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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/26/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12-19 are 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.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "a section" in line 2 and “the second section” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of expediting prosecution, the Examiner interprets the phrase “a section” to be read --a second section--. Furthermore, claims 13-19 recites the limitation "a section" and “the second section”.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 8-10, 12-15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Seo et al. (US 2021/0059060).
Regarding claim 1, Seo discloses, a divider system configured to separate a first section (see annotated Fig. 14 below) from a second section (see annotated Fig. 14 below) within an internal cabin of a vehicle, the divider system comprising:
one or more walls (10, 20); and
one or more electronic screens (110-1 and 110-2) secured to the one or more walls (Para. 0058 and see 161 of Figs. 9-11), wherein the one or more electronic screens are transparent (Para. 0039 and 0066) and configured to show electronic content thereon (Para. 0039 and 0066).
PNG
media_image1.png
595
697
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 2 and 14, Seo discloses, the one or more electronic screens comprise a transparent organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen (Para. 0039 and 0066).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Seo discloses, the one or more walls comprise a first wall (10) and a second wall (20), and wherein the one or more electronic screens comprise a first electronic screen (110-1) coupled to the first wall, and a second electronic screen (110-2) coupled to the second wall.
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Seo discloses, the first wall and the second wall are configured to be separated by an aisle within the internal cabin (Para. 0064 and see area where 121 and 152 are disposed in Fig. 14).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Seo discloses, the one or more walls (10, 20) are configured to extend to one or both of an overhead stowage bin (50) or a ceiling (40) within the internal cabin (see Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 9, Seo discloses, a control unit (120) in communication (Para. 0050-0052 and 121, 152) with the one or more electronic screens, wherein the control unit is configured to control operation of the one or more electronic screens to display various types of the electronic content (Para. 0040; note, discloses the control unit drives the displays to display video signals).
Regarding claim 10, Seo discloses, the vehicle is an aircraft (Para. 0063).
Regarding claim 12, Seo discloses, an aircraft (Figs. 1-14) comprising:
an internal cabin (Para. 0064 and see Fig. 14) having a first section (see annotated Fig. 14 below) from a second section (see annotated Fig. 14 above); and
a divider system (10, 20, 110-1, 110-2) within the internal cabin, wherein the divider system separates the first section (see annotated Fig. 14 above) from the second section (see annotated Fig. 14 above), the divider system comprising:
one or more walls (10, 20); and
one or more electronic screens (110-1 and 110-2) secured to the one or more walls (Para. 0058 and see 161 of Figs. 9-11), wherein the one or more electronic screens are transparent (Para. 0039 and 0066) and configured to show electronic content thereon (Para. 0039 and 0066).
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 (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 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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 2021/0059060) as applied to claim 3 above, in view of Spencer et al. (US 2020/0369361).
Seo remains as applied to claim 3 above.
Seo does not disclose each of the first electronic screen and the second electronic screens is a transparent organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen.
Spencer teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle that it would have been desirable to make each of the first electronic screen and the second electronic screens is a transparent organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen (Para. 0035 and see 116 of Figs. 6-9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make each of the first electronic screen and the second electronic screens is a transparent organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen as taught by the divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle of Spencer in the divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle of Seo since Spencer teaches it is known to include this feature in a divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle for the purpose of providing an electronic screen with enhanced viewing, decreased weight and improved passenger entertainment.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 2021/0059060) as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, in view of Kondo et al. (US 2008/0182076).
Seo remains as applied to claims 1 and 12 above.
Seo does not disclose the one or more electronic screens are selectively switchable between a transparent mode and an opaque mode.
Kondo teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle that it would have been desirable to make the one or more electronic screens are selectively switchable between a transparent mode and an opaque mode (Para. 0110).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the one or more electronic screens are selectively switchable between a transparent mode and an opaque mode as taught by the divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle of Kondo in the divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle of Seo since Kondo teaches it is known to include this feature in a divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle for the purpose of providing an electronic screen with reduced power consumption and improved brightness.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 2021/0059060) as applied to claim 1 and 12 above.
Seo remains as applied to claims 1 and 12 above.
Furthermore, Seo discloses, the divider divides the cabin of the vehicle into predetermined areas (sections), but does not explicitly disclose the first section is a first class section or a business class section, and the second section is the business class section or an economy section.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the predetermined areas of Seo the first section is a first class section or a business class section, and the second section is the business class section or an economy section because it is known for an aircraft to have a divider that divides the cabin into a first section that is a first class section or a business class section, and a second section that is the business class section or an economy section.
Claim 11 and 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 2021/0059060) as applied to claims 10 and 12 above, in view of Garrettson (US 2015/0042494).
Seo remains as applied to claims 10 and 12 above.
Seo does not disclose the control unit is configured to control the one or more electronic screens based on phases of a flight of the aircraft.
Garrettson teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle that it would have been desirable to make the control unit is configured to control the one or more electronic screens based on phases of a flight of the aircraft (Para. 0054-0055 and see 122 of Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the control unit is configured to control the one or more electronic screens based on phases of a flight of the aircraft as taught by the divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle of Garrettson in the divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle of Seo since Garrettson teaches it is known to include this feature in a divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle for the purpose of effectively notifying a passenger of information.
Regarding claim 19, Seo in view of Garrettson discloses and teaches as set forth above, and Seo further discloses, a control unit (120) in communication (Para. 0050-0052 and 121, 152) with the one or more electronic screens, wherein the control unit is configured to control operation of the one or more electronic screens to display various types of the electronic content (Para. 0040; note, discloses the control unit drives the displays to display video signals).
Furthermore, Garrettson teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in a divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle that it would have been desirable to make the control unit is configured to control the one or more electronic screens based on phases of a flight of the aircraft (Para. 0054-0055 and see 122 of Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the above mentioned limitations as taught by the divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle of Garrettson in the divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle of Seo since Garrettson teaches it is known to include this feature in a divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle for the purpose of effectively notifying a passenger of information.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 2021/0059060) in view of Spencer et al. (US 2020/0369361) in view of Garrettson (US 2015/0042494), and further in view of Kondo et al. (US 2008/0182076).
Regarding claim 20, Seo discloses, an aircraft (Figs. 1-14) comprising:
an internal cabin (Para. 0064 and see Fig. 14) having a first section (see annotated Fig. 14 above) from a second section (see annotated Fig. 14 above), and a divider system (10, 20, 110-1, 110-2) within the internal cabin, wherein the divider system separates the first section from the second section (see annotated Fig. 14 above), the divider system comprising:
a first wall (10) extending to one or both of a first overhead stowage bin (50) or a ceiling (40) within the internal cabin;
a first organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen (110-1) coupled to the first wall, wherein the first OLED screen is configured to show first electronic content thereon (Para. 0039 and 0066);
a second wall (20) separated from the first wall by an aisle (Para. 0064 and see area where 121 and 152 are disposed in Fig. 14), wherein the second wall extends to one or both of a second overhead stowage bin (50) or the ceiling (40) within the internal cabin;
a second OLED screen (110-2) coupled to the second wall, wherein the second transparent OLED screen is configured to show second electronic content thereon (Para. 0039 and 0066); and
a control unit (120) (120) in communication (Para. 0050-0052 and 121, 152) with the first OLED screen and the second OLED screen, wherein the control unit is configured to control operation of the first OLED screen and the second OLED screen to display various types of the first electronic content and the second electronic content (Para. 0040; note, discloses the control unit drives the displays to display video signals), respectively, and wherein the control unit is configured to control the first OLED screen and the second OLED screen (Para. 0040; note, discloses the control unit drives the displays to display video signals).
Furthermore, The Examiner points out that Seo discloses, the divider divides the cabin of the vehicle into predetermined areas (sections), but does not explicitly disclose the first section is a first class section or a business class section, and the second section is the business class section or an economy section.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the predetermined areas of Seo the first section is a first class section or a business class section, and the second section is the business class section or an economy section because it is known for an aircraft to have a divider that divides the cabin into a first section that is a first class section or a business class section, and a second section that is the business class section or an economy section.
PNG
media_image1.png
595
697
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Seo does not disclose the first electronic screen and the second electronic screens is a transparent organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen.
Spencer teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in aircraft that it would have been desirable to make the first electronic screen and the second electronic screens is a transparent organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen (Para. 0035 and see 116 of Figs. 6-9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to the first electronic screen and the second electronic screens is a transparent organic light-emitting diode (OLED) screen as taught by the aircraft of Spencer in the aircraft of Seo since Spencer teaches it is known to include this feature in an aircraft for the purpose of providing an electronic screen with enhanced viewing, decreased weight and improved passenger entertainment.
Seo in view of Spender does not disclose the control unit is configured to control the first transparent OLED screen and the second transparent OLED screen based on phases of a flight of the aircraft.
Garrettson teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an aircraft that it would have been desirable to make the control unit is configured to control the first transparent OLED screen and the second transparent OLED screen based on phases of a flight of the aircraft (Para. 0054-0055 and see 122 of Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the control unit is configured to control the first transparent OLED screen and the second transparent OLED screen based on phases of a flight of the aircraft as taught by the aircraft of Garrettson in the combination of Seo in view of Spencer since Garrettson teaches it is known to include this feature in an aircraft for the purpose of effectively notifying a passenger of information.
Seo, Spencer and Garrettson does not disclose the one or more electronic screens are selectively switchable between a transparent mode and an opaque mode.
Kondo teaches, from the same field of endeavor that in an aircraft that it would have been desirable to make the one or more electronic screens are selectively switchable between a transparent mode and an opaque mode (Para. 0110).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the one or more electronic screens are selectively switchable between a transparent mode and an opaque mode as taught by the aircraft of Kondo in the combination of Seo, Spencer and Garrettson since Kondo teaches it is known to include this feature in a divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle for the purpose of providing an electronic screen with reduced power consumption and improved brightness.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chen et al. (US 2017/0057638) and Nguyen et al. (US 2021/0070448) discloses a divider system within an internal cabin of a vehicle, the divider system comprising: one or more walls; and one or more electronic screens secured to the one or more walls.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAWAYNE A PINKNEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1305. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 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, Pinping Sun can be reached at 571-270-1284. 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.
/DAWAYNE PINKNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 01/16/2026