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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Saville et al (US Patent 5535784 herein after Saville).
Regarding Claim 1, Saville shows an aircraft comprising: a fuselage (12), at least one tank for storing waste water (column 7 lines 10-11), and a drainage device (16, 28) for the at least one tank comprising a drainage duct that has an upstream end configured to open into the tank and a downstream end to which a discharge duct (30) is configured to be connected (column 7 lines 7-12), a drainage valve (18) positioned between the upstream and downstream ends of the drainage duct (column 7 lines 10-18), a housing (10) dimensioned to house at least the downstream end of the drainage duct (Fig.6), and a hatch (18) configured to move between an open position (Fig.7) in which the hatch opens the housing and a closed position (Fig.6) in which the hatch closes the housing, the hatch comprising an inner face (68) oriented toward the drainage duct when the hatch is in the closed position (Fig.6) and an outer face (38) opposite the inner face and positioned to extend the fuselage when the hatch is in the closed position (Fig.6), wherein the hatch comprises a liquid store (34) positioned on the inner face thereof (Fig.7), into which the drainage duct opens when the hatch is in the closed position, the liquid store configured to collect and store any liquid coming out of the drainage duct (column 7 lines 37-45). Wherein the hatch (18) and the liquid store (34) are integrally formed as a single part (Figs.1 & 7).
Regarding claim 2, Saville shows the aircraft as claimed in claim 1, wherein the liquid store comprises at least one lateral wall (see annotated figure below) that extends along a closed perimeter (see annotated figure below) between a lower edge (see annotate figure below) joined to the inner face of the hatch and an upper edge (39 or see annotated figure below) remote from the inner face of the hatch.
PNG
media_image1.png
673
858
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, Saville shows the aircraft as claimed in claim 2, wherein the lateral wall has a height (see annotated figure below), corresponding to a distance between the lower and upper edges (39 or see annotated figure below) thereof, such that the downstream end of the drainage duct is positioned between the inner face of the hatch and a surface containing the upper edge of the lateral wall (Fig.6).
PNG
media_image2.png
673
858
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4, Saville shows the aircraft as claimed in claim 2, wherein the upper edge (39) of the lateral wall is positioned in a substantially horizontal plane when the hatch is in the closed position (Fig. 6a).
Regarding Claim 5, Saville shows the aircraft as claimed in claim 2, wherein the closed perimeter followed by the lateral wall is remote and separate from the drainage duct (they are two separate pieces; Fig.7).
Regarding Claim 6, Saville shows the aircraft as claimed in claim 2, wherein the closed perimeter followed by the lateral wall has a section very slightly larger than the section of the drainage duct (the lateral wall surrounds the drainage duct; Fig.6a).
Regarding Claim 7, Saville shows the aircraft as claimed in claim 2, wherein the liquid store comprises a bottom (see annotated figure below) joined to the lateral wall about the entire closed perimeter.
PNG
media_image3.png
673
858
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8, Saville shows the aircraft as claimed in claim 7, wherein the bottom is positioned in a first plane substantially parallel to a second plane containing the downstream end of the drainage duct when the hatch is in the closed position (Fig.6).
Regarding Claim 9, Saville shows the aircraft as claimed in claim 8, wherein the bottom is positioned so as to be pressed against the downstream end of the drainage duct when the hatch is in the closed position (Fig.6)
Regarding Claim 10, Saville shows the aircraft as claimed in claim 1, wherein the drainage device further comprises a ring joint (58) interposed between the drainage duct and the liquid store when the hatch is in the closed position (Fig.6A).
11. (New) An aircraft comprising:
a fuselage (12),
at least one tank for storing waste water (column 7 lines 10-11), and
a drainage device (16, 28) for the at least one tank comprising a drainage duct that has an upstream end configured to open into the at least one tank and a downstream end to which a discharge duct is configured to be connected,
a drainage valve (18) positioned between the upstream and downstream ends of the drainage duct (column 7 lines 10-18),
a housing (10) dimensioned to house at least the downstream end of the drainage duct (Fig.6), and
a hatch (18) configured to move between an open position (Fig.7) in which the hatch opens the housing and a closed position (Fig.6) in which the hatch closes the housing, the hatch comprising an inner face (68) oriented toward the drainage duct when the hatch is in the closed position and an outer face (38) opposite the inner face and positioned to extend the fuselage when the hatch is in the closed position (Fig.6),
wherein the hatch comprises a liquid store (34) positioned on the inner face thereof (Fig.7), into which the drainage duct opens when the hatch is in the closed position, the liquid store configured to collect and store any liquid coming out of the drainage duct (column 7 lines 37-45).
wherein the liquid store comprises at least one lateral wall (see annotated figure below) that extends along a closed perimeter (see annotated figure below) between a lower edge (see annotated figure below) joined to the inner face of the hatch and an upper edge (see annotated figure below) remote from the inner face of the hatch,
wherein the liquid store comprises a bottom (see annotated figure below) joined to the lateral wall about the entire closed perimeter (see annotated figure below), and
wherein the bottom of the liquid store is the inner face (opposite side of 38) of the hatch.
PNG
media_image3.png
673
858
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
673
858
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/4/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the limitation “the hatch and the liquid store are integrally formed as a single piece” is not shown by the cited prior art. The examiner disagrees. Saville teaches a hatch and a liquid store are integrally formed as a single piece as illustrated below. Saville further disclosed the means (34) for preventing external leakage and therefore is a liquid store to hold liquid to prevent leaking (column 7 lines 37-40. 50-55).
PNG
media_image4.png
600
704
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAUREN ASHLEY CRANE whose telephone number is (571)270-5198. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays & Tuesdays 8 am - 4pm.
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, David Angwin can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
/LAUREN A CRANE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights