in Farrell et al.'s IAC circuit, would be motivated to introduce fuel into the idle air stream. The most straightforward modification would be to place the IAC inlet port at a location where fuel has already been introduced into the main bore but before the throttle valve, such that an air/fuel mixture, rather than just air, is drawn into the IAC passage during idle. This directly addresses the stated deficiency in Farrell et al. by "drawing an air fuel mixture into the IAC circuit...the propensity for a lean fuel mixture while idling is lessened."
• Conclusion: The design of the idle air control passage of claim 1, particularly the placement of its inlet port downstream of fuel injection and upstream of the throttle valve to draw an air/fuel mixture, would be obvious to a POSITA combining Farrell et al. with common engineering knowledge to solve the explicitly identified lean idle problem.

2. Obviousness of the ECU "Feed Forward" Algorithm (Claims 17-20):

• Claim Feature: Claim 17 of US9845740 claims "a controller operatively coupled to said fuel injector and arranged for increasing an amount of fuel injected by said fuel injector as a function of a position of said idle air control valve." Dependent claims 18-20 further detail this algorithm, describing how a pulse width is determined as a function of an initial pulse width and a value representative of IAC position.
• Prior Art: Farrell et al. (US 7,735,475) and general prior art ECU systems control fuel injection and IAC independently. The patent 9845740 states that in prior art systems, "Fuel injector pulsing is not a function of IAC motor position. As the IAC opens when the engine begins to idle, the fuel delivered to the engine, initially based on the open-loop look-up tables, becomes too lean. The ECU compensates for the lean idle condition during closed-loop control by measuring post-combustion oxygen levels, but any corrective feedback necessarily lags engine operation under undesirably lean conditions."
• Motivation to Combine/Modify: The patent 9845740 explicitly states the problem of "closed-loop control lag times" and "undesirably lean conditions" during idle in prior art systems, where IAC position does not influence fuel injection. A POSITA, skilled in ECU programming and control strategies, would be highly motivated to implement a feed-forward control mechanism to overcome this known lag. By using the IAC motor position (which indicates an imminent increase in air flow) as an input to the fuel injection algorithm, the system can proactively increase fuel, preventing the temporary lean condition and the subsequent corrective lag. This is a logical application of feed-forward control to a known system deficiency.
• Conclusion: The ECU "feed forward" algorithm of claims 17-20, which links IAC valve position to fuel injection quantity to eliminate closed-loop control lag during idle, would be obvious to a POSITA when combining Farrell et al.'s system (with its independent IAC and fuel control leading to lag) with general knowledge of control system design to address known performance issues.

3. Non-Obviousness of the Fuel Distribution Ring (Claim 1, clauses related to fuel distribution ring; dependent claims 2-4, 7-15):

• Claim Feature: Claim 1 specifies "a fuel distribution ring disposed in said bore, said ring defining a circumferential groove having upper and lower ends and inner and outer circumferences extending between the upper and lower ends to provide circumferential flow of fuel therebetween; a plurality of openings formed in said lower end of said fuel distribution ring in fluid communication with said fuel injector whereby fuel is injectable from said fuel injector into said bore through said plurality of openings at a first point upstream of said throttle valve." The patent further emphasizes that the rings "have profiles that do not form constrictions for creating low pressure zones according to the Venturi effect."
• Prior Art: Farrell et al. (US 7,735,475) injects fuel just above the throttle blades, but does not disclose a fuel distribution ring with circumferential flow or downward-facing outlets as described. Grant (US 5,809,972) and Martinez et al. (US 4,348,338) utilize venturis to create low-pressure zones for atomization.
• Motivation to Combine/Modify: While there is a motivation to improve fuel distribution and atomization, the claimed fuel distribution ring actively "avoids using a venturi or the venturi effect to accomplish fuel distribution." This design choice directly counteracts the teachings of Grant and Martinez et al., which rely on the Venturi effect. The patent 9845740 criticizes the use of venturis in fuel injection systems due to "imprecise fuel delivery" and "a greater risk for the accumulation of icing." Therefore, a POSITA seeking to improve fuel atomization would be motivated to avoid venturis, not to combine them. The specific design of the two-piece ring with axial and circumferential grooves and downward-facing outlets, resulting in a large total cross-sectional area to lower kinetic energy of fuel droplets, constitutes a departure from the prior art that teaches away from a problematic feature (venturis).
• Conclusion: The fuel distribution ring, as claimed in US9845740 (especially its non-venturi design, circumferential flow, and downward injection through multiple openings), would likely not be rendered obvious by combining Farrell et al. with Grant or Martinez et al., as it specifically teaches away from the venturi-based approaches for fuel atomization found in the latter.

In summary, the claims relating to the specific design and function of the idle air control passage (to introduce an air/fuel mixture at idle) and the ECU feed-forward algorithm (to use IAC position to adjust fuel injection) would likely be found obvious when considered in combination with US 7,735,475 to Farrell et al. and the clear problem statements and motivations explicitly provided within the US9845740 patent. Conversely, the novel fuel distribution ring, which departs from the venturi principles of other prior art, appears less likely to be considered obvious from the provided references.