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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 7, 8, and 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Reed (US 2008/0087039), which shows all of the claimed limitations. Reed shows:
1. A galley water heating system for heating water of a water supply system of an aircraft galley 12, comprising: a galley water supply system 20 which comprises water bearing parts 22,24,40,72; a fresh air piping system comprising an air inlet 54 located at one end of the fresh air piping system; a first air outlet 94 for supplying fresh air to an aircraft cabin, wherein the first air outlet is located at another end of the fresh air piping system (fig. 1); and a second air outlet 52 located in relation to the galley water supply system such that fresh air can flow at least in sections against predetermined water bearing parts of the galley water supply system (fig. 1).
7. The galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined water bearing parts (sink and toilet) are enclosed in a compartment of an aircraft galley which is fluidly connected to the second air outlet 52 of the fresh air piping system (fig. 1).
8. The galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein the fresh air piping system, the air inlet and the second air outlet are configured to have an air flow rate adapted to a predetermined amount of thermal convection needed at the predetermined water bearing parts of the galley water supply system being flowed against for keeping water temperature above a freezing point (inherent for keeping the water from freezing).
10. An aircraft galley comprising a galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein fresh air supplied by the second air outlet 52 provides a thermal energy (heat) to the predetermined water bearing parts 40 of the galley water supply system by thermal convection on a surface of the galley water supply system (fig. 1).
11. The aircraft galley according to claim 10, further comprising a compartment 12 which encloses the predetermined water bearing parts of the galley water supply system, wherein the compartment is fluidly connected to the second air outlet 52 (fig. 1).
12. The aircraft galley according to claim 11, wherein the compartment comprises an opening for releasing fresh air stored in the compartment (inherent – fig. 1).
13. The aircraft galley according to claim 12, wherein the opening of the compartment is fluidly connected to the first air outlet of the fresh air piping system (everything is fluidly connected between the various compartments).
14. The aircraft galley according to claim 11, wherein the compartment comprises a drain hole 94 (outflow valve inherently includes a hole) for releasing fresh air in case pressure inside the compartment exceeds a predetermined threshold pressure (fig. 1).
15. An aircraft with an aircraft galley according to claim 10 (Abstract).
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reed (US 2008/0087039) in view of Seewang (US 2018/0338666).
Reed discloses substantially all of the claimed limitations as described above, but fails to explicitly teach the claimed water filter.
Seewang, in the same or related field of endeavor (i.e., aircraft water supply), teaches that it is known in the art to provide a water filter (para. 0043).
** teaches that such an arrangement provides for weight reduction (para. 0043).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention incorporate the filter as taught by Seewang into the invention disclosed by Reed, so as to provide for weight reduction.
Claims 3-6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reed (US 2008/0087039) in view of Vue (US 2016/0096628).
Reed discloses substantially all of the claimed limitations as described above, but fails to explicitly recite:
3. The galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein the air inlet is configured as a coupling interface for fluidly connecting the fresh air piping system to a fresh air supply system of an aircraft.
4. The galley water heating system according to claim 3, wherein the coupling interface comprises a bifurcation element which is configured to divide a fresh air flow, wherein one branch supplies fresh air to the first air outlet and another branch supplies fresh air to the second air outlet.
5. The galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein the fresh air piping system comprises a bifurcation element which is configured to divide a fresh air flow, wherein one branch supplies fresh air to the first air outlet and another branch supplies fresh air to the second air outlet.
6. The galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein the first air outlet is configured as an adjustable nozzle for providing an adjustable amount of fresh air to an aircraft cabin.
9. The galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein the fresh air piping system is fluidly connected to a trim air path having a valve for supplying the fresh air piping system with trim air having a higher temperature than fresh air, wherein the valve is configured to vary an amount of trim air flowing from the trim air path into the fresh air piping system.
Vue, in the same or related field of endeavor (i.e., aircraft air flow), teaches that it is known in the art to provide:
3. The galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein the air inlet is configured as a coupling interface for fluidly connecting the fresh air piping 216 system to a fresh air supply system of an aircraft (para. 0021).
4. The galley water heating system according to claim 3, wherein the coupling interface comprises a bifurcation element (fig. 4 – 220 is split into 222 and 224) which is configured to divide a fresh air flow, wherein one branch supplies fresh air to the first air outlet and another branch supplies fresh air to the second air outlet.
5. The galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein the fresh air piping system comprises a bifurcation element (fig. 4 – 220 is split into 222 and 224) which is configured to divide a fresh air flow, wherein one branch supplies fresh air to the first air outlet and another branch supplies fresh air to the second air outlet.
6. The galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein the first air outlet is configured as an adjustable nozzle for providing an adjustable amount of fresh air to an aircraft cabin (para. 0018).
9. The galley water heating system according to claim 1, wherein the fresh air piping system is fluidly connected to a trim air path having a valve for supplying the fresh air piping system with trim air having a higher temperature than fresh air, wherein the valve is configured to vary an amount of trim air flowing from the trim air path into the fresh air piping system (para. 0003).
Vue teaches that such an arrangement provides for maintaining temperature requirements in the cabin (para. 0003).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention incorporate the above limitations as taught by Vue into the invention disclosed by Reed, so as to provide for maintaining temperature requirements in the cabin.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. These references disclose devices with many of the claimed components. Nevertheless, in order to avoid overburdening the applicant with redundant rejections, these references were not applied.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFRED BASICHAS whose telephone number is 571 272 4871. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday during regular business hours.
To contact the examiner’s supervisor please call MICHAEL HOANG whose telephone number is 571 272 6460.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Tech Center telephone number is 571 272 3700.
March 6, 2026
/ALFRED BASICHAS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762