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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the amendments with respect to the prior art rejections have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection is a new interpretation of the reference applied in the prior rejection of record and does not rely on any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The new interpretation of the cabinet module and the portions which represent the first and second parts is best shown in the figure below, and reads on the new limitations regarding the height.
Applicant also argues that the interpretation of “first part” and “second part” does not correspond to real or actual structures and that the skilled person would not somehow subdivide the second storage compartment to be two parts. The reinterpretation of the art renders this moot, but the examiner notes that “first part” and “second part” do not denote specific structure by themselves. The applicant has not stated why the right half of a structure could not be called the first part and the left half could be called the second part. Therefore, this argument is not found convincing.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dowty et al (US 20220024591 A1).
For claim 1, Dowty discloses a cabinet for an aircraft cabin characterized in that it comprises:
at least one first cabinet module Fig. 4A-6B as shown below comprising:
- a front side left side as marked below and a rear side right side, the front side facing a space dedicated to a crew member left, the rear side facing an opposite side toward a seat unit right,
- a first lateral side top side of first part as viewed in the image below and a second lateral side bottom side of second part,
a first part as marked below, called "crew member part", containing an equipment to be used by a crew member Para 0058: “storage compartments 118 may include one or more safety devices (e.g., air masks, personal floatation devices, or the like)” which may be used by crew, and
- a second part as marked below, called "passenger part", comprising an element specific to a passenger seat cut-out footwell 608 (Fig. 6B), wherein the passenger part comprises a housing in which is arranged a foot rest Fig. 6C: footrest 610 is arranged in the cut-out,
wherein the crew member part comprises a height greater than a height of the passenger part, wherein an entirety of the crew member part extends along an entire height of the aircraft cabin in a full-height configuration Fig. 6B: the right part which is the crew member part is full-height along the entirety of it and is taller than the passenger part,
said crew member part and said passenger part extending between the front side and the rear side of said first cabinet module as shown,
said crew member part and said passenger part longitudinally overlapping each other along a longitudinal axis of said cabinet as shown,
wherein the crew member part and the passenger part have a common partition wall at least the wall between 204 and 118, and as shown in Fig. 1B the partition wall inside extends to the front side.
PNG
media_image1.png
413
596
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. 1B shows a partition wall within the cavity 120, this wall diving the first part and the second part, but it is not disclosed that the common partition wall is at a non-zero angle with respect to the longitudinal axis of the cabinet. However, the embodiment of Fig. 5A-5B teaches a different common partition wall that may be at a non-zero angle (the wall between 202 and 118 above it). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Dowty by angling the common partition wall. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to narrow the footwell at the back in order to create more space for the storage areas next to it.
Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the cabinet of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient, in order to maximize the storage space while allowing for enough space for the footwell. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
As modified, the common partition wall forms a non-zero angle with respect to the longitudinal axis of the cabinet partition is angled, so that the crew member part and the passenger part each have respectively a first trapezoidal shape and a second trapezoidal shape as modified,
the first trapezoidal shape corresponding to the crew member part being formed by a portion of the front side, a portion of the rear side, the common partition wall and the first lateral side as shown above,
the second trapezoidal shape corresponding to the passenger part being formed by a portion of the front side, a portion of the rear side, the common partition wall and the second lateral side as shown above,
wherein the crew member part and the passenger part of the first cabinet module have openings in two different directions so as to respectively allow access to an element of a kitchen module by a crew member Fig. 1B: opening 120 and access to the footrest by a passenger Fig. 6B: 608,
an opening of the crew member part being positioned in the front side opening 120 opens to the front side,
an opening of the passenger part being positioned in the rear side footwell 608 opens to the rear side.
For claim 3, Dowty discloses the cabinet according to claim 1, characterized in that the crew member part comprises a storage space containing an equipment to be used by a crew member Para 0058: “storage compartments 118 may include one or more safety devices (e.g., air masks, personal floatation devices, or the like)” which may be used by crew.
For claim 4, Dowty discloses the cabinet according to claim 1, characterized in that the passenger part comprises a passenger seat at the least, the footwell is a component of a passenger seat, and it could be interpreted that the passenger seat is a part of the passenger part.
For claim 5, Dowty discloses the cabinet according to claim 1, characterized in that the crew member part has a height greater than a height of the passenger part Fig. 6B.
For claim 8, Dowty discloses the cabinet according to claim 1, characterized in that it further comprises a second cabinet module Fig. 1A-1C: actuable panel 110 attached to 104 having a front side side furthest from monument 104 and a rear side side attached to monument 104; Para 0048: “actuatable panel 110 may be coupled to the primary monument 104”, said rear side of the second cabinet module being attached to the front side of the first cabinet module with no space between the rear side of the second cabinet module and the front side of the first cabinet module Fig. 1A-1C.
For claim 9, Dowty discloses the cabinet according to claim 8, characterized in that it further comprises a third cabinet module Fig. 1A-1C: actuable panel 110 attached to auxiliary monument 106 having a front side side attached to 106 and a rear side side which extends toward other panel 110,
but fails to disclose that the panels 110 are attached to one another.
However, the examiner takes official notice that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the panels by attaching them to one another with a latch/lock mechanism in order to secure them once they are deployed.
As modified, said rear side of the third cabinet module would be attached to the front side of the second cabinet module with no space between the front side of the second cabinet module and the rear side of the third cabinet module as they are locked together, as modified.
For claim 10, Dowty discloses an aircraft cabin comprising at least one seat unit 132 and at least one cabinet as defined in claim 1 see claim 1.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dowty in view of Moran (US 20190291868 A1).
For claim 2, Dowty discloses the cabinet according to claim 1, but fails to disclose that the crew member part comprises a kitchen module containing at least one element chosen from: a trolley, a half-trolley, a refrigerator, or an oven.
However, Moran teaches a cabinet with a crew member part that contains a trolley Fig. 2: cabinet monument 104 contains trolley 118 within door 146.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by Dowty by storing a trolley in the compartment as disclosed by Moran. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to safely stow a trolley when not in use and to provide easy access to the trolley for distributing items to passengers.
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 COLIN N M ZOHOORI whose telephone number is (571)272-7996. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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 on (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.
/COLIN ZOHOORI/Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642