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 Group 1, claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 11/19/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there would not be an undue search burden if they were to be examined together.
This is not found persuasive. The applicant argues that because dependent claims 2-10 disclose an expansion space, that therefore there is overlapping subject matter between the groups. However, applicant has not addressed claim 1 which does not include this expansion space. Group 1 includes claim 1, which therefore encompasses an invention that does not require an expansion space. The other groups do not encompass such an invention. Likewise, groups 2-3 do not require an aircraft while group 1 does –therefore there is subject matter which does not overlap. If claim 1 were amended to include the expansion space, then the argument may be found persuasive.
The applicant then states that the Examiner’s basis for restriction is that the claims “fall into different classifications”. First, it is unclear where this quote is coming from, as it is not in the previous Office Action. The restriction requirement states “there is at least a separate classification and a different field of search, such as differing search terms”. The applicant does not discuss the differing search terms necessary. The applicant argues that group 1 requires searching fuel systems which are integrated into aircraft, while groups 2-3 require searching fuel storage technology specifically designed for aircraft, and therefore would encompass the same search. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Groups 2-3 are intended to be used in an aircraft, but would require searching fuel systems which are not in an aircraft, but would be able to be integrated into an aircraft. It would be up to the examiner to inspect each fuel system which is not on an aircraft and to determine whether it is capable for use in an aircraft or not.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 11/19/25.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 11 is 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 11 states “the gravity fuel port tank connection is arranged to prevent filling the entire main tank by gravity fueling”. There is not support for this limitation as it relates to the claimed embodiment. The claims are drawn to the embodiment of Figs. 6-10, which includes a separate expansion tank. The discussion of this embodiment in Para 0111 begins “in contrast to Figure 4 the gravity fuel port 6b of the gravity fuel port tank connection 6 is now at least arranged such that the maximum gravity fueling level 6a is maximally located at a lower expansion tank level 17c defined by a lower side of the expansion tank 17, as illustrated” and continues “filling of the expansion tank 17 during gravity fueling of the main tank 5a may be prevented, while completely filling the main tank 5a is rendered possible”. In this embodiment, due to the location of the filling port, it is the expansion tank which is prevented from being entirely filled. For examination purposes, this is how the claim will be interpreted.
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 1-14 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 1 recites “the floor panel” and “the cross tank system”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for these limitations.
Further, claim 1 recites “at least one crossing ventilation line”. Is it unclear if this is one of “a plurality of ventilation lines” or a separate element entirely. Consistent nomenclature should be used for the same elements.
All dependent claims not addressed above are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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) 1-9 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Barbosa et al (US 20090050743 A1).
For claim 1, Barbosa discloses an aircraft with a fuselage that accommodates a floor panel and a fuel storage system, wherein the fuel storage system comprises:
a tank system with at least one main tank that is arranged underneath the floor panel Fig. 1; and
a plurality of ventilation lines Fig. 2 that vent the cross tank system, wherein at least one crossing ventilation line is routed from a first lateral side of the tank system to an opposite second lateral side of the tank system Fig. 4: 152 is a lateral conduit routed from one side to the other,
wherein the at least one crossing ventilation line is routed underneath or in the floor panel from the first lateral side of the tank system to the second lateral side of the tank system Fig. 4.
For claim 2, Barbosa discloses the aircraft of claim 1, wherein the tank system comprises a fuel volume expansion space in an expansion tank separate from the main tank one of the smaller tanks relative to one of the larger main tanks.
For claim 3, Barbosa discloses the aircraft of claim 2, wherein the expansion tank is arranged at the second lateral side smaller tank located at the left side.
For claim 4, Barbosa discloses the aircraft of claim 3, wherein the at least one crossing ventilation line is routed underneath or in the floor panel from a first ventilation point provided at the first lateral side on the at least one main tank to the expansion tank Fig. 4.
For claim 5, Barbosa discloses the aircraft of claim 2, wherein the plurality of ventilation lines comprises at least one further ventilation line Fig. 3: conduit 112 that is routed underneath or in the floor panel from a second ventilation point provided at the second lateral side on the at least one main tank located on left side of main tank to the expansion tank 112 connects to smaller tanks (expansion tank).
For claim 6, Barbosa discloses the aircraft of claim 5, wherein the at least one crossing ventilation line is connected to the expansion tank at a first position that is further away from the floor panel than a second position where the at least one further ventilation line is connected to the expansion tank Fig. 2: 142 is behind/lower than conduits 112, and therefore further from the floor.
For claim 7, Barbosa discloses the aircraft of claim 2, wherein the plurality of ventilation lines comprises at least two outlet ventilation lines two of lines 150 that are routed underneath or in the floor panel from the expansion tank to associated outlets two of vent access ports 146.
For claim 8, Barbosa discloses the aircraft of claim 7, wherein the expansion tank is arranged at the second lateral side left and the associated outlets are arranged at the first lateral side right.
For claim 13, Barbosa discloses the aircraft of claim 1, wherein the tank system comprises a fuel volume expansion space positioned within the main tank any space within the tank may be an expansion space if the tank is not fully filled.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-11, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over non-patent literature reference entitled Operator’s Manual—Army Model UH-1H/V Helicopters (“UH1 Manual NPL”) in view of the non-patent literature reference entitled “Evaluation of the UH-1D/H Helicopter Crashworthy Fuel System in a Crash Environment” (“UH1 Evaluation NPL”).
For claim 1, UH1 Manual NPL discloses an aircraft with a fuselage that accommodates a floor panel and a fuel storage system, wherein the fuel storage system comprises:
a tank system with at least one main tank that is arranged underneath the floor panel Fig. 2-10 and 6-1: the two front tanks are located under the cabin floor as labeled in Fig. 6-1; and
but fails to explicitly disclose the ventilation lines that may be present.
However, the UH1 Evaluation NPL teaches a UH-1 helicopter tank system with a plurality of ventilation lines Fig. 2: vent lines 12 that vent the cross tank system, wherein at least one crossing ventilation line is routed from a first lateral side of the tank system to an opposite second lateral side of the tank system from a right half of the tank system to a left half of the tank system, as can be better seen in Fig. 3,
wherein the at least one crossing ventilation line is routed underneath or in the floor panel from the first lateral side of the tank system to the second lateral side of the tank system in light of the location of these tanks in Fig. 6-1 of UH1 Manual NPL.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention disclosed by theUH1 Manual NPL by including the ventilation and fuel lines and tank configuration as disclosed by the UH1 Evaluation NPL. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to provide a fuel/vent system for the fuel tanks to prevent unwanted build-up of pressure or vacuum during operation.
For claim 2, UH1 Manual NPL discloses the aircraft of claim 1, wherein the tank system comprises a fuel volume expansion space in an expansion tank separate from the main tank UH1 Evaluation NPL, Fig. 3: upper tank.
For claim 3, UH1 Manual NPL discloses the aircraft of claim 2, wherein the expansion tank is arranged at the second lateral side UH1 Evaluation NPL, Fig. 3: upper tank spans in both lateral directions, and is at least partially located at the second lateral side.
For claim 4, UH1 Manual NPL discloses the aircraft of claim 3, wherein the at least one crossing ventilation line is routed underneath or in the floor panel from a first ventilation point provided at the first lateral side on the at least one main tank to the expansion tank UH1 Evaluation NPL, Fig. 3: vent line extends from the right side to the upper tank.
For claim 9, UH1 Manual NPL discloses the aircraft of claim 2, wherein the expansion tank of the tank system is arranged above the level of the floor panel Fig. 6-1: rear tank is located at least partially above the cabin floor.
For claim 10, UH1 Manual NPL discloses the aircraft of claim 2, wherein the tank system comprises a gravity fuel port tank connection that allows gravity fueling of the at least one main tank, wherein the gravity fuel port tank connection is arranged above floor panel level and below the expansion tank Fig. 2-10: fuel filler location is at the top of the side of the upper/expansion tank.
For claim 11, UH1 Manual NPL discloses the aircraft of claim 10, wherein the gravity fuel port tank connection is arranged to prevent filling the entire expansion tank by gravity fueling since the filling port is on the side of the expansion tank.
For claim 13, UH1 Manual NPL discloses the aircraft of claim 1, wherein the tank system comprises a fuel volume expansion space positioned within the main tank any space within the tank may be an expansion space if the tank is not fully filled.
For claim 14, UH1 Manual NPL discloses the aircraft of claim 1, wherein the aircraft is a helicopter Fig. 2-10.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over non-patent literature reference entitled Operator’s Manual—Army Model UH-1H/V Helicopters (“UH1 Manual NPL”) in view of the non-patent literature reference entitled “Evaluation of the UH-1D/H Helicopter Crashworthy Fuel System in a Crash Environment” (“UH1 Evaluation NPL”), further in view of the web publication entitled “Split Flapper Fuel Valve” (“Essex NPL”).
For claim 12, both the UH1 Manual NPL and the UH1 Evaluation NPL show a fuel filler located near an upper portion of the aft fuel tank. However, both the UH1 Manual NPL and the UH1 Evaluation NPL does not discuss or show a one-way valve provided for the fuel filler.
In the same field of endeavor, the Essex NPL discloses a split flapper fuel valve for gravity fueling operations to prevent backflow of fuel. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the gravity fuel filler of the UN1 Manual NPL and UH1 Evaluation NPL to include a split flapper fuel valve, in light of the teachings of the Essex NPL, for the predictable result of preventing backflow of fuel out of the fuel filler.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COLIN N M ZOHOORI whose telephone number is (571)272-7996. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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 J 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.
/COLIN ZOHOORI/Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights