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 4th February 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-15 and 17-22 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 14th November 2025.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-7, 11-12 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gates (NPL; cited in the IDS) in view of Mohammed et al. (US 2021/0206471) and Murta et al. (US 2018/0029689).
Regarding claims 1, 7 and 22, Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) a center wing box assembly for an aircraft/ an aircraft comprising a center wing box assembly, the center wing box assembly comprising/including:
a forward spar member, a rear spar member, an upper panel member, and a lower panel member that defines an interior space (clearly shown in the figure below); and
one or more spanwise beam sections arranged in the interior space between the upper panel member and the lower panel member (clearly shown in the figure below), the one or more spanwise beam sections having a structural configuration that includes spanwise beam web section and chord members connecting the one or more spanwise beam sections to the upper panel member and the lower panel member, the chord members serving as load-bearing structural reinforcement members for the spanwise beam web section and an access hole (clearly seen in the figure below; chord members connect and reinforce the spanwise beam web section to the upper and lower panel members, thus serves as load-bearing structural reinforcement members);
wherein the access hole is completely open between and through a first face and an opposite second face of the one or more spanwise beam sections (clearly seen in the figure below)
PNG
media_image1.png
666
1169
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the center wing box assembly/the aircraft wherein the one or more spanwise beam sections having a segmented structural configuration that includes a first spanwise beam continuous web section and a second spanwise beam continuous web section.
Mohammed et al. ‘471 teaches (figures 1-10) a side of body CFRP rib assembly/spanwise beam section (100) comprising an aft CFRP rib web/spanwise beam web section (100A), a middle CFRP rib web/spanwise beam web section (100B) and a forward CFRP rib web/spanwise beam web section (100C) wherein the aft CFRP rib webs/spanwise beam web sections (100A-C) are formed separately and then connected together to form the side of body CFRP rib assembly (100) (Para 0026).
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 Gates (NPL) to incorporate the teachings of Mohammed et al. ‘471 to configure the center wing box assembly/the aircraft wherein the one or more spanwise beam sections having a segmented structural configuration that includes a first spanwise beam continuous web section and a second spanwise beam continuous web section.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would facilitate the installation of the spanwise beam section (Para 0026).
Modified Gates (NPL) is silent about the center wing box assembly/the aircraft wherein a second spanwise beam continuous web section is spaced apart from the first spanwise beam continuous web section, wherein the chord members connect the first and second spanwise beam continuous web sections and wherein a rectangular access hole extends to and is between a first inner peripheral edge of the first spanwise beam continuous web section, a second inner peripheral edge of the second spanwise beam continuous web section, and peripheral edges of the chord members.
Murta et al. ‘689 teaches (figures 1-3) a wing spar (30) having two continuous web sections spaced apart from each other and connected via upper and lower flanges/chords (30a, 30b) and a rectangular access hole defined between a first inner peripheral edge of the first spanwise beam continuous web section, a second inner peripheral edge of the second spanwise beam continuous web section, and peripheral edges of the chord (clearly shown in the figure below; Para 0022).
PNG
media_image2.png
484
780
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 Gates (NPL) to incorporate the teachings of Murta et al. ‘689 to configure the center wing box assembly/the aircraft wherein a second spanwise beam continuous web section is spaced apart from the first spanwise beam continuous web section, wherein the chord members connect the first and second spanwise beam continuous web sections and wherein a rectangular access hole extends to and is between a first inner peripheral edge of the first spanwise beam continuous web section, a second inner peripheral edge of the second spanwise beam continuous web section, and peripheral edges of the chord members.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would customize the opening of the access hole as needed.
Regarding claims 5 and 11, modified Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) the center wing box assembly/the aircraft wherein the first spanwise beam continuous web section and the second spanwise beam continuous web section are arranged symmetrically relative to the rectangular access hole (as modified by Murta et al. ‘689).
Regarding claims 6 and 12, modified Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) the center wing box assembly/the aircraft wherein the first spanwise beam continuous web section and the second spanwise beam continuous web section are composed of a material web comprising carbon fiber (Page 2 Para 19 Page 3 Para 1, 9; spanwise beam web sections are part of a carbon fiber wing).
Claim(s) 2-4, and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gates (NPL; cited in the IDS), Mohammed et al. (US 2021/0206471) and Murta et al. (US 2018/0029689) as applied to claims 1, and 7 above, and further in view of Kooiman et al. (US 2019/0217942).
Regarding claims 2-3 and 8-9, modified Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) the center wing box assembly/the aircraft wherein the chord members comprise an upper chord member and a lower chord member, spaced from the upper chord member (clearly seen in the figure below)
PNG
media_image1.png
666
1169
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the center wing box assembly/the aircraft comprises an upper chord member extending in a lateral direction for connection to a planar surface at an upper region of the first spanwise beam continuous web section and second spanwise beam continuous web section, and
a lower chord member extending in the lateral direction for connection to a planar surface at a lower region of the first spanwise beam continuous web section and second spanwise beam continuous web section.
Kooiman et al. ‘942 teaches (figures 1-2, 3C) a wing (104) with a torque box (108) comprising forward spar (110), an aft spar (112), a lower skin (114), an upper skin (116) and a plurality or ribs (200) wherein a rib (200) includes an upper rib cap (402) and an upright (416)/ upper chord member which attaches the rib web/spanwise beam web section (210) to an upper skin/ panel(116), and a lower rib cap (404) and an upright (426)/ lower chord member which attaches the rib web/spanwise beam web section (210) to a lower skin/panel (114) (Para 0013, 0018-0019; rib cap and upright together forms a chord member; uprights (416, 426) extend away from the rib caps (402, 404) in the lateral direction and connects to a planer/bonding surface (220, 230) of the rib web/spanwise web section).
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 Gates (NPL) to incorporate the teachings of Kooiman et al. ‘942 to configure the center wing box assembly/the aircraft comprises an upper chord member extending in a lateral direction for connection to a planar surface at an upper region of the first spanwise beam continuous web section and second spanwise beam continuous web section, and
a lower chord member extending in the lateral direction for connection to a planar surface at a lower region of the first spanwise beam continuous web section and second spanwise beam continuous web section.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enhance the reinforcement of the spanwise beam web sections.
Regarding claims 4 and 10, modified Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) the center wing box assembly/the aircraft wherein the rectangular access hole extends to and is between/defined by the first inner peripheral edge of the first spanwise beam continuous web section, the second inner peripheral edge of the second spanwise beam continuous web section, a lower peripheral edge of the upper chord member, and upper peripheral edge of the lower chord member (as modified by Murta et al. ‘689; clearly shown in the annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
484
780
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 13, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gates (NPL; cited in the IDS) in view of and Murta et al. (US 2018/0029689).
Regarding claim 13, Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) a spanwise beam section for a center wing box assembly of an aircraft, wherein the spanwise beam section is configured to be disposed between an upper panel member and a lower panel member of the center wing box assembly (clearly shown in the figure below), the spanwise beam section comprising:
spanwise beam web section (clearly shown in the figure below);
chord members configured to connect the spanwise beam section to the upper panel member and the lower panel member, the chord members serving as load-bearing structural reinforcement members for the spanwise beam web section (clearly shown in the figure below; chord members connects spanwise web sections to the upper and lower panels, thus serves as load-bearing structural reinforcement members), and
an access hole (clearly shown in the figure below)
PNG
media_image1.png
666
1169
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the spanwise beam section comprising
a first spanwise beam continuous web section;
a second spanwise beam continuous web section spaced from the first spanwise beam continuous web section; and
the chord members extending across the interior space between the first spanwise beam continuous web section and the second spanwise beam continuous section to connect the first spanwise beam continuous web section and the second spanwise beam continuous web section, wherein a rectangular access hole extends and is between a first inner peripheral edge of the first spanwise beam continuous web section, a second inner peripheral edge of the second spanwise beam continuous web section, and peripheral edges of the chord members.
Murta et al. ‘689 teaches (figures 1-3) a wing spar (30) having two continuous web sections spaced apart from each other and connected via upper and lower flanges/chords (30a, 30b) and a rectangular access hole defined between a first inner peripheral edge of the first spanwise beam continuous web section, a second inner peripheral edge of the second spanwise beam continuous web section, and peripheral edges of the chord (clearly shown in the figure below; Para 0022).
PNG
media_image2.png
484
780
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 Gates (NPL) to incorporate the teachings of Murta et al. ‘689 to configure the spanwise beam section comprising
a first spanwise beam continuous web section;
a second spanwise beam continuous web section spaced from the first spanwise beam continuous web section; and
the chord members extending across the interior space between the first spanwise beam continuous web section and the second spanwise beam continuous section to connect the first spanwise beam continuous web section and the second spanwise beam continuous web section, wherein a rectangular access hole extends and is between a first inner peripheral edge of the first spanwise beam continuous web section, a second inner peripheral edge of the second spanwise beam continuous web section, and peripheral edges of the chord members.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would customize the opening of the access hole as needed.
Regarding claim 18, modified Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) the spanwise beam section wherein the first spanwise beam continuous web section and the second spanwise beam continuous web section are arranged symmetrically relative to the rectangular access hole (as modified by Murta et al. ‘689).
Regarding claims 19-20, modified Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) the spanwise beam section wherein the first spanwise beam continuous web section and the second spanwise beam continuous web section are composed of a material web comprising carbon fiber (Page 2 Para 19 Page 3 Para 1, 9; spanwise beam web sections are part of a carbon fiber wing).
Claim(s) 14-15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gates (NPL; cited in the IDS), and Murta et al. (US 2018/0029689) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Kooiman et al. (US 2019/0217942).
Regarding claims 14-15, modified Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) the spanwise beam section wherein the chord members comprise an upper chord member and a lower chord member, spaced from the upper chord member (clearly seen in the figure below)
PNG
media_image1.png
666
1169
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the spanwise beam section comprises an upper chord member extending in a lateral direction for connection to a planar surface at an upper region of the first spanwise beam continuous web section and an upper region of the second spanwise beam continuous web section, and
a lower chord member extending in the lateral direction for connection to a planar surface at a lower region of the first spanwise beam continuous web section and a lower region of the second spanwise beam continuous web section.
Kooiman et al. ‘942 teaches (figures 1-2, 3C) a wing (104) with a torque box (108) comprising forward spar (110), an aft spar (112), a lower skin (114), an upper skin (116) and a plurality or ribs (200) wherein a rib (200) includes an upper rib cap (402) and an upright (416)/ upper chord member which attaches the rib web/spanwise beam web section (210) to an upper skin/ panel(116), and a lower rib cap (404) and an upright (426)/ lower chord member which attaches the rib web/spanwise beam web section (210) to a lower skin/panel (114) (Para 0013, 0018-0019; rib cap and upright together forms a chord member; uprights (416, 426) extend away from the rib caps (402, 404) in the lateral direction and connects to a planer/bonding surface (220, 230) of the rib web/spanwise web section).
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 Gates (NPL) to incorporate the teachings of Kooiman et al. ‘942 to configure the spanwise beam section comprises an upper chord member extending in a lateral direction for connection to a planar surface at an upper region of the first spanwise beam continuous web section and an upper region of the second spanwise beam continuous web section, and
a lower chord member extending in the lateral direction for connection to a planar surface at a lower region of the first spanwise beam continuous web section and a lower region of the second spanwise beam continuous web section.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would enhance the reinforcement of the spanwise beam web sections.
Regarding claim 17, modified Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) the spanwise beam section wherein the rectangular access hole is defined by the first inner peripheral edge of the first spanwise beam continuous web section, the second inner peripheral edge of the second spanwise beam continuous web section, a lower peripheral edge of the upper chord member, and upper peripheral edge of the lower chord member (as modified by Murta et al. ‘689; clearly shown in the annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image2.png
484
780
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gates (NPL; cited in the IDS), and Murta et al. (US 2018/0029689) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Mohammed et al. (US 2021/0206471).
Regarding claim 21, modified Gates (NPL) teaches (figure 6) the spanwise beam section of claim 13 but it is silent about the spanwise beam section wherein the first spanwise beam continuous web section and the second spanwise beam continuous web section are arranged asymmetrically relative to the rectangular access hole.
Mohammed et al. ‘471 teaches (figure 1) a side of body CFRP rib assembly (100) comprising a plurality of apertures/access hole (10) that permits the passage of various lines through the side of body CFRP rib assembly (100) (Para 0026; apertures are located at various position).
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 Gates (NPL) to incorporate the teachings of Mohammed et al. ‘471 to configure the spanwise beam section wherein the first spanwise beam continuous web section and the second spanwise beam continuous web section are arranged asymmetrically relative to the rectangular access hole (positioning the aperture close to one end of the spanwise beam section creates an asymmetric arrangement of the first and second spanwise beam continuous web sections).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would provide flexibility to position the access hole as needed in the spanwise beam section.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4th February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to applicant’s arguments, as explained in the rejection above, combined teachings of Gates (NPL), Mohammed et al. ‘471 and Murta et al. ‘689 teaches claims 1 and 7 and combined teachings of Gates (NPL), and Murta et al. ‘689 teaches claim 13.
Gates (NPL) teaches spanwise beam section of a wing comprising a through and completely open access hole. Mohammed et al. ‘471 teaches a CFRP rib assembly/spanwise beam section (100) of a CFRP wing box made up of separate rib web/spanwise web sections. Murta et al. ‘689 teaches a wing spar with two continuous web sections spaced apart from each other and connected via upper and lower flanges/chords and a rectangular shaped access hole.
Spanwise beam section of Gates (NPL), CFRP rib assembly of Mohammed et al. ‘471 and wing spar of Murta et al. ‘689 are analogous as all of them are structural components of wings.
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