Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendments
The amendment filed October 2nd, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7, 9-12, 15-20, 22-23, 25 and 27-35 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed July 2nd. 2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 12 and 30-32 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 12 lines 19-21, “wherein the proprotors provide lift whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a vertical takeoff and landing mode and a hover mode wherein the proprotors provide lift whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a vertical takeoff and landing mode and a hover mode via the one…” should read “wherein the proprotors provide lift whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a vertical takeoff and landing mode and a hover mode via the one…”.
In claim 30 line 2, “…batteries connected…” should read “…batteries are connected…”.
In claim 31 line 2, “…batteries connected…” should read “…batteries are connected…”.
In claim 32 line 2, “…batteries connected…” should read “…batteries are connected…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 9-10, 12, 17, 19-20, and 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nissen et al. (US 2020/0172235) in view of Sambell (US 5,085,315) and Vondrell et al. (US 2018/0065742).
Regarding claim 1, Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) a hybrid propulsion system for a tiltrotor aircraft comprising:
two turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) externally mounted to a fuselage (12) between one or more wings (14) and an aft end of the tiltrotor aircraft (10) (clearly seen in figures 1-4), wherein the two turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) provide a first forward thrust whenever the tiltrotor aircraft (10) is in a first forward flight mode (figure 4) (Para 0017, 0022; engine (24) is a convertible engine which can operate in both turboshaft and turbofan modes);
one or more electric generators (38s) disposed within the fuselage, wherein the one or more electric generators are connected to turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) (Para 0017, 0024; engine (24) is a convertible engine which can operate in both turboshaft and turbofan modes);
one or more batteries (46) disposed within the fuselage and connected to one or more generators (38s) (Para 0026);
two pylon assemblies/nacelles (18a, 18b), each pylon assembly/nacelle (18a, 18b) mounted proximate to an outboard portion of the one or more wings (14) and housing one or more electric motors (40s) connected to the one or more electric generators (38s) and a proprotor (20a, 20b), and wherein part of each pylon assembly is rotatable to rotate the proprotor (20a, 20b) between a forward position/ forward flight mode (figure 2) and a vertical position/helicopter flight mode (figure 1) (Para 0017-0019, 0025);
wherein the proprotors (20a, 20b) provide lift whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a vertical takeoff and landing mode and a hover mode/helicopter mode (figure 1) via the one or more electric motors (40s) powered by a combination of the one or more turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) and the one or more batteries (46) such that the one or more turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) are smaller than required to provide the lift alone (Para 0026-0027; battery provide additional capability for increased power during VTOL/lift, thus the turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) are smaller than required to provide the VTOL/lift alone);
wherein the proprotors provide a second forward thrust via the one or more electric motors (40s) powered by the two turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a second forward flight mode (figure 2) (Para 0018-0019, 0025-0026); and
wherein the one or more electric motors can be turned off during the first forward flight mode (fig. 4) (Para 0022; proprotors (20a, 20b), which are powered by the one or more electric motors, are folded in the first forward flight mode, thus the one or more electric motors can be turned off),
but it is silent about the system comprising:
two turbofan engines and separate one or more turboshaft engines, the one or more turboshaft engines connected to one or more electric generators, wherein the one or more electric generators are not connected to the two turbofan engines, and
wherein the tiltrotor aircraft can maintain controlled forward flight throughout a loss of power from either the two turbofan engines or the one or more turboshaft engines.
Sambell ‘315 teaches (figures 1-2) an aircraft (10) comprising a fuselage (11), wings (12, 14), a pair of jet engines (18, 20) and a pair of rotary wing assemblies (24, 26) wherein the pair of rotary wing assemblies (24, 26) are connected to a separate engine/power source i.e., rotary wing assemblies are not rotated by a pair of jet engines (18, 20) (Col. 2 lines 65-68; Col. 3 Lines 1-14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Sambell ‘315 to configure the system comprising:
two turbofan engines and a separate one or more turboshaft engines, the one or more turboshaft engines connected to one or more electric generators, wherein the one or more electric generators are not connected to the two turbofan engines (aircraft has pair of turbofan engine (24s) to provide thrust and a separate dedicated one or more turboshaft engine is connected to generator which powers electric motor), and
wherein the tiltrotor aircraft can maintain controlled forward flight throughout a loss of power from either the two or more turbofan engines or the one or more turboshaft engines (power from either turbofan engine or turboshaft engine enables controlled forward flight).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would provide dedicated engines for lift and forward flight.
Modified Nissen et al. ‘235 is silent about the system comprising:
the one or more turboshaft engines internally-mounted to the fuselage.
Vondrell et al. ‘742 teaches (figures 1-13) a hybrid propulsion system (38) for an aircraft (10) comprising an electrical power source (40) disposed within the fuselage (18) wherein the electrical source comprises an internal turboshaft engine (124) connected to an electric generator (122) (Para 0031, 0045);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Vondrell et al. ‘742 to configure the system comprising:
the one or more turboshaft engines internally-mounted to the fuselage.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would reduce drag during flight since electrical sources are internally mounted.
Regarding claim 2, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the system wherein:
one or more electrical lines (clearly shown in the figure below) are disposed within each wing connecting the one or more electric generators (38s) to the one or more electric motors (40s) in each pylon assembly/ nacelles (18a, 18b) (Para 0026).
PNG
media_image1.png
744
593
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the system further comprising a proprotor gearbox (42) connected between the one or more electric motors (40s) and each proprotor (20a, 20b) (Para 0025).
Regarding claim 10, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the system wherein the proprotor (20a, 20b) is a stop and fold proprotor (Para 0021-0022).
Regarding claim 12, Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) a tiltrotor aircraft comprising:
a fuselage (12 ) (Para 0017);
one or more wings (14) attached to the fuselage (12) (Para 0017);
two turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) externally mounted to the fuselage (12) between one or more wings (14) and an aft end of the tiltrotor aircraft (10) (clearly seen in figures 1-4), wherein the two turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) provide a first forward thrust whenever the tiltrotor aircraft (10) is in a first forward flight mode (figure 4) (Para 0017, 0022; engine (24) is a convertible engine which can operate in both turboshaft and turbofan modes);
one or more electric generators (38s) disposed within the fuselage, wherein the one or more electric generators are connected to turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) (Para 0017, 0024; engine (24) is a convertible engine which can operate in both turboshaft and turbofan modes);
one or more batteries (46) disposed within the fuselage and connected to the one or more generators (38s) (Para 0026);
two pylon assemblies/nacelles (18a, 18b), each pylon assembly/nacelle (18a, 18b) mounted proximate to an outboard portion of the one or more wings (14) and housing one or more electric motors (40s) connected to the one or more electric generators (38s) and a proprotor (20a, 20b), and wherein part of each pylon assembly is rotatable to rotate the proprotor (20a, 20b) between a forward position/ forward flight mode (figure 2) and a vertical position/helicopter flight mode (figure 1) (Para 0017-0019, 0025); and
one or more electrical lines (clearly shown in the figure above) disposed within the one or more wings connecting the one or more electric generators (38s) to the one or more electric motors in each pylon assembly/ nacelles (18a, 18b) (Para 0026); and
wherein the proprotors (20a, 20b) provide lift whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a vertical takeoff and landing mode and a hover mode/helicopter mode (figure 1) via the one or more electric motors (40s) powered by a combination of the one or more turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) and the one or more batteries (46) such that the one or more turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) are smaller than required to provide the lift alone (Para 0026-0027; battery provide additional capability for increased power during VTOL/lift, thus the turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s)are smaller than required to provide the VTOL/lift alone);
wherein the proprotors provide a second forward thrust via the one or more electric motors (40s) whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a second forward flight mode (figure 2) (Para 0018-0019, 0025-0026); and
wherein the one or more electric motors can be turned off during the first forward flight mode (fig. 4) (Para 0022; proprotors (20a, 20b), which are powered by the one or more electric motors, are folded in the first forward flight mode, thus the one or more electric motors can be turned off)
but it is silent about the tiltrotor aircraft comprising:
two turbofan engines and separate one or more turboshaft engines, the one or more turboshaft engines connected to one or more electric generators, wherein the one or more electric generators are not connected to the two turbofan engines,
wherein the tiltrotor aircraft can maintain controlled forward flight throughout a loss of power from either the two or more turbofan engines or the one or more turboshaft engines.
Sambell ‘315 teaches (figures 1-2) an aircraft (10) comprising a fuselage (11), wings (12, 14), a pair of jet engines (18, 20) and a pair of rotary wing assemblies (24, 26) wherein the pair of rotary wing assemblies (24, 26) are connected to a separate engine/power source i.e., rotary wing assemblies are not rotated by a pair of jet engines (18, 20) (Col. 2 lines 65-68; Col. 3 Lines 1-14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Sambell ‘315 to configure the tiltrotor aircraft comprising:
two turbofan engines and a separate one or more turboshaft engines, the one or more turboshaft engines connected to one or more electric generators, wherein the one or more electric generators are not connected to the two turbofan engines (aircraft has pair of turbofan engine (24s) to provide thrust and a separate dedicated one or more turboshaft engine is connected to generator which powers electric motor), and
wherein the tiltrotor aircraft can maintain controlled forward flight throughout a loss of power from either the two or more turbofan engines or the one or more turboshaft engines (power from either turbofan engine or turboshaft engine enables controlled forward flight).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would provide dedicated engines for lift and forward flight.
Modified Nissen et al. ‘235 is silent about the tiltrotor aircraft comprising:
one or more turboshaft engines internally-mounted to the fuselage.
Vondrell et al. ‘742 teaches (figures 1-13) a hybrid propulsion system (38) for an aircraft (10) comprising an electrical power source (40) disposed within the fuselage (18) wherein the electrical source comprises an internal turboshaft engine (124) connected to an electric generator (122) (Para 0031, 0045);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Vondrell et al. ‘742 to configure the tiltrotor aircraft comprising:
one or more turboshaft engines internally-mounted to the fuselage.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would reduce drag during flight since electrical sources are internally mounted.
Regarding claim 17, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the tiltrotor aircraft wherein the proprotor (20a, 20b) is a stop and fold proprotor (Para 0021-0022).
Regarding claim 19, Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) a method of providing propulsion to a tiltrotor aircraft (10) comprising:
providing a first forward thrust from two turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) externally mounted to a fuselage (12) between one or more wings (14) and an aft end of the tiltrotor aircraft (10) whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a first forward flight mode (figure 4) (Para 0017, 0022; engine (24) is a convertible engine which can operate in both turboshaft and turbofan modes);
generating electrical power from one or more electric generators (38s) connected to turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) (Para 0017, 0024; engine (24) is a convertible engine which can operate in both turboshaft and turbofan modes);
driving one or more electric motors (40s) within two pylon assemblies/nacelles (18a, 18b) using the electrical power, wherein each pylon assembly/nacelle (18a, 18b) is mounted proximate to an outboard portion of the one or more wings (14) (Para 0017, 0025)
driving a proprotor (20a, 20b) on each pylon assembly/nacelle (18a, 18b) using one or more electric motors (40s) (Para 0017-0018, 0025);
providing lift from the proprotors (20a, 20b) whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a vertical takeoff and landing mode and a hover mode/ helicopter flight mode (figure 1), wherein the one or more electric motors (40s) are powered by a combination of the one or more turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) and one or more batteries (46) disposed within the fuselage such that the one or more turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) are smaller than required to provide the lift alone (Para 0026-0027; battery provide additional capability for increased power during VTOL/lift, thus the turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) are smaller than required to provide the VTOL/lift alone);
transitioning to or from the vertical takeoff and landing mode or the hover mode/helicopter flight mode by rotating part of each pylon assembly to rotate the proprotor between a forward position/ forward flight mode (figure 2) and a vertical position/helicopter flight mode (figure 1) (Para 0017-0019, 0025);
providing a second forward thrust from the proprotors (20a, 20b) via the one or more electric motors whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a second forward flight mode (figure 2) (Para 0019); and
wherein the one or more electric motors can be turned off during the first forward flight mode (fig. 4) (Para 0022; proprotors (20a, 20b), which are powered by the one or more electric motors, are folded in the first forward flight mode, thus the one or more electric motors can be turned off),
but it is silent about the method comprising:
two turbofan engines and separate one or more turboshaft engines,
one or more electric generators connected to one or more turboshaft engines, wherein the one or more electric generators are not connected to the two turbofan engines; and
wherein the tiltrotor aircraft can maintain controlled forward flight throughout a loss of power from either the two or more turbofan engines or the one or more turboshaft engines.
Sambell ‘315 teaches (figures 1-2) an aircraft (10) comprising a fuselage (11), wings (12, 14), a pair of jet engines (18, 20) and a pair of rotary wing assemblies (24, 26) wherein the pair of rotary wing assemblies (24, 26) are connected to a separate engine/power source i.e., rotary wing assemblies are not rotated by a pair of jet engines (18, 20) (Col. 2 lines 65-68; Col. 3 Lines 1-14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Sambell ‘315 to configure the method comprising:
two turbofan engines and separate one or more turboshaft engines,
one or more electric generators connected to one or more turboshaft engines, wherein the one or more electric generators are not connected to the two turbofan engines (aircraft has pair of turbofan engine (24s) to provide thrust and a separate dedicated one or more turboshaft engine is connected to generator which powers electric motor); and
wherein the tiltrotor aircraft can maintain controlled forward flight throughout a loss of power from either the two or more turbofan engines or the one or more turboshaft engines (power from either turbofan engine or turboshaft engine enables controlled forward flight).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would provide dedicated engines for lift and forward flight.
Modified Nissen et al. ‘235 is silent about the method comprising:
one or more turboshaft engines internally-mounted to the fuselage
Vondrell et al. ‘742 teaches (figures 1-13) a hybrid propulsion system (38) for an aircraft (10) comprising an electrical power source (40) disposed within the fuselage (18) wherein the electrical source comprises an internal turboshaft engine (124) connected to an electric generator (122) (Para 0031, 0045);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Sambell ‘315 to incorporate the teachings of Vondrell et al. ‘742 to configure the method comprising:
one or more turboshaft engines internally-mounted to the fuselage.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would reduce drag during flight since electrical sources are internally mounted.
Regarding claim 20, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the method wherein:
each pylon assembly/nacelle (18a, 18b) is mounted proximate to an outboard portion of the one or more wings (14) (Para 0017); and
one or more electrical lines (clearly shown in the figure above) are disposed within the one or more wings connecting the one or more electric generators to the one or more electrical motors in each pylon assembly/ nacelles (18a, 18b) (Para 0026).
Regarding claim 27, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the method further comprising a proprotor gearbox (42) connected between the one or more electric motors (40s) and each proprotor (20a, 20b) (Para 0025).
Regarding claim 28, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the method further comprising stopping and folding each of the proprotors (20a, 20b) (Para 0021-0022).
Claims 4, 15, 22, 30, 31 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nissen et al. (US 2020/0172235), Sambell (US 5,085,315) and Vondrell et al. (US 2018/0065742) as applied to claims 1, 12 and 19 above, and further in view of Tamada (US 2021/0261268).
Regarding claims 4, 15 and 22 modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method, wherein the one or more batteries (46) are disposed within the fuselage (12) (Para 0026),
but it is silent about the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method wherein the one or more batteries are disposed within both the fuselage and each pylon assembly.
However, Tamada et al. ‘268 teaches (figures 1-7) a flying body (1100) wherein the battery (1004) is provided in the pylon portion (1102) of the flying body and a storage battery provided in the airframe (1101) (Para 0070, 0074, 0085).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Tamada et al. ‘268 to configure the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method wherein the one or more batteries are disposed within both the fuselage and each pylon assembly.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would provide a backup power source to power aircraft.
Regarding claims 30, 31, and 32, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method wherein the one or more batteries (46) are connected to the one or more electric motors (40s) to provide supplemental power (Para 0026-0027; batteries (46) provide additional capability for increased power during VTOL or other rotary operations by supplying additional electric power for short durations).
but it is silent about the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method further comprising one or more batteries disposed within each pylon assembly.
However, Tamada et al. ‘268 teaches (figures 1-7) a flying body (1100) wherein the battery (1004) is provided in the pylon portion (1102) of the flying body (Para 0070, 0074).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Tamada et al. ‘268 to configure the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method further comprising one or more batteries disposed within each pylon assembly.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would provide a backup power source to power proprotors.
Claims 5, 16 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nissen et al. (US 2020/0172235), Sambell (US 5,085,315) and Vondrell et al. (US 2018/0065742) as applied to claims 1, 12 and 19 above, and further in view of Combs et al. (US 2020/0350640).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the system and the tiltrotor aircraft of claims 1 and 12 respectively but it is silent about the system and the tiltrotor aircraft wherein the one or more batteries are ejectable during an emergency.
However, Combs et al. ‘640 teaches (figure 9) ejecting a belly-mounted battery pack (902) in the case of an imminent crash, belly landing, fire or other issue/emergency (Para 0065).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Combs et al. ‘640 to configure the system and the tiltrotor aircraft wherein the one or more batteries are ejectable during an emergency.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enhance safety and minimize damage.
Regarding claim 23, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the method of claim 19 but it is silent about the method further comprising ejecting the one or more batteries during an emergency.
However, Combs et al. ‘640 teaches (figure 9) ejecting a belly-mounted battery pack (902) in the case of an imminent crash, belly landing, fire or other issue/emergency (Para 0065).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Combs et al. ‘640 to configure the method further comprising ejecting the one or more batteries during an emergency.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enhance safety and minimize damage.
Claims 7 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nissen et al. (US 2020/0172235), Sambell (US 5,085,315) and Vondrell et al. (US 2018/0065742) as applied to claims 1 and 19 above, and further in view of Bedrine et al. (US 2015/0143950).
Regarding claims 7 and 25, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the system and the method of claims 1 and 19 above but it is silent about the system and the method wherein one or more reduction gearboxes are disposed between the one or more turboshaft engines internally-mounted to the fuselage and the one or more electric generators.
However, Bedrine et al. ‘950 teaches (figure 3a) an architectural configuration wherein the reduction gear assembly (11a) directly connects the APU unit/engine (3) to the reversible motor generator (7) for energy conversion (Para 0059-0060).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Bedrine et al. ‘950 to configure the system and the method wherein one or more reduction gearboxes are disposed between the one or more internally-mounted turboshaft engines and the one or more electric generators.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would increase the torque output to the generator.
Claims 11, 18 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nissen et al. (US 2020/0172235), Sambell (US 5,085,315) and Vondrell et al. (US 2018/0065742) as applied to claims 1, 12 and 19 above, and further in view of Green et al. (US 2004/0076428).
Regarding claims 11, 18 and 29, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method of claims 1, 12 and 19 above respectively but it is silent about the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method wherein each pylon assembly further houses one or more weapons, missiles, targeting devices, lasers, countermeasures, surveillance devices, or deployable drones.
However, Green et al. ‘428 teaches a system in aircraft comprising a plurality of weapons carried on a wing pylons (Para 0010).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Martin et al. ‘562 to configure the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method wherein each pylon assembly further houses weapons.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enable to use the aircraft as an attack aircraft.
Claims 33-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nissen et al. (US 2020/0172235), Sambell (US 5,085,315) and Vondrell et al. (US 2018/0065742) as applied to claims 1, 12 and 19 above, and further in view of Hohenthal (US 2017/0320568).
Regarding claims 33, 34 and 35, modified Nissen et al. ‘235 teaches (figures 1-5) the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method of claims 1, 12 and 19 above respectively, but it is silent about the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method wherein the one or more batteries are movable within the fuselage to optimize a center of gravity of the tiltrotor aircraft.
Hohenthal ‘568 teaches an aircraft comprising a battery pack wherein a battery pack or at least a portion thereof is adapted to be moveable and thereby capable of shifting the aircraft’s center of gravity between various flight modes (Para 0012).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Nissen et al. ‘235 to incorporate the teachings of Hohenthal ‘568 to configure the system, the tiltrotor aircraft and the method wherein the one or more batteries are movable within the fuselage to optimize a center of gravity of the tiltrotor aircraft.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enhance the performance of the aircraft by optimizing a center of gravity of the tiltrotor aircraft based on various flight modes.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8th January 2025 with respect to claims 1, 12 and 19 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that “Nissen discloses that "The convertible engine horsepower is sized to provide for vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL)" and "Due to the VTOL power requirement being higher than the cruise power requirement, significant power is available to apply power to an alternate device during cruise mode." (paragraph [0027]). As a result, Nissen does not disclose, teach or suggest "wherein the proprotors provide lift whenever the tiltrotor aircraft is in a vertical takeoff and landing mode and a hover mode via the one or more electric motors powered by a combination of the one or more turboshaft engines and the one or more batteries such that the one or more turboshaft engines are smaller than required to provide the lift alone", however, as explained in the rejection above, Nissen eta l. ‘235 further discloses “Electrical storage 46 provides additional capability for increased power during VTOL or other rotary operations by supplying additional electric power for short durations.” (Para 0027), i.e., electrical storage/battery (46) supply additional electric power required during VTOL/lift or other rotary operations, thus the turbofan/turboshaft engines (24s) are smaller than required to provide the lift/VTOL operation alone.
In response to applicant's argument that regarding Sambell ‘315, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). The combination of Nissen et al’ 235 and Sambell ‘315 results in two turbofan engines and a separate one or more turboshaft engines, thus the tiltrotor aircraft can maintain controlled forward flight throughout a loss of power from either the two or more turbofan engines or the one or more turboshaft engines as either the two or more turbofan engines or the one or more turboshaft engines, which has power, can supply the power to maintain controlled forward flight.
Applicant’s argument with respect to amended claims 11, 18 and 29 are persuasive, however, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Green et al. (US 2004/0076428).
In response to applicant's argument regarding Tamada et al ‘268 in claims 30-32, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Tamada et al. ‘268 teaches battery (1004) provide in the pylon portion (1102) of the flying body.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHESH DANGOL whose telephone number is (303)297-4455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0730-0530 MT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua J Michener can be reached at (571) 272-1467. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ASHESH DANGOL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights