DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8 December 2025 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
The term “porosity” will be interpreted as synonymous with “permeability”, in light of [0023] of the applicant’s disclosure.
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) 1-4 and 6-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu (CN 116 280 164; provided English translation used).
Regarding independent claims 1 and 14, and claims 2, 4, 6, and 17:
Liu discloses a vehicle comprising:
a body extending from a nose section (e.g. Fig 1) to a tail (inherent to the aircraft), the nose terminating at a tip (as seen in Fig 1), and a body centerline axis (central axis), the nose comprising:
an outer wall having an outer surface, inner surface, outer wall centerline and a thickness (as seen in e.g. Fig 1, the centerline being the line midway between the inner and outer surfaces), a flared cross-section such that the local thickness is greater than the tip thickness (as seen in e.g. Fig 1, the wall thickness increases toward the rear); and
a porous material (1, 2, 3) provided along at least a portion of the outer wall wherein the nose permeability/porosity is non-equal to the local porosity (page 5, last para – page 6, first para), and a non-porous tail (as seen in Figs 1 and 6, the rear portion starting at the unnumbered bulkhead is depicted as non-porous).
The differing thickness of the nose/materials renders a non-equal porosity at the local thickness than the tip.
Regarding claims 3, 7, 8, 15, and 18:
The discussion above regarding claims 1, 6, 14, and 17 is relied upon.
Liu discloses the heat flux, permeability, and thickness equations, as these are simply mathematical formulas defining the physics of the system provided (heat flux is a function of permeability and thickness, which can be re-ordered to solve for thickness or permeability), as a ratio between the nose and tip locations (since the nose is thinner and porosity differs, there will be a ratio with respect to the thicker portions).
Regarding claims 9 and 16:
The discussion above regarding claims 6 and 14 is relied upon.
Liu discloses the permeability of the nose larger than the local permeability (page 5, para 6 – page 6, para 1).
Regarding claim 10:
The discussion above regarding claim 6 is relied upon.
Liu discloses the nose having local permeabilities that are equal or non-equal to each other, as this covers all possible values.
Regarding claims 11 and 20:
The discussion above regarding claims 5 and 14 is relied upon.
Liu discloses a cooling circuit (7, 9, et al.) at least partially defined by the nose interior and exhausting through the porous material (page 6, para 3).
Regarding claims 12, 13, and 19:
The discussion above regarding claims 1 and 14 is relied upon.
Liu discloses a hypersonic vehicle (page 2, para 2; note: the background indicates the invention is an improvement for this type of craft), which is a type of supersonic vehicle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s argument that Liu does not disclose a transition to a non-porous tail, Liu depicts a transition to a non-porous tail starting at the unnumbered aft bulkhead (e.g. Figs 1 and 6).
In response to applicant’s argument that Liu does not disclose a vehicle, Liu explicitly discloses such (e.g. Technical Field).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph W Sanderson whose telephone number is (571)272-6337. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 6-3 ET.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached on 571-270-3614. 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.
/JOSEPH W SANDERSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619