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 were received on May 12th 2023. These drawings are accepted.
Status of the Claims
This action is in response to the applicant’s filing on October 6th 2025;
Claims 1-20 are pending and examined below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered but are moot. While the Examiner agrees that the prior art does not explicitly teach as it is currently recited in claim language;" … (i) uploading the fault data from the ECU to the FST and (ii) generating summary data from the uploaded fault data, the summary data providing a final state of faults described in the fault data. “. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn; However, upon further consideration a new ground(s) of rejection is made for Claims 1 over Dixit (Patent No. US10964130B1) in view of Misenheimer (Patent No. US20220063839A1) and Lycoming engine manual (Engine Installation and Operation Manual - TEO-540-A1A Engine).
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.
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.
Claims 1 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixit (Patent No. US10964130B1) in view of Misenheimer (Patent No. US20220063839A1) and Lycoming engine manual (Engine Installation and Operation Manual - TEO-540-A1A Engine).
Regarding claim 1 Dixit teaches a method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies in an engine of an aircraft, comprising; (See Dixit column 5, line 55-67 and column 6, line 1-3; “Operational Flight Program (OFP) 102 encompasses hardware and software for managing the overall operation of the vehicle. OFP 102 includes a runtime diagnostics engine IVHMExec 104. OFP 102 may also be implemented as a standalone avionics IVHM computer attached passively to the avionics data buses, actively interfaced with mission planning systems, and actively interfaced with ground systems and maintenance systems 122. IVHMExec 104 includes a diagnostic Model Based Reasoner (MBR) Engine 106. MBR Engine 106 combines a physical model of a vehicle system or subsystem with input data describing the system state, then performs deterministic inference reasoning to determine whether the system is operating normally, if any system anomalies exist, and if so, to isolate and identify the locations and types of faults and false alarms that exist.”);
the FST including a GUI (graphical user interface) having a set of UI (user interface) controls; and in response to a user operation of one or more of the UI controls; (See Dixit column 37, line 37-58; “FIGS. 36-37 provide a block diagram of an exemplary Fleet Level Prognostics System 3600 for which user selectable controls are provided by GUI 3601, as shown in more detail in FIG. 44. The exemplary GUI 3601 consists of a menu bar 3602 with a plurality of menus, a toolbar 3603 with a plurality of actionable button icons configured to initiate actions as indicated by the names in the tooltips 3604 shown when the mouse hovers over the button icons. The main screen body 3605 is a table that displays rows of all available aircraft where each row displays one aircraft as identified by tail number (aircraft from the fleet of like-type aircrafts are individually identified by their tail numbers). Each column in the table may display attributes particular to an aircraft tail number, such as, its serial number, tail number, mission capability (ground based, partially mission capable (PMC), non-mission capable (NMC) and fully mission capable (FMC)), it's zone, it's location, and other user defined attributes. Each displayed aircraft can be mouse selected to show its state, equipment assets, etc. The GUI has modes of operation which are role-based, i.e. each role pertains to different usage by personnel having different objectives.”);
Dixit does not teach but Lycoming engine Manual teaches, while the aircraft is in flight, recording, by an ECU (engine control unit) coupled to the engine, fault data generated in real time by the engine; (See Misenheimer paragraph 0038 and Figure 1 and 2 “…the aircraft system 100 may include a variety of sensors that may detect faults during a flight. In known systems, the faults may be identified and recorded by the ECU 200 or other components of the aircraft system 100 based on the sensor data...”);
PNG
media_image1.png
511
406
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Both Dixit and Misenheimer are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Misenheimer ECU coupled to the engine recording fault data. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the ECU coupled to the engine recording fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Dixit does not teach but Lycoming engine manual teaches, while the aircraft is not in flight, running an FST (field service tool) by a computer coupled to the ECU; (See Lycoming engine manual page 4 and figure 5; “The Field Service Tool (FST) is diagnostic software that identifies fault codes (Appendix C in the TEO-540-A1A Engine Maintenance Manual) and engine operation information to be used by ground-based support personnel to:
• View fault codes from the ECU
• Upload fault codes from the ECU
• Monitor ECU operation
• Upload data from the data logger (if needed)
The EECS collects internal fault log data and external fault log data. Maintenance personnel use this data for diagnostic and continuous airworthiness.”); (i) uploading the fault data from the ECU to the FST; (See Lycoming engine manual page 4 and figure 5; “The Field Service Tool (FST)
• Upload fault codes from the ECU”); and (ii) generating summary data from the uploaded fault data, the summary data providing a final state of faults described in the fault data; (See Lycoming engine manual page 20 and table 2;” If the NTO annunciator is constantly illuminated before, during, or after completing the Pre-Flight Test, while the aircraft is on the ground, do not take-off. Identify the fault(s) using the FST, correct the condition(s), and clear the fault(s).
If the NTO annunciator illuminates during flight and stays illuminated constantly, land as soon as safely possible. Although, the engine will continue to operate, operation will be in a degraded mode which requires a prompt, safe landing. Identify the fault(s) using the FST, correct the condition(s), and clear the fault(s) before further flight.”).
Both Dixit and Lycoming engine manual are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Lycoming providing a final state of faults described in the fault data. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the providing a final state of faults described in the fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 17 Dixit teaches a computer program product including a set of non-transitory, computer-readable media having instructions which, when executed by control circuitry of a computerized apparatus; (See Dixit column 23, line 38-65; “FIG. 25 is a block diagram of an exemplary computing system 2500 for implementing the high frequency sensor analysis and integration with low frequency sensor data. Central to the computing system on system on chip (SOC) is microprocessor 2505 which may also include an arithmetic processing unit and/or a graphical processing unit (GPU). Alternatively, a GPU may be used by itself to process some of the computations/decisions of FIGS. 23 and 24, i.e. other than “graphical” information. A read-only memory (ROM) 2510 contains stored program instructions and data for use by the microprocessor 2505. A random-access memory (RAM) 2515 is also used by the microprocessor 2505 as a location where data may be stored and later read (the GPU also has its own RAM). A nonvolatile memory device 2520 is utilized to store instructions and/or data that will not be lost upon a loss of power to the computing system. An input/output (I/O) buffer 2525 is coupled to the microprocessor 2505 and facilitates the receipt of external data and the transmission of data from the microprocessor to external devices. Input devices 2530 represent conventional ways for a user to input information to the computing system, e.g. keyboard, mouse, etc. Output devices 2535 are conventional ways for information to be conveyed from the computer system to a user, e.g. video monitor, printer, etc. Depending on the number of parallel cores of the microprocessor 2505 (or the GPU), all cores provide sufficient computational power needed to process the data from all of the sensors in accordance with the steps explained above…”);
the FST including a GUI (graphical user interface) having a set of UI (user interface) controls; and in response to a user operation of one or more of the UI controls; (See Dixit column 37, line 37-58; “FIGS. 36-37 provide a block diagram of an exemplary Fleet Level Prognostics System 3600 for which user selectable controls are provided by GUI 3601, as shown in more detail in FIG. 44. The exemplary GUI 3601 consists of a menu bar 3602 with a plurality of menus, a toolbar 3603 with a plurality of actionable button icons configured to initiate actions as indicated by the names in the tooltips 3604 shown when the mouse hovers over the button icons. The main screen body 3605 is a table that displays rows of all available aircraft where each row displays one aircraft as identified by tail number (aircraft from the fleet of like-type aircrafts are individually identified by their tail numbers). Each column in the table may display attributes particular to an aircraft tail number, such as, its serial number, tail number, mission capability (ground based, partially mission capable (PMC), non-mission capable (NMC) and fully mission capable (FMC)), it's zone, it's location, and other user defined attributes. Each displayed aircraft can be mouse selected to show its state, equipment assets, etc. The GUI has modes of operation which are role-based, i.e. each role pertains to different usage by personnel having different objectives.”).
Dixit does not teach but Lycoming engine Manual teaches, the ECU coupled to the engine and configured to record fault data generated in real time by the engine; (See Misenheimer paragraph 0038 and Figure 1 and 2 “…the aircraft system 100 may include a variety of sensors that may detect faults during a flight. In known systems, the faults may be identified and recorded by the ECU 200 or other components of the aircraft system 100 based on the sensor data...”).
PNG
media_image1.png
511
406
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Both Dixit and Misenheimer are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Misenheimer ECU coupled to the engine recording fault data. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the ECU coupled to the engine recording fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Dixit does not teach but Lycoming teaches, cause the computerized apparatus to perform a method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies in an engine of an aircraft; (See Lycoming engine manual page 4; “The Field Service Tool (FST) is diagnostic software that identifies fault codes (Appendix C in the TEO-540-A1A Engine Maintenance Manual) and engine operation information to be used by ground-based support personnel to:
• View fault codes from the ECU
• Upload fault codes from the ECU
• Monitor ECU operation
• Upload data from the data logger (if needed)
The EECS collects internal fault log data and external fault log data. Maintenance personnel use this data for diagnostic and continuous airworthiness.
Access to this tool is through a laptop where the software is installed and through an established link with the EECS.”); the method comprising: running an FST (field service tool), the ECU coupled to the engine and configured to record fault data generated in real time by the engine; (See Lycoming engine manual page 4 and figure 5; “The Field Service Tool (FST) is diagnostic software that identifies fault codes (Appendix C in the TEO-540-A1A Engine Maintenance Manual) and engine operation information to be used by ground-based support personnel to:
• View fault codes from the ECU
• Upload fault codes from the ECU
• Monitor ECU operation
• Upload data from the data logger (if needed)
The EECS collects internal fault log data and external fault log data. Maintenance personnel use this data for diagnostic and continuous airworthiness.”); (i) uploading the fault data from the ECU to the FST; (See Lycoming engine manual page 4 and figure 5; “The Field Service Tool (FST)
• Upload fault codes from the ECU”); and (ii) generating summary data from the uploaded fault data, the summary data providing a final state of faults described in the fault data; (See Lycoming engine manual page 20 and table 2;” If the NTO annunciator is constantly illuminated before, during, or after completing the Pre-Flight Test, while the aircraft is on the ground, do not take-off. Identify the fault(s) using the FST, correct the condition(s), and clear the fault(s).
If the NTO annunciator illuminates during flight and stays illuminated constantly, land as soon as safely possible. Although, the engine will continue to operate, operation will be in a degraded mode which requires a prompt, safe landing. Identify the fault(s) using the FST, correct the condition(s), and clear the fault(s) before further flight.”).
Both Dixit and Lycoming engine manual are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Lycoming providing a final state of faults described in the fault data. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the providing a final state of faults described in the fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 18 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the computer program product of claim 17, Dixit does not teach but Lycoming engine manual teaches, wherein the method further comprises preventing, by the FST, users from changing engine parameters except for a limited set of allowed parameters selected to avoid a need for a service visit while having no effect on safety or compliance ; (See Lycoming engine manual page 20 and table 2; “The EECS has a simple set of hardwired warning annunciators (shown in Figure 1 and identified in Table 2 along with pilot action), to supply critical system status data to the pilot. These annunciators are connected directly to the ECU. The annunciators will still operate if airframe power is lost.
During routine maintenance, such as a scheduled oil change, the service technician can display the ECU fault codes (Appendix D in the TEO-540-A1A Engine Maintenance Manual) using the FST on an attached laptop. If any fault is present, the service technician must take action to correct the fault.…If the TLO annunciator illuminates, it is still safe for flight if flight is necessary. However, it is recommended the fault(s) is identified using the FST, the condition(s) corrected, and the fault(s) cleared. If service is not done within 20 hours, the NTO annunciator will illuminate... If this annunciator is illuminated, the pre-flight test is in progress. Do not move the power control until the annunciator has turned off. If the pre-flight test sequence is stopped before it is completed, the PFT annunciator will flash. Momentarily press the PFT button. Complete another pre-flight test per instructions in this chapter.”).
Both Dixit and Lycoming engine manual are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Lycoming engine manual to implement changing a limited set of engine parameters. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the user by allow the user to receive more accurate aircraft engine fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 2-4, 7-9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixit (Patent No. US10964130B1) in view of Misenheimer (Patent No. US20220063839A1), Lycoming engine manual (Engine Installation and Operation Manual - TEO-540-A1A Engine) and Wodecki (Patent No. US20170024943A1).
Regarding claim 2 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 1, Dixit does not teach but Wodecki teaches, wherein generating the summary data includes, for a particular fault type, consolidating multiple fault messages of the uploaded fault data for the particular fault type into a single fault message that provides the final state of the particular fault type; (See Wodecki paragraph 0019 and figure 2A, 4, 5 and 8 ; “FIGS. 2(A)-2(B) show a scenario of providing service assessment for a vehicle 210 at a service provider location, according to another example embodiment. As shown, the vehicle 210 has a telematics device 212, which can transmit the fault code information to the user device 225 via a network 202. Thus the user device 225 can receive the fault code information and determine possible cause of the fault and estimated labor hours before the vehicle 210 arrives at the service provider location. When the vehicle 210 arrives, the service advisor 220 directs the vehicle 210 to a corresponding bay 232 based on the reading of the possible source and estimated labor hours from the user device 225.”).
Both Dixit and Wodecki are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Wodecki consolidating multiple fault messages of the uploaded fault data. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow consolidating multiple fault messages of the uploaded fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 3 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 2, Dixit dos not teach but Lycoming engine manual teaches, wherein generating the summary data for the particular fault type includes constructing the single fault message to include: a fault code that identifies the fault; an ECU channel from which the fault originated, as one of a primary channel or a secondary channel; a final fault status of the particular fault type as one of active or inactive; and a lamp indicator that identifies a cockpit lamp that the fault caused to illuminate; (See Lycoming engine manual page 5 and 20 and Table 2; “The ECU transmits output data through two CAN buses (CAN2 and CAN3) and one RS232 bus (Figure 6). The CAN2 is used to connect the FST…During routine maintenance, such as a scheduled oil change, the service technician can display the ECU fault codes (Appendix D in the TEO-540-A1A Engine Maintenance Manual) using the FST on an attached laptop.”).
Both Dixit and Lycoming engine manual are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Lycoming providing a final state of faults described in the fault data. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the providing a final state of faults described in the fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 4 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 3, Dixit does not teach but Wodecki teaches, wherein constructing the single fault message to include the fault code further includes: accessing a database or other file based on the fault code to identify a human-readable description of the fault; and providing the human-readable description of the fault in the single fault message; (See Wodecki paragraph 0019 and figure 2A, 4, 5 and 8 ; “FIGS. 2(A)-2(B) show a scenario of providing service assessment for a vehicle 210 at a service provider location, according to another example embodiment. As shown, the vehicle 210 has a telematics device 212, which can transmit the fault code information to the user device 225 via a network 202. Thus the user device 225 can receive the fault code information and determine possible cause of the fault and estimated labor hours before the vehicle 210 arrives at the service provider location. When the vehicle 210 arrives, the service advisor 220 directs the vehicle 210 to a corresponding bay 232 based on the reading of the possible source and estimated labor hours from the user device 225.”).
Both Dixit and Wodecki are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Wodecki consolidating multiple fault messages of the uploaded fault data. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow consolidating multiple fault messages of the uploaded fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 7 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 2, Dixit does not teach but Lycoming engine manual teaches, further comprising, upon uploading the fault data from the ECU to the FST, automatically storing the uploaded fault data in a log file accessible by the computer, such that no additional user action is required for storing the uploaded fault data in the log file; (See Lycoming engine manual page 3 and 57; “Engine Control Unit (ECU) (also identified as ACU) - is a dual channel unit which contains system processors, input signal conditioning, output actuator drive stages, and aircraft communication interfaces. The ACU Controller Area Network (CAN) bus communications linked to a host personal computer can be used to monitor the system and upload logged data…During engine operation, the data logger (if installed) will automatically record all engine operating data. This data can be accessed after flight on the FST.”).
Both Dixit and Lycoming engine manual are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Lycoming engine automatically storing the uploaded fault data in a log file. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the automatically storing the uploaded fault data in a log file. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 8 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 2, Dixit also teaches, further comprising: operating the engine while the aircraft is not in flight; (See Dixit column 38, line 6-10; “prognostics system goes into an autonomous mode and establishes various data socket links with the COMMS System 3605 which receives data from various aircrafts in flight or other in ground operations such as pre-flight testing, taxiing, and pre-launch.”).
Dixit does not teach but Lycoming engine manual teaches, converting, by the FST, the real-time data from raw units into human-readable engineering units; and displaying, by the GUI, the real-time data in the human-readable engineering units; (See Lycoming engine manual page 7 and 20 and table 2; “Sensors, identified in Table 2, are connected to the wiring harnesses. The sensors measure engine parameters and supply input to the ECU…During routine maintenance, such as a scheduled oil change, the service technician can display the ECU fault codes (Appendix D in the TEO-540-A1A Engine Maintenance Manual) using the FST on an attached laptop. If any fault is present, the service technician must take action to correct the fault...”).
Dixit does not teach but Misenheimer teaches, receiving, by the FST, real-time data acquired by the ECU from sensors configured to measure parameters of the engine; (See Misenheimer paragraph 0038; “…the aircraft system 100 may include a variety of sensors that may detect faults during a flight. In known systems, the faults may be identified and recorded by the ECU 200 or other components of the aircraft system 100 based on the sensor data…”);
Both Dixit and Misenheimer are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Misenheimer to implement the real-time data acquired by the ECU from sensors. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the user by allow the user to receive more accurate aircraft engine fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 9 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 2, Dixit does not teach but Lycoming engine manual teaches, further comprising preventing, by the FST, users from changing engine parameters except for a limited set of allowed parameters selected to avoid a need for a service visit while having no effect on safety or compliance; (See Lycoming engine manual page 20 and table 2; “The EECS has a simple set of hardwired warning annunciators (shown in Figure 1 and identified in Table 2 along with pilot action), to supply critical system status data to the pilot. These annunciators are connected directly to the ECU. The annunciators will still operate if airframe power is lost.
During routine maintenance, such as a scheduled oil change, the service technician can display the ECU fault codes (Appendix D in the TEO-540-A1A Engine Maintenance Manual) using the FST on an attached laptop. If any fault is present, the service technician must take action to correct the fault.…If the TLO annunciator illuminates, it is still safe for flight if flight is necessary. However, it is recommended the fault(s) is identified using the FST, the condition(s) corrected, and the fault(s) cleared. If service is not done within 20 hours, the NTO annunciator will illuminate... If this annunciator is illuminated, the pre-flight test is in progress. Do not move the power control until the annunciator has turned off. If the pre-flight test sequence is stopped before it is completed, the PFT annunciator will flash. Momentarily press the PFT button. Complete another pre-flight test per instructions in this chapter.”).
Both Dixit and Lycoming engine manual are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Lycoming engine manual to implement changing a limited set of engine parameters. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the user by allow the user to receive more accurate aircraft engine fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 15 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 9, Dixit does not teach but Misenheimer teaches, wherein the limited set of allowed parameters includes a control for resetting an offset of a TPS (throttle position sensor) within the engine; (See Misenheimer paragraph 0021; “…A FADEC system generally functions by receiving a plurality of input variables of a current flight condition, including, but not limited to, air density, throttle lever position, engine temperature, engine pressure, and/or the like. The inputs are received, analyzed, and used to determine operating parameters such as, but not limited to, fuel flow, stator vane position, bleed valve position, and/or the like. The FADEC system may also control a start or a restart of the engines 140. The operating parameters of the FADEC can be modified by installing and/or updating software, such as the software that is distributed by the aircraft system 100 described herein. As such, the FADEC can be programmatically controlled to determine engine limitations, receive engine health reports, receive engine maintenance reports and/or the like to undertake certain measures and/or actions in certain conditions.”).
Both Dixit and Misenheimer are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Misenheimer to implement changing a limited set of engine parameters. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the user by allow the user to receive more accurate aircraft engine fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixit (Patent No. US10964130B1) in view of Misenheimer (Patent No. US20220063839A1), Lycoming engine manual (Engine Installation and Operation Manual - TEO-540-A1A Engine), Wodecki (Patent No. US20170024943A1) and Lee (Patent No. US20220135244A1).
Regarding claim 5 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 2, Dixit does not teach but Lee teaches, wherein said one or more of the UI controls includes at least one control for establishing a timespan over which fault messages are uploaded and/or displayed by the FST, said at least one control allowing user selection between (i) an interval of time since an immediately previous engine overhaul and (ii) an interval of time since fault messages in the ECU were last cleared; (See Lee paragraph 0030; “Maintenance personnel may then use the device(s) 110 to access the data associated with (or relevant to) the engine fault and accordingly perform maintenance on the engine 10 to troubleshoot malfunctions. As will be discussed further below, the data associated with the engine fault may be output at (e.g., rendered or otherwise displayed on) the device(s) 110 and maintenance personnel may access the data via a suitable input/output device, such as a video display and keyboard, associated with their device 110. In particular, the fault codes and associated indication messages contained in the engine fault data may be accessed and used to direct maintenance efforts. After carrying out appropriate corrective actions or responses to each fault code, the maintenance personnel may further update maintenance logs (or records) associated with the engine 10 and/or the aircraft 100. The maintenance record(s) may be indicative of date(s) and time(s) at which engine and/or aircraft maintenance has been performed.”).
Both Dixit and Lee are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Lee fault data decoding. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by providing human-readable data to analyze. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 6 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 2, Dixit does not teach but Lee teaches, wherein the GUI of the FST further includes a set of controls for clearing faults stored in the ECU, and wherein the method further comprises (i) the GUI receiving a user operation to clear faults stored in the ECU and (ii) the FST thereafter clearing the faults in the ECU; (See Lee paragraph 0030; “Maintenance personnel may then use the device(s) 110 to access the data associated with (or relevant to) the engine fault and accordingly perform maintenance on the engine 10 to troubleshoot malfunctions. As will be discussed further below, the data associated with the engine fault may be output at (e.g., rendered or otherwise displayed on) the device(s) 110 and maintenance personnel may access the data via a suitable input/output device, such as a video display and keyboard, associated with their device 110. In particular, the fault codes and associated indication messages contained in the engine fault data may be accessed and used to direct maintenance efforts. After carrying out appropriate corrective actions or responses to each fault code, the maintenance personnel may further update maintenance logs (or records) associated with the engine 10 and/or the aircraft 100. The maintenance record(s) may be indicative of date(s) and time(s) at which engine and/or aircraft maintenance has been performed.”).
Both Dixit and Lee are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Lee set of controls. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by including a set of controls to allow the workers to check and update maintenance logs. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixit (Patent No. US10964130B1) in view of Misenheimer (Patent No. US20220063839A1), Lycoming engine manual (Engine Installation and Operation Manual - TEO-540-A1A Engine), Wodecki (Patent No. US20170024943A1) and Debelak (Patent No. US20150081194A1).
Regarding claim 10 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 9, Dixit does not teach but Debelak teaches, wherein the limited set of allowed parameters includes a setting in the ECU that records a total number of engine hours in which the engine has been in service; (See Debelak paragraph 0052; “…One embodiment provides that during the operation of the internal combustion engine 100 the operating data in the engine identification module 3 are updated be the electronic engine control unit 2. Operating data comprise, for example, the engine operating hours and the injector wear. Likewise, the engine identification module 3 can constitute a redundant data memory for the electronic engine control unit 2 in which the learned data values are stored.”).
Both Dixit and Debelak are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Debelak record a total number of engine hours. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allowing to identifying engine operating hours and the injector wear. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 11 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 10, Dixit does not teach but Debelak teaches, wherein the engine has a current total number of engine hours, and wherein the method further comprises: replacing the ECU with a new ECU; (See Debelak paragraph 0048; “…It is also conceivable that a specific number of starting attempts or a time limit is predefined. If, for example, after a defect the electronic engine control unit is replaced with a new one, the correct pairing of the engine control unit/internal combustion engine is ensured by means of the method…”); and operating the FST to update the total number of engine hours of the new ECU to match the current total number of engine hours of the engine; (See Debelak paragraph 0052; “…One embodiment provides that during the operation of the internal combustion engine 100 the operating data in the engine identification module 3 are updated be the electronic engine control unit 2. Operating data comprise, for example, the engine operating hours and the injector wear…”).
Both Dixit and Debelak are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Debelak record a total number of engine hours. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allowing to identifying engine operating hours and schedule the ECU replacement. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 12 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 9, Dixit does not teach but Debelak teaches, wherein the limited set of allowed parameters includes a setting in the ECU that records an engine serial number; (See Debelak paragraph 0034 and 0046; “…With respect to the control unit, for example the serial number, part number, design version and CCS can be stored…At least one microprocessor and a memory module, for example E.sup.2PROM for storing an engine identification and engine specifics are arranged in the engine identification module 3. Engine identification is to be understood as meaning the engine type, the engine part number and the serial number. Engine specifics are the individual properties of the internal combustion engine which are determined on an acceptance test bench...”).
Both Dixit and Debelak are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Debelak record engine serial number. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by recording engine serial number to identify the correct engines for testing. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 13 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 12, Dixit does not teach but Debelak teaches, wherein the engine has a particular engine serial number, and wherein the method further comprises: replacing the ECU with a new ECU; (See Debelak paragraph 0048; “…It is also conceivable that a specific number of starting attempts or a time limit is predefined. If, for example, after a defect the electronic engine control unit is replaced with a new one, the correct pairing of the engine control unit/internal combustion engine is ensured by means of the method…”); and operating the FST to update a setting in the new ECU that records the engine serial number to match the particular engine serial number of the engine; (See Debelak paragraph 0052; “…One embodiment provides that during the operation of the internal combustion engine 100 the operating data in the engine identification module 3 are updated be the electronic engine control unit 2. Operating data comprise, for example, the engine operating hours and the injector wear…”).
Both Dixit and Debelak are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Debelak record engine serial number. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by recording engine serial number to identify the correct engines for testing. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 14 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 12, Dixit does not teach but Debelak teaches, further comprising: moving the ECU from the engine to a second engine; (See Debelak paragraph 0048; “…It is also conceivable that a specific number of starting attempts or a time limit is predefined. If, for example, after a defect the electronic engine control unit is replaced with a new one, the correct pairing of the engine control unit/internal combustion engine is ensured by means of the method…”); and operating the FST to update the setting in the ECU that records the engine serial number such that the setting matches an engine serial number of the second engine; (See Debelak paragraph 0062 and Figure 4; “The sequence of the maintenance steps S1 to S4 can also be reversed if an upload of engine data from an engine 20 is necessary to the manufacturer region HH, this can be necessary, for example, within the scope of diagnostic maintenance or data protection. For this purpose, the non-volatile storage medium 30 can be operated, for example, as a data logger memory which continuously logs operating data or as a crash recorder memory of the maintenance software module 60. Maintenance proves advantageous in particular in the case of replacement of an engine or of a pool motor; in this case for saving analog data and operating data (upload) and transferring it into a new device (download). Both may also be necessary when a control unit is replaced in order to save software data in terms of uploading and transferring into a new device (downloading)…”).
Both Dixit and Debelak are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Debelak record engine serial number. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by recording engine serial number to apply correct stings in the ECU. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixit (Patent No. US10964130B1) in view of Misenheimer (Patent No. US20220063839A1), Lycoming engine manual (Engine Installation and Operation Manual - TEO-540-A1A Engine) and Debelak (Patent No. US20150081194A1).
Regarding claim 19 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 18, Dixit does not teach but Debelak teaches,, wherein the limited set of allowed parameters includes a setting in the ECU that records a total number of engine hours in which the engine has been in service; (See Debelak paragraph 0052; “…One embodiment provides that during the operation of the internal combustion engine 100 the operating data in the engine identification module 3 are updated be the electronic engine control unit 2. Operating data comprise, for example, the engine operating hours and the injector wear. Likewise, the engine identification module 3 can constitute a redundant data memory for the electronic engine control unit 2 in which the learned data values are stored.”).
Both Dixit and Debelak are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Debelak record a total number of engine hours. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allowing to identifying engine operating hours and the injector wear. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 20 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 9, Dixit does not teach but Debelak teaches, wherein the limited set of allowed parameters includes a setting in the ECU that records an engine serial number; (See Debelak paragraph 0034; “…With respect to the control unit, for example the serial number, part number, design version and CCS can be stored…”).
Both Dixit and Debelak are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Debelak record engine serial number. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by recording engine serial number to apply correct stings in the ECU. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixit (Patent No. US10964130B1) in view of Misenheimer (Patent No. US20220063839A1) and Lycoming engine manual (Engine Installation and Operation Manual - TEO-540-A1A Engine), Wodecki (Patent No. US20170024943A1) and Volponi (Patent No. US20190130294A1).
Regarding claim 16 Dixit in view of Misenheimer and Lycoming engine manual teaches the method of claim 2, Dixit further teaches, the TLO being triggered in response to a fault condition in the aircraft that must be addressed within a determined amount of time before the aircraft is deemed non-flightworthy; (See Dixi column 21, line 39-49; “This procedure is also utilized for nominal data to reduce its output size. It is anticipated that this information will be used in both real time for prediction of a future state/value of the component and in a non-real time environment such as for maintenance analysis performed at a maintenance location. The output 1220 may be transmitted such as wirelessly to the ground control station and/or maintenance location or may be stored locally in non-volatile storage and later transferred from storage to the maintenance location or retrieved from vehicle by a connected hand held device running the PMD Viewer.”).
Dixit does not teach but Volponi teaches, wherein the GUI of the FST displays an amount of time remaining following a TLO (time-limited operation); (See Volponi paragraph 0066-0067 and Figure 9 and 10; “FIG. 9 …The GUI 900 can access multiple databases, such as data repository 120A-120N of FIG. 2, fleet event history 202 of FIG. 2, and other data sources (not depicted) for fault records and associated data. As shown in FIG. 9, a filter interface 902 can allow events to be accessed based on customer name,”).
Both Dixit and Volponi are in the same field of diagnosis of anomalies. It would have been obvious for one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of present invention to modify Dixit method of facilitating diagnosis of anomalies with Volponi to implement the GUI that is having UI controls. No new functionality would arise from the combination and the combination would improve usability of Dixit by allow the user to access and interpret aircraft engine fault data. Further, finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIDIA KWIATKOWSKA whose telephone number is (571)272-5161. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, Scott A. Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/SCOTT A BROWNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights