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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because:
-Claim 7 recites “a computer program comprising instructions for executing the steps of a method according to claim 1 when said program is executed by a computer” which is signal per se per MPEP 2106.03 (I).
(As the courts' definitions of machines, manufactures and compositions of matter indicate, a product must have a physical or tangible form in order to fall within one of these statutory categories. Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1348, 111 USPQ2d at 1719. Thus, the Federal Circuit has held that a product claim to an intangible collection of information, even if created by human effort, does not fall within any statutory category. Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1350, 111 USPQ2d at 1720 (claimed "device profile" comprising two sets of data did not meet any of the categories because it was neither a process nor a tangible product). Similarly, software expressed as code or a set of instructions detached from any medium is an idea without physical embodiment. See Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437, 449, 82 USPQ2d 1400, 1407 (2007); see also Benson, 409 U.S. 67, 175 USPQ2d 675 (An "idea" is not patent eligible). Thus, a product claim to a software program that does not also contain at least one structural limitation (such as a "means plus function" limitation) has no physical or tangible form, and thus does not fall within any statutory category. Another example of an intangible product that does not fall within a statutory category is a paradigm or business model for a marketing company. In re Ferguson, 558 F.3d 1359, 1364, 90 USPQ2d 1035, 1039-40 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Even when a product has a physical or tangible form, it may not fall within a statutory category. For instance, a transitory signal, while physical and real, does not possess concrete structure that would qualify as a device or part under the definition of a machine, is not a tangible article or commodity under the definition of a manufacture (even though it is man-made and physical in that it exists in the real world and has tangible causes and effects), and is not composed of matter such that it would qualify as a composition of matter. Nuijten, 500 F.3d at 1356-1357, 84 USPQ2d at 1501-03. As such, a transitory, propagating signal does not fall within any statutory category. Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc., 851 F.3d 1275, 1294, 112 USPQ2d 1120, 1133 (Fed. Cir. 2017); Nuijten, 500 F.3d at 1356-1357, 84 USPQ2d at 1501-03.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner respectfully suggests claim 7 to be amended so that the program is stored on a non-transitory computer readable-medium that includes executable instructions when executed by a computer processor to perform method claim 1.
- Claim 8 recites “a recording medium….” which is drawn are drawn to a “medium". The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a medium covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification is silent (see MPEP 2111.01). Because the broadest reasonable interpretation covers a signal per se, a rejection under 35 USC 101 is appropriate as covering non-statutory subject matter. See 351 OG 212, Feb 23 2010. Also see MPEP 2106.03 (II). Examiner respectfully suggests adding --non-transitory-- before “recording medium” in the preamble of the claim.
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.
Claims 1, 2, and 4-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Demaison et al. (USPAP. 20130218399) (corresponding to FR 2958911 submitted by Applicants) (hereinafter “Demaison”) and Raimarckers et al. (USPAP. 20120130617) (hereinafter “Raimarckers” (Submitted by Applicants).
Regarding claims 1, 4, and similar claims 5-8, Demaison discloses a method for monitoring an anti-leak valve of a circuit for supplying oil between an oil reservoir and elements to be lubricated of a jet engine, characterized in that it comprises steps of:
- Measuring oil level values in the reservoir, respectively at the beginning and at the end of starting the jet engine (Fig. 2: Step E10, take oil level measurements; Pars.10, 15, 72, 73,80, 84, 85: obtaining a plurality of measurements of an oil level of the tank, each measurement being associated with an oil temperature and with an engine speed of rotation. Demaison discloses at Pars. 77-81 that in parallel with acquiring measurements of oil level, of speed of rotation, and of oil temperature, pertinent measurements are extracted in accordance with the invention. This extraction is performed progressively during the mission of the aircraft, firstly in order to optimize the time required for processing the measurements, and secondly for limiting the quantity of measurements stored. The processing for extracting pertinent measurements may differ as a function of the stage of flight during which the measurements are taken, beginning with a step of identifying the flight stage applicable to the aircraft (e.g. engine stopped, starting, taxiing before takeoff, takeoff, climbing, cruising, descending, taxiing after landing, stopping the engine. The speed of rotation of the turbojet is represented by a parameter N2 that specifies the speed of rotation of the high-pressure compressor shaft of the turbojet. In a variant, the speed of rotation could be represented by other operating parameters of the turbojet, for example by the parameter N1 that specifies the speed of rotation of the low-pressure compressor shaft of the turbojet. The processing for extracting pertinent measurements may differ as a function of the stage of flight during which the measurements are taken, beginning with a step of identifying the flight stage applicable to the aircraft (e.g. engine stopped, starting, taxiing before takeoff, takeoff, climbing, cruising, descending, taxiing after landing, stopping the engine, etc.). In light of Applicants’ Specification, Pages 7 and 8 discloses “starting of the jet engine is identified by the speed of the high pressure shaft of the jet Engine. Starting of the jet engine is identified by the speed N2 of the high pressure shaft of the jet engine. Indeed, during starting of the jet engine, the speed N2 of the high pressure shaft of the jet engine varies between zero at the beginning of starting and a speed characteristic of an idle power, at the end of starting. The speed characteristic of an idle power is for example equal to 70% of the maximum power of the jet engine. And that beginning of starting (zero engine power) and the end of starting (engine idling reached).” Therefore, it is the Examiner’s position, Demaison meets the claimed “at the beginning and at the end of starting the jet engine”);
- calculating the difference between the oil level values in the reservoir at the beginning and at the end of starting the jet engine, to form a measured change in the oil level in the reservoir (E50 in Fig. 2, Pars. 87 and 88, Fig. 3 aggregation at Pars. 103-106, 109 “for each mission, aggregating the measurements selected during taxiing stages (before takeoff and after landing) and during the cruising stage, as received by the communications means 31 of the device 3 on the ground (steps F10 and F30)” ;
- measuring an oil temperature value (Pars. 91, 99, and 100),
- determining an estimated change of the oil level in the reservoir, depending on the oil temperature value (Fig. 2, E70, Pars. 95, 99 and 100 “the segments corresponding to identical oil level measurements are stored, it is preferable during the step E70 to select segments for which the associated minimum and maximum temperatures lie on either side of the reference temperature. In a variant, it is also possible to select segments in which the minimum and maximum temperatures are relatively close to the reference temperature, i.e. within a predetermined positive or negative offset of the order of a few degrees Celsius”; also see Fig. 3, F20 correct for temperature offsets from reference temperature),
calculating the difference between the measured change in the oil level in the reservoir and the estimated change in the oil level in the reservoir for the measured temperature value (Abstract, Par. 40: comparing the aggregated measurements with reference data to identify abnormal oil consumption of the engine),
comparing the calculated difference with a detection threshold (Pars. 3 and 40: the aggregated measurements are compared relative to a predetermined threshold representative of abnormal consumption of oil by the engine. in order to detect abnormal oil consumption by the engine).
Demaison does not explicitly disclose “and activating an alarm if the calculated difference is lower than the detection threshold.”
Raimarckers teaches “activating an alarm if the calculated difference is lower than the detection threshold” (see Raimarckers: Par. 26 discloses that an alarm is triggered when the status has reached a critical level and/or when the evolution is abnormal and/or when a drift of the parameters of the models for status calculation and/or of the parameters of the models for evolution calculation is observed and/or when the autonomy is insufficient).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time of filling the Application to modify Demaison's invention using Raimarckers’ invention to arrive at the claimed invention specified in claim to return the status of the lubrication system to a higher monitoring system of an engine or of the airplane and to provide diagnosis and prognosis of a plurality of problems and breakdowns of the engine and of its lubrication system in order to determine the remaining lifetime before a breakdown (Raimarckers: Abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Demaison and Raimarckers disclose everything as applied above (Claims 1 and 4). In addition, Demaison discloses wherein the beginning and the end of starting the jet engine are detected on the basis of a speed measurement (N2) of a high pressure shaft of the jet engine (Fig. 2: Step E10, take oil level measurements; Pars.10, 15, 72, 73,80, 84, 85: obtaining a plurality of measurements of an oil level of the tank, each measurement being associated with an oil temperature and with an engine speed of rotation. Demaison discloses at Pars. 77-81 that in parallel with acquiring measurements of oil level, of speed of rotation, and of oil temperature, pertinent measurements are extracted in accordance with the invention. This extraction is performed progressively during the mission of the aircraft, firstly in order to optimize the time required for processing the measurements, and secondly for limiting the quantity of measurements stored. The processing for extracting pertinent measurements may differ as a function of the stage of flight during which the measurements are taken, beginning with a step of identifying the flight stage applicable to the aircraft (e.g. engine stopped, starting, taxiing before takeoff, takeoff, climbing, cruising, descending, taxiing after landing, stopping the engine. The speed of rotation of the turbojet is represented by a parameter N2 that specifies the speed of rotation of the high-pressure compressor shaft of the turbojet. In a variant, the speed of rotation could be represented by other operating parameters of the turbojet, for example by the parameter N1 that specifies the speed of rotation of the low-pressure compressor shaft of the turbojet. The processing for extracting pertinent measurements may differ as a function of the stage of flight during which the measurements are taken, beginning with a step of identifying the flight stage applicable to the aircraft (e.g. engine stopped, starting, taxiing before takeoff, takeoff, climbing, cruising, descending, taxiing after landing, stopping the engine, etc.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is patentably distinguishable over the prior art of record.
Demaison and Raimarckers disclose everything as applied above (see claim 1). However, the closest prior art of record (Demaison and Raimarckers) either alone or in combination fails to anticipate or render obvious the combination wherein “wherein the alarm is activated if the comparison is lower than the detection threshold for a first predetermined number (N) of startings of the jet engine from a second predetermined number (M) of recent startings of the jet engine, higher than the first predetermined number” in combination with other limitations in the claims as defined by Applicants.
Conclusion
Beier te al. (USPAP. 20190226358) discloses an oil circuit of an aircraft engine which includes a tank, a lubricant pump and a recirculation pump. The lubricant pump supplies oil via a supply line from the tank to a load of the engine and to an accessory gearbox. Oil is resupplied via a recirculation conduit to the tank by the recirculation pump. The recirculation conduit is connected to the accessory gearbox via a further recirculation conduit. A valve is provided that can be switched between an open switching state and a closed state. In the open switching state of the valve, oil is supplied to the tank via the recirculation conduit. In the closed state of the valve device, an oil feed to the tank via the recirculation conduit is blocked, and oil from the recirculation conduit is supplied to the accessory gearbox via the further recirculation conduit. Beier discloses an anti-leak valve device 34 and 38 (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONG HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-2718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00AM-5:30PM.
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, Andrew M Schechter can be reached at 571-272-2302. 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.
/PHUONG HUYNH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857 December 4, 2025