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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A, 1, I, AA (Fig. 1, filler 410, Fig. 3 middle picture, Fig. 5, with support 210, and Fig. 7) in the reply filed on 02/18/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no additional search burden.
This is not found persuasive because species always refer to the different embodiments (MPEP 806.04(e)) of the invention as stated by Applicant in his specification under “description of drawings”.
Furthermore the office has identified the different search areas necessary for the varying species in the restriction requirement dated 12/18/2025.
For instance searching species IV requires searches in B64C 3/18, 3/187 and species I-III do not. This establishes a search burden and proves the species require different searches, it is not a mere conclusory statement, it is a very specific example of an extended search requirement for a particular species. Additionally species I would require search queries include “I-beam near3 fill$4 same composit$” while species II and III would not. Similarly, a search of species 2 would require text queries for randomly oriented fibers while a search of species 1 would require text queries for fibers in differing directions. Etc.
Applicant's own disclosure stated that they are of different or alternative embodiments. It is a serious burden on the Examiner to search multiple embodiments because examiner has to search for the different feature(s) of the each species. If applicant does not believe that the species are different, then applicant can admit on the record that the species are obvious variants over one another and the species election requirement will be withdrawn.
Additionally it is noted that upon allowance of any generic claim to the species, the restriction will be withdrawn and the species rejoined.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim 12 is withdrawn as it pertains to the details of the rib 310 depicted in unelected Fig. 6 species IV.
Specification
The abstract is objected to because of the following informalities:
The abstract is objected to because it includes the phrase “are disclosed” in line 1 which is implied and should be deleted.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
Reference numeral 220 is not found in the drawings.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Stawski (US 2021/0023796, cited in IDS).
For claims 1 and 9, Stawski discloses an aircraft assembly (abstract, fig. 1), comprising:
a first composite structure; a second composite structure (see figs. 2-7, first and second composite structures of the wing panel); and
a composite radius filler (200) comprising:
a body (Fig. 11-12, comprising radius filler elements 220) having a longitudinal axis, wherein the body comprises:
a main-portion (Figs. 11-12, first two left radius filler elements 220) that extends along the longitudinal axis and that has a first stiffness (para 0065); and
an end-portion that extends along the longitudinal axis (Figs. 11-12, right radius filler segment 220), that is adjacent to the main-portion (see Figs. 11-12), that defines at least a portion of a terminal end of the body (224), and that has a second stiffness that differs from the first stiffness (Figs. 13-16. Para 0065, implicit stiffness of 200 is different shapes at different locations along the length);
wherein at least a first portion of an interface (228) between the main-portion and the end-portion is at an angle relative to the longitudinal axis (228 at an angle of 90 deg Fig. 12); and
wherein the composite radius filler is operatively positioned between the first composite structure and the second composite structure (see figs. 5-7).
For claim 2, Stawski further discloses wherein the main-portion comprises main- portion fibers, wherein all of the main-portion fibers are unidirectional, and wherein the main-portion fibers are aligned with the longitudinal axis (para 0056).
For claim 3, Stawski further discloses wherein the end-portion comprises end- portion fibers that are not all unidirectional (para 0056).
For claim 4, Stawski further discloses wherein a tapered portion of the main- portion tapers in width and in height as the tapered portion extends towards the terminal end of the body (para 0063, “dovetail configuration”).
For claim 5, Stawski further discloses wherein the first portion of the interface is positioned at an angle between 5-90 degrees relative to the longitudinal axis of the body (228, 90 deg, fig.12).
For claim 6, Stawski further discloses wherein the interface comprises a second portion, and wherein the second portion of the interface is at a second angle relative to the longitudinal axis (any portion of 228 can be considered a “second portion” of 228, it is also at an angle of 90 deg, the claim does not require the second angle different from the first).
For claim 10, Stawski further discloses wherein the first composite structure comprises a support extending away from the second composite structure, and wherein the body of the composite radius filler is arranged within a void formed between the second composite structure and the support (see figs. 1-7).
For claim 11, Stawski further discloses wherein the aircraft assembly comprises an aircraft, wherein the aircraft comprises a wing, and wherein the composite radius filler is arranged within the wing (see figs. 1-7).
Claim(s) 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by McCarville et al. (US 9463864, cited in IDS, hereafter referred to as McCarville).
For claim 1 and 9, McCarville discloses an aircraft assembly (abstract, fig. 1-3), comprising:
a first composite structure; a second composite structure (see figs. 2-3, first and second composite structures of the wing panel); and
a composite radius filler (300) comprising:
a body (Fig. 11-15) having a longitudinal axis, wherein the body comprises:
a main-portion (see Fig. 15, main portion is considered the portion in front of 370) that extends along the longitudinal axis and that has a first stiffness (Col. 12, line 66-Col. 13, line 23); and
an end-portion that extends along the longitudinal axis (Figs. 15, rear of 370), that is adjacent to the main-portion (see Fig. 15), that defines at least a portion of a terminal end of the body (see Figs. 11-15), and that has a second stiffness that differs from the first stiffness (Col. 5, lines 38-44, Col. 12, line 66-Col. 13, line 23);
wherein at least a first portion of an interface (at 370) between the main-portion and the end-portion is at an angle relative to the longitudinal axis (see Fig. 15 annotated below); and
wherein the composite radius filler is operatively positioned between the first composite structure and the second composite structure (see figs. 2-3).
PNG
media_image1.png
456
652
media_image1.png
Greyscale
For claim 2 McCarville further discloses wherein the main-portion comprises main- portion fibers, wherein all of the main-portion fibers are unidirectional, and wherein the main-portion fibers are aligned with the longitudinal axis (Col. 5, lines 50-57).
For claim 3, McCarville further discloses wherein the end-portion comprises end- portion fibers that are not all unidirectional (Col. 5, lines 50-57).
For claim 4, McCarville further discloses wherein a tapered portion of the main- portion tapers in width and in height as the tapered portion extends towards the terminal end of the body (see Fig. 11).
For claim 5, McCarville further discloses wherein the first portion of the interface is positioned at an angle between 5-90 degrees relative to the longitudinal axis of the body (see fig. 15).
For claim 6, McCarville further discloses wherein the interface comprises a second portion, and wherein the second portion of the interface is at a second angle relative to the longitudinal axis (see annotated Fig. 15 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
456
652
media_image2.png
Greyscale
For claim 7, McCarville further discloses wherein the second portion extends to the terminal end of the body (see annotated Fig. 15 above).
For claim 8, McCarville further discloses wherein the interface extends to the terminal end of the body (see annotated Fig. 15 above).
For claim 10, McCarville further discloses wherein the first composite structure comprises a support extending away from the second composite structure, and wherein the body of the composite radius filler is arranged within a void formed between the second composite structure and the support (see figs. 2-3).
For claim 11, McCarville further discloses wherein the aircraft assembly comprises an aircraft, wherein the aircraft comprises a wing, and wherein the composite radius filler is arranged within the wing (see figs. 2-3).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The cited prior art of record is noted as it pertains to composite fillers for aircraft I beams and load structures.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAGDALENA TOPOLSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3568. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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 Huson can be reached at 5712705301. 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.
/MAGDALENA TOPOLSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642