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 Amendment
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 03/03/2026. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 8-11, 13-16, and 18-20 are examined.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11, 13-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klonowski 2022/0177147 in view of Stitt 10128785, Hon 2022/0242585, and further in view of Sawata 2020/0215922.
Regarding Claim 1, Klonowski teaches a series hybrid propulsion system 100 of an aircraft (multi-rotor rotatory-wing aircraft), comprising:
a gas turbine engine 112;
an electrical generator 114 operably connected to the gas turbine engine 112 configured to generate electrical power from operation of the gas turbine engine 112 ([0076]; Fig. 4);
one or more electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d configured to provide propulsion for the aircraft (multi-rotor rotatory-wing aircraft) ([0089-90]; Fig. 4);
an electrical power grid 120 configured to distribute the electrical power generated at least at the electrical generator 114 to the one or more electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d ([0089-90]; Fig. 4);
and a voltage regulator 115 disposed downstream (seen in Fig. 4) of the electrical generator 114 configured to take one or more actions (control and protection circuits to ensure performance under all conditions. This reads on one or more actions being taken by voltage regulator 115) to compensate for a loss of load (loss of a winding of electric generator 114 or a complete loss of the electric generator 114. This reads on the loss of the load) on the electrical generator 114; the loss of load (loss of a winding of electric generator 114 or a complete loss of the electric generator 114) is a disconnection of the electrical generator 114 from the electrical power grid 120 ([0079-80, 0094-99]; Fig. 4. [0094] teaches that the loss of load can be an event of the loss of a winding of electric generator 114 or a complete loss of the electric generator 114. This event is interpreted a disconnection of the electrical generator 114 as claimed.),
and system controller 102, 132a-d operably connected to the gas turbine engine 112 and the voltage regulator 115 ([0079-90]; Fig. 4).
Klonowski does not teach voltage regulator including one or more sensors to monitor a current and voltage from the electrical generator.
Stitt teaches
voltage regulator 140 including one or more sensors 305, 310 to monitor a current and voltage (current via transient current sensor system 310, voltage via transient voltage sensor system 305, seen in Fig 3) from the electrical generator 125 (Col. 3, l. 6 - Col. 4, l. 4 and Col. 6, ll. 26-50; Figs. 1 & 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the voltage regulator 115 of Klonowski to include Stitt’s voltage regulator 140 including one or more sensors 305, 310 to monitor a current and voltage (current via transient current sensor system 310, voltage via transient voltage sensor system 305) from the electrical generator 125, in order to detect characteristics of transients such as … voltage level fluctuations, and current level fluctuations (Stitt, Col. 6, ll. 33-37).
Klonowski in view of Stitt does not teach a system controller configured to slow operation of the gas turbine engine to a preselected RPM condition when the loss of load is detected by the voltage regulator, and to return the hybrid propulsion system to normal operation once the gas turbine engine reaches the preselected RPM condition; the loss of load is a disconnection of the electrical generator from the electrical power grid and the slowing of the operation of the gas turbine engine prevents overspeed of the gas turbine engine due to the disconnection.
Hon teaches a hybrid electric propulsion system 110 and
a system controller 130, 134, 136 configured to slow operation (reducing fuel flow to the engine to reduce the engine output torque) of the gas turbine engine 112 to a preselected RPM condition (to have the engine output torque drop to match the torque load on the engine – when the torques match then this is the preselected RMP condition) when the loss of load (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) is detected (via sensors 132), and to return the hybrid propulsion system 110 to normal operation once the gas turbine engine 112 reaches the preselected RPM condition (engine output torque drop matches the torque load on the engine); the loss of load is a disconnection (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) of the electrical generator 114 (first electric machine 114 fails) from the electrical power grid 120 and the slowing of the operation of the gas turbine engine prevents overspeed of the gas turbine engine 112 (prevent overspeed of the engine) due to the disconnection (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) ([0028, 0031-32, 0036, 0042, 0044; 0051-52]; Figs. 2-3. Hon teaches that rapid loss of a load leads to overspeed and the control system automatically takes corrective action to prevent it by slowing down the engine to a condition when the output torque matches the torque load on the engine. The controller is an EEC or ECU with FADEC and takes action quickly. Therefore, it is inherent that the controller will return the hybrid system 110 once the engine’s 112 output torque matches the engine torque.).
Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon, as discussed so far does not teach a system controller configured to slow operation of the gas turbine engine to a preselected RPM condition when the loss of load is detected by the voltage regulator via the one or more sensors.
However, Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon teaches a system controller 102, 132a-d, 130, 134, 136 operably connected to the gas turbine engine 112 and the voltage regulator 115. The gas turbine engine 112 comprising an electrical generator 114, one or more electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d, an electrical power grid 120 configured to distribute the electrical power generated at least at the electrical generator 114 to the one or more electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d, and a voltage regulator 115 configured to take one or more actions (control and protection circuits to ensure performance under all conditions. This reads on one or more actions being taken) to compensate for a loss of load (loss of a winding of electric generator 114 or a complete loss of the electric generator 114) on the electrical generator 114. Furthermore, the controller 102, 132a-d, 130, 134, 136 is configured to slow operation (reducing fuel flow to the engine to reduce the engine output torque) of the gas turbine engine 112 to a preselected RPM condition (to have the engine output torque drop to match the torque load on the engine – when the torques match then this is the preselected RMP condition) when the loss of load (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) is detected by the voltage regulator 115 via Stitt’s one or more sensors 305, 310, and to return the hybrid propulsion system 110 to normal operation once the gas turbine engine 112 reaches the preselected RPM condition (engine output torque drop matches the torque load on the engine). Therefore, Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon’s system controller 102, 132a-d, 130, 134, 136 is capable of slowing operation of the gas turbine engine to a preselected RPM condition when the loss of load is detected by the voltage regulator, because it has been held that “apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co. v Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2114 II, and a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). See MPEP 2114 II. In this case, the claimed structure is identical to the applied prior art, and is found capable of operating in the claimed manner as discussed above, and therefore is unpatentable over Klonowski in view of Hon.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the system controller 102, 132a-d of Klonowski in view of Stitt with Hon’s system controller 130, 134, 136 configured to slow operation (reducing fuel flow to the engine to reduce the engine output torque) of the gas turbine engine 112 to a preselected RPM condition (to have the engine output torque drop to match the torque load on the engine – when the torques match then this is the preselected RMP condition) when the loss of load (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) is detected (via sensors 132), and to return the hybrid propulsion system 110 to normal operation once the gas turbine engine 112 reaches the preselected RPM condition (engine output torque drop matches the torque load on the engine); the loss of load is a disconnection (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) of the electrical generator 114 (first electric machine 114 fails) from the electrical power grid 120 and the slowing of the operation of the gas turbine engine prevents overspeed of the gas turbine engine 112 (prevent overspeed of the engine) due to the disconnection (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease), in order prevent overspeed of the engine by rapidly and automatically taking action in the event of a rapid electrical load change (Hon [0028]).
Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon does not teach each of the electrical generator and the one or more electrically-driven propulsors are switchably connectible and disconnectible from the electrical power grid via a plurality of switches operated by the system controller.
Sawata teaches a similar propulsion system 402 and
each of the electrical generator 106 (seen in Figs. 2 & 5) and the one or more electrically-driven propulsors 114 are switchably connectible and disconnectible (seen in Fig. 5) from the electrical power grid (grid seen in Fig. 5 comprised of 3 lines connecting generator and motor with switches 406, 404 on them) via a plurality of switches 406, 404 operated by the system controller 110 (labeled and seen in Fig. 2; seen in Fig. 5, but not labeled.) ([0040, 0061, 0076]; Figs. 2 & 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the series hybrid propulsion system 100 of Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon to include Sawata’s plurality of switches 406, 406 and system controller 110, in order to provide a connection from the inverter to either propulsion motor or the generator (Sawata, [0076]).
Regarding Claim 2, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Klonowski further teaches
the one or more actions (control and protection circuits to ensure performance under all conditions. This reads on one or more actions being taken by voltage regulator 115) includes applying an emergency load (a transient resistive torque that is created) to the electrical generator 114 ([0080; 0098-103]; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 4, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 2, and Klonowski further teaches
the emergency load (a transient resistive torque that is created) is applied via a shunt circuit 200 (200 short-circuiting device is a shunt circuit) at the voltage regulator 115 ([0080; 0094-103]; Figs. 2 & 4. Voltage regulator 115 has control and protection circuits to ensure performance under all conditions, including a loss of load on the generator 114, this includes using a shunt circuit 200 that applies emergency load (a transient resistive torque that is created). The shunt circuit 200 is part of the voltage generator’s 115 protection circuits. Therefore, the shunt circuit 200 is at the voltage regulator 115, as claimed).
Regarding Claim 5, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Klonowski further teaches
the loss of load (a loss of a propeller 124a-d; propeller is the load) is determined by measuring one of a current (current 1114 of the generator) or a voltage (output voltage U114) at the electrical generator 114 ([0080; 0094]; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 8, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Klonowski further teaches
the one or more electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d includes: a fan 124a-d; and an electric motor 122a-d configured to drive the fan 124a-d ([0090]; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 9, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 8, and Klonowski further teaches
a motor controller 132a-d configured to control operation of the electric motor 122a-d ([0090]; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 10, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Klonowski further teaches
an energy storage system 126 operably connected to the electrical power grid 120 configured to store the electrical power (via element 206 configuration; seen in Fig. 5) generated at the electrical generator 114 [0091; 0119]; Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 11, Klonowski teaches a method of operating a series hybrid propulsion system 100 of an aircraft (multi-rotor rotatory-wing aircraft), comprising:
generating electrical power at an electrical generator 114 via operation of a gas turbine engine 112 operably connected to the electrical generator 114 ([0076]; Fig. 4);
distributing the electrical power (from generator 114) to an electrical power grid 120 (Fig. 4);
operating one or more electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d from the electrical power provided to the electrical power grid 120 to provide propulsion for the aircraft (multi-rotor rotatory-wing aircraft) ([0089-90]; Fig. 4);
abruptly reducing a load (a loss of a propeller 124a-d; propeller is the load) on the electrical generator 114 ([0094]; Fig. 4);
taking one or more actions (control and protection circuits to ensure performance under all conditions. This reads on one or more actions being taken by voltage regulator 115) at the voltage regulator 115 disposed downstream (seen in Fig. 4) of the electrical generator 114 to compensate for the reduction of the load (loss of a winding of electric generator 114 or a complete loss of the electric generator 114. This reads on the reduction of the load) on the electrical generator 114; the loss of load (loss of a winding of electric generator 114 or a complete loss of the electric generator 114) is a disconnection of the electrical generator 114 from the electrical power grid 120 ([0079-80, 0094-99]; Fig. 4. [0094] teaches that the loss of load can be an event of the loss of a winding of electric generator 114 or a complete loss of the electric generator 114. This event is interpreted as a disconnection of the electrical generator 114 as claimed.).
Klonowski does not teach detecting the reduction of the load via one or more sensors of a voltage regulator disposed downstream of the electrical generator;
Stitt teaches
detecting the reduction of the load (detect characteristics of transients such as … voltage level fluctuations, and current level fluctuations. Voltage and current level fluctuations are interpreted as indication of a reduction of the load) via one or more sensors 305, 310 of a voltage regulator 140 disposed downstream (seen in Fig. 1) of the electrical generator 125 (Col. 3, l. 6 - Col. 4, l. 4 and Col. 6, ll. 26-50; Figs. 1 & 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the voltage regulator 115 of Klonowski to include Stitt’s voltage regulator 140 that includes one or more sensors 305, 310 for detecting the reduction of the load (detect characteristics of transients such as … voltage level fluctuations, and current level fluctuations) and is disposed downstream of the electrical generator 125, for the same reason as discussed in rejection of claim 1 above.
Klonowski in view of Stitt does not teach slowing operation of the gas turbine engine to a preselected RPM condition when the reduction of the load is detected by the voltage regulator; and returning the hybrid propulsion system to normal operation once the gas turbine engine reaches the preselected RPM condition; the loss of load is a disconnection of the electrical generator from the electrical power grid and the slowing of the operation of the gas turbine engine prevents overspeed of the gas turbine engine due to the disconnection.
Hon teaches
slowing operation (reducing fuel flow to the engine to reduce the engine output torque via controller 130, 134, 136) of the gas turbine engine 112 to a preselected RPM condition (to have the engine output torque drop to match the torque load on the engine – when the torques match then this is the preselected RMP condition) when the reduction of the load (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) is detected (via sensors 132), and returning the hybrid propulsion system 110 to normal operation once the gas turbine engine 112 reaches the preselected RPM condition (engine output torque drop matches the torque load on the engine); the loss of load is a disconnection (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) of the electrical generator 114 (first electric machine 114 fails) from the electrical power grid 120 and the slowing of the operation of the gas turbine engine prevents overspeed of the gas turbine engine 112 (prevent overspeed of the engine) due to the disconnection (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) ([0028, 0031-32, 0036, 0042, 0044; 0051-52]; Figs. 2-3. Hon teaches that rapid loss of a load leads to overspeed and the control system automatically takes corrective action to prevent it by slowing down the engine to a condition when the output torque matches the torque load on the engine. The controller is an EEC or ECU with FADEC and takes action quickly. Therefore, it is inherent that the controller will return the hybrid system 110 once the engine’s 112 output torque matches the engine torque.).
Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon, as discussed so far does not teach slowing operation of the gas turbine engine to a preselected RPM condition when the reduction of the load is detected by the voltage regulator.
However, Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon teaches a system controller 102, 132a-d, 130, 134, 136 operably connected to the gas turbine engine 112 and the voltage regulator 115. The gas turbine engine 112 comprising an electrical generator 114 , a voltage regulator 115 disposed downstream of the electrical generator 114, one or more electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d, an electrical power grid 120 configured to distribute the electrical power generated at least at the electrical generator 114 to the one or more electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d, and a voltage regulator 115 configured to take one or more actions (control and protection circuits to ensure performance under all conditions. This reads on one or more actions being taken) to compensate for a loss of load (loss of a winding of electric generator 114 or a complete loss of the electric generator 114) on the electrical generator 114, and detects the reduction of the load via Stitt’s one or more sensors 305, 310. Furthermore, the controller 102, 132a-d, 130, 134, 136 is configured to slow operation (reducing fuel flow to the engine to reduce the engine output torque) of the gas turbine engine 112 to a preselected RPM condition (to have the engine output torque drop to match the torque load on the engine – when the torques match then this is the preselected RMP condition) when the loss of load (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) is detected, and to return the hybrid propulsion system 110 to normal operation once the gas turbine engine 112 reaches the preselected RPM condition (engine output torque drop matches the torque load on the engine). Therefore, Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon’s system controller 102, 132a-d, 130, 134, 136 is capable of slowing operation of the gas turbine engine to a preselected RPM condition when the reduction of the load is detected by the voltage regulator, because it has been held that “apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co. v Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2114 II, and a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). See MPEP 2114 II. In this case, the claimed structure is identical to the applied prior art, and is found capable of operating in the claimed manner as discussed above, and therefore is unpatentable over Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the system controller 102, 132a-d of Klonowski in view of Stitt with Hon’s system controller 130, 134, 136 that slows operation (reducing fuel flow to the engine to reduce the engine output torque) of the gas turbine engine 112 to a preselected RPM condition (to have the engine output torque drop to match the torque load on the engine – when the torques match then this is the preselected RMP condition) when the reduction of the load (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) is detected (via sensors 132), and returning the hybrid propulsion system 110 to normal operation once the gas turbine engine 112 reaches the preselected RPM condition (engine output torque drop matches the torque load on the engine); the loss of load is a disconnection (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease) of the electrical generator 114 (first electric machine 114 fails) from the electrical power grid 120 and the slowing of the operation of the gas turbine engine prevents overspeed of the gas turbine engine 112 (prevent overspeed of the engine) due to the disconnection (rapid electrical load change may be load decrease), for the same reason as discussed in rejection of claim 1 above.
Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon does not teach each of the electrical generator and the one or more electrically-driven propulsors are switchably connectible and disconnectible from the electrical power grid via a plurality of switches operated by the system controller.
Sawata teaches a similar propulsion system 402 and
each of the electrical generator 106 (seen in Figs. 2 & 5) and the one or more electrically-driven propulsors 114 are switchably connectible and disconnectible (seen in Fig. 5) from the electrical power grid (grid seen in Fig. 5 comprised of 3 lines connecting generator and motor with switches 406, 404 on them) via a plurality of switches 406, 404 operated by the system controller 110 (labeled and seen in Fig. 2; seen in Fig. 5, but not labeled.) ([0040, 0061, 0076]; Figs. 2 & 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the series hybrid propulsion system 100 of Klonowski in view of Stitt and Hon to include Sawata’s plurality of switches 406, 406 and system controller 110, for the same reason as discussed in rejection of claim 1 above.
While Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches an apparatus, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered an obvious extension of prior art teachings.
Regarding Claim 13, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Klonowski further teaches
the one or more actions (control and protection circuits to ensure performance under all conditions. This reads on one or more actions being taken by voltage regulator 115) includes applying an emergency load (a transient resistive torque that is created) to the electrical generator 114 ([0080; 0098-103]; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 14, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 13, and Klonowski further teaches
the emergency load (a transient resistive torque that is created) is applied via a shunt circuit 200 (200 short-circuiting device is a shunt circuit) at the voltage regulator 115 ([0080; 0094-103]; Figs. 2 & 4. Voltage regulator 115 has control and protection circuits to ensure performance under all conditions, including a loss of load on the generator 114, this includes using a shunt circuit 200 that applies emergency load (a transient resistive torque that is created). The shunt circuit 200 is part of the voltage generator’s 115 protection circuits. Therefore, the shunt circuit 200 is at the voltage regulator 115, as claimed).
Regarding Claim 15, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the method as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Klonowski further teaches
the reduction of the load (a loss of a propeller 124a-d; propeller is the load) is determined by measuring one of a current (current 1114 of the generator) or a voltage (output voltage U114) at the electrical generator 114 ([0080; 0094]; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 16, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the method as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Klonowski further teaches
the reduction in load (a loss of a propeller 124a-d; propeller is the load) on the electrical generator 114 is due to one or more electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d (electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d is made up of electric motor 122a-d that drive the fan 124a-d; a loss of a propeller 124a-d means that electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d are disconnected) being disconnected from the electrical power grid 120 ([0089-90; 0094]; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 18, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the method as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Klonowski further teaches
the one or more electrically-driven propulsors 125a-d includes: a fan 124a-d; and an electric motor 122a-d configured to drive the fan 124a-d ([0090]; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 19, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the method as claimed and as discussed above for claim 18, and Klonowski further teaches
a motor controller 132a-d configured to control operation of the electric motor 122a-d ([0090]; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 20, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the method as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Klonowski further teaches
storing the electrical power (via element 206 configuration, seen in Fig. 5) generated at the electrical generator 114 at an energy storage system 126 operably connected to the electrical power grid 120 ([0091; 0119]; Fig. 5).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata, and further in view of Okland 2021/0245854.
Regarding Claim 10, Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Klonowski further teaches
an energy storage system 126 operably connected to the electrical power grid 120 configured to store the electrical power (via element 206 configuration; seen in Fig. 5) generated at the electrical generator 114 [0091; 0119]; Fig. 5).
Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata does not teach the energy storage system operably connected to the electrical power grid via a battery switch operated by the system controller.
Okland teaches
the energy storage system 114 operably connected to the electrical power grid 102,104,106 via a battery switch (switches SW) operated by the system controller (operated either automatically or manually – automatically is interpreted as inherently being a system controller, as claimed) ([0037,0040, 0052, 0061, 0094]; Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the series hybrid propulsion system 100 of Klonowski in view of Stitt, Hon, and Sawata to include Okland’s battery switch (switches SW) that connects the energy storage system 114 operably connected to the electrical power grid 102,104,106, in order to “allow each thruster, or other load component, to be disconnected from the power distribution grid in the event of a component failure” (Okland, [0040]).
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments, filed on 03/03/2026., with respect to 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims -2, 4-5, 8-11, 13-16, and 18-20 have been considered, but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new combination of references necessitated by Applicant’s Amendment. However, to the extent possible, Applicant’s arguments have been addressed in the body of the rejections at the appropriate locations.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACEK LISOWSKI whose telephone number is (408) 918-7635. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 10 am - 6 pm PST.
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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached on (571) 270-5426. 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.
/JACEK LISOWSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/PHUTTHIWAT WONGWIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights