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 .
Status of Claims
The Examiner acknowledges that the current application is a continuation (CON) of the parent application 17842458, which has an effective filing date of 06/16/2022.
Response to Arguments
The Office Action mailed on April 14, 2026, is withdrawn because it was based on claims filed on March 25, 2024, rather than the claims currently under examination. A new ground of rejection is set forth herein based on the Preliminary Amendment filed on January 12, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 21 – 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 21, line 10 – 15 recite “determine, based on sensor data generated by the sensor system, a surface- interaction condition affecting vertical movement of the aircraft chassis relative to the environment; and control the propulsion system to modulate thrust generated by at least one of the plurality of independently controllable propulsion units based on the surface-interaction condition.”
The claim recites determining “a surface-interaction condition affecting vertical movement of the aircraft chassis relative to the environment” based on sensor data and “control the propulsion system based on the surface-interaction condition”. However, the specification is narrowly limited to measuring and compensating for “surface tension” of a fluid surface using dedicated surface tension sensors (e.g., QELS systems applying Lamb’s equation) and calculating a corresponding reaction force. See paragraphs [0005], [0017]–[0018], [0022]–[0023], [0026]–[0034], and the associated figures. The broader term “surface-interaction condition” is not used or described in the specification and encompasses subject matter (e.g., other types of surface interactions) for which the disclosure provides neither a representative number of species nor a disclosure of common structural or functional features. Consequently, the specification does not demonstrate that the inventor was in possession of the full scope of the claimed subject matter at the time of filing. Applicant is required to amend the claims to recite only the subject matter that is adequately supported by the original disclosure.
Claims 22 – 39 are dependent from claim 21 and are rejected for the same basis as claim 21 above.
Claim 40 recites a method with substantially similar scope as claim 21, thus being rejected for the same basis as claim 21 above.
Note: No prior art rejection under 102 or 103 is made at this time because the rejection of claims 21 – 40 under 112a set forth above must first be resolved.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7320. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 11am - 7pm 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, James J Lee can be reached at (571) 270-5965. 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.
/STEVEN VU NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights