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.
Claims 1-5 and 7-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Surawski et al. (U.S. 2014/0345700). Surawski et al. teaches a flow regulation and protection system at 10 configured to be coupled in fluid communication with a supply line 16 of an oxygen-depleted air system that supplies oxygen-depleted air to a fuel tank of an aircraft (paragraph [0008]), the flow regulation and protection system comprising an OPP-FCV 26 configured to be coupled in fluid communication with the supply line 16 of the oxygen-depleted air system at a point along the supply line upstream from the fuel tank 12 (figure 1), the OPP-FCV 26 selectively adjustable to regulate a flow of the oxygen-depleted air through the supply line and supplied to the fuel tank and to restrict or prevent the flow of the oxygen-depleted air along the supply line to prevent over pressurization of the fuel tank (paragraph [0011]).
Regarding claim 2, the OPP-FCV 26 is configured to control the flow of the oxygen-depleted air in the supply line without venting the oxygen-depleted air from the supply line (see last 6 lines of paragraph [0011]) and paragraphs [0012] and [0013]).
Regarding claim 3, the OPP-FCV 26 is configured to regulate the flow of the oxygen-depleted air based on a difference between an atmospheric pressure and a supply line pressure upstream from the fuel tank {paragraphs [0012]-[0013]).
Regarding claim 4, a pressure sense line 32 configured to be coupled in fluid communication with the supply line 36 from a pressure sense point between the OPP-FCV and the fuel tank 12 (figure 1), the pressure sense line 32 being coupled in fluid communication with the OPP-FCV 26 such that the OPP-FCV is configured to sense the supply line pressure through the pressure sense line.
Regarding claim 5, the OPP-FCV 26 comprises an integrated pressure sense point 36 that is configured to be coupled in fluid communication with the supply line 16 within the OPP-FCV configured to sense supply line pressure downstream of an OPP-FCV seat (figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, a controller 34 comprising processing circuitry and configured to receive inputs comprising a supply line pressure at one or more points along the supply line, an atmospheric pressure, a mass flow rate of the oxygen-depleted air at one or more points along the supply line, and an operating state of the aircraft, the controller configured to adjust the OPP-FCV based on the inputs (34; paragraph [0011]).
Regarding claim 8, the controller 34 is configured to receive one or more of the inputs from the aircraft through a communications bus of the aircraft (paragraph [0013]).
Regarding claim 9, the controller 34 is configured to perform testing of the system when the aircraft is in one of a plurality of predetermined operating states (paragraph [0013]).
Regarding claim 10, Surawski et al. teaches a flow regulation and protection system 10 configured to be coupled in fluid communication with a supply line 16 of an Oxygen-Depleted Air Distribution System (ODAS) (22; paragraph [0009]) that supplies oxygen-depleted air to a fuel tank of an aircraft, the flow regulation and protection system comprising an OPP-FCV 26 configured to be coupled in fluid communication with the supply line at a point upstream from the fuel tank (figure 1), the OPP-FCV comprising a valving unit 26, a line pressure sensing element 28 located in the supply line 16 downstream from the OPP-FCV (paragraphs [0011]-[0012]), a controller 34 comprising processing circuitry configured to determine inputs comprising a supply line pressure sensed by the line pressure sensing element at one or more points along the supply line (paragraphs [0012]-[0013]), an atmospheric pressure, a mass flow rate of the oxygen-depleted air at one or more points along the supply line, and an operating state of the aircraft; and the controller configured to adjust the valving unit based on the inputs to control the flow of the oxygen-depleted air through the supply line and prevent over pressurization of the fuel tank (paragraphs [0012]-[0014]).
Regarding claim 11, the OPP-FCV 26 comprises a body with the controller integrated in the body (integrated means connected or linked therefor the controller is electrically connected to valve 26).
Regarding claim 12, a pressure sense line integrated with the body and configured to be coupled in fluid communication with the supply line 16, the controller configured to sense the supply line pressure at the OPP-FCV through the integrated pressure sense line (paragraph [0010]).
Regarding claim 13, one or more line pressure sensing elements mounted to the body (paragraphs [0011]-[0013]).
Regarding claim 14, the controller is configured to determine a difference between the supply line pressure and the atmospheric pressure (“configured to detect a pressure differential between a supply line pressure and an ambient pressure outside of the supply line 16”; paragraph [0010]).
Regarding claim 15, the fuel tank 12 is a first fuel tank and the OPP-FCV is configured to be mounted along the supply line 16 upstream from a junction of the supply line that supplies the oxygen- depleted air to the fuel tank and one or more additional fuel tanks and wherein the controller is configured to adjust the valving unit based on the inputs to control the flow of the oxygen-depleted air to each of the fuel tanks and to prevent over pressurization of each of the fuel tanks (paragraphs [0008]-[0009]).
Regarding claim 16, the controller 34 is configured to receive one or more of the inputs from the aircraft through a communications bus of the aircraft and compute the mass flow rate and an overpressure set point based on the one or more inputs (paragraphs [0011]-[0014]).
Regarding claim 17, the controller is configured to perform testing of the system when the aircraft is in one of a plurality of predetermined operating states and report test results through a communications bus to the aircraft (paragraph [0014]).
Regarding claim 18, Surawski et al. teaches a method of regulating a flow of oxygen-depleted air from an oxygen-depleted air distribution system to a fuel tank of an aircraft and to prevent over-pressurizing the fuel tank (paragraph [0008]), the method comprising coupling an OPP-FCV 26 in fluid communication with a supply line 16 of the oxygen-depleted air distribution system at a point along the supply line that is upstream from the fuel tank (figure 1), operating the OPP-FCV and controlling a flow rate of the oxygen-depleted air moving along the supply line; and operating the OPP-FCV and preventing a pressure within the fuel tank from exceeding an over- pressure protection limit (paragraphs [0011]-[0015]).
Regarding claim 19, operating the OPP-FCV without venting the oxygen-depleted air (see last 6 lines of paragraph [0011]) and paragraphs [0012] and [0013]).
Regarding claim 20, closing the OPP-FCV and preventing the oxygen- depleted air from passing along the supply line (see last 6 lines of paragraph [0011]).
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Surawski et al. (U.S. 2014/0345700) in view of Tichborne et al. (U.S. 2014/0238501). Surawski et al. does not specifically disclose a mass flow sensor coupled to the supply line. Tichborne et al. teaches an inerting system wherein a supply line includes a mass flow sensor (see element 38). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the system of Surawski et al. to include a mass flow sensor, as taught by Tichborne et al., as another method of monitoring flow conditions through the system.
Further regarding claim 6, one or more atmospheric pressure sensing elements configured to sense an atmospheric pressure (“configured to detect a pressure differential between a supply line pressure and an ambient pressure outside of the supply line 16”; paragraph [0010]), one or more line pressure sensing elements configured to sense a pressure within the supply line (“configured to detect a pressure differential between a supply line pressure and an ambient pressure outside of the supply line 16”; paragraph [0010]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art is cited for the valve system.
THIS ACTION IS NON-FINAL.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIKI MARINA ELOSHWAY whose telephone number is (571)272-4538. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 7: 00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m..
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, Orlando E. Avilés can be reached at 571-270-5531. 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.
/NIKI M ELOSHWAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3736