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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/6/2026 has been entered.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-6, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coleman (US 10,307,871 B2), in view of Grip (US 2023/0140102 A1), in view of Bannink (US 4,556,591), and in view of Palombini (US 2024/0051676 A1).
Claim 1: Coleman discloses an aircraft fuel cell arrangement, comprising:
an aircraft cooling device (to clarify, as claimed aircraft cooling device is aircraft skin component, further skin component is a composite structure that can be used in any application including aircraft) for cooling a fluid, or the drainage device, or both, the aircraft cooling device configured as an aircraft skin component (aircraft is intended use; to clarify, skin component is a composite structure that can be used in any application including aircraft) for the aircraft (intended use),
the aircraft skin component comprising
an integrated ply (layer 306) of one or more hollow fibers (1102), each hollow fiber (1102) of the integrated ply configured for conducting the fluid (fluid transfer 1103) from one end portion to another end portion (column 72 lines 48-55: fluid transfer component comprises of hollow fibers which the inner surface 1107 of hollow fibers 1102 define channels through which transfer fluid 1103 flows in the fluid transfer component 1105) of the hollow fiber (1102) such that the fluid supply (column 65 lines 4-5: fluid is pumped from reservoir) or the drainage device is configured to pump the fluid through the one or more hollow fibers of the integrated ply (306); and
an integrated fiber arrangement of one or more hollow fibers (column 52 lines 1-4: channels of bundle of fibers used as fiber arrangement),
each hollow fiber (1102) of the integrated fiber arrangement (channels of bundle of fibers used as fiber arrangement) configured for conducting a fluid from one end portion to another end portion (functional language/intended use) of the hollow fiber (1102) such that the fluid is pumped through (column 61 line45-47; column 66 line 42: fluid is pumped by pump to flow through channels) the one or more hollow fibers (1102), in fluid connection with the integrated fiber arrangement for pumping the fluid (column 66 line 42: fluid is pumped by pump) through the one or more hollow fibers (1102) of the fiber arrangement (channels of bundle of fibers used as fiber arrangement), and
wherein the one or more hollow fibers (1102) of the integrated ply (layer 306) form structure- reinforcing for the aircraft skin component (Coleman discloses hollow fibers 1102 which are used in composite materials in order to reinforce the structure which is applicable to aircraft skin component or wing or other part of the aircraft as desired).
Coleman discloses the claimed limitations in claim 1, but fails to disclose an aircraft fluid supply or drainage device, a fuel cell device fluidically connected with the aircraft fluid supply or drainage device, wherein the fuel cell device includes a polar plate.
However, Palombini teaches an aircraft fluid supply (paragraph [29]: coolant source 144 includes a tank to supply coolant by pump through channels 132) for the purpose of absorbing and dissipating heat in cooling device of the aircraft (paragraph [3]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Coleman to include an aircraft fluid supply as taught by Palombini to be in fluid communication with the aircraft skin component of Coleman in order to absorb and to dissipate heat in cooling device of the aircraft.
Further, Grip teaches a fuel cell device (paragraph [167]: fuel tanks used as fuel cell device) fluidly connected with the aircraft fluid supply (intended use; taught by Palombini) for the purpose of reducing interference drag which significantly improves the aerodynamic performance of the aircraft (paragraph [3]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Coleman to include a fuel cell device as taught by Grip in order to reduce interference drag which significantly improves the aerodynamic performance of the aircraft.
Further, Bannink teaches a polar plate (column 3 lines 47-50: plate made from multiple of laminations in form of fiber, plates forming wings, fuselage and fuel tanks 12 integral within the wing, plate structure forming fuel tank) for the purpose of reducing maintenance cost and providing a light weight and stiff fuel tank to prevent damages from fatigue in the sense that metal material does (column 1 line 33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the invention of Coleman to include a polar plate as taught by Bannink in order to reduce maintenance cost and providing a light weight and stiff fuel tank to prevent damages from fatigue in the sense that metal material does.
Claim 2: Coleman as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the one or more hollow fibers (1102) of the integrated fiber arrangement, or the one or more hollow fibers (1102) of the integrated ply (306), or both respectively and independently:
are configured as carbon fibers (column 7 line 6); or
include one or more cavities extending from one of the end portions to the other of the end portions of the hollow fiber (to clarify, hollow fibers includes cavities to form channels through which fluid flows through the cavities; see column 72 lines 52-55, see FIG.11 fibers 1102 include cavities inside inner surface 1107 of fibers); or both.
Claim 3: Coleman as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the skin component is configured as a composite (column 7 lines 39-44: each layer has different thermal mechanical properties such as composite materials), a laminate, or both.
Claim 4: Coleman as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the integrated ply (306) is integrated in an outermost layer (to clarify, outer most layer 306 is at top of the laminate structure) of the skin component (FIG.3).
Claim 5: Coleman as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the one or more hollow fibers (1102) are configured for conducting a coolant (column 63 lines 18-22: fluid transfer component includes hollow fibers with a heat transfer fluid flowing through fibers to cool a liquid).
Claim 6: Coleman as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed 1, wherein the aircraft skin component (to clarify, skin component is a composite structure with fibers matrix arrangement that can be used in any application including aircraft) comprising a wing-fuselage fairing, or a belly fairing, or any part of either (Grip, paragraph [135]: aircraft includes the skin panel with wing-fuselage joint covered by wing fairing).
Claim 10: Coleman as modified discloses the apparatus as claimed in claim 1, an aircraft (intended use; column 59 line 9: aircraft).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to all the claims under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 & 103 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Examiner response to Applicant’s arguments on pages 4-6: Examiner respectfully disagrees:
The argument regarding limitations such as "configured for conducting; configured to pump", they are considered functional language/intended use, because this is an apparatus claim which is rely on or base on structures, it is not a method claim. Further, the invention is about fuel cell for aircraft therefore aircraft is intended use. Regarding limitation "fuel cell device", Coleman is modified to include fuel cell device taught by Grip in order to reduce drag. Note that no limitations replaced neither substituted any of the limitations that disclosed by Coleman. Further regarding the amendments, as indicated in the office action, Coleman discloses hollow fibers 1102 which are used in composite materials in order to reinforce the structure which is applicable to aircraft skin component or wing or other part of the aircraft as desired.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure which is relevant to Aircraft system:
Sabanayagam (US 2024/0083138 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI whose telephone number is (313)446-6612. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 am to 5:00 pm 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, Len Tran can be reached on (571) 272-1184. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KAMRAN TAVAKOLDAVANI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3763 /PAUL ALVARE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
