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 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 12 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 11, the term “the support members ” lacks proper antecedent basis.
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) 1-2, 4-5, and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Curry (US 8702036 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Curry (US 8702036 B2) discloses a configurable aircraft aisle flooring system, the system comprising:
a configurable floor for an aircraft aisle having a flat floor configuration (Curry, figure 21) and a drop-down aisle configuration (Curry, figure 22), wherein the configurable floor comprises:
a trough (Curry, figure 22, item 290) disposed between a first upper surface and a second upper surface (Curry, figure 22, items 270 and 286, upper surfaces on the left and right sides of the troughs), wherein the first and second upper surfaces are elevated above the trough and the first and second upper surfaces extend outboard from opposing sides of the trough (Curry, figure 22, items 270 and 286, upper surfaces on the left and right sides of the troughs are elevated above and on opposite sides of the trough);
a first mounting strip disposed along an inboard edge of the first upper surface and a second mounting strip disposed opposite the first mounting strip along an inboard edge of the second upper surface (Curry, col 14, lines 43-59, edges of the plate members supported by ball-bearing linear guides mounted to sides of seat tracks);
a plurality of floor panels (Curry, figures 21-22, items 272 and 274) each configured to fasten to the first and second mounting strips for spanning across the trough between the first and second upper surfaces for providing the flat floor configuration (Curry, col 14, lines 43-59, edge of the plate members supported by ball-bearing linear guides mounted to sides of seat tracks); and
a drop-down floor configured to attach to the trough when the floor panels are removed to provide the drop-down aisle configuration (Curry, figures 18-19, item 200, lift platform can form a drop down floor).
Regarding claim 2, Curry discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the drop-down floor is below the first and second upper surfaces in the drop-down aisle configuration (Curry, figures 18-19, item 200, lift platform can be below the first and second upper surfaces) and the floor panels form a flat floor that is level with the first and second upper surfaces in the flat floor configuration (Curry, figures 21, items 272 and 274, plates forming the floor are level with the rest of the floor).
Regarding claim 4, Curry discloses the system of claim 1, comprising a plurality of support members each configured to mechanically couple to the first and second mounting strips for supporting the floor panels (Curry, col 14, lines 43-59, ball bearing linear guides which attach to sides of the seat tracks).
Regarding claim 5, Curry discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the support members each include floor fastening arrangements configured to secure the support members to the floor panels (Curry, col 14, lines 43-59, ball bearing linear guides and attachment to the rails fastens the support members to the floor panels).
Regarding claim 18, Curry discloses a configurable aircraft aisle flooring system, the system comprising:
a configurable aircraft floor configured to provide a flat floor in a first configuration (Curry, figure 21) or a drop-down aisle in a second configuration (Curry, figure 22), wherein the configurable aircraft floor comprises:
a pair of outboard sections positioned at an upper elevation along outboard sides of an aircraft fuselage (Curry, figure 22, items 270 and 286, upper surfaces on the left and right sides of the opening);
an inboard section positioned at a lower elevation between the pair of outboard sections (Curry, figure 21, lower deck has a lower elevation and at least a section of this deck is between the outboard sections);
a first mounting strip disposed along an upper edge of a first outboard section of the pair (Curry, col 14, lines 43-59, seat tracks on the lateral sides of the opening);
a second mounting strip disposed along an upper edge of a second outboard section of the pair, opposite the first outboard section (Curry, col 14, lines 43-59, seat tracks on the lateral sides of the opening),
wherein a plurality of support members are configured to mechanically couple to corresponding mounting strips on the pair of outboard sections (Curry, col 14, lines 43-59, ball-bearing linear guides mounted to sides of the seat tracks), and a plurality of floor panels (Curry, figures 21-22, items 272 and 274) are configured to be secured to the plurality of support members for forming the flat floor above the inboard section and level with the upper elevation (Curry, col 14, lines 43-59, edge of the plate members supported by ball-bearing linear guides mounted to sides of the seat tracks); and
a mounting rail disposed above the inboard section (Curry, figures 17-19, item 202, guide rails above inboard section),
wherein the inboard section is configured to receive the drop-down aisle that mounts to the mounting rail for forming the drop-down aisle at the lower elevation (Curry, figures 18-19, item 200, lift platform attached to guide rail can form a drop down aisle).
Regarding claim 19, Curry discloses the system of claim 18, comprising a middle elevation having floor panels which are elevated above the lower elevation but beneath the upper elevation (Curry, figures 18-19, item 200, lift platform can be located above the lower deck but beneath the upper deck).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 6-10, 12-17, and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 3, Curry discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the drop-down aisle configuration comprises a bottom floor (Curry, figures 18-19, bottom floor below lift) disposed in between a front panel (Curry, figures 18-19, front panel in front of lift), the front panel extending upwards at a front edge of the bottom floor (Curry, figures 18-19, front panel extends upwards from a front edge of the bottom floor), except:
a rear panel where the rear panel extends upwards from a back edge of the bottom floor.
Thus, the prior art fails to teach the claimed matter alone and it would not have been obvious to meet the claims either without undue hindsight based on the applicant' s disclosure.
Regarding claim 8, Curry discloses the system of claim 1, except:
wherein the first mounting strip and the second mounting strip each comprise a ramp portion configured to connect from the first and second upper surfaces to a lower surface, the lower surface being elevated above the trough bottom but beneath the first and second upper surfaces.
Thus, the prior art fails to teach the claimed matter alone and it would not have been obvious to meet the claims either without undue hindsight based on the applicant' s disclosure.
Regarding claim 9, Curry discloses the system of claim 1, except:
comprising a ramp support structure configured to support one or more floor panels for forming a ramped floor.
Thus, the prior art fails to teach the claimed matter alone and it would not have been obvious to meet the claims either without undue hindsight based on the applicant' s disclosure.
Regarding claim 12, Curry discloses an aisle flooring system for an aircraft, comprising:
a configurable floor for an aircraft aisle wherein the configurable floor comprises:
a flat floor configuration (Curry, figure 21) comprising a plurality of floor panels configured to extend above a trough (Curry, figure 22, item 290) positioned in between a first upper surface and a second upper surface (Curry, figure 22, items 270 and 286, upper surfaces on the left and right sides of the trough), wherein the first and second upper surfaces are elevated above the trough and the first and second upper surfaces extend outboard from opposing sides of the trough (Curry, figure 22, items 270 and 286, upper surfaces on the left and right sides of the troughs are elevated above and on opposite sides of the trough);
a drop-down aisle configuration (Curry, figure 22) comprising a bottom floor disposed in between a front panel extending upwards at a front edge of the bottom floor, and the bottom floor is configured to attach to the trough in between the first and second upper surfaces;
wherein either the flat floor configuration or the drop-down aisle configuration is disposed in the aircraft (Curry, abstract, system is for an aircraft), except:
a rear panel extending upwards from a back edge of the bottom floor.
Thus, the prior art fails to teach the claimed matter alone and it would not have been obvious to meet the claims either without undue hindsight based on the applicant' s disclosure.
Regarding claim 20, Curry discloses system of claim 19, except:
comprising a ramped floor having angled floor panels configured to provide a ramp connecting the floor panels of the upper elevation with floor panels at the middle elevation.
Thus, the prior art fails to teach the claimed matter alone and it would not have been obvious to meet the claims either without undue hindsight based on the applicant' s disclosure.
Claims 6-7, 10-11 and 13-17 are noted for being dependent on an indicated claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Schomacker (US 9887586 B2) teaches an aircraft floor system with a trough and a floor panel between sides of trough
Haselmeier (US 20130340364 A1) teaches a flooring with a trough (used as a cable channel) covered by floor panels
Huber (US 8226034 B2) teaches an aircraft with a fuselage having an upper and lower deck
Ebeling (US 20140367055 A1) teaches a passage between an upper compartment and a lower compartment
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN ANDREW YANKEY whose telephone number is (571)272-9979. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30 - 5:00.
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 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.
/RYAN ANDREW YANKEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642