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 .
Claim Status
This action is in response to the application filed on 08/26/2024. Claims 1-7 are pending and examined below.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 9536435 B1 (“Shay”).
Regarding claim 1, Shay teaches an acquiring step for acquiring current values of input parameters including at least a weight of the aircraft, a speed of the aircraft, an altitude of the aircraft and a reference temperature (see at least Col. 15 line 50 – Col. 16 line 15);
a determining step for determining a current optimized DTflex value from the current values of the input parameters acquired in the acquiring step and from optimized DTflex values recorded in a database integrated into the avionic computer, the database having been created beforehand by associating an optimized DTflex value with each combination of input parameters for a predefined number of combinations of input parameters (see at least Col. Col. 8 line 63 – Col. 9 line 5); and
a transmitting step for transmitting the current optimized DTflex value determined in the determining step to a user system capable of using the current optimized DTflex value to control the thrust of the aircraft (see at least Col. 5 line 46 – Col. 6 line 7).
Regarding claim 2, Shay teaches a preliminary step implementing a creating method to create the database, the preliminary step comprising a set of sub-steps implemented for each of the combinations of input parameters (see at least Col. 2 line 66 – Col. 3 line 37):
a first computing sub-step for computing sets of climb parameters characterizing the climb phase of the aircraft with the input parameters in question, the climb parameters comprising at least a fuel flow rate of the aircraft, a net thrust of the aircraft and a drag of the aircraft, a set of climb parameters being computed for each DTflex value among a predefined number of DTflex values (see at least Col. Col. 3 line 38 – Col. 4 line 7);
a second computing sub-step for computing at least one value representing a cost of the climb phase for each set of climb parameters computed in the first computing sub-step (see at least Col. 16 line 57 – Col. 17 line 7); and
a selecting sub-step for selecting the DTflex value for which the cost of the climb phase is minimal and for recording the DTflex value in the database as the optimized DTflex value associated with the combination of input parameters in question (see at least Col. 17 lines 8-23).
Regarding claim 3, Shay teaches a value J representing the cost of the climb phase is computed with a following mathematical formula: J=1Ė.FF-λref.V in which: Ė is a specific energy of the aircraft; FF is the fuel flow rate of the aircraft; λref is a reference factor; and V is the speed of the aircraft (see at least Col. 13 lines 5-35).
Regarding claim 4, Shay teaches in the first computing sub-step, the DTflex values for which a set of climb parameters is computed are comprised between a minimum DTflex value and a maximum DTflex value, the minimum DTflex value corresponding to a DTflex value for which thrust is maximum and the maximum DTflex value corresponding to a DTflex value for which the climb rate of the aircraft is equal to a predefined minimum climb rate (see at least Col. 15 line 50 – Col. 16 line 15).
Regarding claim 6, Shay teaches measuring the current values of the input parameters and for transmitting the current values of the input parameters to the avionic computer (see at least Col. 10 line 61 – Col. 11 line 5).
Regarding claim 7, Shay teaches acquire current values of input parameters including at least a weight of the aircraft, a speed of the aircraft, an altitude of the aircraft and a reference temperature (see at least Col. 15 line 50 – Col. 16 line 15);
determine a current optimized DTflex value from the current values of the input parameters acquired in the acquiring step and from optimized DTflex values recorded in a database integrated into the avionic computer, the database having been created beforehand by associating an optimized DTflex value with each combination of input parameters for a predefined number of combinations of input parameters (see at least Col. Col. 8 line 63 – Col. 9 line 5); and
transmit the current optimized DTflex value determined in the determining step to a user system capable of using the current optimized DTflex value to control the thrust of the aircraft (see at least Col. 5 line 46 – Col. 6 line 7).
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9536435 B1 (“Shay”) in view of US 20230050939 A1 (“Drolet”).
Regarding claim 5, Shay is not explicit on determining a theoretical value of an exhaust-gas temperature of the aircraft that should be obtained with the current optimized DTflex value determined in the determining step, based on predetermined exhaust-gas-temperature values; comparing the theoretical value of the exhaust-gas temperature with a limit value of the exhaust-gas temperature; and if the theoretical value of the exhaust-gas temperature is lower than or equal to the limit value of the exhaust-gas temperature, transmitting the current optimized DTflex value in the transmitting step; and if the theoretical value of the exhaust-gas temperature is higher than the limit value of the exhaust-gas temperature, transmitting the DTflex value for which the theoretical value of the exhaust-gas temperature is equal to the limit value of the exhaust-gas temperature as current optimized DTflex value in the transmitting step, however,
Drolet discloses determining a theoretical value of an exhaust-gas temperature of the aircraft that should be obtained with the current optimized DTflex value determined in the determining step, based on predetermined exhaust-gas-temperature values; comparing the theoretical value of the exhaust-gas temperature with a limit value of the exhaust-gas temperature (see at least [0020]); and
if the theoretical value of the exhaust-gas temperature is lower than or equal to the limit value of the exhaust-gas temperature, transmitting the current optimized DTflex value in the transmitting step (see at least [0022]); and
if the theoretical value of the exhaust-gas temperature is higher than the limit value of the exhaust-gas temperature, transmitting the DTflex value for which the theoretical value of the exhaust-gas temperature is equal to the limit value of the exhaust-gas temperature as current optimized DTflex value in the transmitting step (see at least [0023]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Shay with the systems and methods for generating additional thrust in aircraft engines disclosed by Drolet so that net thrust can be increased (Drolet, [0020]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATHEW FRANKLIN GORDON whose telephone number is (408)918-7612. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 - 5:00 PST.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at (571) 272-4190. 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.
/MATHEW FRANKLIN GORDON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665
