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 .
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 8 and 16-20 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.
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 recites the limitation "the second direction" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 16, the limitation “a channeled end with sidewalls spaced apart such that an end of the right diagonal linking member pivotally secures in between the sidewalls such that the end is secured to the right truss link member and the forward-right wing truss joint simultaneously” because it is not clear which ‘end’ is being referred to by “the end”.
Claims 17-20 are rejected for depending on a rejected claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 and 9-15 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, Benthien (US 9248902 B2) discloses a wing-fuselage truss joint assembly for an aircraft comprising:
a forward-left joining member, an aft-left joining member, a forward-right joining member, and an aft-right joining member configured to join a wing to a fuselage (Benthiem, figures 1 and 4, items 6, 11, 12, and 3, joining member on each side), wherein each of the joining members comprises:
a wing truss joint mechanically coupled to a spar of the wing (Benthiem, figures 1 and 4, item 13, joints attaching to wings and thereby coupling with wing as a whole);
a fuselage truss joint mechanically coupled to a bulkhead of the fuselage (Benthiem, figure 1, items 2 and 11, joint connecting with fuselage); and
an upright member pivotally coupled to the wing truss joint at a first end and pivotally coupled to the fuselage truss joint at a second end (Benthiem, figure 1, item 12, members between joints);
a left diagonal linking member pivotally coupled to an aft-left fuselage truss joint and pivotally coupled to a forward-left wing truss joint (Benthiem, figure 1, item 7, linking member coupled with both the fuselage and the wing and would thus be coupled with the all other truss joints); and
a right diagonal linking member pivotally coupled to an aft-right fuselage truss joint and pivotally coupled to a forward-right wing truss joint (Benthiem, figure 1, item 7, linking member coupled with both the fuselage and the wing and would thus be coupled with the all other truss joints; mirror on other side of craft), except:
an interconnecting joint mechanically coupled to a forward bulkhead between the forward-left joining member and the forward-right joining member;
at least one interconnecting member pivotally coupled to the interconnecting joint and pivotally coupled to a forward wing truss joint.
Voss teaches an interconnecting joint mechanically coupled to a fuselage between the left joining member and the right joining member (Voss, figure 5, item 106, joint on fuselage frame between left and right members);
at least one interconnecting member pivotally coupled to the interconnecting joint and pivotally coupled to a forward wing truss joint (Voss, figure 5, item 105 and 107).
Benthien and Voss are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft to wing attachments. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the joining between the wing and fuselage of Benthient with the interconnecting joint and members of Voss with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide redundancy in the case of a single joint/member failing.
The prior art fails to teach “a left diagonal linking member pivotally coupled directly to an aft-left fuselage truss joint at a left pivotal connection and pivotally coupled to a forward-left wing truss joint, wherein the left pivotal connection is formed into the aft-left fuselage truss joint; a right diagonal linking member pivotally coupled directly to an aft-right fuselage truss joint at a right pivotal connection and pivotally coupled to a forward-right wing truss joint, wherein the right pivotal connection is formed into the aft-right fuselage truss joint” alone or in combination.
Regarding claim 10, Benthien (US 9248902 B2) discloses a wing-fuselage truss joint assembly for an aircraft comprising:
a forward-left joining member, an aft-left joining member, a forward-right joining member, and an aft-right joining member configured to join a wing to a fuselage (Benthiem, figures 1 and 4, items 6, 11, 12, and 3, joining member on each side), wherein each of the joining members comprises:
a wing truss joint mechanically coupled to a spar of the wing (Benthiem, figures 1 and 4, item 13, joints attaching to wings and thereby coupling with wing as a whole);
a fuselage truss joint mechanically coupled to a bulkhead of the fuselage (Benthiem, figure 1, items 2 and 11, joint connecting with fuselage); and
an upright member pivotally coupled to the wing truss joint at a first end and pivotally coupled to the fuselage truss joint at a second end (Benthiem, figure 1, item 12, members between joints);
a left diagonal linking member pivotally coupled to an aft-left fuselage truss joint and pivotally coupled to a forward-left wing truss joint (Benthiem, figure 1, item 7, linking member coupled with both the fuselage and the wing and would thus be coupled with the all other truss joints); and
a right diagonal linking member pivotally coupled to an aft-right fuselage truss joint and pivotally coupled to a forward-right wing truss joint (Benthiem, figure 1, item 7, linking member coupled with both the fuselage and the wing and would thus be coupled with the all other truss joints; mirror on other side of craft), except:
an interconnecting joint mechanically coupled to a forward bulkhead between the forward-left joining member and the forward-right joining member;
at least one interconnecting member pivotally coupled to the interconnecting joint and pivotally coupled to a forward wing truss joint;
a right linking member pivotally coupled to an aft-right wing truss joint and pivotally coupled to the forward-right wing truss joint; and
a left linking member pivotally coupled to an aft-left wing truss joint and pivotally coupled to the forward-left wing truss joint.
Voss teaches an interconnecting joint mechanically coupled to a fuselage between the left joining member and the right joining member (Voss, figure 5, item 106, joint on fuselage frame between left and right members);
at least one interconnecting member pivotally coupled to the interconnecting joint and pivotally coupled to a forward wing truss joint (Voss, figure 5, item 105 and 107).
Benthien and Voss are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft to wing attachments. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the joining between the wing and fuselage at the front and rear of the wing of Benthient with the interconnecting joint and members of Voss with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide redundancy in the case of a single joint/member failing.
The prior art fails to teach “wherein the right linking member comprises a channeled end with sidewalls spaced apart such that an end of the right diagonal linking member pivotally secures in between the sidewalls at the forward-right wing truss joint, and
wherein the left linking member comprises a channeled end with sidewalls spaced apart such that an end of the left diagonal linking member pivotally secures in between the sidewalls at the forward-left wing truss joint” alone or in combination.
Claims 2-7, 9, and 11-15 are allowed for depending on an allowable claim.
Thus, the prior art fails to teach the claimed matter alone and it would not have been obvious to meet the claims either without undue hindsight based on the applicant' s disclosure.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claim 8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 16 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Regarding claim 16, Benthien (US 9248902 B2) discloses a wing-fuselage truss joint assembly for an aircraft comprising:
a forward-left joining member, an aft-left joining member, a forward-right joining member, and an aft-right joining member configured to join a wing to a fuselage (Benthien, figures 1 and 4, items 6, 11, 12, and 3, joining members on each side), wherein the joining members comprises:
a wing truss joint mechanically coupled to a spar of the wing (Benthien, figures 1 and 4, item 13, joints attaching to wing and thereby coupling with wings as a whole);
a fuselage truss joint mechanically coupled to a bulkhead of the fuselage (Benthien, figure 1, items 2 and 11, joint connecting with fuselage); and
an upright member pivotally coupled to the wing truss joint at a first end and pivotally coupled to the fuselage truss joint at a second end (Benthien, figure 1, item 12, members between joints);
a left diagonal linking member pivotally coupled to an aft-left fuselage truss joint and pivotally coupled to a forward-left wing truss joint (Benthien, figure 1, item 7, linking member coupled with both the fuselage and the wing and would thus be coupled with the all other truss joints); and
a right diagonal linking member pivotally coupled to an aft-right fuselage truss joint and pivotally coupled to a forward-right wing truss joint (Benthien, figure 1, item 7, linking member coupled with both the fuselage and the wing and would thus be coupled with the all other truss joints; mirrored on other side of craft); except:
an interconnecting joint mechanically coupled to a forward bulkhead between the forward-left joining member and the forward-right joining member;
an interconnecting member pivotally coupled to the interconnecting joint and pivotally coupled to a forward wing truss joint; and
an aft truss member pivotally coupled from an aft bulkhead to an aft wing truss joint;
and a right truss link member having a channeled end with sidewalls spaced apart such that an end of the right diagonal linking member pivotally secures in between the sidewalls such that the end is secured to the right truss link member and the forward-right wing truss joint simultaneously.
Voss teaches an interconnecting joint mechanically coupled to a fuselage between the left joining member and the right joining member (Voss, figure 5, item 106, joint on fuselage frame between left and right members);
an interconnecting member pivotally coupled to the interconnecting joint and pivotally coupled to a forward wing truss joint (Voss, figure 5, items 105 or 107); and
a truss member pivotally coupled from a fuselage to a wing truss joint (Voss, figure 5, items 105 or 107)
Benthien and Voss are both considered analogous art as they are both in the same field of aircraft to wing attachments. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the joining between the wing and fuselage at the front and rear of the wing of Benthient with the interconnecting joint and members of Voss with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide redundancy in the case of a single joint/member failing.
Such a modified invention would meet the requirement for an interconnecting member and an aft truss member as claimed.
The prior art fails to teach “a right truss link member having a channeled end with sidewalls spaced apart such that an end of the right diagonal linking member pivotally secures in between the sidewalls such that the end is secured to the right truss link member and the forward-right wing truss joint simultaneously” alone or in combination.
Claims 17-20 are indicated for depending on claim 16.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9 of applicant’s reply, filed 12/23/2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 5, 10, 14, 15, 16, and dependencies have been fully considered under 35 USC 112(b) are persuasive. These rejections have been withdrawn. Note: the rejection of claim 8 under 35 USC 112(b) that was not addressed by applicant’s response remains.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9 of applicant’s reply, filed 12/23/2025, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 10, 16, and dependencies have been fully considered under 35 USC 102/103 are persuasive. These rejection have been withdrawn.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 115009505 A teaches direction connection between fuselage and spar
Haack (DE 102006027707 A1) teaches a similar bulkhead arrangement
Stephens (US 20230365247 A1) teaches a truss attachment for an engine
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 RYAN ANDREW YANKEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9979. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30 - 5:00.
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, Joshua Michener can be reached at (571) 272-1467. 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.
/RYAN ANDREW YANKEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642