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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 10 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.
A broad range or limitation followed by linking terms (e.g., preferably, maybe, for instance, especially) and a narrow range or limitation within the broad range or limitation is considered indefinite since the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection required. Therefore, it is unclear whether the claim requires no failure levels or no failure levels 1 to 3. Examiner suggests removing the phrase “preferably no failure levels 1 to 3”. For the purposes of examination the limitation will be interpreted as no failure levels.
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, 3-5, 7-9, and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (CN 115762292).
As per claim 1, Chen discloses a rotorcraft with at least one main rotor (helicopter rotor 1) and at least one engine (turboshaft engine 3,4) for powering the at least one main rotor in a normal flight mode, comprising
an autorotation training mode control system that is activatable for switching rotorcraft operation between the normal flight mode and an autorotation training mode configured to enable training of autorotation, wherein the autorotation training mode control system comprises at least one main control element that is manually operable for activating the autorotation training mode control system and switching the rotorcraft operation from the normal flight mode to the autorotation training mode to engage the autorotation training mode (see at least para. 5 for control system for simulated engine rotation training; see at least para. 11 for #1 engine control switch 7 used to enable simulated rotation training function).
As per claim 3, Chen further discloses wherein the at least one main control element is a switch or a button (see at least para. 11 for #1 engine control switch 7 used to enable simulated rotation training function).
As per claim 4, Chen further discloses wherein the at least one main control element is further manually operable for deactivating the autorotation training mode control system and disengaging the autorotation training mode for switching the rotorcraft operation from the autorotation training mode to the normal flight mode (see at least para. 21-22 for if #1 engine control switch 7 is not in flight status control position then terminate simulated autorotation landing training control).
As per claim 5, Chen further discloses at least one auxiliary control element that is manually operable for activating the autorotation training mode control system and switching the rotorcraft operation from the normal flight mode to the autorotation training mode to engage the autorotation training mode, and/or for deactivating the autorotation training mode control system and disengaging the autorotation training mode for switching the rotorcraft operation from the autorotation training mode to the normal flight mode (see at least para. 11 and 21-22 for #2 engine control switch 8 used to enable simulated rotation training function and if 21 engine control switch 8 is not in flight status control position then terminate simulated autorotation landing training control.
As per claim 7, Chen further discloses wherein the at least one auxiliary control element is a switch or a button (see at least para. 11 and 21-22 for #2 engine control switch 8 used to enable simulated rotation training function).
As per claim 8, Chen further discloses wherein the autorotation training mode control system comprises a data processing unit configured to control execution of the autorotation training mode (see at least para. 8 for engine control system 5, 6).
As per claim 9, Chen further discloses wherein the data processing unit enables execution of the autorotation training mode only if predetermined execution conditions are fulfilled (see at least para. 17-19 for conditions for entering the simulated rotation training).
As per claim 11, Chen further discloses wherein the data processing unit decreases a predetermined engine free turbine speed datum by a predetermined reduction rate during execution of the autorotation training mode (see at least para. 8 for engine gas turbine speed Ng drops to the target Ngtarget; para. 11 of specification as filed recites “decreasing a predetermined engine free turbine speed datum by a predetermined reduction rate, i.e., from a nominal engine free turbine speed to a predefined decreased engine free turbine speed”).
As per claim 12, Chen further discloses wherein the autorotation training mode control system is configured for disengaging the autorotation training mode if one or more predetermined disengagement conditions are fulfilled (see at least para. 15 and 20-24 for exiting the simulated rotation training function when conditions are met).
As per claim 13, Chen further discloses wherein the data processing unit monitors rotorcraft operating parameters for determining whether the one or more predetermined disengagement conditions are fulfilled (see at least para. 24 for exiting the simulated rotation training function when there is a turboshaft engine fault).
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) 2 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Groden (US 2025/0019089).
As per claim 2, Chen is silent regarding, but Groden teaches at least one of a main instrument panel, a slant console, and a middle console, wherein the at least one main control element is arranged on one of the main instrument panel, the slant console, or the middle console (see at least para. Figs 8A,D,E and para. 114 for fourth interface 820 displayed on vehicle state display 210 includes a slider to initiate autorotation practice).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Chen with the features of Groden because all the selectable modes are placed in a central location for the operator to easily locate instead of having multiple mode activation means scattered about the cockpit.
As per claim 15, Chen is silent regarding, but Groden teaches wherein the autorotation training mode control system comprises a display indicator for visualizing engagement of the autorotation training mode (see at least para. Fig 8E and para. 114 for fourth interface 820 displayed on vehicle state display 210 includes a slider to initiate autorotation practice; wherein the slider is in the activation position when activated).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Chen with the features of Groden because it provides a positive feedback to indicate when the mode is activated.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Lavallee (US 2018/0251214).
As per claim 6, Chen is silent regarding, but Lavallee teaches at least one of a collective stick, a pilot cyclic stick, and a co-pilot cyclic stick, wherein the at least one auxiliary control element is arranged on one of the collective stick, the pilot cyclic stick, and/or the co-pilot cyclic stick (see at least para. 16 for collective control stick with switch for transitioning between modes when training such as autorotation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Chen with the features of Lavallee because it would allow the operator to switch modes without
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is 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 10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not teach the required conditions for activating/deactivating as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4838. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM - 4PM ET.
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, ANNA MOMPER can be reached at (571) 270-5788. 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.
/ROBERT T NGUYEN/PRIMARY EXAMINER, Art Unit 3619