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 .
Specification
The amendment to the specification filed 09/24/2025 is acceptable and has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-5 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
change line 7 of claim 1 accordingly: “a first command of the commands”
change line 12 of claim 1 accordingly: “a second command of the commands”
change line 18 of claim 1 accordingly: “a third command of the commands”
change claim 2 accordingly: “to different modes of the at least two modes of operation”
change claim 3 accordingly: “to different modes of the at least two modes of operation”
change line 7 of claim 4 accordingly: “a [[third]] command”
change lines 1-2 of claim 5 accordingly: “output of [[a]] the hybrid-electric powerplant of [[an]] the aircraft”
change line 7 of claim 11 accordingly: “a first command of the commands”
change line 13 of claim 11 accordingly: “a second command of the commands”
change line 18 of claim 11 accordingly: “a third command of the commands”
change line 23 of claim 11 accordingly: “[[the]] a propulsion mechanism”
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 2, 4, 5 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pub. No. US 2019/0323427 A1 (Mackin) in view of Pub. No.: US 2018/0194483 A1 (Schwöller).
Regarding claim 1, Mackin discloses (see figs. 1-2) a control system for adjusting output of a hybrid-electric powerplant 200 of an aircraft comprising: an input 224 of a controller 208 configured to receive commands 224; the controller 208 configured to set a mode of operation (see par. 33, middle) based on the commands, wherein the mode of operation comprises an output mode (see par. 33; first and second modes for example determine which of, or that both of, the gas turbine engine 202 and electric motor 212 drive the propulsion mechanism 204) of the hybrid-electric powerplant 200, and wherein there are at least two modes of operation (first mode and second mode, see par. 33), and further wherein: a first command 224 (see par. 88 regarding going to the first mode) provided to the input causes the hybrid electric powerplant to: operate an engine 202 having a mechanical output 218; output first electrical energy (see par. 79, bottom wherein motor 212 is a motor/generator) from a motor/generator 222 driven by (see fig. 2) the mechanical output 218 of the engine; drive (see par. 79) a propulsion mechanism 204 by the mechanical output (at least one of 218,220,222 depending upon the status of clutch 216) of the engine; and upon receipt of a second command 224 (see par. 34 during the first mode, the motor/generator 212 may cooperate with the engine 202 drive the propulsion device 204), the hybrid electric powerplant 200 is configured to: operate the engine 202 having the mechanical output 218; receive second electrical energy at the motor/generator 212; drive the mechanical output with the motor/generator 212 using the second electrical energy; and drive the propulsion mechanism by the mechanical output; upon receipt of a third command (transition from first mode to second mode; see par. 58), the hybrid electric powerplant 200 is configured to: receive third electrical energy (from battery 214, see par. 61) at the motor/generator 212; drive the mechanical output with the motor/generator using the third electrical energy; and drive the propulsion mechanism by the mechanical output, wherein the engine is not used (see par. 87, bottom: in the second mode only the electric motor 212 drives the propulsion mechanism 204) to drive the mechanical output. Mackin does not explicitly disclose receipt of the second command at the controller 208 regarding use of electric motor during the first mode.
Schwöller teaches a hybrid electric powerplant (see pars. 43 and 46; both an electric motor and internal combustion engine are connected to the propeller; just the internal combustion engine (ICE) may drive the propeller, see range between positions 35 and 36 of power lever 22 in fig. 9 and see par. 61; both the electric motor and the ICE may drive the propeller, see range between positions 36 and 37 of power lever 22 in fig. 9 and see par. 162; or just the electric motor may drive the propeller, see par. 163) and further teaches use of an electric motor during a first mode (mode wherein internal combustion engine combines with electric motor to drive propeller shaft propulsion device, see pars. 46 and 140).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Mackin with receipt of the second command at the controller regarding use of electric motor during the first mode as taught by Schwöller in order to facilitate a simple and efficient control of hybrid electric powerplant (see Schwöller pars. 9-10). This results in the lever of Schwöller being included with the pilot input of Mackin (discussed for example in par. 55).
Regarding claim 2, Mackin in view of Schwöller teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Mackin in view of Schwöller teach the input comprise a lever 22 (see Schwöller fig. 9) configured to move in response to a force from a pilot (see Schwöller par. 146) or operator such that different positions ((a) 35-36 correspond with just internal combustion engine; and (b) 36-37 correspond with combined electric motor and internal combustion engine as discussed in the claim 1 analysis above) are used as commands (Schwöller applied to Mackin in the claim 1 analysis above resulted in the instant lever being included with the combination such that commands 224 in Mackin fig. 2 correspond with positions of the instant lever) that correspond to different modes (scenarios (a) and (b) correspond to the first and second commands discussed in the claim 1 analysis above).
Regarding claim 4, Mackin discloses (see figs. 1-2) adjusting output of a hybrid-electric powerplant 200 of an aircraft 100 comprising: the hybrid electric powerplant 200 is configured to: operate an engine 202 having a mechanical output (at least one of 218,220,222 depending upon the status of clutch 216); output first electrical energy (see par. 79, bottom wherein motor 212 is a motor/generator) from a motor/generator 222 driven by (see fig. 2) the mechanical output 218,220,222 of the engine 202; and drive (see par. 79) a propulsion mechanism 204 by the mechanical output of the engine 202; the hybrid electric powerplant 200 is configured to: operate the engine having the mechanical output; receive second electrical energy (208,214; see par. 47) at the motor/generator (see par. 34 during the first mode, the motor/generator 212 may cooperate with the engine 202 drive the propulsion device 204); drive the mechanical output 220 with the motor/generator 212 using the second electrical energy; and drive the propulsion mechanism 204 by the mechanical output 220; and upon receipt of a third command (transition from first mode to second mode; see par. 58), the hybrid electric powerplant 200 is configured to: receive third electrical energy (from battery 214, see par. 61) at the motor/generator 212; drive the mechanical output with the motor/generator using the third electrical energy; and drive the propulsion mechanism by the mechanical output, wherein the engine is not used (see par. 87, bottom: in the second mode only the electric motor 212 drives the propulsion mechanism 204) to drive the mechanical output. Mackin does not disclose a lever; the lever configured to move over an overall range of positions, wherein movement of the lever adjusts the output of the hybrid-electric powerplant between at least two modes of operation, wherein: in a first subset of positions within the overall range of positions; and in a second subset of positions within the overall range of positions.
Schwöller teaches a hybrid electric powerplant (see pars. 43 and 46; both an electric motor and internal combustion engine are connected to the propeller; just the internal combustion engine (ICE) may drive the propeller (i.e., mode (a) for purposes of this claim analysis), see range between positions 35 and 36 of power lever 22 in fig. 9 and see par. 61; both the electric motor and the ICE may drive the propeller (i.e., mode (b) for purposes of this claim analysis), see range between positions 36 and 37 of power lever 22 in fig. 9 and see par. 162; or just the electric motor may drive the propeller (i.e., mode (c) for purposes of this claim analysis), see par. 163) and further teaches (see fig. 9) a lever 22; the lever configured to move over an overall range of positions (see range of positions from location 35 to location 37 for example), wherein movement of the lever 22 adjusts the output of the hybrid-electric powerplant between at least two modes of operation (modes (a) and (b) as discussed above; and in mode (c) wherein power output of the electric motor is adjusted within range 36-37 in fig. 9 however the ICE being off by way of a switch, see par. 169, a first subset (mode (a) above) of positions within the overall range of positions (mode (a) above); and a second subset (mode (b) above) of positions within the overall range of positions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Mackin with a lever; the lever configured to move over an overall range of positions, wherein movement of the lever adjusts the output of the hybrid-electric powerplant between at least two modes of operation, wherein: in a first subset of positions within the overall range of positions; and in a second subset of positions within the overall range of positions as taught by Schwöller in order to facilitate a simple and efficient control of hybrid electric powerplant (see Schwöller pars. 9-10).
Note regarding claim 4 analysis: the claim does not appear to require that the lever during the first subset of positions cause the output of electric energy from the motor/generator (the specifics of this is at Applicant par. 28). The claim just requires that the hybrid electric powerplant operate as described in in claim 4 lines 8-11 when the lever is the first subset of positions. For example operation of the motor/generator 212 as described in Mackin par. 79, bottom, may be activated by a switch as is known in the art (see pertinent prior art infra).
Regarding claim 5, Mackin in view of Schwöller teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. The teachings of Schwöller applied in the claim 4 analysis above include a method for adjusting output of a hybrid-electric powerplant of an aircraft using the lever of claim 4, the method comprising: moving the lever 22 (see Schwöller fig. 9) to the first subset of positions within the overall range of positions. For example, the lever 22 may moved from with the range 36-37 to within the range 35-36 when power from the electric motor is no longer needed to supplement that of the engine.
Regarding claim 7, Mackin in view of Schwöller teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. The teachings of Schwöller applied in the claim 4 analysis above include the first subset of positions (35 to 36; see fig. 9) represent a first continuous group of positions (see par. 162).
Regarding claim 8, Mackin in view of Schwöller teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. The teachings of Schwöller applied in the claim 4 analysis above include the second subset of positions (36 to 37; see fig. 9) represent a second continuous group of positions (see pars. 161-162; there is a travel range of the added electric motor power that goes up to the max power of the hybrid electric powerplant of Mackin in view of Schwöller.
Regarding claim 9, Mackin in view of Schwöller teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. The teachings of Schwöller applied in the claim 4 analysis above include wherein one position of the first subset (35 to 36; see fig. 9) of positions is adjacent (see fig. 9) to one position of the second subset (36 to 37; see fig. 9) of positions.
Regarding claim 10, Mackin in view of Schwöller teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Mackin in view of Schwöller further discloses wherein the at least two modes of operation comprises three or more modes of operation. A third mode of operation is what happens upon the receipt of the third command such that the engine is not used to drive the mechanical output. This corresponds with the second mode of Mackin second mode (see par. 87, bottom: in the second mode only the electric motor 212 drives the propulsion mechanism 204). In Mackin in view of Schwöller this mode is when lever 22 (see fig. 9 of Schwöller) travels in the range 36-37 (see par. 170 of Schwöller).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackin in view of Schwöller as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2021/0347490 A1 (Landers).
Regarding claim 3, Mackin in view of Schwöller teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Mackin discloses (see fig. 2) the controller 208 is configured to receive electronic commands 224 that correspond to different modes (as discussed in the claim 1 analysis above). Mackin does not explicitly disclose the input (i.e., the switch and button of Mackin and also with the lever of Schwoller) comprises an electrical connection with a computerized flight control system, and the electronic commands are from the computerized flight control system.
Landers teaches a hybrid-electric powerplant 210,215,225 of an aircraft (see par. 22) and further teaches (see fig. 2) an input (to a controller 250 of the hybrid-electric powerplant) comprises an electrical connection with a computerized flight control system (260; one of ordinary skill would recognize control signals discussed in par. 28 to be electronic fly by wire signals between the flight controller and the control surfaces and thus controller 260 is computerized), and electronic commands (to the controller 250) are from the computerized flight control system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Mackin in view of Schwöller with the input comprises an electrical connection with a computerized flight control system, and the electronic commands are from the computerized flight control system as taught by Landers in order to facilitate using electric control of flight control surfaces that are less bulky and lighter than corresponding mechanical (i.e. cable and pully type) and thus result in fuel savings. This results in for example the power lever 6 signals of Reinhardt traversing the flight control system of the combination as before reaching control unit 7 of Reinhardt (see fig. 7 of Reinhardt).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mackin, as evidenced by US 2016/0061053 A1 (Thomassin), in view of Schwöller.
Regarding claim 6, Mackin in view of Schwöller teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Mackin further discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored thereon that, upon execution by a computing device, cause the computing device to perform operations for adjusting output of a hybrid-electric powerplant of an aircraft using the lever of claim 4.
Controller 208 of Mackin in fig. 2 is an electronic engine control for a gas turbine that is a computer controller with memory storing instructions that the processor of the controller executes (Thomassin par. 37 is evidence of this). The lever of Mackin in view of Schwöller is used to provide the input signals 224 from the cockpit 225 (see fig. 2).
Claim(s) 11, 12 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pub. No. US 2022/0258871 A1 (Long) in view of Mackin, as evidenced by Pub. No.: US 2020/0062414 A1 (Hon).
Regarding claim 11, Long discloses (see figs. 1 and 2) a thrust control system for adjusting output of a hybrid-electric powerplant 8,10A,10B of an aircraft (see par. 2) comprising: an input (see input from pilot interface 40 to controller 36 in fig. 1) of a controller 36 configured to receive commands (from the pilot interface); the controller configured to set a mode of operation of a hybrid system based on the commands, wherein the mode of operation comprises an output mode (the hybrid-electric powerplant can operate in regeneration mode 306, off mode 308, flight Idle mode 316, maximum electric only mode 310, maximum continuous dual source mode 312, and maximum non-continuous dual source mode 314, see par. 48; for example the modes can be an output mode because power is output to propel aircraft in par. 2 using propulsion units 12A-D; there are also modes in the range of lever positions between the instant lever positions 306,308,310,312,314 discussed above; for example see par. 51, bottom and par. 69; for example in par. 51 the lever 304A in fig. 3 is “between maximum electric only position 310 and maximum continuous dual source position 312; thus a possible mode is dual source mode less than the maximum dual source mode; the dual source being the source ESS 34A and the source motor/generators 10A,10B in fig. 1 as discussed in the Abstract pointing out the two sources) of the hybrid-electric powerplant, and wherein there are at least two modes of operation, and further wherein: upon receipt of a first command at the input (commands related to modes are output from source manager 208 to ESS 34A for example and power unit 6 for example, see fig. 2 and par. 42; the functions of the source manager is performed by controller 36, see fig. 1 and par. 42; input to the source demand manager is from pilot throttles 44, see figs. 1 and 2, and from pilot switches 40, see figs. 1 and 5), the hybrid electric powerplant is configured to: operate an engine 8 having a mechanical output 7A,7B; output first electrical energy from a motor/generator 10A,10B driven by the mechanical output of the engine, the first electrical energy being output to an electric propulsion motor (for example, electric machine 10A outputs electric energy, via bus 4A, to motor 14A that drives propulsor 16A; see par. 69; wherein the first command originates from the lever 304A position being as discussed in par. 69 wherein the mode can be flight idle, or alternatively, dual source wherein the ESS 34A source is set to 0 % to accommodate ESS 34A charging as discussed in par. 69) of the aircraft and a battery 34A (see par. 69 wherein the battery is charging; in addition par. 16 points out that the “ESS may be charged with electrical energy generated by the generator(s) using mechanical energy from the combustion motor(s)”) of the aircraft; and upon receipt of a second command (from controller 36, see fig. 1) at the input, the hybrid electric powerplant is configured to: output second electrical energy from the motor/generator, the second electrical energy being output to the electric propulsion motor of the aircraft and not the battery of the aircraft (see par. 70 and fig. 4; for example, control lever 304A set to within the maximum dual source position and battery power share greater than 0%; i.e., the battery 34A is now supplying electricity rather than being charged by bus 4A; alternatively, on/off button of battery on pilot interface 40 in fig. 5 can disconnect battery 34A from bus 4A for example, see par. 53, wherein this can relate to the scenario of par. 71 wherein the battery is not charging or discharging). Long does not disclose upon receipt of a third command at the input, the hybrid electric powerplant is configured to: receive third electrical energy at the motor/generator; drive the mechanical output with the motor/generator using the third electrical energy; and drive the propulsion mechanism by the mechanical output, wherein the engine is not used to drive the mechanical output.
Mackin teaches (see fig. 2) upon receipt of a command (transition to second mode; see par. 58; such that gas turbine engine is not used to drive mechanical output 220), the hybrid electric powerplant 200 is configured to: receive electrical energy (from battery 214, see par. 61) at the motor/generator 212; drive the mechanical output with the motor/generator using the third electrical energy; and drive the propulsion mechanism by the mechanical output, wherein the engine is not used (see par. 87, bottom: in the second mode only the electric motor 212 drives the propulsion mechanism 204) to drive the mechanical output.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Long with upon receipt of a third command at the input, the hybrid electric powerplant is configured to: receive third electrical energy at the motor/generator; drive the mechanical output with the motor/generator using the third electrical energy; and drive the propulsion mechanism by the mechanical output, wherein the engine is not used to drive the mechanical output as taught by Mackin in order to facilitate an additional source of thrust by coupling the engine of Long to a propulsion device (as taught by Mackin; i.e. propulsion device 204 in fig. 2) while providing the option of good efficiency at cruise (see Mackin par. 47, bottom). Hon is evidence that it is known for (see fig. 2 of Hon) a motor/generator 114 of an hybrid electric powerplant 112,114 to output electrical energy to electric propulsion motor 126 to drive electric propulsion motor 126).
Regarding claim 12, Long in view of Mackin teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Long discloses the input (see input from pilot interface 40 to controller 36 in fig. 1) comprises a lever (e.g., lever 304A of throttle control 44, see figs. 1 and 3; there is one lever of levers 304A-D for each corresponding propulsion unit 12A-D, see figs. 1 and 4) configured to move in response to a force from a pilot (see par. 49) or operator such that different positions 306,308,316,310,312,314 are used as commands that correspond to different modes (for example, see par. 34 wherein in response to the control lever 304A at the regeneration mode position 306, controller 36 commands propulsion motor 12A to charge battery 23A via bus 4A; another example is par. 38 wherein in response to lever 304A being in the dual source position 312, both generator 10A, driven by engine 8, and battery 34A provide electrical power, via bus 4A, to motor 14A in order to rotate propulsor 16A to propel aircraft, see figs. 1 and 3).
Regarding claims 14 and 15, Long in view of Mackin teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Long discloses upon receipt of the first command (see par. 69) wherein (Claim 14) the hybrid electric power plant 8,10A,10B is operated in a first mode (power unit 6, see fig. 1, is supplying electric power to propulsion unit 12A via bus 4A, while battery 34A is charging) of the at least two modes of operation, and upon receipt of the second command (see par. 70) the hybrid electric power plant is operated in a second mode of the at least two modes of operation (both power unit 6 and battery 34A, see fig. 1, are supplying electric power to propulsion unit 12A via bus 4A); (Claim 15) wherein in the second mode, the battery is configured to output third electrical energy (in the instant mode, the electrical energy is being output from the battery, rather than the motor/generator regarding the first two electrical energies) to the electric propulsion motor 14A of the aircraft.
Regarding claim 16, Long in view of Mackin teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Long discloses in the second mode (see par. 70), the motor/generator is driven by the mechanical output of the motor/generator (this is interpreted as the motor/generator is driven by the mechanical output of the engine because it is not possible for the motor/generator to be driven by itself; it is pointed out in line 10 of claim 11 that the instant mechanical output refers to the engine; this is also addressed in the Claim Objection section above) (par. 70 points out that electric energy is sourced from power unit 6; thus engine 8 is driving motor/generator 10A to supply the instant electric energy).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Long in view Mackin, as evidenced by Hon, as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Landers.
Regarding claim 13, Long in view of Mackin teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Long discloses the controller 36 is configured to receive electronic commands that correspond to different modes (controller 36 is a computer controller, see pars. 30 and 31 and receives signals from the throttle controls 44; thus the controller receives electronic commands corresponding with the different modes of the throttle control lever 304, such modes being electric only 310 or dual source 312 for example, see par. 48). Long does not explicitly disclose the input comprises an electrical connection with a computerized flight control system, and the electronic commands are from the computerized flight control system.
Landers teaches (see fig. 2) an input (to a controller 250 of a hybrid-electric powerplant 210,215,225) comprises an electrical connection with a computerized flight control system (260; one of ordinary skill would recognize control signals discussed in par. 28 to be electronic fly by wire signals between the flight controller and the control surfaces and thus controller 260 is computerized), and electronic commands (to the controller 250) are from the computerized flight control system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Long in view of Mackin with the input comprises an electrical connection with a computerized flight control system, and the electronic commands are from the computerized flight control system as taught by Landers in order to facilitate using electric control of flight control surfaces that are less bulky and lighter than corresponding mechanical (i.e. cable and pully type) and thus result in fuel savings. This results in for example the throttle control signals 44 of Long going traversing the flight control system of the combination before reaching the controller 36 of Long (see fig. 1 of Long).
Claim(s) 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Long in view of Mackin, as evidence by Hon, as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of US Patent 10450080 (Beach).
Regarding claims 17-20, Long in view of Mackin teach the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Long further discloses (see fig. 1 and par. 18 pointing out bus 4A can be a DC bus) (Claim 17) the electric propulsion motor 14A is connected to a direct current (DC) bus 4A, (Claim 18) wherein the battery 34A is connected to the DC bus. Long does not explicitly disclose (Claim 17) the electric propulsion motor is connected to an inverter and the inverter is connected to a direct current (DC) bus, (Claim 19) wherein the inverter is a first inverter, and further wherein the motor/generator is connected to a second inverter, (Claim 20) wherein the second inverter is connected to the DC bus.
Beach teaches hybrid electric propulsion (see title) and further teaches (see fig. 1) (Claim 17) an electric propulsion motor 110 is connected to an inverter 106,right and the inverter is connected to a direct current (DC) bus 112, (Claim 19) wherein the inverter is a first inverter, and further wherein a generator 104 is connected to a second inverter 106,left, (Claim 20) wherein the second inverter is connected to the DC bus.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Long in view of Mackin with the electric propulsion motor is connected to an inverter and the inverter is connected to a direct current (DC) bus, wherein the inverter is a first inverter, and further wherein the motor/generator is connected to a second inverter, wherein the second inverter is connected to the DC bus as taught by Beach in order to facilitate good performance and low cost energy transmission (see Beach col. 1, ll. 25-35). Using the instant inverters permits AC supplied by the motor/generator or the propulsion motor to travel on the DC bus in order to power the propulsion motor, or to charge the battery, respectively.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4 and 11 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.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
operation of a motor/generator may be activated by a switch: US 20140010652 (see par. 76, top) (see hybrid electric powerplant 114,116 in fig. 2 wherein either engine 114 or electric motor 116 or both may drive propeller 102 as discussed in par. 55).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC J AMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-9948. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6:00.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/MARC AMAR/Examiner, Art Unit 3741 /DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741