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 the Applicant’s arguments
The previous rejection is withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments are entered. Applicant’s remarks are also entered into the record. A new search was made necessitated by the applicant’s amendments.
A new reference was found. A new rejection is made herein.
Applicant’s arguments are now moot in view of the new rejection of the claims.
PNG
media_image1.png
708
1202
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 17 is amended to recite and the primary reference to BALDWIN is silent but LYASOFF teaches “...a flying unit, having fil a self-contained framework structure extending in a plane E (see FIG. where the flying unit includes a first wing and a second rear wing with four propellers 27-45 on the first wing and four different propellers on the second rear wing 41-44)
PNG
media_image2.png
708
1442
media_image2.png
Greyscale
that corresponds to a central cross-sectional plane of the framework structure, and being
formed by framework bars connected to each other, (ii) several drive units arranged (see FIG. 2 where the device has a frame that supports the passenger cabin and a frame work of bars to support the 8 electric motors and propellers that can rotate counter clockwise or clockwise)
on the framework structure,
PNG
media_image3.png
678
1058
media_image3.png
Greyscale
each drive unit having an electric motor and at least one propeller that is in operative connection with the electric motor, and (iii) several movable air-guiding devices arranged on the framework structure, (see FIG. 5 where the device has a first wing and a second wing can be pivoted up from 0 degrees to 90 degrees) each with an adjustable angle of incidence ~1-n, each angle of incidence ~1-n being variable between a minimum angle of incidence ~1-n,min and a maximum angle of incidence ~1-n,max,.....
an articulated coupling device for an articulated connection of the flying unit to another end (see Fig. 5 where the first wing that can support the four first motors can provide an articulated configuration from zero degrees to an intermediate forwarding pivot angle and the second wing in FIG. 1-5 can provide a second opposite pivoting angle from going from a forward thrust to a vertical lift)
of the elongate shaft of the transportation unit and for adjusting an angle or tilt respectively,
between the flying unit and the transportation unit during different phases of flight, such that
an adjustable tilt angle u which is enclosed by (a) a gravity line S that is perpendicular to an
earth's surface and corresponds substantially to a longitudinal axis Ls of the elongate shaft(see paragraph 60-65 where during a phase of the flight the propellers can be provided in a full horizontal mode however during a landing phase which is a second flight phase and to land the aircraft, the adjustable tilt angle can move from zero degrees to 90 degrees and fully vertical to hover and then land the aircraft relative to the plane of the earth and gravity plane)
which with respect to the earth's surface is arranged vertically on the transport unit that is
arranged on the flying unit, and (b) the plane E of the framework structure of the flying unit.,_
and is variable between a minimum tilt angle Umin in a range 0° ~Umin< 30 and a maximum tilt angle Umax = 90°.” (see paragraph 60-65 and 96 where an electric motor is provided and where during a phase of the flight the propellers can be provided in a full horizontal mode however during a landing phase which is a second flight phase and to land the aircraft, the adjustable tilt angle can move from zero degrees to 90 degrees and fully vertical to hover and then land the aircraft relative to the plane of the earth and gravity plane)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of LYASOFF with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since LYASOFF teaches that an aircraft can include a first wing and a second wing. Each of the propellers can include electric motors and can move from zero degrees for horizontal flight to a second intermediate and then vertical position so the aircraft can provide a hovering function and then a vertical flight so the aircraft can land by adjusting the angle of incidence. This can include a flight phase where the angle is near to be horizonal to 90 degrees to hover and then land. This provides an improved flight where it can land vertically in any desired location. See paragraph 60-69.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US6845939B1 to BALDWIN that was filed in 2003 (hereinafter “BALDWIN”) and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20190322368A1 to Melcher that was filed in 2019 and in view of United States Patent Application Pub. No.: US20190291862A1 to LYASOFF et al. that was filed in 2017.
PNG
media_image1.png
708
1202
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 17 is amended to recite and the primary reference to BALDWIN is silent but LYASOFF teaches “...a flying unit, having fil a self-contained framework structure extending in a plane E (see FIG. where the flying unit includes a first wing and a second rear wing with four propellers 27-45 on the first wing and four different propellers on the second rear wing 41-44)
PNG
media_image2.png
708
1442
media_image2.png
Greyscale
that corresponds to a central cross-sectional plane of the framework structure, and being
formed by framework bars connected to each other, (ii) several drive units arranged (see FIG. 2 where the device has a frame that supports the passenger cabin and a frame work of bars to support the 8 electric motors and propellers that can rotate counter clockwise or clockwise)
on the framework structure,
PNG
media_image3.png
678
1058
media_image3.png
Greyscale
each drive unit having an electric motor and at least one propeller that is in operative connection with the electric motor, and (iii) several movable air-guiding devices arranged on the framework structure, (see FIG. 5 where the device has a first wing and a second wing can be pivoted up from 0 degrees to 90 degrees) each with an adjustable angle of incidence ~1-n, each angle of incidence ~1-n being variable between a minimum angle of incidence ~1-n,min and a maximum angle of incidence ~1-n,max,.....
an articulated coupling device for an articulated connection of the flying unit to another end (see Fig. 5 where the first wing that can support the four first motors can provide an articulated configuration from zero degrees to an intermediate forwarding pivot angle and the second wing in FIG. 1-5 can provide a second opposite pivoting angle from going from a forward thrust to a vertical lift)
of the elongate shaft of the transportation unit and for adjusting an angle or tilt respectively,
between the flying unit and the transportation unit during different phases of flight, such that
an adjustable tilt angle u which is enclosed by (a) a gravity line S that is perpendicular to an
earth's surface and corresponds substantially to a longitudinal axis Ls of the elongate shaft(see paragraph 60-65 where during a phase of the flight the propellers can be provided in a full horizontal mode however during a landing phase which is a second flight phase and to land the aircraft, the adjustable tilt angle can move from zero degrees to 90 degrees and fully vertical to hover and then land the aircraft relative to the plane of the earth and gravity plane)
which with respect to the earth's surface is arranged vertically on the transport unit that is
arranged on the flying unit, and (b) the plane E of the framework structure of the flying unit.,_
and is variable between a minimum tilt angle Umin in a range 0° ~Umin< 30 and a maximum tilt angle Umax = 90°.” (see paragraph 60-65 and 96 where an electric motor is provided and where during a phase of the flight the propellers can be provided in a full horizontal mode however during a landing phase which is a second flight phase and to land the aircraft, the adjustable tilt angle can move from zero degrees to 90 degrees and fully vertical to hover and then land the aircraft relative to the plane of the earth and gravity plane)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of LYASOFF with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since LYASOFF teaches that an aircraft can include a first wing and a second wing. Each of the propellers can include electric motors and can move from zero degrees for horizontal flight to a second intermediate and then vertical position so the aircraft can provide a hovering function and then a vertical flight so the aircraft can land by adjusting the angle of incidence. This can include a flight phase where the angle is near to be horizonal to 90 degrees to hover and then land. This provides an improved flight where it can land vertically in any desired location. See paragraph 60-69.
PNG
media_image4.png
548
544
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Baldwin discloses “....17. (new) An aircraft that takes off and lands vertically, for transporting people
and/or loads, wherein the aircraft comprises: (see Fig. 7 and Fig. 10 where the aircraft can fly horizontally or take off and land vertically) at col. 1, line 5)
PNG
media_image5.png
558
476
media_image5.png
Greyscale
— a flying unit, having a framework structure formed in a plane E, drive units being arranged on the framework structure, and air-guiding devices, (the frame is shown by element 3 and air guiding device is shown by element 8) (see FIG. 1-10 where the device includes wings and a tail 150 and 140 and a propulsion propeller driver unit 128 that can move from vertical flight to horizontal flight)
PNG
media_image6.png
584
764
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Baldwin is silent but Melcher teaches “...each with an adjustable angle of incidence Bin, each angle of incidence Bj, being variable between a minimum angle of incidence Bj-n,min and a maximum angle of incidence Bi-nmax; (see paragraph 24-30 and FIG. 1a to 1b where the wings can be adjusted to fly horizontally or folded up and down to fly vertically as shown)
PNG
media_image7.png
592
442
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Baldwin discloses “...- a transportation unit comprising a conveying pod and a connection device for connecting the conveying pod to the flying unit, the connection device having an elongate shaft, one end of which is attached to the conveying pod, and” (see payload 190 that can have a crew compartment 134 via a shaft 110 and FIG 1 where the pod and passenger compartment is below the propeller and can be below or raised higher where the pod is under the wings in FIG. 1-10)”
— an articulated coupling device for an articulated connection of the flying unit to another end of the elongate shaft, such that an adjustable tilt angle a of the flying unit is variable between a minimum tilt angle Omin in a range 0° < Omin < 30 and a maximum tilt angle Omax = 90°. (see FIG. 1-10 where the propulsion device can articulate from a vertical flight to a horizontal flight and adjust from vertical flight to a horizontal flight from 0 to 90 degrees and see claims 1-6).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of MELCHER with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since MELCHER teaches that a boom device can include a propulsion member at one end. That can articulate from a horizontal position to a vertical position for horizontal or vertical flight. At the other end, it can include a docking port for lifting a payload such as vehicle and transporting it and dropping it off where it is desired. A rotational joint and hinge can provide the rotating of the propulsion member . This can avoid traffic and transport the vehicles using an inventive VTOL aircraft. See paragraph 1-10 and claims 1-7.
Baldwin discloses “...18. (new) The aircraft of claim 17, wherein the minimum tilt angle Omin is O° < Onin < 10°.” (see FIG. 1-10 where the propulsion device can articulate from a vertical flight to a horizontal flight and adjust from vertical flight to a horizontal flight from 0 to 90 degrees and see claims 1-6).
Claims 19-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US6845939B1 to BALDWIN that was filed in 2003 (hereinafter “BALDWIN”) and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20190322368A1 to Melcher that was filed in 2019 and in view of United States Patent Application Pub. No.: US 2019/0152593 a1 to Casetllano et al. that was filed in 2015 and Lyasoff.
PNG
media_image8.png
842
586
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Castellano teaches “...19. (new) The aircraft of claim 17, wherein the articulated coupling device is slidable along the framework structure parallel to the plane E between a centric position and an outer position” (see paragraph 62-69 where the propellors can be titled and moved forwarding in a sliding movement direction relative to the fuselage) .
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CASTELLANO with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since CASELLANO teaches that in FIG. 6 the propulsion elements can be moved from a vertical to a horizontal position for vertical or horizontal flight and also the support can be moved to increase in length and decrease in length via member 15. This can provide a sliding movement and clearance. See paragraph 60-65/
Castellano teaches “...20. (new) The aircraft of claim 17, wherein a length | of the shaft is variable between a minimum length |nin and a maximum length ]ax. (see paragraph 62-69 where the propellors can be titled and moved forwarding in a sliding movement direction relative to the fuselage) .
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CASTELLANO with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since CASELLANO teaches that in FIG. 6 the propulsion elements can be moved from a vertical to a horizontal position for vertical or horizontal flight and also the support can be moved to increase in length and decrease in length via member 15. This can provide a sliding movement and clearance. See paragraph 60-65/
Castellano teaches “...21. (new) The aircraft of claim 19, wherein the outer position is located at a distance from a central axis M of the flying unit in such a way (see paragraph 62-69 where the propellors can be titled and moved forwarding in a sliding movement direction relative to the fuselage) .
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CASTELLANO with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since CASELLANO teaches that in FIG. 6 the propulsion elements can be moved from a vertical to a horizontal position for vertical or horizontal flight and also the support can be moved to increase in length and decrease in length via member 15. This can provide a sliding movement and clearance. See paragraph 60-65/
Baldwin discloses “...and/or wherein a maximum length Imax Of the shaft is such that the conveying pod, for the minimum tilt angle Omin, is located outside of an outer boundary of the framework structure”. (see FIG. 1-10 where the device includes wings and a tail 150 and 140 and a propulsion propeller driver unit 128 that can move from vertical flight to horizontal flight where the passenger compartment is under the propeller or behind the propeller)
Baldwin discloses “...22. (new) The aircraft of claim 21, wherein the outer position is located at a distance from a central axis M of the flying unit in such a way that the conveying pod, for the minimum tilt angle Omin, is located outside of an outer boundary of the framework structure. (see FIG. 1-10 where the device includes wings and a tail 150 and 140 and a propulsion propeller driver unit 128 that can move from vertical flight to horizontal flight where the passenger compartment is under the propeller or behind the propeller)
Baldwin discloses “...23. (New) The aircraft of claim 21, wherein a maximum length |max of the shaft is such that the conveying pod, for the minimum tilt angle Onin, is located outside of an outer boundary of the framework structure”. . (see FIG. 1-10 where the device includes wings and a tail 150 and 140 and a propulsion propeller driver unit 128 that can move from vertical flight to horizontal flight where the passenger compartment is under the propeller or behind the propeller)
PNG
media_image9.png
648
928
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Castellano teaches “..24. (new) The aircraft of claim 19, wherein the articulated coupling device, as a function of the tilt angle a, is slidable along the framework structure parallel to the plane E and/or wherein the length | of the shaft is variable as a function of the tilt angle a”. (see paragraph 60-70 where the member 14 can move and slide the propellers out and tilt the propellers from a vertical to a horizontal position)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CASTELLANO with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since CASELLANO teaches that in FIG. 6 the propulsion elements can be moved from a vertical to a horizontal position for vertical or horizontal flight and also the support can be moved to increase in length and decrease in length via member 15. This can provide a sliding movement and clearance. See paragraph 60-65/
Castellano teaches “..25. (new) The aircraft of claim 24, wherein the articulated coupling device, as a function of the tilt angle a, is slidable along the framework structure parallel to the plane E. (see paragraph 60-70 where the member 14 can move and slide the propellers out and tilt the propellers from a vertical to a horizontal position)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CASTELLANO with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since CASELLANO teaches that in FIG. 6 the propulsion elements can be moved from a vertical to a horizontal position for vertical or horizontal flight and also the support can be moved to increase in length and decrease in length via member 15. This can provide a sliding movement and clearance. See paragraph 60-65/
PNG
media_image10.png
868
830
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Castellano teaches “..26. (new) The aircraft of claim 24, wherein the length | of the shaft is variable as a function of the tilt angle a. (see paragraph 30-35 and 60-70 where the member 14 can move and slide the propellers out and tilt the propellers from a vertical to a horizontal position and then tilt from zero to 90 degrees)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of CASTELLANO with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since CASELLANO teaches that in FIG. 6 the propulsion elements can be moved from a vertical to a horizontal position for vertical or horizontal flight and also the support can be moved to increase in length and decrease in length via member 15. This can provide a sliding movement and clearance. See paragraph 60-65/
Claims 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US6845939B1 to BALDWIN that was filed in 2003 (hereinafter “BALDWIN”) and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20190322368A1 to Melcher that was filed in 2019 and in view of International Patent Pub. No.: WO2020035900A1 assigned to Aeronext that was filed in 2018 and Lyasoff.
Aeronext teaches “...27. (new) The aircraft of claim 17, wherein the framework structure and the connection device are connected to each other via a damping device. (A damper 171 for suppressing the rotational movement of the frame 161 around the x axis is provided between the arm portion 141 and the frame 161, and a frame 162 is provided between the frame 161 and the frame 162. The damper 172 which suppresses the rotational movement about the y-axis is provided. The dampers 171 and 172 extend the time required for the displacement so that the posture of the rotary wing machine 10B does not become unstable due to the rapid movement of the first mounting portion 25 due to the rotational movement of the frames 161 and 162. It is a means for doing.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of AERONEXT with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since AERONEXT teaches that a damper can be provided to avoid unstable shaking of the device during rapid movement.
Aeronext teaches “...28. (new) The aircraft of claim 17, wherein on the framework structure a locking device, configured to lock the shaft, is arranged. (An aerial imaging rotary wing machine system consisting of a tethered rope connected to the bottom of the mounting part, one end of the tethering rope connected to the vertically lower end of the mounting part, and the other end of the tethering rope locked to the ground It is disclosed.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of AERONEXT with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since AERONEXT teaches that a damper can be provided to avoid unstable shaking of the device during rapid movement.
Claims 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US6845939B1 to BALDWIN that was filed in 2003 (hereinafter “BALDWIN”) and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20190322368A1 to Melcher that was filed in 2019 and Lyasoff.
Melcher teaches “...29. (new) The aircraft of claim 17, wherein the flying unit and the transportation unit are present in the form of modules design, so that the flying unit is capable of being joined to the transportation unit and separated therefrom by the articulated coupling device”. (See payload connector 80-96 where a vehicle can be connected and docket and then removed when dropped off)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of MELCHER with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since MELCHER teaches that a boom device can include a propulsion member at one end. That can articulate from a horizontal position to a vertical position for horizontal or vertical flight. At the other end, it can include a docking port for lifting a payload such as vehicle and transporting it and dropping it off where it is desired. A rotational joint and hinge can provide the rotating of the propulsion member . This can avoid traffic and transport the vehicles using an inventive VTOL aircraft. See paragraph 1-10 and claims 1-7.
Melcher teaches “...30. (new) The aircraft of claim 17, wherein the air-guiding devices are shaped in an air foil design”. (See claims 1-23 where the device has a wings and paragraph 20 where the sky boom has an airfoil shape as well)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of MELCHER with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since MELCHER teaches that a boom device can include a propulsion member at one end. That can articulate from a horizontal position to a vertical position for horizontal or vertical flight. At the other end, it can include a docking port for lifting a payload such as vehicle and transporting it and dropping it off where it is desired. A rotational joint and hinge can provide the rotating of the propulsion member . This can avoid traffic and transport the vehicles using an inventive VTOL aircraft. See paragraph 1-10 and claims 1-7.
Claims 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US6845939B1 to BALDWIN that was filed in 2003 (hereinafter “BALDWIN”) and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20190322368A1 to Melcher that was filed in 2019 and Lyasoff.
Melcher teaches “...31. (new) The aircraft of claim 17, wherein the aircraft can be operated in at least one take-off phase, a cruising flight phase and a landing phase, and wherein the aircraft is set up and configured such that:
- during a transition from the take-off phase to the cruising phase, the tilt angle o of the flying unit is reduced, and - during a transition from the cruising flight phase to the landing phase, the tilt angle o of the flying unit is increased. (see paragraph 24-30 and FIG. 1a to 1b where the wings can be adjusted to fly horizontally or folded up and down to fly vertically as shown)”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of MELCHER with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since MELCHER teaches that a boom device can include a propulsion member at one end. That can articulate from a horizontal position to a vertical position for horizontal or vertical flight. At the other end, it can include a docking port for lifting a payload such as vehicle and transporting it and dropping it off where it is desired. A rotational joint and hinge can provide the rotating of the propulsion member . This can avoid traffic and transport the vehicles using an inventive VTOL aircraft. See paragraph 1-10 and claims 1-7.
Melcher teaches “...32. (new) The aircraft of claim 31, wherein the aircraft is set up and configured such that:
- during the take-off phase, the angles of incidence {., of a particular number of the air-guiding devices (81-,) are reduced, and /or
- during the landing phase, the angles of incidence B)., of a particular number of the air-guiding devices (8;-,) are increased. (see paragraph 24-30 and FIG. 1a to 1b where the wings can be adjusted to fly horizontally or folded up and down to fly vertically as shown)”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present disclosure to combine the teachings of MELCHER with the disclosure of BALDWIN with a reasonable expectation of success since MELCHER teaches that a boom device can include a propulsion member at one end. That can articulate from a horizontal position to a vertical position for horizontal or vertical flight. At the other end, it can include a docking port for lifting a payload such as vehicle and transporting it and dropping it off where it is desired. A rotational joint and hinge can provide the rotating of the propulsion member . This can avoid traffic and transport the vehicles using an inventive VTOL aircraft. See paragraph 1-10 and claims 1-7.
Baldwin discloses “...33. (new) The aircraft of claim 32, wherein the aircraft is configured such that:
- during the take-off phase, the angles of incidence {., of a particular number of the air-guiding devices (81.,) are reduced into a range of a minimum angle of incidence Bi-nmin from 90° < Bi-nmin < 120° and /or
- during the landing phase, the angles of incidence B,., of a particular number of the air-guiding devices (8;) are increased into a range of a maximum angle of incidence Bi-nmax from 150° < Bi-nmax < 180°.”(see payload 190 that can have a crew compartment 134 via a shaft 110 and FIG 1 where the pod and passenger compartment is below the propeller and can be below or raised higher where the pod is under the wings in FIG. 1-10)” (see FIG. 1-10 where the propulsion device can articulate from a vertical flight to a horizontal flight and adjust from vertical flight to a horizontal flight from 0 to 90 degrees and see claims 1-6).
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US6845939B1 to BALDWIN that was filed in 2003 (hereinafter “BALDWIN”) and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20190322368A1 to Melcher that was filed in 2019 and Lyasoff.
Castellano teaches “...34. (new) The aircraft of claim 31, wherein the aircraft is configured such that:
- during the transition from the take-off phase to the cruising flight phase, the shaft of the transportation unit is extended and/or the articulated coupling device is slid along the framework structure parallel to the plane E into an outer position, and
- during the transition from the cruising flight phase to the landing phase, the shaft of the transportation unit is shortened and/or the articulated coupling device is slid along the framework structure parallel to the plane E into a centric position. (see paragraph 62-69 where the propellors can be titled and moved forwarding in a sliding movement direction relative to the fuselage) .
See motivation statement above.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US6845939B1 to BALDWIN that was filed in 2003 (hereinafter “BALDWIN”) and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20190322368A1 to Melcher that was filed in 2019 and in view of Lyasoff.
Baldwin discloses “..35. (new) The aircraft of claim 17, wherein the control unit is set up and configured for generating and emitting control signals which bring about an adjustment of the tilt angle a and/or an adjustment of the angles of incidence Bi-n. (see payload 190 that can have a crew compartment 134 via a shaft 110 and FIG 1 where the pod and passenger compartment is below the propeller and can be below or raised higher where the pod is under the wings in FIG. 1-10)” (see FIG. 1-10 where the propulsion device can articulate from a vertical flight to a horizontal flight and adjust from vertical flight to a horizontal flight from 0 to 90 degrees and see claims 1-6).
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. sec. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious in view of United States Patent No.: US6845939B1 to BALDWIN that was filed in 2003 (hereinafter “BALDWIN”) and in view of United States Patent Pub. No.: US20190322368A1 to Melcher that was filed in 2019 and in view of Castellano and Lyasoff.
Castellano teaches “..36. (new) The aircraft of claim 35, wherein the control unit is set up and configured for generating and emitting control signals which bring about a change in length of the shaft and/or a change in a sliding position of the articulated coupling device along the framework structure parallel to the plane E”. (see paragraph 30-40 and 62-69 where the propellors can be titled and moved forwarding in a sliding movement direction relative to the fuselage) . See motivation statement above.
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 JEAN PAUL CASS whose telephone number is (571)270-1934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 7 am to 7 pm; Saturday 10 am to 12 noon.
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, Scott A. Browne can be reached at 571-270-0151. 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.
/JEAN PAUL CASS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666