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 § 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) 1-11,13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dray(GB2513646A).
[claim 1] Dray teaches a cargo hook device(10) with a housing(20) that is adapted for attachment to a rotorcraft(pg 1, lines 2-3), wherein the housing accommodates at least partly: a cargo hook(30) that is adapted for carrying a cargo in a closed position(fig 3) and that is rotatable between the closed position and an open position(fig 6); and a cargo hook blocking and releasing mechanism(50,60) that is adapted for blocking, in a locked state(fig 3), the cargo hook in the closed position and for releasing, in a released state(fig 6), the cargo hook to enable rotation of the cargo hook between the closed position and the open position, wherein the cargo hook blocking and releasing mechanism comprises: a blocking arm(50,52) that blocks, in the locked state, movement of the cargo hook, an activatable locking lever(62) that blocks, in the locked state, movement of the blocking arm(fig 3), and an activatable safety locking device(70) that blocks, in the locked state, movement of one of the cargo hook, the blocking arm, or the activatable locking lever; wherein the activatable locking lever and the activatable safety locking device are activatable independently one from the other(locking lever activatable by lever 68 or solenoid in housing 25, safety locking device activatable by projection 80).
[claim 2] wherein the cargo hook is rotatably mounted to the housing by means of a cargo hook rotation shaft(33).
[claim 3] wherein the blocking arm is rotatably mounted to the housing by means of a blocking arm rotation shaft(51).
[claim 4] wherein the blocking arm comprises a first bearing(54) that abuts, in the locked state, against the cargo hook to block movement of the cargo hook.
[claim 5] wherein the blocking arm comprises a second bearing(56) that abuts, in the locked state, against the activatable locking lever to block movement of the blocking arm(fig 3).
[claim 6] wherein the activatable locking lever is rotatably mounted to the housing by means of a locking lever rotation shaft(61).
[claim 7] wherein the cargo hook blocking and releasing mechanism comprises at least one locking lever actuator(either solenoid in housing 25 or lever 68, pg 10 L21-24) for actuating the activatable locking lever.
[claim 8] wherein the cargo hook blocking and releasing mechanism comprises at least a main locking lever actuator(solenoid in housing 25) and a redundant locking lever actuator(manual lever 68) for actuating the activatable locking lever, wherein the main locking lever actuator and the redundant locking lever actuator are operable independent from each other.
[claim 9] wherein the activatable safety locking device comprises a movable safety element(70).
[claim 10] wherein the activatable safety locking device comprises a spring element(74( that biases the movable safety element into a blocking position.
[claim 11] wherein the cargo hook blocking and releasing mechanism comprises at least one safety locking device actuator(projection 80) for actuating the activatable safety locking device.
[claim 13] Dray further teaches a rotorcraft with a fuselage(pg 1 L2-3) and the cargo hook device according to claim 1, as detailed above, that is mounted to the fuselage.
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.
Claim(s) 12,14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dray as applied to claims 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Hainsworth et al.(US5850991).
[claim 12] Dray teaches a cargo hook device as detailed above, wherein the cargo hook blocking and releasing mechanism comprises at least a main safety locking device actuator(projection 80) for actuating the activatable safety locking device. Dray however does not teach a redundant safety locking device actuator that is operable independent of the main safety locking device actuator.
Hainsworth teaches a similar cargo hook device and further teaches two separate actuators operable independent of each other(ABS, C3 L1-12). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to use a separate independent redundant actuator with the cargo hook device of Dray, a taught by Hainsworth, as this would have the predictable effective of providing a back up or alternative means of operating the safety locking device actuator.
[claim 14] Dray in view of Hainsworth as applied above teaches a rotorcraft wherein the cargo hook blocking and releasing mechanism of the cargo hook device comprises at least a main safety locking device actuator and a redundant safety locking device actuator for actuating the activatable safety locking device, wherein the main safety locking device actuator and the redundant safety locking device actuator are operable independent from each other. Hainsworth further teaches wherein a first operating element for operating the main safety locking device actuator is provided on a first control element(in cockpit of the aircraft, see ABS) of the rotorcraft, and wherein a second operating element for operating the redundant safety locking device actuator is provided on a second control element(in cabin or aircraft, see ABS, C3 L1-12) of the rotorcraft.
[claim 15] Dray in view of Hainsworth teaches a rotor craft as detailed above, with the two separate operating elements for independently operating the main safety locking device actuator and redundant safety locking device actuator are on two separate control elements, and may not teach that the two separate operating elements are provided together on a single control element of the rotorcraft. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date to provide operating elements for the main and redundant safety locking device actuators on the same single control element, as this would merely be using known elements for their known functions, and would provide additional back up control means to a user of the cargo hook device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US8016333, US20050258658, US5887924, US5836548, US5836548, US4530535, US3630562, US3575459, US3533655, US3243219, US3174790, US3016257.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY H DUCKWORTH whose telephone number is (571)272-2304. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 5712724979. 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.
/BRADLEY DUCKWORTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights