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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-18 in the reply filed on 11/12/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “none of independent claims 1, 16, or 19 require either ‘a single barrier’ or ‘a plurality of teeth.’ Rather, all of claims 1, 16, and 19 recite an obstacle that is configured to ‘position in an extended position’ when a ‘pressure parameter is less than a parameter threshold’ and ‘position in a retracted position’ when the ‘pressure parameter is greater than or equal to the parameter threshold,’ that is configured to ‘extend at least a portion of the obstacle from the wall surface into the fluid flow flowing over the wall surface in the extended position,’ and that is configured to ‘retract the portion of the obstacle out of the fluid flow flowing over the wall surface in the retracted position,’ all of which are compatible with both ‘a single barrier’ and ‘a plurality of teeth.’”. Examiner finds these arguments persuasive as the art relied upon to teach independent claim 1 in the current office action can be relied upon to teach claim 19, and the art relied upon to teach claims 8 and 11 in the current office action can be relied upon to teach claim 20. Thus, the restriction requirement has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 10-15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Loukusa (US20160229540A1).
Regarding claim 1, Loukusa teaches
a system (system 400) comprising: a valve (fig. 4a-4b) comprising a gate (forward gate 405), wherein the gate is configured to contact a frame (aft gate 410) when the valve is in a closed position and configured to displace away from the frame when the valve is in an open position (“One or both of the gates 405 , 410 can be opened and closed to control cabin air pressure”) [0031], and wherein, in the open position, the valve defines a flow passage including an inflow portion of the flow passage (vent 450 left of trailing edge 405a on fig. 4a) and an outflow portion of the flow passage (vent 450 right of trailing edge 405a on fig. 4a), the inflow portion configured to receive a fluid flow and the outflow portion configured to discharge the fluid flow (as shown by direction of airflow on fig. 4a);
a wall surface, wherein the wall surface is configured to deliver the fluid flow to the inflow portion when the valve is in the open position and the fluid flow flows over the wall surface, and wherein the wall surface is configured to remain stationary with respect to the frame when the gate displaces from the frame (leading edge 410a; “One or both of the gates 405 , 410 can be opened and closed to control cabin air pressure” [0031], thus, leading edge 410a of aft gate 410 is configured to remain stationary during opening);
an obstacle (small flow disruptors 470, large flow disruptors 475) configured to position in an extended position and position in a retracted position (“the small flow disruptors 470 , large flow disruptors 475 , or some or all of both 470 , 475 can be moveable between a first, retracted position and a second, deployed position” [0039]), wherein the obstacle is configured to extend at least a portion of the obstacle from the wall surface into the fluid flow flowing over the wall surface in the extended position, and wherein the obstacle is configured to retract the portion of the obstacle out of the fluid flow flowing over the wall surface in the retracted position (as shown on fig. 4a); and control circuitry configured to:
determine a pressure parameter, wherein the pressure parameter is indicative of a pressure of the fluid flow at the inflow portion compared to a pressure of the fluid flow at the outflow portion, cause the obstacle to position in the extended position when the pressure parameter is less than a parameter threshold, and cause the obstacle to position in the retracted position when the pressure parameter is greater than or equal to the parameter threshold (“the large flow disruptors 475 can be deployed, for example, to quell tonal noise at lower differential pressures and then to retracted at higher differential pressures to improve flow efficiency, reduce broadband noise and, in some cases, increase thrust recovery” [0039]; via control system 500 comprising external (“atmospheric”) pressure sensor 505 and internal (“cabin”) pressure sensor 510)
Regarding claim 2, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 1,
further comprising the frame, wherein at least one of the gate or the frame are configured to define a convergent section of the flow passage, and wherein at least one of the gate or the frame are configured to define a divergent section of the flow passage, the convergent section configured to receive the fluid flow from the inflow portion and the divergent section configured to discharge the fluid flow to the outflow portion (as shown on fig. 4a, flow converges between 405 and 410 while diverging after exiting vent 450)
Regarding claim 3, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 1,
wherein the gate is configured to cause an acceleration of the fluid flow from a subsonic speed at the inflow portion to a supersonic speed at the outflow portion when the gate displaces away from the frame and the outflow portion discharges the fluid flow (as disclosed in [0005])
Regarding claim 4, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 1,
wherein the pressure parameter is indicative of a ratio of the pressure of the fluid flow at the inflow portion compared to the pressure of the fluid flow at the outflow portion (“the large flow disruptors 475 can be deployed, for example, to quell tonal noise at lower differential pressures and then to retracted at higher differential pressures to improve flow efficiency, reduce broadband noise and, in some cases, increase thrust recovery” [0039]; via control system 500 comprising external (“atmospheric”) pressure sensor 505 and internal (“cabin”) pressure sensor 510)
Regarding claim 6, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 1,
wherein the obstacle defines an obstacle surface configured to extend into the fluid flow when the fluid flow flows over the wall surface and the obstacle is in the extended position, and wherein the obstacle surface is configured to align with the wall surface when the fluid flow flows over the wall surface and the obstacle is in the retracted position (fig. 4c-4f)
Regarding claim 7, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 1,
wherein the obstacle is configured to rotate relative to the wall surface when the obstacle transitions between the extended position and the retracted position (“as shown in FIG. 7, for example, the flow disruptor 705 can be pivotally coupled to the forward gate 405 (or aft gate 410 ) with, for example and not limitation, a hinge, pin, or pivot arm 710”) [0051]
Regarding claim 10, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 1,
wherein the control circuitry is configured to: determine a cabin pressure in a cabin of an aircraft, determine an external pressure external to the aircraft, determine the pressure of the fluid flow at the inflow portion using the cabin pressure, and determine the pressure of the fluid flow at the outflow portion using the external pressure (via control system 500 comprising external (“atmospheric”) pressure sensor 505 and internal (“cabin”) pressure sensor 510)
Regarding claim 11, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 1,
further comprising an actuator system including a housing supporting a motor (servo motors 915, 920), wherein: the control circuitry is configured to command the actuator system to cause the obstacle to position in the extended position and command the actuator system to cause the obstacle to position in the retracted position, the actuator system is configured to cause the obstacle to position in the extended position using the motor and configured to cause the obstacle to position in the extended position using the motor (as described in [0053]), and the housing is configured to remain substantially stationary relative to at least one of the wall surface or the frame when the valve transitions between the open position and the closed position (servo motors 915, 920 configured as part of aft gate 410 as shown on fig. 9, thus will be stationary relative to aft gate 410 at all times)
Regarding claim 12, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 11,
further comprising the frame, wherein the housing is coupled to the frame (fig. 9), and wherein the housing is configured to remain substantially stationary relative to the frame when the valve transitions between the open position and the closed position (servo motors 915, 920 configured as part of aft gate 410 as shown on fig. 9, thus will be stationary relative to aft gate 410 at all times)
Regarding claim 13, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 1,
further comprising a driver (shafts 905, 910) configured to rotate about an axis relative to the wall surface, wherein the obstacle is configured to rotate synchronously with the driver, and wherein the driver is configured to transition the obstacle between the extended position and the retracted position when the driver rotates relative to the wall surface (described in [0053] and fig. 9)
Regarding claim 14, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 13,
wherein the gate is configured to move relative to the driver when the valve transitions between the open position and the closed position (shafts 905, 910 shown disposed on aft gate 410 on fig. 9, and are thus configured to move relative to forward gate 405 when the valve transitions between the open position and the closed position)
Regarding claim 15, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 1,
wherein the obstacle comprises a plurality of teeth (fig. 4c-4f), wherein each tooth in the plurality of teeth is configured to extend from the wall surface into the fluid flow when the obstacle positions in the extended position (as shown on fig. 7)
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is rejected in view of Loukusa by the same or substantially the same rationale as applied to claim 1, above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loukusa (US20160229540A1) in view of Tretow (US20170275012A1).
Regarding claim 5, Loukusa does not teach the system of claim 4,
wherein the ratio is indicative of the pressure of the fluid flow at the inflow portion divided by the pressure of the fluid flow at the outflow portion, and wherein the parameter threshold is indicative of a range of ratios that includes a ratio of about 1.87
Tretow teaches
wherein the ratio is indicative of the pressure of the fluid flow at the inflow portion divided by the pressure of the fluid flow at the outflow portion, and wherein the parameter threshold is indicative of a range of ratios that includes a ratio of about 1.87 (“the throat 408 provides a chocked flow (e.g., a fluid flow velocity of Mach 1) when the pressure differential between the cabin pressure and the ambient pressure is greater than 1.89” [0039]; ratio of 1.89 reads on a ratio of “about 1.87”)
Loukusa teaches “the large flow disruptors 475 can be deployed, for example, to quell tonal noise at lower differential pressures and then to retracted at higher differential pressures to improve flow efficiency, reduce broadband noise and, in some cases, increase thrust recovery” [0039], but does not disclose the ratio of low and high pressure differentials. However, [0005] of Loukusa describes “subsonic flow through the CPOV at lower pressure differentials” and “increased pressure differential increases the velocity of the flow, often to supersonic levels”; since [0039] of Tretow describes fluid flow velocity of Mach 1 when the pressure differential between the cabin pressure and the ambient pressure is greater than 1.89, this ratio can also be applied as the threshold for the low and high pressure differentials of Loukusa, which comprises a similar valve arrangement. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this ratio to the system of Loukusa, in order to apply a known threshold for balancing a reduction in broadband noise with flow efficiency.
Claim(s) 8-9, 16-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loukusa (US20160229540A1) in view of Horner (US20130059517A1).
Regarding claim 8, Loukusa does not teach the system of claim 1,
further comprising the frame, wherein the gate is pivotably attached to the frame
Horner teaches
further comprising the frame, wherein the gate is pivotably attached to the frame (“the forward door leading edge 254 may be configured to have a partial bell-mouth cross section shape and the forward seat 212, or at least a portion thereof, may be configured to have a reverse bell-mouth cross section shape. Thus, when the forward door section 226 is in the forward door closed position, the partial bell-mouth cross section shape of the forward door leading edge 254 mates with like shaped portion of the forward seat 212”; shown on fig. 6) [0029]
While Loukusa teaches forward gate 405 and aft gate 410 pivotably in contact with one another in a closed position, it does not teach wherein the forward gate 405 is pivotably attached to aft gate 410. Horner teaches forward door section 226 pivotably in contact with frame 202, wherein the configuration additionally describes the frame 202 comprising a seat 212 to complementary mate with forward door leading edge 254 in the closed position, thus reading on the “attached” configuration. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide this arrangement of Horner to forward gate 405 and aft gate 410 of Loukusa, in order to ensure a complete seal of the valve in the closed position.
Regarding claim 9, Loukusa, as modified, teaches the system of claim 8,
wherein the frame defines the wall surface (as shown on fig. 4b of Loukusa, leading edge 410a defined by aft gate 410)
Regarding claim 16, Loukusa teaches
a system (system 400) comprising: a frame (aft gate 410) defining a wall surface (leading edge 410a);
a valve (fig. 4a-4b) comprising a gate (forward gate 405), wherein the valve is configured to seat against the frame when the valve is in a closed position and configured to displace away from the frame when the valve is in an open position (“One or both of the gates 405 , 410 can be opened and closed to control cabin air pressure”) [0031],
wherein, when the valve is in the open position, the gate and the frame are configured to define a flow passage including an inflow portion of the flow passage configured to receive an fluid flow (vent 450 left of trailing edge 405a on fig. 4a) and an outflow portion of the flow passage configured to discharge the fluid flow (vent 450 right of trailing edge 405a on fig. 4a),
wherein the gate and the frame are configured to accelerate the fluid flow to a supersonic speed when the outflow portion discharges the fluid flow (as disclosed in [0005]), and
wherein the wall surface is configured to deliver the fluid flow to the inflow portion when the valve is in the open position and the fluid flow flows over the wall surface (leading edge 410a; “One or both of the gates 405 , 410 can be opened and closed to control cabin air pressure” [0031], thus, leading edge 410a of aft gate 410 is configured to remain stationary during opening);
an obstacle (small flow disruptors 470, large flow disruptors 475) configured to position in an extended position and configured to position in a retracted position (“the small flow disruptors 470 , large flow disruptors 475 , or some or all of both 470 , 475 can be moveable between a first, retracted position and a second, deployed position” [0039]), wherein the obstacle is configured to extend at least a portion of the obstacle from the wall surface into the fluid flow flowing over the wall surface in the extended position, and wherein the obstacle is configured to retract the portion of the obstacle out of the fluid flow flowing over the wall surface in the retracted position (as shown on fig. 4a); and;
an actuator system including a housing supporting a motor (servo motors 915, 920), the motor configured to cause the obstacle to position in the extended position and cause the obstacle to position in the retracted position (as described in [0053]), wherein the motor housing is coupled to the frame (on aft gate 410 as shown on fig. 9); and
control circuitry configured to: determine a pressure parameter, wherein the pressure parameter is indicative of a pressure of the fluid flow at the inflow portion compared to a pressure of the fluid flow at the outflow portion, command the actuator system to the motor to position the obstacle in the extended position when the pressure parameter is less than a parameter threshold, and command the actuator system to the motor to position the obstacle in the retracted position when the pressure parameter is greater than or equal to the parameter threshold (“the large flow disruptors 475 can be deployed, for example, to quell tonal noise at lower differential pressures and then to retracted at higher differential pressures to improve flow efficiency, reduce broadband noise and, in some cases, increase thrust recovery” [0039]; via control system 500 comprising external (“atmospheric”) pressure sensor 505 and internal (“cabin”) pressure sensor 510)
Loukusa does not teach
a gate pivotably coupled to the frame
Horner teaches
a gate pivotably coupled to the frame (“the forward door leading edge 254 may be configured to have a partial bell-mouth cross section shape and the forward seat 212, or at least a portion thereof, may be configured to have a reverse bell-mouth cross section shape. Thus, when the forward door section 226 is in the forward door closed position, the partial bell-mouth cross section shape of the forward door leading edge 254 mates with like shaped portion of the forward seat 212”; shown on fig. 6) [0029]
While Loukusa teaches forward gate 405 and aft gate 410 pivotably in contact with one another in a closed position, it does not teach wherein the forward gate 405 is pivotably coupled to aft gate 410. Horner teaches forward door section 226 pivotably in contact with frame 202, wherein the configuration additionally describes the frame 202 comprising a seat 212 to complementary mate with forward door leading edge 254 in the closed position, thus reading on the “coupled” configuration. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide this arrangement of Horner to forward gate 405 and aft gate 410 of Loukusa, in order to ensure a complete seal of the valve in the closed position.
Regarding claim 17, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 16,
wherein the control circuitry is configured to: determine a cabin pressure in a cabin of an aircraft, determine an external pressure external to the aircraft, determine the pressure of the fluid flow at the inflow portion using the cabin pressure, and determine the pressure of the fluid flow at the outflow portion using the external pressure (via control system 500 comprising external (“atmospheric”) pressure sensor 505 and internal (“cabin”) pressure sensor 510)
Regarding claim 18, Loukusa teaches the system of claim 16,
wherein the obstacle comprises a plurality of teeth (fig. 4c-4f), wherein each tooth in the plurality of teeth is configured to extend from the wall surface into the fluid flow when the obstacle is positioned in the extended position (as shown on fig. 7)
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 is rejected over Loukusa in view of Horner by the same or substantially the same rationale as applied to claims 8 and 11, above.
Conclusion
The prior art of record not relied upon includes:
Steinert (US20100291852A1), which teaches an outflow valve similar to the claimed valve system
Hoffman (US20040238046A1), which teaches a fluid control valve similar to the claimed valve system
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRETT P. MALLON whose telephone number is (571)272-4749. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 8am to 5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MICHAEL HOANG can be reached at (571)272-6460. 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.
/BRETT P. MALLON/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /MICHAEL G HOANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762