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 .
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 arrangement of first, second, third and fourth propellers recited in claims 1, 10 and 16, showing the following limitations in combination:
wherein all four propellers are symmetrically distributed along the plurality of support structures;
wherein the first propeller and the second propeller are adjacent to one another on one side of the fuselage and are tilted away from one another at equal tilt angles with respect to a vertical axis disposed between the first propeller and the second propeller,
wherein the third and the fourth propeller are adjacent to one another on another side of the fuselage and are tilted toward one another at equal tilt angles with respect to a vertical axis disposed between the third and the fourth propeller, and
wherein a summation of all the first and second horizontal force vectors is substantially zero when the first thrust is substantially equal to the second thrust.
No new matter should be entered. See the corresponding rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, below for details.
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
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 1-2, 4-17 and 19-20 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.
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 16: as amended, the claims require first and second propellers which are adjacent on one side of the fuselage and third and fourth propellers adjacent on another side of the fuselage, where the first and second propellers are tilted away from one another and the third and fourth propellers are tilted toward one another, and where a summation of all the horizontal force vectors is substantially zero when the thrusts are substantially equal.
There is support in the originally filed disclosure for adjacent first and second propellers tilted away from one another and adjacent third and fourth propellers tilted toward one another.
Figures 4A-4M show propellers tilted away from each other in adjacent pairs 420a and 420l, 420c and 420b, 420e and 420d, 420g and 420f, 420i and 420h, 420k and 420j; and tilted toward one another in adjacent pairs 420a and 420b, 420c and 420d, 420e and 420f, 420g and 420h, 420i and 420j, 420k and 420l (specification, ¶ [0083]). Figure 5A shows propellers tilted away from each other in adjacent pairs 510a and 510b, 510c and 510d, 510e and 510f, 510g and 510h; and tilted toward one another in adjacent pairs 510a and 510h, 510b and 510c, 510d and 510e, 510f and 510g (¶ [0096]).
For example, in figures 4A and 5A:
PNG
media_image1.png
1040
954
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1040
1009
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Item A (right: vertical axes ⊗ between adjacent propellers)
There is support in the originally filed disclosure for first and second adjacent propellers having equal and opposing tilt angles and third and fourth adjacent propellers having equal and opposing tilt angles where summation of all the horizontal force vectors is substantially zero when the thrusts are substantially equal.
For example in figures 4A and 5A, adjacent pairs of propellers may be selected such that the summation of all the horizontal force vectors is substantially zero when the thrusts are substantially equal, where the adjacent propellers are tilted away from one another or where the adjacent propellers are tilted toward one another; see Item B:
PNG
media_image3.png
1040
954
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
1040
954
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
1040
1009
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
1040
1009
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Item B: summation of horizontal force vectors is substantially zero
However, the pairs in Item B are either all tilted away from one another or all tilted toward one another. There is no support in the originally filed disclosure for two pairs of adjacent propellers where both conditions are met; where adjacent first and second propellers are tilted away from one another on one side of the fuselage and adjacent third and fourth propellers are tilted toward one another on another side of the fuselage and the summation of all the horizontal force vectors is substantially zero when the thrusts are substantially equal.
In Item A above, propellers 1 and 3 have horizontal force vectors which will sum to zero but propellers 2 and 4 do not (for fig. 5A of Item A, propellers 2 and 4′ do and propellers 1 and 3′ do not) and the sum of all the horizontal force vectors will not sum to zero. Similarly in Item C below, neither arrangement of four propellers have horizontal force vectors which will sum to zero when the thrusts are substantially equal.
PNG
media_image7.png
1040
954
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
1040
954
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Item C: Adjacent propellers tilted away from and toward one another
Further, the first, second, third and fourth propellers are claimed to be symmetrically distributed among the plurality of support structures, which is not supported by the four propellers indicated in either Item A or C above. Propellers 1 - 4, 1′ - 4′, and 1″ - 4″ in Item B are symmetrically distributed but both adjacent propellers 1, 2 and 3, 4 (or 1′/1″, 2′/2″ and 3′/3″, 3′/3″) are tilted toward one another. Neither figure 4A or figure 5A shows a pair of adjacent propellers tilted away from one another and a pair of adjacent propellers tilted toward one another, where the four propellers are symmetrically distributed.
With respect to claims 3 and 18, not rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, there is support in figure 4A for eight propellers in four adjacent pairs, propellers 1, 2 and 5, 6 tilted apart and propellers 3, 4 and 7, 8 tilted together, where the summation of the horizontal force vectors of all eight propellers is substantially zero when the thrusts are substantially zero, see Item D below:
PNG
media_image9.png
1040
954
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
1040
1009
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Item D: with adjacent propellers 5, 6 tilted apart and adjacent propellers 7, 8 tilted toward one another
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10, filed November 24, 2025, with respect to claims 1, 10, and 16 have been fully considered and are persuasive.
Judas does not teach first and second propellers which are adjacent on the same side of the fuselage and tilted away from one another at equal tilt angles with respect to a vertical axis disposed between the first and second propellers, and while Reichert does teach adjacent propellers tilted in different directions on the same side of the fuselage, no adjacent propellers on the same side are tilted away at equal tilt angles. Further, it would not have been obvious to modify either Judas or Reichert to arrive at the claimed invention without a teaching or suggestion in the prior art to do so.
However, there may not be support in the originally filed disclosure for the subject matter recited in claims 1, 10 and 16; see the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 4-17 and 19-20 may be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 3 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims (see the discussion above regarding claims 1, 10 and 16).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Richard Green whose telephone number is (571)270-5380. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 11:00 to 7:00.
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 at (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.
/Richard Green/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647