DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This action is in response to the RCE filed 28 April 2026 for the application filed 8 June 2023 which claims priority now abandoned application 16/748,560 filed 21 January 2020 which claims priority to PRO 62/794,464 filed 18 January 2019.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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 28 April 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1, 3, and 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Evulet (US 2017/0057648).
- Regarding Claim 1. Evulet discloses a vehicle (fig. 6-10), comprising:
a fuselage (700 illustrated by the figures);
a primary wing (701) coupled to the fuselage (700, illustrated by fig. 10) and having an upper surface, a distal end and a leading edge (fig. 10 illustrates the aircraft from an isometric view, illustrating the upper surface of the primary wing, the leading edge and the distal end), the upper
PNG
media_image1.png
525
779
media_image1.png
Greyscale
surface having one or more recesses formed therein (as illustrated in fig 10, the wing has a recessed area);
a source of pressurized fluid (“supplied with hotter-than-ambient air (i.e., a pressurized motive gas stream) from, for example, a combustion-based engine” [0030]) coupled to the fuselage (700 “employed by the vehicle” [0030]);
at least one conduit (704, “conduit” [0030]) in fluid communication with the one or more recesses and the source (“supplied with hotter-than-ambient air (i.e., a pressurized motive gas stream)” [0030]); and
one or more ejectors (703/903), each of the one or more ejectors (703/903) having inlets (illustrated by fig 7) and being disposed within a respective one of the one or more recesses (see annotated fig. 10, the ejector inlets and outlets are illustrated as recessed from the wing and disposed on the upper surface) and configured to receive pressurized fluid (“supplied with hotter-than-ambient air (i.e., a pressurized motive gas stream)” [0030]) via the at least one conduit (704), wherein each of the one or more recesses (see annotated fig. 10) comprises aerodynamic surfaces (702/902 fig. 9) fore and aft of each respective ejector (703, fig. 9-10 illustrate the wing leading edge fore and wing trailing edge aft of the recess and ejector).
- Regarding Claim 3. Evulet discloses the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the inlets (illustrated by fig 7) of the one or more ejectors (703/903) are positioned on the upper surface to enable ingestion of boundary layer air formed on the leading edge (as illustrated in fig. 7, the ejectors inlets will ingest boundary layer air along the leading edge).
- Regarding Claim 9. Evulet discloses the vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a secondary airfoil (1010) coupled to the fuselage (700, fig. 10 illustrates the coupling), the secondary airfoil (1010) having a leading edge and located directly downstream of the ejectors (703/903, fig. 10 illustrates the arrangement) such that a gas stream from each ejector (703/903) flows over the leading edge of the secondary airfoil (1010, “gas stream from the ejectors flows over the secondary airfoil” [0033]).
- Regarding Claim 10. Evulet discloses the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the source (“combustion-based engine” [0030]) is disposed in the fuselage (“employed by the vehicle 700” [0030], see claim 10 of Evulet).
- Regarding Claim 11. Evulet discloses the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the fluid produced by the source (“combustion-based engine” [0030]) is the sole means of propulsion of the vehicle (see claim 12 of Evulet).
- Regarding Claim 12. Evulet discloses a vehicle (illustrated by fig. 10), comprising:
a fuselage (700 illustrated by the figures);
a primary wing (701) coupled to the fuselage (700, illustrated by fig. 10) and having an upper surface, a distal end and a leading edge (fig. 10 illustrates the aircraft from an isometric view, illustrating the upper surface of the primary wing, the leading edge and the distal end), the upper
PNG
media_image1.png
525
779
media_image1.png
Greyscale
surface having one or more recesses formed therein (as illustrated in fig 10, the wing has a recessed area);
a source of pressurized fluid (“supplied with hotter-than-ambient air (i.e., a pressurized motive gas stream) from, for example, a combustion-based engine” [0030]) coupled to the fuselage (700 “employed by the vehicle” [0030]);
at least one conduit (704, “conduit” [0030]) in fluid communication with the one or more recesses and the source (“supplied with hotter-than-ambient air (i.e., a pressurized motive gas stream)” [0030]); and
one or more ejectors (703/903), each of the one or more ejectors (703/903) having inlets (illustrated by fig 7) and being disposed within a respective one of the one or more recesses (see annotated fig. 10, the ejector inlets and outlets are illustrated as recessed from the wing and disposed on the upper surface) and configured to receive pressurized fluid (“supplied with hotter-than-ambient air (i.e., a pressurized motive gas stream)” [0030]) via the at least one conduit (704), the pressurized fluid being received below the upper surface by each of the one or more ejectors (703/903, illustrated by fig. 7) wherein each recess comprises aerodynamic surfaces fore (701) and aft (702/902) of each respective ejector (703/903, fig. 9-10 illustrates the wing leading edge fore and wing trailing edge aft of the recess and ejector), each aft aerodynamic surface (702/902) is positioned such that fluid from each respective ejector (703/903) flows over each aft aerodynamic surface (702/902), and each aft aerodynamic surface has a non-zero radius of curvature (illustrated by fig. 9).
- Regarding Claim 13. Evulet discloses the aircraft of claim 1, wherein the one or more ejectors (703/903) comprise tapering sidewalls (illustrated by fig 7).
- Regarding Claim 14. Evulet discloses the vehicle of claim 12, wherein the one or more ejectors (703/903) comprise tapering sidewalls (illustrated by fig 7).
- Regarding Claim 15. Evulet discloses the vehicle of claim 1, wherein each aft aerodynamic surface (703/903) is located directly behind each respective ejector (703/903, illustrated by fig. 9)
- Regarding Claim 16. Evulet discloses the vehicle of claim 12, wherein each aft aerodynamic surface (703/903) is located directly behind each respective ejector (703/903, illustrated by fig. 9)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evulet (US 2017/0057648) in view of Pouit (US 3,051,413).
- Regarding Claim 6. Evulet discloses the vehicle of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the size of each ejector is progressively smaller as each ejector is positioned in the primary wing from the fuselage to the distal end.
However, Pouit discloses a similar aircraft (fig. 1-2) wherein the size of each ejector (5) is progressively smaller as each ejector (5) is positioned in the primary wing (3) from the fuselage (2) to the distal end (fig. 2 illustrates the ejectors progressively smaller as the ejector approaches the distal end of the wing). 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 the wing of Evulet to be modified to provide progressively smaller ejectors as disclosed by Pouit to ensure that the pressurized fluid speed emitted by the ejectors maintained a uniform speed allowing for even lift to be produced and increasing the maneuverability of the aircraft.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evulet in view of Evulet (US 2018/0370627), hereinafter Evulet-627.
- Regarding Claim 7. Evulet discloses the vehicle of claim 1, but does not disclose the vehicle further comprising a canard wing coupled to the fuselage and positioned forward along the fuselage relative to the primary wing.
However, Evulet-627 discloses a similar vehicle (100, fig. 1) further comprising a canard wing (118/117) coupled to the fuselage (101) and positioned forward along the fuselage (101, fig. 1 illustrates the canards positioned forward) relative to the primary wing (115). 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 the vehicle of Evulet as modified to incorporate the canards of Evulet-627 to allow for the aircraft to have greater maneuverability and to develop boundary layers of ambient air as disclosed by Evulet-627 in [0045].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see pages 5-8, filed 25 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicants’ arguments are not persuasive. While the examiner concedes that fig. 10 is detailed as an alternative embodiment, the examiner interprets from the specification and drawings that fig. 10 simply adds tandem wings aft of the augmenting airfoils present in fig. 8-9. As such, the examiner includes fig. 10 as part of the rejection, as it illustrates the embodiment of fig. 8-9 on a full aircraft, with the addition of tandem aft wings, and no other alteration to the structure of the main wing 701, which incorporates the recess and augmenting airfoils of 702/902. Regarding the arguments related to the aerodynamic surface aft of the ejector, the examiner maintains that fig. 9 clearly illustrates 702/902 containing trailing portions that constitute aerodynamic surfaces aft of the ejectors 703/903. Fig. 9 clearly labels the surfaces and the gap between the aerodynamic surfaces 802. Regarding the amendment to claim 12, the examiner contends that fig. 9 clearly illustrates the aerodynamic surfaces with non-zero radius of curvature.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in PTO-892.
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 TYE W ABELL whose telephone number is (303)297-4408. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday 0700-1700 MST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Timothy Collins can be reached on 571-272-6886. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/TYE WILLIAM ABELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3644
5 May 2026
Prosecution Insights