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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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: “Thermocouple 76” in paragraph [0054] and “Memory 6” in paragraph [0055] does not exist in any of the figures. 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 § 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 3, 5 and 8-11 are 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.
Claim 3 recites “the fuel storage system” which lacks antecedent basis and is unclear if this refers to the “fuel system” in claim 1.
Claim 5 recites “the cryogenic fuel,” which lacks antecedent basis, because claim 1 recites only “a fuel,” rendering unclear whether the claim is limited to cryogenic fuel.
Claim 8 recites “substantially free,” which is a term of degree lacking objective boundaries in the claim and in the specification. Therefore, the scope of claim 8 is not reasonably certain. See MPEP § 2173.05(b)
Claim 9-11 depend from claim 8 and are indefinite for the same reason.
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)(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.
Claims 1-6, 8-9, 13-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gaikwad et al (US 20230294838 A1, hereafter Gaikwad).
As per claim 1, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“A fuel system comprising: a chamber for storing a fuel” at paragraph [0020];
“…an optical differential pressure sensor” at Summary; paragraph [0006];
“one or more processors in communication with the optical differential pressure sensor” at paragraph [0006];
“…wherein the optical differential pressure sensor is fluidically connected to the chamber and is configured to” at paragraph [0027], Figures 2C-D, 3A-E;
“…when the fuel is stored in the chamber, output a signal indicative of a pressure difference in the optical differential pressure sensor to the one or more processors.” at paragraph [0054], Figures 2C-D, 3A-E.
As per claim 2, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The fuel system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to gauge fuel stored within the chamber based on a signal output by the optical differential pressure sensor.” At Summary paragraph [0005] and [0006].
As per claim 3, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The fuel storage system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause an indication to be output to an operator, based on the signal received from the differential pressure sensor.” at paragraph [0052] and [0054], 714 of Figure 7, Refuel Panel of Figure 8.
As per claim 4, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The fuel system according to claim 1, wherein the optical differential pressure sensor is located outside of the chamber.” at paragraph [0033].
As per claim 5, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The fuel system according to claim 1, wherein the optical differential pressure sensor is positioned such that, when the fuel is stored in the chamber, the differential pressure sensor is located above a plane defined by a surface of the cryogenic fuel.” at paragraph [0023].
As per claim 6, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The fuel system according to claim 1, wherein the optical differential pressure sensor is located in a vacuum.” at paragraph [0046].
As per claim 8, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The fuel system according to claim 7, wherein, when the fuel is stored in the chamber, the chamber comprises a head space which is substantially free of fuel in a liquid state and a liquid space in which fuel in the liquid state is located, and wherein a first side of the diaphragm is fluidically connected to the head space and a second side of the diaphragm is fluidically connected to the liquid space.” at paragraph [0046]; Figure 6.
As per claim 9, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The fuel system according to claim 8, comprising a first feed pipe and a second feed pipe, wherein the first side of the diaphragm is fluidically connected to the head space by the first feed pipe and the second side of the diaphragm is fluidically connected to the liquid space by the second feed pipe.” at paragraph [0046]; 630 of Figure 6.
As per claim 11, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The fuel system according to claim 9, wherein the first feed pipe and the second feed pipe are thermally insulated.” at paragraph [0046]; 620 at Figure 6. Gaikwad describes the fuel system incased in an outer tank with the pipes in a vacuumed space. The vacuum can be considered as a type of insulator because it minimizes heat transfer.
As per claim 13, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The fuel system according to claim 1, further comprising: a temperature sensor configured to determine a temperature of gas within the optical differential pressure sensor.” 350 of Figure 3A.
As per claim 14, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“An aircraft fuel system comprising the fuel system according to claim 1.” at paragraph [0033];
As per claim 15, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“An aircraft comprising the fuel system according to claim 1.” at paragraph [0032-0033]; Figure 1 and 2B.
As per claim 16, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The aircraft according to claim 15, wherein the chamber of the fuel system is located within at least one of a wing of the aircraft and a tail section of the aircraft.” Figure 1 and 2B.
As per claim 17, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“A method of gauging a fuel stored within a chamber, the method comprising: measuring a differential pressure in the chamber using an optical differential pressure sensor;” at paragraph [0031];
“outputting, by the optical differential pressure sensor, a signal indicative of the differential pressure; receiving, at one or more processors, the signal output by the differential pressure sensor; and based on the received signal, at paragraph [0050]; 702 and 704 of Figure 7.
“gauging the fuel stored within the chamber using the one or more processors.” at paragraph [0059]; 960 of Figure 9
As per claim 18, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The method according to claim 17, comprising causing an indication to be output based on the received signal.” at paragraph [0047] and [0050]; 670 and 675 of Figure 6; 792 of Figure 7.
As per claim 20, Gaikwad teaches the following:
“The method according to claim 17, further comprising: storing information indicative of the differential pressure across a diaphragm on a memory.” at paragraph [0051].
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaikwad as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takano Toshiyuki (JP 2005069705, hereafter Toshiyuki).
As per claim 7, Gaikwad does not teach that the gas is located on both sides of the diaphragm.
However, Toshiyuki does teach the following:
“…and wherein the optical differential pressure sensor is fluidically connected to the chamber such that, when the fuel is stored in the chamber, a gas is located on both sides of the diaphragm.” Section [0002]; Figure 3; and “Means for solving the problems” at Section [0019].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Gaikwad with both sides of the diaphragm have gas in order to improve pressure measurement accuracy.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaikwad as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Minas et al (US 20240151358 A1).
As per claim 10, Gaikwad does not teach the second feed pipe into the chamber is at least partly submerged in the fuel.
However, Minas teaches the following:
“The fuel system according to claim 9, wherein the second feed pipe extends into the chamber such that, when the fuel is stored within the chamber, the second feed pipe is at least partly submerged in the fuel.” 420 and 432 of Figure 4.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Gaikwad with the second feed pipe submerged in fuel in order to allow the optical differential pressure sensor to be positioned away from the chamber, so that it will reduce the likelihood of condensation and evaporation. As a result, this will improve measurement accuracy.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaikwad as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sanguignol, Cedric (EP 2551200 A2, hereafter Sanguignol).
As per claim 12, Gaikwad does not teach a pressurized fuel system.
However, Sanguignol teaches the following:
“The fuel system according to claim 1, wherein the fuel system is pressurized.” at Background of Invention; paragraph [0002].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Gaikwad with a pressurized fuel system in order to eliminate the need for absolute pressure sensors.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaikwad as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Carralero et al (CA 2972458 A1, hereafter Carralero).
As per claim 19, Gaikwad does not teach the fuel system determining the weight of fuel.
However, Carralero teaches the following:
“The method according to claim 17, wherein gauging the fuel stored in the chamber further comprises determining a weight of the fuel within the chamber.” at page 12 line 3.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date to modify Gaikwad with determining fuel weight in order to improve accuracy.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tessalie A. Caze-Cortes whose telephone number is 571-270-3235. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am to 4pm.
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, John Breene can be reached at 571-272-4107. 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.
/TESSALIE A. CAZE-CORTES/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights