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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the term "optional" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claims 2-8 are rejected merely due to their dependency from Claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 10, 12, 15, 17, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by European Patent No. EP 1080009 to Salamat et al.
Regarding Claim 10, Salamat et al disclose a hydraulic brake system for activating wheel brakes of an aircraft (see column 1 paragraph 0001) having all the features of the instant invention including: a supply line (see Figure 14 and the supply line for ball 50 as described in paragraph 0032) for supplying hydraulic fluid to one or more brakes, which are arranged, under action of the hydraulic fluid, to apply a braking force to one or more wheels of an aircraft landing gear assembly of the aircraft (see paragraphs 0015, 0016 and 0022), a return line (see Figure 14 and the line for ball 53 as described in paragraph 0032), and a control unit 172/178 to operate in each of separate and distinct modes of operation (see Claim 19 of the reference and paragraph 0056) of: a first mode of increasing a pressure and/or volume of hydraulic fluid in at least a portion of the return line without simultaneously activating the wheel brakes (see paragraph 0032, wherein when solenoid valve 48 is not energized, its control port is connected to the return line and its volume is increased without activating the wheel brakes), and a second mode of causing activation of the wheel brakes (see paragraph 0032, wherein when solenoid valve 48 is energized, braking occurs).
Regarding Claim 12, Salamat et al further disclose that the control unit 172/178 is configured to operate in a third separate and distinct mode of operation in which the control unit causes a test of the brake system to be performed (see Claim 31 of the reference).
Regarding Claim 15, Salamat et al further disclose that the control unit 172/178 is configured to operated one or more valves 48,58 of the hydraulic brake system when in the first mode of operation and to operate one or more valves 48, 58 of the hydraulic brake system in a different way when in the second mode of operation (see paragraph 0032).
Regarding Claim 17, Salamat et al further disclose a control unit 172/178 configured to operate in each of a first mode and a second mode of operation in accordance with the control unit of Claim 10.
Regarding Claim 19, Salamat et al further disclose a computer program product comprising instructions which, when the program is executed by a suitable programmable control unit 172/178, cause a control unit to be in accordance with he control unit of Clam 17.
Regarding Claim 20, see paragraph 0001.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 11 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over European Patent No. EP 1080009 to Salamat et al.
Regarding Claim 11, Salamat et al disclose most all the features of the instant invention as applied above, and further including that the hydraulic brake system comprises a means to alert the control unit 172/178 of a potential fault in the hydraulic system.
However, Salamat et al do not disclose that the means to alert the control unit is a hydraulic fuse, so that when the fuse trips, it alerts the control unit of a potential fault in the hydraulic system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the hydraulic brake system of Salamat et al with a hydraulic fuse, which when the fuse trips, alerts the control unit of a potential fault in the hydraulic system as an alternate means of indicating a fault in the system. A hydraulic fuse is a well known means used to restrict or shut off fluid flow when a surge is detected so as to protect against total system failure by preventing massive fluid loss while ensuring remaining functioning components of the system continue to operate normally, which would not be beyond the realm of one of ordinary skill in the art to employ.
Regarding Claim 13, see Claims 11 and 12 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8, 16, and 18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding independent Claim 1 (and its respective dependent Claims 2-8, 16, and 18), while U.S. Patent No. 2,377,115 to Van Der Werff disclose a method of operating a brake system of an aircraft, the brake system comprising a supply line for supplying hydraulic fluid to one or more brakes, which are arranged, under action of the hydraulic fluid, to apply a braking force to one or more wheels of an aircraft landing gear assembly of the aircraft, and a return line for return of hydraulic fluid from the one or more brakes, the method also comprising the step of increasing pressure and/or volume of hydraulic fluid in at least a portion of the return line, Van Der Werff do not disclose the step of increasing pressure and/or volume of hydraulic fluid in at least a portion of the return line both a) before initiating a subsequent step of activating the brake system to apply a braking force to the one or more wheels of the aircraft during landing, and b) before an intervening step of performing a test of the brake system before landing of the aircraft (see also the 112 rejection above).
Claim 9 is allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding Claim 9, while European Patent No. EP 1080009 to Salamat et al disclose a method of initializing a braking system of an aircraft before being used to cause braking of wheels of the aircraft on landing, the aircraft having a first hydraulic system to power various parts of an aircraft including one or more control surfaces and one or more wheel brakes, and a second hydraulic system, provided as an alternate system which provides redundancy, the second hydraulic system being configured to power various parts of the aircraft including one or more control surfaces and one or more wheel brakes, Salamat et al do not disclose that the method also comprises increasing in situ a volume and/or pressure of the hydraulic fluid in a return line of the second hydraulic system from a supply of hydraulic fluid on the aircraft in advance of testing the second hydraulic system before landing of the aircraft.
Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
PG Publication No. 2024/0140382 to Bidmead et al., U.S. Patent No. 12,344,205 to Bidmead et al., and British Patent No. GB 2563675 to Howell et al all disclose methods of operating brake systems of aircraft similar to applicant’s..
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7 AM - 5 PM.
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, Robert Siconolfi can be reached at 571-272-7124. 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.
PAMELA RODRIGUEZ
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3616
/PAMELA RODRIGUEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3616 02/18/26