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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments on page 9, applicants argue “Seger fails to anticipate "storing the fault data in a generator memory unit installed locally in the generator." Examiner respectfully disagree because Seger FIG. 4 and (col. 6 line 57-col. 8 line 11 GBCM processor 64 store data and commands of the control module 24.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SEGER et al. USP 10000296 (hereinafter “SEGER”).
As to claim 20, SEGER teaches a method of exchanging data using a data-enabled aircraft generator module (claim 1 “second control module (26) positioned at a second location proximate the generator (22) and configured to regulate the at least one output of the generator (22), wherein the at least one output includes a voltage”), the method comprising: outputting, by a generator control unit (GCU) (claim 1 “first control module (24) positioned at a first location remote from the generator (22)”), at least one control signal (claim 1 “detect a fault condition of the generator” and col. 3 lines 52-67); generating electrical power from a generator included in the data-enabled aircraft generator module based at least in part on the at least one control signal (col. 7 lines 53-67 “outputs 66 include, for example, activation of aircraft 10 systems, such as lights and actuators, opening and closing contactors, providing commands and signals to the second control module 26 or the generator 22”); and generating fault data indicative of at least one fault occurring in the generator (claim 1 “first control module (24) positioned at a first location remote from the generator (22), the first control module (24) being configured to verify at least one output of the generator (22), detect a fault condition of the generator (22), and control operation of at least one power bus (32) in communication with the first control module (24)” and col. 2 line 28- col. 3 line 65); and storing the fault data in a generator memory unit installed locally in the generator (col. 6 line 57-col. 8 line 11 “main GBCM processor 64, for example only, may be any type of known microprocessor having desired performance characteristics. The first control module 24 may, for example only, include UVPROM, EEPROM, FLASH, RAM, ROM, DVD, CD, a hard drive, or other computer readable medium (not shown) which may store data and operation commands of the first control module 24”).
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.
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) 1 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROBAB et al. EP 2775457 (hereinafter “ROBAB”) in view of SEGER et al. USP 10000296 (hereinafter “SEGER”).
As to claim 1, ROBAB teaches a data-enabled aircraft generator module (paragraph 0021 “maintenance indication system”) comprising: a generator configured to power an aircraft based at least in part on at least one control signal output from a generator control unit (GCU) (FIG. 1 generator 120 with data lie 124 and paragraph 0020-0022); and a generator memory unit configured to exchange data with the GCU (paragraph 0021 “generator 120 may provide the data to the branch node 130 via a connection 124 (e.g., one or more wires). The branch node 130 may generate (e.g., determine) status information associated with the generator 120 based on the data provided to the branch node 130, as described with reference to FIG. 3 . In a particular embodiment, the branch node 130 collects data from the generator 120”).
However, Robab does not explicitly teach a generator memory unit installed locally in the generator.
However, SEGER teaches a generator memory unit installed locally in the generator (col. 6 line 57-col. 8 line 11 “main GBCM processor 64, for example only, may be any type of known microprocessor having desired performance characteristics. The first control module 24 may, for example only, include UVPROM, EEPROM, FLASH, RAM, ROM, DVD, CD, a hard drive, or other computer readable medium (not shown) which may store data and operation commands of the first control module 24”).
Robab and SEGER are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain overlapping structural and functional similarities. They both relate to aircraft generator system.
Therefore at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above aircraft generator system, as taught by Robab, and incorporating a generator memory unit installed locally in the generator, as taught by SEGER.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to improve monitoring, controlling to detect a variety of possible generator faults , such as an overvoltage condition , which could cause damage or a catastrophic loss to the aircraft, as suggested by SEGER (col. 1 lines 5-20).
As to claim 14, is related to claim 1 with similar limitations also rejected by same rational.
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.
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) 2-13 and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROBAB et al. EP 2775457 (hereinafter “ROBAB”) in view of SEGER et al. USP 10000296 (hereinafter “SEGER”) further in view of GIULIANO AU2015201505A1 (hereinafter “GIULIANO”).
As to claims 2 and 15, ROBAB and SEGER teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB and SEGER does not teach wherein the generator memory unit includes one or both of non-volatile memory (NVM) and Static Random-Access Memory (SRAM).
However, GIULIANO teaches wherein the generator memory unit includes one or both of non-volatile memory (NVM) and Static Random-Access Memory (SRAM) (paragraph 0014 “alternator capable of recording and saving alternator performance data; the alternator having; a micro controller, a software module integrated into control firmware of the microcontroller, and non volatile memory; wherein during operation of the alternator, performance data information is available to the software module, the non volatile memory storing said data”).
ROBAB, SEGER and GIULIANO are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and contain overlapping structural and functional similarities. They both relate to electrical power health monitoring system.
Therefore at the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the above electrical power health monitoring system, as taught by ROBAB and SEGER, and incorporating fault condition, as taught by GIULIANO.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to improve monitoring, performance in real time and during operation so that with knowledge of performance parameters, an operator can monitor alternator and associated machine performance, as suggested by GIULIANO (paragraph 0006).
As to claim 3, ROBAB and SEGER teaches all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB and SEGER does not teach further comprising a memory interface in signal communication with the generator memory unit, the memory interface configured to establish a data communication connection between the generator memory unit and the GCU to exchange the data.
However, GIULIANO teaches further comprising a memory interface in signal communication with the generator memory unit, the memory interface configured to establish a data communication connection between the generator memory unit and the GCU to exchange the data (FIG. 1 and paragraph 0019-0023 “control system 1 including a machine controller 18, a communications interface 19 between the machine controller 18”).
As to claim 4, ROBAB, SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the generator memory unit is configured to store performance metrics output from the GCU during a flight of the aircraft (paragraph 0084 “system 500 also enables distributed analysis of the performance data and other data to diagnose faults with the electrical system or to generate prognostic data that projects future problems with the electrical system”).
As to claim 5, ROBAB<SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the generator memory unit is configured to store fault data output from the GCU, the fault data indicative of at least one fault occurring in the generator (claim 9 “electrical system health data includes status information associated with a device of the electrical system, wherein the device of the electrical system is a generator, a generator control unit (GCU), a contactor, a relay, a load controller, a load, a feeder, a bus, or a combination thereof”).
As to claim 6, ROBAB, SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein at least one fault includes one or a combination of an overvoltage fault, an undervoltage fault, a short-circuit fault, an open-circuit fault, an overheating event, a rotor/stator imbalance, bearing wear, a phase imbalance, a frequency imbalance, and a voltage regulator failure (paragraph 0078-0080 “(e.g., node health data, such as load health data or load controller health data), power flow parameters in the distribution system (e.g., voltage, current, or frequency), usage parameters (e.g., operational time),information about the health of feeders and busses, other information, or a combination thereof”).
As to claim 7, ROBAB< SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the generator memory unit is configured to store aircraft identification data output from the GCU (paragraph 0078-0081 “FIG. 1 , to communicate the contactor health data, the node health data, the power flow parameters, the contactor usage data, the usage parameters, a feeder identifier (e.g., identifying a feeder, such as an electrical power cable or bus of the power distribution system, that the contactor 540A-E is coupled to), the other information, or the combination thereof to a branch node of the corresponding branch”).
As to claim 8, ROBAB, SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches further comprising at least one sensor configured to output at least one signal indicative of at least one measured parameter corresponding to the generator (paragraph 0021 “generator 120 may include one or more sensors”).
As to claim 9, ROBAB,SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the at least one measured parameter includes at least one of voltage level output, current level output, voltage output frequency, voltage output phase, component temperatures, fluid temperatures, load ratings, and rotational speed (paragraph 0078-0080 “information about the health of the node below the contactor (e.g., node health data, such as load health data or load controller health data), power flow parameters in the distribution system (e.g., voltage, current, or frequency), usage parameters (e.g., operational time),information about the health of feeders and busses, other information, or a combination thereof”).
As to claim 10, ROBAB,SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the memory interface is configured to establish a diagnostic data communication connection between the generator memory unit and a mobile diagnostic tool (paragraph 0053-0056 “processor 316 may process at least a portion of the first data packet 152. For example, the processor 316 may compare data (e.g., values) received from a first remote node to data (e.g., values) received from a second remote node, may mathematically or logically combine the values received from the first remote node and the values received from the second remote node, or a combination thereof”).
As to claim 11, ROBAB,SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the generator memory unit is configured to output one or a combination of the performance metrics, the fault data, and the aircraft identification data to the mobile diagnostic tool (paragraph 0053-0060 “memory 318 to diagnose a condition of a device associated with a remote node (e.g., to determine diagnostic data), to project a condition of the device associated with the remote node (e.g., to determine prognostic data), or both” and claim 9).
As to claim 12, ROBAB, SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the generator memory unit is configured to store maintenance data received from the mobile diagnostic tool (paragraph 0060-0065 “processor 416 may store the system health data (e.g., processed system health data) at the memory 418”).
As to claim 13, ROBAB, SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the maintenance data includes one or a combination of generator identification information, generator production information, maintenance work data, maintenance date and time information, and historical diagnostic data (paragraph 0028-0029 “faults of the electrical system 104 appear to originate at a particular component (e.g., based on an analysis of sensed data from multiple remote nodes), other diagnostic information (e.g., historical faults), or a combination thereof” and claims 7-9).
As to claim 16, ROBAB, SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the GCU is configured to determine at least one performance metric of the aircraft and to store the at least one performance metric in the generator memory unit (paragraph 0084 “system 500 also enables distributed analysis of the performance data and other data to diagnose faults with the electrical system or to generate prognostic data that projects future problems with the electrical system”).
As to claim 17, ROBAB, SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the GCU is configured to generate fault data indicative of at least one fault occurring in the generator, and is configured to store the fault data in the generator memory unit (claim 9 “electrical system health data includes status information associated with a device of the electrical system, wherein the device of the electrical system is a generator, a generator control unit (GCU), a contactor, a relay, a load controller, a load, a feeder, a bus, or a combination thereof”).
As to claim 18, ROBAB, SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches wherein the GCU is configured to store aircraft identification data associated with the aircraft in the generator memory unit (paragraph 0078-0081 “FIG. 1 , to communicate the contactor health data, the node health data, the power flow parameters, the contactor usage data, the usage parameters, a feeder identifier (e.g., identifying a feeder, such as an electrical power cable or bus of the power distribution system, that the contactor 540A-E is coupled to), the other information, or the combination thereof to a branch node of the corresponding branch”).
As to claim 19, ROBAB, SEGER and GIULIANO teach all the limitations of the base claims as outlined above.
ROBAB further teaches further comprising at least one sensor in signal communication with the GCU, wherein the at least one sensor is configured to output at least one signal indicative of at least one measured parameter corresponding to the generator (paragraph 0021-0023 “generator 120 may include one or more sensors”), and wherein the GCU is configured to store the at least one measured parameter in the generator memory unit (paragraph 0040-0042 “processed sensor data) to be stored in the memory 218”).
As to claim 20, SEGER, SEGER teaches a method of exchanging data using a data-enabled aircraft generator module (claim 1 “second control module (26) positioned at a second location proximate the generator (22) and configured to regulate the at least one output of the generator (22), wherein the at least one output includes a voltage”), the method comprising: outputting, by a generator control unit (GCU) (claim 1 “first control module (24) positioned at a first location remote from the generator (22)”), at least one control signal (claim 1 “detect a fault condition of the generator” and col. 3 lines 52-67); generating electrical power from a generator included in the data-enabled aircraft generator module based at least in part on the at least one control signal (col. 7 lines 53-67 “outputs 66 include, for example, activation of aircraft 10 systems, such as lights and actuators, opening and closing contactors, providing commands and signals to the second control module 26 or the generator 22”); and generating fault data indicative of at least one fault occurring in the generator (claim 1 “first control module (24) positioned at a first location remote from the generator (22), the first control module (24) being configured to verify at least one output of the generator (22), detect a fault condition of the generator (22), and control operation of at least one power bus (32) in communication with the first control module (24)” and col. 2 line 28- col. 3 line 65); and storing the fault data in a generator memory unit installed locally in the data-enabled aircraft generator module (col. 6 line 57-col. 8 line 11 “main GBCM processor 64, for example only, may be any type of known microprocessor having desired performance characteristics. The first control module 24 may, for example only, include UVPROM, EEPROM, FLASH, RAM, ROM, DVD, CD, a hard drive, or other computer readable medium (not shown) which may store data and operation commands of the first control module 24”).
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
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.
Walker et al USPGPUB 20050187677 A1 a Protected Primary Focal Node PFN is a Trusted Remote Activity Controller TRAC and mobile communication router platform that provides accountable remote and robotics control to transportation vehicles by interfacing with the vehicles E/E systems. It connects each vehicle either on the earth's surface or near the earth's surface with application specific intranets for air, sea and land travel, via either host commercial servers or agency providers through wireless communication gateways and then further interfaces these vehicles in a larger machine messaging matrix via wireless and IP protocols to further coordinate movement assess and manage equipment use and impact on the world resources, societies infrastructure and the environment. This filing focuses directly on PFN/TRAC System use to augment and upgrade public safety and security in the Airline Industry and restrict any unauthorized use of an aircraft. Additionally, this application and related filings teaches the PFN/TRAC System.TM. use for all vehicle platforms to increase safety and security in a free society like the United State of America. The other related filings instruct in the technology's use for robust and accountable remote control for personal applications, stationary equipment and standalone functions, and coordinates them and interfaces them within the communication matrix.
Morrison USPGPUB 20220315223 A1 teaches mobile emergency communication and vehicle propulsion power system, method, and apparatus for full-scale, clean fuel, electric-powered vehicles having a fuel cell module including a plurality of fuel cells working together to process oxidizers including gaseous oxygen from the atmosphere or local oxygen supply and fuels including gaseous hydrogen from liquid hydrogen, to collect electrons from the plurality of hydrogen fuel cells to supply voltage and current to and control an amount and distribution of electrical voltage or current for use in collecting and amplifying communications signals to function as a cell site repeater and for propulsion systems of the vehicle itself. The system can accordingly be deployed at a location to provide wireless communication functionality in remote areas or areas cut off due to natural disaster.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZIAUL KARIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3279. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8:00-4:00 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mohammad Ali can be reached on 571 272 4105. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ZIAUL KARIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119
Prosecution Insights