DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 8, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9, 11-18, 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites, “controlling the at least one heat engine and the at least one electric motor ….. so as to satisfy a mechanical power requirement associated with propelling the rotorcraft”. This is considered new matter. The application as filed does state that the mechanical power requirement itself is associated with propelling the rotorcraft. The specification states that a determination of the mechanical power requirement may be determined as a function of its forward speed, but how that speed relates or impacts the function is not clear or explained.
Claim 1 also recites, “while limiting electrical power contribution to not exceed an electrical power usage limit based on that at least one first characteristic”. This is not present in the specification and is not gleaned from the drawings. The specification fails to mention a usage limit for the electrical supply. This limitation is also considered new matter. Please note that a similar limitation is present in claim 17.
.
Applicant has not provided enough details in their specification related to algorithms or calculations to provide a showing of possession for the specific algorithm / control steps / method claimed. Generally, the specification repeats the language of the claims and does not provide any details of how the invention takes inputs and creates an output as a function of the inputs. Below are a few of the steps and an explanation of how the written description is lacking:
In reference to claims 1 and 17,
“satisfying a mechanical power requirement associated with propelling the rotorcraft” – The specification states that determining the mechanical power requirement may be carried out in a conventional manner, for example as a function of the mass of the rotorcraft, its forward speed, its vertical speed and the values of the collective pitch and cycle pitch controls of the main rotor blades (paragraph 45). The rotorcraft may include a device dedicated to determining this mechanical power requirement of the rotorcraft. An avionics system equipping the rotorcraft may also determine this mechanical power requirement as a function of information provided by various sensors of the rotorcraft. The calculator can also determine this mechanical power requirement from such information. (paragraph 46, 94). Further, as mentioned above, the mechanical power requirement is not clearly defined in the specification being associated with propelling the rotorcraft.
The application fails to identify how the inputs are used to determine a mechanical power requirement and does not provide any algorithm or calculation using the inputs that arrive at the mechanical power requirement.
With respect to “defining a first power distribution”.
The specification is lacking in guidance of what the claimed function is and how it manages the inputs, the at least one first characteristic and the mechanical power requirement, to arrive at a first power distribution. The specification provides how differing first characteristics can be used as inputs, but fails to explain or show how those inputs are used in a function to arrive at the output of a first power distribution. This is exasperated by the step of “determining a flight phase of the rotorcraft”. This step is also an input into “determining a first power distribution”. Further, the step of determining a flight phase is not explained to provide a showing that applicant had possession of the claimed invention. Paragraph 68 states that the flight phase may be determined as a function of one or more second characteristics of the rotorcraft. There are zero details provided as to what the function or process is to make the determination. Further, there is not any discussion of how the flight phase is used as an input to determine power distribution.
Claim 2-3 and 18, recites that a second characteristic value is used in determining the mechyanical power requirements. The specification does provide examples of what the second characteristic values may be, but lacks any details of how this value is used during the determining power distribution step.
Claim 4, there is not description of how a state of health of a heat engine can be found using the input provided in the disclosure.
Claim 6, recites that the determination of a first power distribution takes into account the preservation of a backup electrical energy reserve, but zero details are provided how this input impacts the determining step.
Claim 7, recites that a flight plan is an input into the power determination step, but fails to provide a showing of details of how this input impacts the output.
Claim 8, details are not provided of how the instant invention determines a state of health of the electrical energy source as the first characteristic. The specification states that this relates to the age of the source, but does not state how this is found as an input.
Claim 9
Claim 13 has a similar issue to claim 1 in that the “second power distribution” is determined from a number of inputs, but a showing of how the inputs are used is lacking.
Claim 15 recties “a calculator” but the specification fails to provide details related to the issues recited above for claims 1-14. For example, algorithms and/or calcualtions are not provided to provide a showing of possession of the funcitons / control claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant amended to attempt to overcome the 112a rejections presented in the non-final. The amendment however introduces new matter and fails to fully remedy the lack of algorithms or control details.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEVON C KRAMER whose telephone number is (571)272-7118. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Thursday 7AM-4PM; Friday Mornings.
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.
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.
DEVON C. KRAMER
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3746
/DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights