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 09/23/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-6 remain pending. Claims 1 and 4 have been amended.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “the at least one thruster having at least one convex surface over which compressed fluid from the source flows” from claims 1 and 4 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
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 and 4 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.
Claims 1 and 4 recite the limitation “the at least one thruster having at least one convex surface over which compressed fluid from the source flows”. There is no disclosure of convex surfaces in the specification or drawings. Therefore, the limitation was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to make and/or use the invention as claimed.
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 Moller (US 2004/0026563 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 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 thruster and the at least one turbine (column 2, line 44- column 3, line 2).
Shaw does not expressly disclose the at least one thruster having at least one convex surface over which compressed fluid from the source flows.
However, in an analogous aircraft art, Moller teaches the at least one thruster having at least one convex surface over which compressed fluid from the source flows (Figs. 5, 7, and 9 shows flow of thrusters flowing over the vanes of the thrusters, each having a concave and convex side; “The boundary layer is the thin layer of flow near the surface and, in the current configuration, develops on the convex side of the vanes and the inner walls holding the lateral ends of the vanes.”, Para. [0011]).
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 the at least one thruster having at least one convex surface over which compressed fluid from the source flows, as taught by Moller, with a reasonable expectation for success, “to provide an improved VTOL vehicle that utilizes nacelles in conjunction with adjustable vane systems to eliminate duct leading edge stall during the transition of the flight mode, to enhance thrust efficiency, to eliminate the need for variable pitch fans and to reduce the tendency to suck foreign objects into the fans”, as discussed by Moller, Para. [0013].
Regarding claim 2, Shaw as modified by Moller 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 Moller 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 thruster (#6) that is controllably operable to enable and disable fluid flow from the source to the at least one 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 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 thruster and the at least one turbine (column 2, line 44- column 3, line 2).
Shaw does not expressly disclose the at least one thruster having at least one convex surface over which compressed fluid from the source flows.
However, in an analogous aircraft art, Moller teaches the at least one thruster having at least one convex surface over which compressed fluid from the source flows (Figs. 5, 7, and 9 shows flow of thrusters flowing over the vanes of the thrusters, each having a concave and convex side; “The boundary layer is the thin layer of flow near the surface and, in the current configuration, develops on the convex side of the vanes and the inner walls holding the lateral ends of the vanes.”, Para. [0011]).
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 the at least one thruster having at least one convex surface over which compressed fluid from the source flows, as taught by Moller, with a reasonable expectation for success, “to provide an improved VTOL vehicle that utilizes nacelles in conjunction with adjustable vane systems to eliminate duct leading edge stall during the transition of the flight mode, to enhance thrust efficiency, to eliminate the need for variable pitch fans and to reduce the tendency to suck foreign objects into the fans”, as discussed by Moller, Para. [0013].
Regarding claim 5, Shaw as modified by Moller 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 Moller 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 thruster (#6) that is controllably operable to enable and disable fluid flow from the source to the at least one 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 Moller (US 2004/0026563 A1) for the added limitations.
Conclusion
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