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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 06/05/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-6 remain pending. Claims 1, 3, 4, and 6 have been amended.
Applicant’s amendment to the claims have overcome each objection and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action dated 01/16/2026.
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.
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) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaw (US 2,939,649) in view of Milde (US 2006/0054736 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shaw teaches a propulsion system, comprising:
a source of compressed fluid (#3; jet propulsion engines provide compressed air);
at least one tail thruster (#6) in fluid communication with the source (#5 to #5a to #6, see Fig. 6);
at least one turbine (#16, Fig. 3) in fluid communication with the source (#3 to #5 to #5a to #7 to #14) and coupled to a propeller (#11); and
an apparatus (#21/#22) for selectively providing the compressed fluid to one or both of the at least one tail thruster and the at least one turbine (column 2, line 44- column 3, line 2).
Shaw does not expressly disclose a primary airfoil element having an interior region, wherein the at least one tail thruster is at least partially disposed within the interior region.
However, in an analogous aircraft art, Milde teaches a primary airfoil element having an interior region, wherein the at least one tail thruster is at least partially disposed within the interior region (Figs. 1-9, with thruster formed by 32, 28, and 30 shown disposed within the interior region of the primary airfoil; “The "thruster" incorporated into each wing component of the aircraft is illustrated in the concept diagrams of FIGS. 2, 5a, 5b, 6, 7 and 9.”, Para. [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the system of Shaw further including a primary airfoil element having an interior region, wherein the at least one tail thruster is at least partially disposed within the interior region, as taught by Milde, with a reasonable expectation for success, “to enhance the vertical lift produced by the wing(s) of an aircraft when the aircraft is flying slowly…When the thruster operates to increase the speed of the air moving over the upper surfaces of the wing components, it decreases the pressure at the surface in accordance with Bernoulli's principle, thereby increasing the lift of the wing.”, as discussed by Milde, Para. [0008] – [0016].
Regarding claim 2, Shaw as modified by Milde teaches the propulsion system of claim 1. Further, Shaw teaches wherein the apparatus comprises at least one exhaust port (#7) and at least one plugging device (#21) that is controllably operable to open and close the at least one exhaust port (column 2, lines 51-65).
Regarding claim 3, Shaw as modified by Milde teaches the propulsion system of claim 1. Further, Shaw teaches wherein the apparatus comprises at least one obstructive device (#22) coupled to the at least one tail thruster (#6) that is controllably operable to enable and disable fluid flow from the source to the at least one tail thruster (column 2, lines 51-65).
Regarding claim 4, Shaw teaches an aircraft (Fig. 1; Title), comprising:
a source of compressed fluid (#3; jet propulsion engines provide compressed air);
at least one tail thruster (#6) in fluid communication with the source (#5 to #5a to #6, see Fig. 6);
at least one turbine (#16, Fig. 3) in fluid communication with the source (#3 to #5 to #5a to #7 to #14) and coupled to a propeller (#11); and
an apparatus (#21/#22) for selectively providing the compressed fluid to one or both of the at least one tail thruster and the at least one turbine (column 2, line 44- column 3, line 2).
Shaw does not expressly disclose a primary airfoil element having an interior region, wherein the at least one tail thruster is at least partially disposed within the interior region.
However, in an analogous aircraft art, Milde teaches a primary airfoil element having an interior region, wherein the at least one tail thruster is at least partially disposed within the interior region (Figs. 1-9, with thruster formed by 32, 28, and 30 shown disposed within the interior region of the primary airfoil; “The "thruster" incorporated into each wing component of the aircraft is illustrated in the concept diagrams of FIGS. 2, 5a, 5b, 6, 7 and 9.”, Para. [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the system of Shaw further including a primary airfoil element having an interior region, wherein the at least one tail thruster is at least partially disposed within the interior region, as taught by Milde, with a reasonable expectation for success, “to enhance the vertical lift produced by the wing(s) of an aircraft when the aircraft is flying slowly…When the thruster operates to increase the speed of the air moving over the upper surfaces of the wing components, it decreases the pressure at the surface in accordance with Bernoulli's principle, thereby increasing the lift of the wing.”, as discussed by Milde, Para. [0008] – [0016].
Regarding claim 5, Shaw as modified by Milde teaches the propulsion system of claim 4. Further, Shaw teaches wherein the apparatus comprises at least one exhaust port (#7) and at least one plugging device (#21) that is controllably operable to open and close the at least one exhaust port (column 2, lines 51-65).
Regarding claim 6, Shaw as modified by Milde teaches the propulsion system of claim 4. Further, Shaw wherein the apparatus comprises at least one obstructive device (#22) coupled to the at least one tail thruster (#6) that is controllably operable to enable and disable fluid flow from the source to the at least one tail thruster (column 2, lines 51-65).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 4 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection relies upon Milde (US 2006/0054736 A1) for the added limitations.
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 STEVEN J SHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-8707. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 am - 4:00 pm EDT.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached on (571)272-6909. 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.
/S.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3647
/KIMBERLY S BERONA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3647
