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 .
The Preliminary Amendment filed on 02/27/2024 has been acknowledged.
Specification
A substitute specification excluding the claims is required pursuant to 37 CFR 1.125(a) because a substitute specification under this section was not submitted with markings showing all the changes relative to the immediate prior version of the specification of record.
A substitute specification must not contain new matter. The substitute specification must be submitted with markings showing all the changes relative to the immediate prior version of the specification of record. The text of any added subject matter must be shown by underlining the added text. The text of any deleted matter must be shown by strike-through except that double brackets placed before and after the deleted characters may be used to show deletion of five or fewer consecutive characters. The text of any deleted subject matter must be shown by being placed within double brackets if strike-through cannot be easily perceived. An accompanying clean version (without markings) and a statement that the substitute specification contains no new matter must also be supplied. Numbering the paragraphs of the specification of record is not considered a change that must be shown.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “18” has been used to designate both fuel tank and microphone on Page 11 in Paragraph [0046] line 6 in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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.
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.
Claims 1-9 & 11-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Eid et al (US 6502042 B1) “hereinafter Eid”.
In regards to claim 1, Eid teaches a system for monitoring an aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13), the system comprising a pressure sensor (16) configured to receive an acoustic signal emitted from a location within the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) in use (Column 3, line 43 – Column 4, line 37 & Column 4, lines 47-67; Figures 1 & 2); and a controller (40, i.e. computer system) configured to: receive information indicative of the acoustic signal (44, i.e. sensor interface section functions to independently control and activate the various different sensors (16) coupled thereto and to receive, process and format the measurement signals from the various sensors (16)) from the pressure sensor (16) (Column 5, line 61 – Column 6, line 10); and perform a determination process to determine (48, i.e. processor carries out the functional and computational aspects of the present invention based on the time sampled data stream received from the sensors (16)), on the basis of the received acoustic signal, whether to output an indicator of a fault condition (i.e. density, acceleration and fuel height) of the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) (Column 5, line 35 – Column 6, line 67).
In regards to claim 2, Eid teaches wherein the controller (40) comprises a memory storing a machine learning model (i.e. neural networks) configured to receive information indicative of the acoustic signal as an input from the pressure sensor (16) and output information indicative of the fault condition (i.e. density, acceleration and fuel height) of the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) (Column 12, line 48 – Column 14, line 58; Figures 10 & 11).
In regards to claim 3, Eid teaches wherein the pressure sensor (16) is configured to be used for at least one further purpose in addition to receiving the acoustic signal from the location within the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) in use (Column 4, lines 61-67; Figures 2 & 2A).
In regards to claim 4, Eid teaches wherein the at least one further purpose comprises detecting a fuel level (i.e. fuel height) within the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) (Column 3, lines 47-65).
In regards to claim 5, Eid teaches comprising a plurality of pressure sensors (26 & 28) configured to receive the acoustic signal (44, via sensor interface section) emitted from the location within the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) in use (Column 4, lines 61-67; Figures 2 & 2A).
In regards to claim 6, Eid teaches a computer-implemented method (40, i.e. computer system) of monitoring an aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13), the method comprising: receiving an acoustic signal (44, i.e. sensor interface section functions to independently control and activate the various different sensors (16) coupled thereto and to receive, process and format the measurement signals from the various sensors (16)) from a location within the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) (Column 5, lines 5-26 & Column 5, line 61 – Column 6, line 10; Figures 2 & 2A); and performing a determination process to determine, on the basis of the received acoustic signal, whether to output an indicator of a fault condition (i.e. sensor failure) of the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) (Column 5, line 35 – Column 6, line 67).
In regards to claim 7, Eid teaches wherein the fault condition (i.e. sensor failure) comprises that at least one component (i.e. sensor) of the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) is not operating correctly (Column 6, lines 3-10).
In regards to claim 8, Eid teaches wherein the at least one component comprises at least one of: a pump, a valve and a support structure (i.e. universal sensor interface (USI) module) (Column 6, lines 3-10).
In regards to claim 9, Eid teaches wherein the fault condition comprises the presence of a foreign object (wherein the calculation of the fuel density is directly related to monitoring for potential impurities, adulteration, or quality of degradation) in the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) (Column 5, line 35 – Column 6, line 67).
In regards to claim 11, Eid teaches wherein the determination process (48, i.e. processor) comprises: inputting information indicative of the acoustic signal into a machine learning model (i.e. neural network), wherein the machine learning model is configured to provide data indicative of the fault condition (i.e. sensor failure) of the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13); and determining whether to output the indicator on the basis of the provided data (Column 12, line 48 – Column 14, line 58; Figures 10 & 11).
In regards to claim 12, Eid teaches comprising training the machine learning model (i.e. neural network) using training data (i.e. training points), wherein the training data comprises information indicative of a plurality of acoustic signals (via ultrasonic sensors (22)) with known fault conditions (Column 12, line 48 – Column 14, line 58; Figures 10 & 11).
In regards to claim 13, Eid teaches wherein the determination process (48, i.e. processor) comprises comparing at least one characteristic value of the received acoustic signal via ultrasonic sensors (22) with at least one predetermined characteristic value (i.e. predetermined threshold) (Column 7, lines 33-63).
In regards to claim 14, Eid teaches wherein the characteristic value of the received acoustic signal via ultrasonic sensors (22) comprises at least one of: an amplitude, a pitch, a duration and a frequency (Column 7, lines 33-63).
In regards to claim 15, Eid teaches wherein the determination process (48, i.e. processor) comprises determining a type of fault condition (i.e. faulty measurement signal), and the indicator indicates the type of fault condition (i.e. faulty measurement signal) (Column 6, lines 11-27).
In regards to claim 16, Eid teaches receiving the acoustic signal comprises receiving the acoustic signal at a plurality of sensors (22, i.e. ultrasonic sensors) and wherein the determination process (48, i.e. processor) comprises calculating a location of an origin of the acoustic signal based on a property of the acoustic signal received at each sensor of the plurality of sensors (22, i.e. ultrasonic sensors) (Column 4, lines 61-67).
In regards to claim 17, Eid teaches wherein the determination of the type of the fault condition (i.e. faulty measurement signal) is based at least in part on the calculated origin of the acoustic signal (Column 4, lines 61-67).
In regards to claim 18, Eid teaches wherein the property of the received acoustic signal is a time of arrival of the received acoustic signal at each sensor of the plurality of sensors (22) (Column 6, lines 11-42).
In regards to claim 19, Eid teaches comprising storing data indicative of at least one of the received acoustic signal (44, i.e. sensor interface section functions to independently control and activate the various different sensors (16) coupled thereto and to receive, process and format the measurement signals from the various sensors (16)) and the determined fault condition (i.e. faulty measurement signal) on a local memory (Column 5, line 61 – Column 6, line 10; Figures 2 & 2A).
In regards to claim 20, Eid teaches comprising transmitting data indicative of at least one of the received acoustic signal (44, i.e. sensor interface section functions to independently control and activate the various different sensors (16) coupled thereto and to receive, process and format the measurement signals from the various sensors (16))and the determined fault condition (i.e. faulty measurement signal) to a location remote from the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (13) (Column 5, line 61 – Column 6, line 10; Figures 2 & 2A).
In regards to claim 21, Eid teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by an aircraft controller (40, i.e. computer system), cause the aircraft controller (40) to carry out the computer-implemented method (Column 5, lines 35-60).
In regards to claim 22, Eid teaches an aircraft (10) comprising the system (Column 3, lines 43-45; Figure 1).
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eid et al (US 6502042 B1) “hereinafter Eid” in view of Orchard et al (US 9964959 B2) “hereinafter Orchard”.
In regards to claim 10, Eid teaches the claimed invention except for wherein the fault condition comprises whether inspection of the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly is required.
Orchard teaches a method and apparatus for inspecting an aircraft fuel tank comprising the fault condition (i.e. structural defect of the fuel tank) further comprises whether inspection of the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly (10) is required (Column 5, lines 11-64).
It would have been obvious to one having skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention being made to provide whether inspection of the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly is required as taught by Orchard into the aircraft fluid storage tank assembly monitor of Eid for the purpose of providing a lifetime of inspection results to determine any common failures in a particular type of fuel tank (Column 5, lines 59-64; Orchard).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Vassberg (US 12330803 B2) - The present invention generally relates to the field of air travel. In particular, the present invention is directed to a method for fueling an aircraft.
Carralero et al (US 10648846 B2) - The present disclosure relates generally to systems and methods for determining a fuel level measurement of a fuel tank, and more particularly to, determining a fuel level measurement of the fuel tank based on the outputs of optical sensors mounted inside the fuel tank.
Nguyen et al (US 10060781 B2) - This disclosure generally relates to methods and systems for measuring a quantity of liquid fuel in a fuel tank, such as a storage tank or other container. More particularly, this disclosure relates to methods and systems for measuring the quantity of liquid fuel in a fuel tank in a manner that does not require the presence of electrical components in the fuel tank.
Lohmann et al (US 9045238 B2) - The invention is directed to an apparatus and a method for fuelling an aircraft tank system, in particular during performing a tank leakage test.
Lynnworth et al (US 4320659 A) - This invention relates in general to ultrasonic measurement systems. More specifically, it relates to an ultrasonic system that utilizes obliquely incident, vertically polarized shear mode (SV) energy propagated in a solid to measure the acoustic impedance and related properties of an adjacent fluid, typically a liquid, and in its preferred form measures a selected parameter of the fluid--its impedance or level--while rendering the measurement substantially insensitive to variations in other parameters affecting the transmission of the interrogating sound wave.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERMAINE L JENKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2179. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-3 EST.
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/J.L.J/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/PETER J MACCHIAROLO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855