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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: in figure 2, reference # 14 is not in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 9, line 8, recites “release or traction of said which” is unclear. What is said referring back to? This appears to be a typo.
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) 1-4, 6, & 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Arrouy et al. (FR Pub No. 3,082,184 A1).
Regarding claim 1
Arrouy teaches a process for deployment of a tethered-wing traction system, (See figures 1-18) the tethered-wing traction system (See figures 1-18) comprising: a traction wing (See figures 1-18, ref # 2) to generate a traction force under the effect of the wind, and is deployed and refolded relative to a base platform (See figures 1-18, ref # 41) having a stowing mast, (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) the traction wing (See figures 1-18, ref # 2) having: a trailing edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 8) which comprises two lateral portions; and a leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) which comprises a median area (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) and two lateral portions; the process comprising a step of making the traction wing (See figures 1-18, ref # 2) fly relative to the stowing mast, (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) the process comprises, before the flight step, a windsock folding step (See figures 6 & 15-18) of the traction wing, (See figures 1-18, ref # 2) wherein: the median area (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) of the leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) is retained relative to the stowing mast (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) at a first height (See figures 1-18, ref # 31) on the stowing mast; (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) the lateral portions of the leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) are retained relative to the stowing mast (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) at a second height (See figures 1-18, ref # 32 & 33) at least on the stowing mast, (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) which is lower than said first height, (See figures 1-18, ref # 31) the leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) forming a windsock air inlet (See figures 6 & 15) with a circular opening; the trailing edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 8) is reclosed by bringing the lateral portions of the trailing edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 8) towards one another. (See figures 6 & 15-18)
Regarding claim 2
Arrouy teaches wherein the retention relative to the stowing mast (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) of the median area (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) of the leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) is provided by traction of a line (See figures 1-18, ref # 16) which is connected to the median area (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) of the leading edge. (See figures 1-18, ref # 7)
Regarding claim 3
Arrouy teaches wherein the retention relative to the stowing mast (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) of the lateral portions of the leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) is provided by traction of folding lines (See figures 1-18, ref # 16, 17, & 18) which each have an end secured to the leading edge, (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) while being spaced from one another along the leading edge. (See figures 1-18, ref # 7)
Regarding claims 4 & 11
Arrouy teaches wherein the folding lines (See figures 1-18, ref # 16, 17, & 18) are positioned in symmetrical pairs, (See figures 1-18, ref # 17a, 17b, 18a, & 18b) with each folding line (See figures 1-18, ref # 17a, 17b, 18a, & 18b) of a pair (See figures 1-18, ref # 17 & 18) connecting the median area (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) of the leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) to another area of the leading edge, (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) and in that the traction of the folding lines (See figures 1-18, ref # 16, 17, & 18) is provided by pulling jointly on the two lines (See figures 1-18, ref # 17a, 17b, 18a, & 18b) of each pair (See figures 1-18, ref # 17 & 18) of folding lines. (See figures 1-18, ref # 16, 17, & 18)
Regarding claim 6
Arrouy teaches wherein the closure of the trailing edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 8) is carried out by traction of at least one closure line (See figures 1-18, ref # 4) connected to the trailing edge. (See figures 1-18, ref # 8)
Regarding claim 10
Arrouy teaches a tethered-wing traction system, (See figures 1-18) comprising: a traction wing (See figures 1-18, ref # 2) which is designed to generate a traction force under the effect of wind, and is designed to be deployed and refolded relative to a base platform (See figures 1-18, ref # 41) which is provided with a stowing mast, (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) the traction wing (See figures 1-18, ref # 2) having: a trailing edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 8) which comprises two lateral portions; and a leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) which comprises a median area (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) and two lateral portions; a plurality of folding lines (See figures 1-18, ref # 16, 17, & 18) each having a free end secured to the leading edge, (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) while being spaced from each other along the leading edge; (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) a line (See figures 1-18, ref # 16) which is connected to the median area (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) of the leading edge; (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) at least one closure line (See figures 1-18, ref # 4) which is connected to the trailing edge; (See figures 1-18, ref # 8) a control unit (something must be controlling the system, this would be the control unit) designed to control traction on the line which is connected to the median area, (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) the folding lines, (See figures 1-18, ref # 16, 17, & 18) and the closure line, (See figures 1-18, ref # 4) the control unit comprising a windsock folding mode (See figures 6 & 15-18) wherein: the median area (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) of the leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) is retained relative to the stowing mast (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) at a first height (See figures 1-18, ref # 31) on the stowing mast, (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) by traction of the line (See figures 1-18, ref # 16) which is connected to the median area; (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) the lateral portions of the leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) are retained relative to the stowing mast (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) at a second height (See figures 1-18, ref # 32 & 33) at least on the stowing mast, (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) which is lower than said first height, (See figures 1-18, ref # 31) by traction of the folding lines; (See figures 1-18, ref # 16, 17, & 18) the trailing edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 8) is reclosed by bringing the lateral portions of the trailing edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 8) towards one another, under the effect of traction of the closure line. (See figures 1, 6, & 15, ref # 4)
Regarding claim 12
Arrouy teaches further comprising carriages (See figures 1-18, ref # 31, 32, & 33) which slide along the stowing mast (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) and grasp in a sliding manner the line which is connected to the median area (See figures 1-18, where ref # 16 & 7 meet) and the folding lines, (See figures 1-18, ref # 16, 17, & 18) these carriages (See figures 1-18, ref # 31, 32, & 33) being spaced from one another along the stowing mast (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) when the control unit (something must be controlling the system, this would be the control unit) is in the windsock folding mode. (See figures 6 & 15-18)
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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arrouy et al. (FR Pub No. 3,082,184 A1) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Arrouy et al. (FR Pub No. 3,082,184 A1).
Regarding claim 5
Arrouy teaches wherein the retention relative to the stowing mast (See figures 1-18, ref # 23) of the lateral portions of the leading edge (See figures 1-18, ref # 7) is provided by traction of at least two pairs of symmetrical folding lines, (See figures 1-18, ref # 17 & 18) following at least two heights (See figures 1-18, ref # 32 & 33) along the stowing mast. (See figures 1-18, ref # 23)
Arrouy is silent about three pairs of folding lines at three heights.
However, adding another pair of folding lines is a duplication of parts without a new and unexpected result. (See MPEP 2144.04 VI B)
Therefore is would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have three pairs of folding lines, since this is a duplication of parts without a new and unexpected result. (See MPEP 2144.04 VI B)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 & 13-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. However, the 112 issues need to be resolved.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 7,
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed “the closure line is grasped by a first carriage sliding along the stowing mast” in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 7.
Regarding claim 9,
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed “said line is connected to the median area of the leading edge is connected to the median area by a clamping device, and is connected to the closure line, with the windsock folding step comprising an operation of release or traction of the closure line. ” in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 9.
Regarding claim 13,
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed “the line which is connected to the median area by a clamping device, and is connected to the closure line, with the control unit being designed to control the clamping device” in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 13.
Regarding claim 14,
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed “wherein the closure line moves along the trailing edge while passing into rings” in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 14.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The reference Arrouy et al. (WO Pub No. 2019/239045 A2) disclose a process and system, a tethered-wing traction system, comprising: a traction wing which is designed to generate a traction force under the effect of wind, and is designed to be deployed and refolded relative to a base platform which is provided with a stowing mast, the traction wing having: a trailing edge which comprises two lateral portions; and a leading edge which comprises a median area and two lateral portions; a plurality of folding lines each having a free end secured to the leading edge, while being spaced from each other along the leading edge; a line which is connected to the median area of the leading edge; at least one closure line which is connected to the trailing edge; a control unit designed to control traction on the line which is connected to the median area, the folding lines, and the closure line, the control unit comprising a windsock folding mode wherein: the median area of the leading edge is retained relative to the stowing mast at a first height on the stowing mast, by traction of the line which is connected to the median area; the lateral portions of the leading edge are retained relative to the stowing mast at a second height at least on the stowing mast, which is lower than said first height, by traction of the folding lines; the trailing edge is reclosed by bringing the lateral portions of the trailing edge towards one another, under the effect of traction of the closure line.
The references Arrouy et al. (US Patent No. 11,225,311 B2) & Arrouy et al. (US Patent No. 11,479,331 B2) each have a common Assignee, 2 common inventors, and some of the same or similar figures as the Instant Application.
The references Jan et al. (Pub No. US 2024/0166321 A1), Verfaillie et al. (Pub No. US 2024/0149997 A1), & Verfaillie et al. (Pub No. US 2024/0166322 A1) each have a common Assignee and some of the same or similar figures as the Instant Application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODNEY ANDREW BONNETTE whose telephone number is (571)270-7556. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 571-272-6909. 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.
/RODNEY A BONNETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647