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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 9-10, filed 19 December 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-10, 12-18 and 20-22 under 35 USC § 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 2014/0117753 by Pradier et al. in view of FR 2640076 by Lucien et al. as described below.
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Regarding claim 4, it is stated “wherein the first current comprises a dual phase.” Claim 4 is dependent on claim 1 where it is stated “a converter unit configured to receive the aircraft current and to generate a single phase first current.” As it is already stated that the first current is a single phase, it is unclear how the first current can now comprise a dual phase. This will be examined as a system that can output a dual phase.
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.
The factual inquiries 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 1-3, 7-10, 12-13, 16, 18, 20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0117753 by Pradier et al. (Pradier hereinafter) in view of FR 2640076 by Lucien et al. (Lucien hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Pradier discloses a vehicle power distribution system [see at least Abstract; Figure 1; Figure 5], comprising: an aircraft power source [see at least Figures 1 and 5, (4); paragraph 0029, “throughout the aircraft cabin”] providing an aircraft current [see at least Figures 1 and 5, (4) to (8); paragraph 0028], wherein the aircraft current is a three-phase, high-frequency alternating current having a first frequency from a power source [see at least paragraph 0033, “a three-phase alternating current of 115 volts at a frequency of 400 Hz by means of the first power line 8”]; a converter unit [see at least Figures 1 and 5, (18)] configured to receive the aircraft current [see at least paragraph 0035] and to generate a single phase first current [see at least paragraph 0036, “into a single-phase alternating current”], and wherein the first current comprises a second frequency that is less than the first frequency [see at least paragraph 0036, “into a single-phase alternating current of 110 volts at a frequency of 60 Hz”]; and a plurality of power outlets [see at least Figures 1 and 5, multiple (14)] in electrical communication with the converter unit [see at least Figure 1, (18) to (10) to (14) via (13); Figure 5, (18) to (66) to (14) via (13)], wherein the plurality of power outlets is configured to receive the first current [see at least paragraph 0035, “Thus the electric current converted by the common power converter 18 is transmitted to the electrical outlets 14”].
Pradier fails to disclose and wherein the converter unit is configured to provide phase balancing of the input current. However, Lucien discloses balancing a three-phase input power when deriving a usable single-phase output [see at least Translation of the Description, page 2, paragraph 0004, “This results in a balance of intensity in the phases of the network as well as a reduction in intensity of approximately 30% in the phases compared to what it would be, at equal single-phase power, drawn directly on one phase” and paragraph 0005, “Its main purpose is to neutralize inequalities in line load by leveling the currents in the three phases and in the neutral”; page 3, “The currents are balanced and distributed across the three phases and the neutral”].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the power distribution system of Pradier to include the phase balancing of the input current, as taught by Lucien, in order to neutralize inequalities in the line load by leveling the currents in the three phases to improve source-side loading characteristics. Thus, ensuring a uniform distribution of the intensities absorbed across the three phases and preventing voltage dips.
Regarding claim 2, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 1.
Pradier discloses wherein the three-phase, high- frequency alternating current [see at least paragraph 0033, “a three-phase alternating current of 115 volts at a frequency of 400 Hz by means of the first power line 8”] and the first current each have a voltage between 100-122 VAC [see at least paragraph 0036, “into a single-phase alternating current of 110 volts at a frequency of 60 Hz”].
Regarding claim 3, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 1.
Pradier discloses wherein the first current comprises a single phase, alternating current having a fixed frequency [see at least paragraph 0036, “into a single-phase alternating current of 110 volts at a frequency of 60 Hz”].
Regarding claim 7, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 1.
Pradier discloses wherein the first frequency is between 300-1,000 hertz [see at least paragraph 0033, “a three-phase alternating current of 115 volts at a frequency of 400 Hz by means of the first power line 8”] and the second frequency is between 30-60 hertz [see at least paragraph 0036, “into a single-phase alternating current of 110 volts at a frequency of 60 Hz”].
Regarding claim 8, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 1.
Pradier discloses wherein the second frequency is approximately 60 hertz [see at least paragraph 0036, “into a single-phase alternating current of 110 volts at a frequency of 60 Hz”].
Regarding claim 9, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 1.
Pradier discloses wherein the first current is received by the power outlets [see at least paragraph 0035, “Thus the electric current converted by the common power converter 18 is transmitted to the electrical outlets 14”].
Regarding claim 10, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of any of claim 9.
Pradier discloses wherein the power outlet comprises an AC power outlet, a universal serial bus port, or an inductive charger [see at least paragraph 0035, “Thus the electric current converted by the common power converter 18 is transmitted to the electrical outlets 14”; Figure 1, (14); Figure 5, (14) and (40)].
Regarding claim 12, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 1.
Pradier discloses further comprising: a control unit [see at least Figure 1, (10); detailed in Figure 2; Figure 5, (66)] configured to receive the first current from the converter unit and enable or disable a flow of the first current to the power outlet based on one or more factors [see at least paragraph 0047, “determines the instantaneous electric current distributed by the corresponding power line, compares it to the threshold values, and sends an authorization or non-authorization command”].
Regarding claim 13, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 12.
Pradier discloses wherein the control unit is configured to receive a signal that a plug is detected in the power outlet [see at least paragraph 0032, “Each electrical outlet 14 comprises a detector capable of detecting the introduction of a plug 10 into the outlet and of generating a signal interpreted by the microprocessor of the distribution unit 10 as a request for distribution of electric current.”.
Regarding claim 16, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 12.
Pradier discloses wherein the control unit [see at least Figures 1-2, (10); Figure 5, (66)] is configured to receive an input from an operator or another system of the vehicle [see at least Figures 1 and 5, (22)], and wherein the controller is configured to enable or disable a flow of the first current to the power outlet based the input [see at least paragraph 0039, “The control module 22 is capable of transmitting a signal to power on or off the electrical outlets 14 in the distribution units 10 during takeoff and landing…”].
Regarding claim 18, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 1.
Pradier discloses further comprising: a power supply [see at least Figure 5, (68)] disposed at a seat group [see at least paragraph 0029, “generally called SPB (Seat Power Boxes), installed next to the passenger seats”; paragraph 0069, “to distribute electric current to all seats in the cabin”] configured to receive first current and output a second current in response to the first current [see at least paragraph 0066, “is able to convert the voltage issuing from the primary power converter 60 from 110 volts 60 Hertz alternating current, or 42 volts direct current, into a direct current of between 3 volts and 15 volts”; although it is stated as primary power converter 60, it is applied to Figure 5 for primary power converter 18]; an aircraft device [see at least Figure 5, (40)] in electrical communication with the power supply [see at least Figure 5, (68) to (40)], wherein the aircraft device is configured to receive power from the second current [see at least Figure 5, (68) to (40)], and wherein the first current is different than the second current [see at least paragraph 0066, “is able to convert the voltage issuing from the primary power converter 60 from 110 volts 60 Hertz alternating current, or 42 volts direct current, into a direct current of between 3 volts and 15 volts”; although it is stated as primary power converter 60, it is applied to Figure 5 for primary power converter 18], and wherein the second current comprises a direct current [see at least paragraph 0066, “is able to convert the voltage issuing from the primary power converter 60 from 110 volts 60 Hertz alternating current, or 42 volts direct current, into a direct current of between 3 volts and 15 volts”; although it is stated as primary power converter 60, it is applied to Figure 5 for primary power converter 18].
Regarding claim 20, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 18.
Pradier discloses wherein the first current comprises a frequency between 30-60 hertz and a voltage between 110-120 VAC [see at least paragraph 0066, “from 110 volts 60 Hertz alternating current], and wherein the second current comprises a voltage of less than 50 VDC [see at least paragraph 0066, “into a direct current of between 3 volts and 15 volts’].
Regarding claim 22, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 18.
Pradier discloses wherein the aircraft device comprises a universal serial bus port, an in-use light, or an in-flight entertainment system [see at least Figure 5, (40)].
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0117753 by Pradier et al. (Pradier hereinafter) in view of FR 2640076 by Lucien et al. (Lucien hereinafter) in further view of US 2003/0155813 by Walter.
Regarding claim 4, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 1.
Pradier in view of Lucien fails to teach wherein the first current comprises a dual phase, alternating current having a fixed frequency. However, Walter discloses a dual-inverter system [see at least Abstract; Figure 1] wherein the output is a split-phase (line-to-line) which is capable of supplying both 120 VAC and 240 VAC [see at least Abstract; Figure 1, (64), (66) and (68)].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Pradier in view of Lucien to include a split-phase output, as disclosed by Walter, in order to provide standardized 220-240 VAC that is commonly used. Thus, expanding the devices that can be powered by the system for convenience to aircraft users.
Regarding claim 5, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 1.
Pradier in view of Lucien fails to teach wherein the output of the converter unit is constructed to be line-to-line. However, Walter discloses a dual-inverter system [see at least Abstract; Figure 1] wherein the output is a split-phase (line-to-line) which is capable of supplying both 120 VAC and 240 VAC [see at least Abstract; Figure 1, (64), (66) and (68)].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Pradier in view of Lucien to include a split-phase output, as disclosed by Walter, in order to provide standardized 220-240 VAC that is commonly used. Thus, expanding the devices that can be powered by the system for convenience to aircraft users.
Regarding claim 6, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 1.
Pradier in view of Lucien fails to explicitly teach wherein the output of the converter unit is constructed with a neutral return. However, Walter discloses a dual-inverter system [see at least Abstract; Figure 1] wherein the output which is capable of supplying both 120 VAC and 240 VAC [see at least Abstract; Figure 1, (64), (66) and (68); paragraph 0017] with a neutral node [see at least paragraph 0023, “The second and third output points are coupled together as a neutral node and connected to ground”].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Pradier in view of Lucien to include a split-phase output, as disclosed by Walter, in order to provide standardized 110-120 VAC that is commonly used. Thus, expanding the devices that can be powered by the system for convenience to aircraft users.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0117753 by Pradier et al. (Pradier hereinafter) in view of FR 2640076 by Lucien et al. (Lucien hereinafter) in further view of US 2013/0057216 by Ribich.
Regarding claim 14, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 12.
Pradier discloses monitoring a current and disabling the flow of the first current when comparing to a threshold [see at least paragraph 0047, “determines the instantaneous electric current distributed by the corresponding power line, compares it to the threshold values, and sends an authorization or non-authorization command”] and therefore Pradier in view of Lucien fails to teach wherein the control unit is configured to monitor the first current and disable the flow of the first current to the power outlet if a voltage of the first current exceeds a first threshold or is less than a second threshold. However, Ribich discloses an aircraft power system which monitors for over-voltage, under-voltage, over-current and under-current situations [see at least paragraph 0060] by measuring if a voltage or current is outside a predetermined range [see at least paragraph 0055; a “predetermined range” would have an upper threshold and a lower threshold].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Pradier in view of Lucien to include measuring for over-voltage and under-voltage, as disclosed by Ribich, in order for the system to disconnect power outlets when the voltage has become unstable. Thus, preventing damage to the power source, the components of the system and devices attached to the power outlets.
Regarding claim 15, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 12.
Pradier discloses monitoring a current and disabling the flow of the first current when comparing to a threshold [see at least paragraph 0047, “determines the instantaneous electric current distributed by the corresponding power line, compares it to the threshold values, and sends an authorization or non-authorization command”] and therefore Pradier in view of Lucien fails to teach wherein the control unit is configured to monitor the first current and disable the flow of the first current to the power outlet if the first current exceeds a first threshold or is less than a second threshold. However, Ribich discloses an aircraft power system which monitors for over-voltage, under-voltage, over-current and under-current situations [see at least paragraph 0060] by measuring if a voltage or current is outside a predetermined range [see at least paragraph 0055; a “predetermined range” would have an upper threshold and a lower threshold].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Pradier in view of Lucien to include measuring for over-current and under-current, as disclosed by Ribich, in order for the system to disconnect power outlets when the voltage has become unstable. Thus, preventing damage to the power source, the components of the system and devices attached to the power outlets.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0117753 by Pradier et al. (Pradier hereinafter) in view of FR 2640076 by Lucien et al. (Lucien hereinafter) in further view of US 2011/0184579 by Nilsen et al. (Nilsen hereinafter).
Regarding claim 17, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 12.
Pradier discloses an enabled mode and a disabled mode [see at least paragraph 0047, “an authorization or non-authorization command”].
Pradier in view of Lucien fails to teach wherein the control unit is configured to implement a tri-state control of the power outlet, wherein the three states applied to the power outlet comprise an enabled mode, a restricted mode, and a disabled mode. However, Nilsen discloses a power management system [see at least Figure 1] which includes a power limiting mode [see at least Abstract; Figure 2, (840)] which is entered when an operational parameter is in an undesired condition [see at least Figure 2, (830)].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Pradier in view of Lucien to add a power limiting mode, as disclosed by Nilsen, in order to allow the system attempt to resolve undesired conditions within the power distribution by limiting/disabling power draw. Thus, allowing for at least some loads to remain powered based on a power management scheme.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0117753 by Pradier et al. (Pradier hereinafter) in view of FR 2640076 by Lucien et al. (Lucien hereinafter) in further view of US 2014/0293661 by Kittel Riel et al. (Kittel hereinafter).
Regarding claim 21, Pradier in view of Lucien teaches the vehicle power distribution system of claim 18.
Pradier in view of Lucien fails to explicitly teach wherein the first current and the second current are in galvanic isolation from one another. However, Kittel discloses an AC/DC converter [see at least Abstract; Figure 1] which provides galvanic isolation [see at least Figure 1, (6); paragraphs 0002 and 0012] which increases efficiency and eliminates electromagnetic interference [see at least paragraphs 0002 and 0009].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the Applicant's invention to modify the system of Pradier in view of Lucien to include the AC/DC converter which includes galvanic isolation, as disclosed by Kittel, to achieve electrical isolation and increase efficiency. Thus, reducing/eliminated electromagnetic interference that could impact devices within the aircraft.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joel Barnett whose telephone number is (571)272-2879. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 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, Menna Youssef can be reached at 571-270-3684. 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.
/JOEL BARNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 2849
/Menatoallah Youssef/SPE, Art Unit 2849
Prosecution Insights