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 .
This is in response to the above application filed on 08 January 2025. Claims 1-6 are examined.
Drawings
Figures 1-17 are objected to, in accordance with 37 CFR 1.84(l), because the weight, density, and darkness of all lines and letters (dashed lines, solid lines, and text within and outside of shaded areas) are not heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction (the figures as filed are blurry).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 3-6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 1:
The recitation “the reverser” (ll. 5, 8,10, 11, 15, and 17) is believed to be in error for – the thrust reverser –.
The recitation “between its advanced direct thrust position and its retracted reverse thrust position” (ll. 12-13) is believed to be in error for – between the advanced direct thrust position and the retracted reverse thrust position –.
The recitation “one or more actuators each comprising” (ll. 13-14) is believed to be in error for – one or more actuators, each comprising –.
The recitation “among said actuator(s) of the actuating system” (l. 19) is believed to be in error for – among the one or more actuators of the actuating system –.
Regarding Claim 3:
The recitation “said two movable reverser cowls” (l. 2) is believed to be in error for – said one or two movable reverser cowls –.
The recitation “the movable actuating member” (l. 5) is believed to be in error for – a movable actuating member –.
The recitation “the two movable cowls” (l. 7) is believed to be in error for – the movable reverser cowl –.
Regarding Claim 4:
The recitation “the deflection cascade support” (l. 3) is believed to be in error for – a deflection cascade support –.
The recitation “the reverser” (l. 4) is believed to be in error for – the thrust reverser –.
The recitation “of the cascade support” (ll. 4-5) is believed to be in error for – of the deflection cascade support –.
Regarding Claim 5:
The recitation “The propulsion unit according to claim 1, wherein the propulsion comprises,” (ll. 1-2) is believed to be in error for – The propulsion unit according to claim 1, further comprises,–.
The recitation “limiting the bending of said movable cowl” (l. 4) is believed to be in error for – limiting a bending of the at least one movable reverser cowl –.
The recitation “of one or more actuators” (l. 5) is believed to be in error for – of the one or more actuators –.
Regarding Claim 6:
The recitation “the reverser” (l. 2) is believed to be in error for – the thrust reverser –.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) are the following:
“means for guiding the movable reverser cowl in translation” in claim 3.
“at least one member for limiting the bending of said movable cowl in the retracted reverse thrust position” in claim 5.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 3 & 5 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.
Regarding Claim 3, Claim limitation “means for guiding the movable reverser cowl in translation” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. This limitation lacks adequate written description in the specification to describe, to one having ordinary skill in the art, the structural components or algorithm(s) to perform the functions. No association between the structure and the function can be found in the specification. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Regarding Claim 5, Claim limitation “at least one member for limiting the bending of said movable cowl in the retracted reverse thrust position” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. This limitation lacks adequate written description in the specification to describe, to one having ordinary skill in the art, the structural components or algorithm(s) to perform the functions. No association between the structure and the function can be found in the specification. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Regarding Claim 3, the recitation “the locking means for the two movable cowls” (l. 6) renders the claim indefinite because the limitation lacks antecedent basis.
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 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-2, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song 20210108594 in view of Gormley 2022/0065195, Stone 2021/0079872, and further in view of Baldwin 6006636.
Regarding Claim 1, Song teaches a propulsion unit (seen in Fig. 1) for an aircraft 2, comprising
a turbomachine 10, a nacelle 12 including ([0057]; Figs. 1-5)
at least one fan cowl 42, as well as a thrust reverser 44 comprising a fixed structure 46 equipped with a radially internal delimiting wall [a] ([a] seen in annotated Fig. 4, below) of a secondary flow path 30 of the propulsion unit intended to be traversed by a secondary flow 100 (seen in Fig. 6), ([0057-59; 0063, 0076]; Fig. 1-6. Annotated Fig. 4, below)
the reverser 44 also comprising ([0059, 0060]; Figs. 1-6)
a movable structure 48 comprising one or two movable reverser cowls 48 (translating cowl 48 – inherently means one movable reverser cowl) each equipped with a radially internal reverser cowl wall 56 delimiting the secondary flow path 30 radially outwards (seen in Figs. 2 & 6), ([0059, 0060]; Figs. 2 & 6)
the reverser 44 also comprising at least one deflection cascade 52,
the movable structure 48 being translatably movable relative to the fixed structure 46 along a longitudinal central axis 36 (engine longitudinal extending axis, as seen in Fig. 2, is also the longitudinal central axis 36 along which the movable structure 48 extends or retracts, seen in Figs. 4-6) of the reverser 48, between an advanced direct thrust position (stowed position, [0045]; seen in n Fig. 4) and a retracted reverse thrust position (deployed position, [0047]; seen in n Fig. 6),
the reverser 44 comprising an actuating system 58, 158 for moving the movable structure between its advanced direct thrust position (stowed position) and its retracted reverse thrust position (deployed position), [0068-69, 0091]; Figs. 4-7)
the actuating system 58, 158 consisting of one or more actuators 70b, 170b (two actuators are seen in Figs. 2-3, one on top and one on bottom; each comprising an actuating member 74b that is translatably movable (move in a substantial axial direction) and centered on an actuating axis [b] ([b] seen in annotated Fig. 4, below) ([0068]; Figs. 2-7. annotated Fig. 4, below),
PNG
media_image1.png
420
727
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A: Annotated Fig. 4 of Song (U.S. 2021/0108594)
the reverser 44 having
a first median plane [c] (seen in annotated Fig. 3, below) of the reverser 44 passing through the longitudinal central axis 36, as well as a second median plane [d] (seen in annotated Fig. 3, below) of the reverser 44 passing through the longitudinal central axis 36 and perpendicular (seen in annotated Fig. 3, below) to the first median plane [c], among said actuator(s) 70b, 170b of the actuating system 58, 158, provision is made of an actuator 70b, 170b (70b, 170b can be hydraulic damper) (Annotated Fig. 3, below). (Annotated Fig. 3, below).
PNG
media_image2.png
636
1002
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure B: Annotated Fig. 3 of Song (U.S. 2021/0108594)
Song does not teach a mast for attaching the turbomachine.
Gormley teaches
a mast 56 for attaching the turbomachine 20 ([0056]; Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the at least one fan cowl 42 of Song to include a mast 56 for attaching the turbomachine 20, as taught by Gormley, in order to mount the aircraft propulsion system to an aircraft body member (Gormley [0056], ll. 4-7).
Song in view of Gormley does not teach among said actuator(s) of the actuating system actuating system, provision is made of an eccentric actuator arranged on a first side of the second median plane opposite a second side of the second median plane where the attachment mast is located, and the actuating axis of which is offset circumferentially with respect to the first median plane, in the case of several actuators constituting the actuating system, the eccentric actuator is asymmetrical with respect to each of the other actuators relative to the first median plane, and the actuating system consists of an odd number of actuators, preferably three or five, the actuators being distributed relative to each other circumferentially in a regular or irregular manner.
Stone teaches (Fig. 4A [0030-32])
among said actuator(s) 430a-430c of the actuating system actuating system 430a-430c (Fig. 4A),
provision is made of an actuator 430a arranged on a first side (first side, seen in annotated Fig. 4A, below) of the second median plane [m] ([m] seen in annotated Fig. 4A, below) opposite a second side (second side, seen in annotated Fig. 4A, below) of the second median plane [m] where the attachment mast is located [p] ([p] is the location where cowl portion 410a is affixed to the aircraft wing (not shown) at hinge 412, 412a-b) (annotated Fig. 4A, below), and the actuating axis [w] ([w] seen in annotated Fig. 4A, below) of which is offset circumferentially with respect to the first median plane [n] (seen in Fig. 4A), in the case of several actuators 430a-430c constituting the actuating system 430a-430c, the actuator 430a is asymmetrical with respect to each of the other actuators 430b, 430c (seen in Fig. 4A-B) relative to the first median plane [n] (annotated Fig. 4A, below),and the actuating system 430a-430c consists of an odd number (three actuators 430a-430c seen in Figs. 4A-B) of actuators 430a-430c, preferably three (three actuators 430a-430c) or five, the actuators 430a-430c being distributed relative to each other circumferentially (seen in Figs. 4A-B) in a regular or irregular manner (regular manner because arrangements are at 2, 6, and 10 o’clock positions, [0031]) (0030-32]; Annotated Fig. 4A, below).
PNG
media_image3.png
724
814
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure C: Annotated Fig. 4A of Stone (U.S. 2021/0079872)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the one or more actuators 70b, 170b of Song in view of Gormley with Stone’s said actuator(s) 430a-430c, and have the actuator 430a arranged on a first side (first side) of the second median plane [m] opposite a second side (second side) of the second median plane [m] where the attachment mast is located [p] ([p] is the location where cowl portion 410a is affixed to the aircraft wing (not shown) at hinge 412, 412a-b), and the actuating axis [w] of which is offset circumferentially with respect to the first median plane [n], with the actuator 430a being asymmetrical with respect to each of the other actuators 430b, 430c (seen in Fig. 4A-B) relative to the first median plane [n], and the actuating system 430a-430c consists of an odd number (three actuators 430a-430c seen in Figs. 4A-B) of actuators 430a-430c, preferably three (three actuators 430a-430c) or five, the actuators 430a-430c being distributed relative to each other circumferentially (seen in Figs. 4A-B) in a regular or irregular manner (regular manner because arrangements are at 2, 6, and 10 o’clock positions), in order to move the moveable transcowl portions 410a, 410b (Stone [0031]).
Song in view of Gormley and Stone does not teach an eccentric actuator.
Baldwin teaches
an eccentric actuator 44 operated to move a rod 42 in a vertical direction (p. 5, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify one actuator 430a of the one or more actuators 430a-430c of Song in view of Gormley and Stone with Baldwin’s eccentric actuator 44, because it has been held that “Use of known technique”, in this case, using Baldwin’s eccentric actuator 44, “to improve similar devices (methods, or products)”, in this case, Song in view of Gormley and Stone’s movable structure 48, “in the same way”, in this case, provide movement along the longitudinal central axis 36, was an obvious extension of prior art teachings. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007), 82 USPQ2d at 1396; MPEP 2143 I (C). Note, Baldwin’s eccentric actuator 44 is applied for its stated and intended use of moving a rod in a single axial direction, and not for its location in the prior art.
Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, as discussed so far, does not teach among said actuator(s) of the actuating system actuating system, provision is made of an eccentric actuator arranged on a first side of the second median plane opposite a second side of the second median plane where the attachment mast is located, and the actuating axis of which is offset circumferentially with respect to the first median plane, in the case of several actuators constituting the actuating system, the eccentric actuator is asymmetrical with respect to each of the other actuators relative to the first median plane, and the actuating system consists of an odd number of actuators, preferably three or five, the actuators being distributed relative to each other circumferentially in a regular or irregular manner.
However, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin teaches a propulsion unit (seen in Fig. 1) for an aircraft 2 comprising a turbomachine 10, Gormley’s a mast 56 for attaching the turbomachine, a nacelle 12 including at least one fan cowl 42, as well as a thrust reverser 44 comprising a fixed structure 46, a movable structure 48 comprising one or two movable reverser cowls 48 each equipped with a radially internal reverser cowl wall 56 delimiting the secondary flow path 30 radially outwards, at least one deflection cascade 52, a first median plane [c] of the reverser 44 passing through the longitudinal central axis 36, as well as a second median plane [d] of the reverser 44 passing through the longitudinal central axis 36 and perpendicular to the first median plane [c], an actuating system 58, 158 for moving the movable structure between its advanced direct thrust position (stowed position) and its retracted reverse thrust position (deployed position). The actuating system 58, 158 consisting of one or more actuators 44, 430b, 430c, as taught by Baldwin and Stone. Each actuator 44, 430b, 430c comprising Song’s actuating member 74b that is translatably movable (move in a substantial axial direction) and centered on an actuating axis [b]. Furthermore, provision made of Baldwin’s eccentric actuator 44 is arranged on a first side (first side) of Song’s second median plane [d] opposite a second side (second side), as taught by Stone, of the second median plane [d] where the attachment mast is located [p] ([p] is the location where cowl portion 410a is affixed to the aircraft wing (not shown) at hinge 412, 412a-b), and the actuating axis [b] of which is offset circumferentially, as taught by Stone, with respect to the first median plane [c], in the case of several actuators 44, 430b, 430c constituting the actuating system 58, 158. Baldwin’s eccentric actuator 44 is asymmetrical with respect to each of the other actuators 430b, 430c, as taught by stone, relative to the first median plane [n] and the actuating system 58, 158consists of an odd number (three actuators 44, 430b, 430c) of actuators 44, 430b, 430c, preferably three (three actuators 44, 430b, 430c) or five, the actuators 44, 430b, 430c being distributed relative to each other circumferentially in a regular or irregular manner (regular manner because arrangements are at 2, 6, and 10 o’clock positions), as taught by Stone.
Regarding Claim 2, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1. However, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, as discussed so far, does not teach the actuating system consists of three actuators, including: the eccentric actuator; two other actuators arranged on either side of the first median plane, symmetrically with respect to this first median plane.
Stone further teaches
the actuating system 430a-430c consists of three actuators 430a-430c (Fig. 4A), including:
the actuator 430a; two other actuators 430b, 430c arranged on either side of the first median plane [n] (Annotated Fig. 4A, below).
PNG
media_image3.png
724
814
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure C: Annotated Fig. 4A of Stone (U.S. 2021/0079872)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the two actuators 430b, 430c of the actuating system 44, 430b, 430c of Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin and have the two other actuators 430b, 430c arranged on either side of the first median plane [n],as taught by Stone, for the same reason as discussed in rejection of claim 1 above.
Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, as discussed so far, does not teach two other actuators arranged on either side of the first median plane, symmetrically with respect to this first median plane.
Gormley further teaches a similar actuating system (seen in Fig. 3) and
two other actuators 68B, 68D arranged on either side of the first median plane [x], symmetrically (symmetrical arrangement seen in Fig. 3; 68B, 68D arranged on opposing sides of nacelle 22, in [0054]) with respect to this first median plane [x] ([0054]; Annotated Fig. 3 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
753
673
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Figure D: Annotated Fig. 3 of Gormley (U.S. 2022/0065195)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the two actuators 430b, 430c of Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin and have the two other actuators 430b, 430c arranged on either side of the first median plane [x], symmetrically (symmetrical arrangement seen in Fig. 3) with respect to this first median plane [x],as taught by Gormley, in order to move the translating sleeve and each of its segments between the forward stowed position and the aft deployed position (Gormley, [0051]).
Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, as discussed so far, does not teach the actuating system consists of three actuators, including: the eccentric actuator; two other actuators arranged on either side of the first median plane, symmetrically with respect to this first median plane.
However, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin teaches a propulsion unit (seen in Fig. 1) for an aircraft 2 comprising a turbomachine 10, Gormley’s a mast 56 for attaching the turbomachine, a nacelle 12 including at least one fan cowl 42, as well as a thrust reverser 44. The thrust reverser 44 comprising a fixed structure 46, a movable structure 48 comprising one or two movable reverser cowls 48 each equipped with a radially internal reverser cowl wall 56 delimiting the secondary flow path 30 radially outwards, at least one deflection cascade 52, a first median plane [c] of the reverser 44 passing through the longitudinal central axis 36, as well as a second median plane [d] of the reverser 44 passing through the longitudinal central axis 36 and perpendicular to the first median plane [c], an actuating system 58, 158 for moving the movable structure between its advanced direct thrust position (stowed position) and its retracted reverse thrust position (deployed position). The actuating system 58, 158 consisting three actuators 44, 430b, 430c, as taught by Baldwin and Stone. Each actuator 44, 430b, 430c comprising Song’s actuating member 74b that is translatably movable (move in a substantial axial direction) and centered on an actuating axis [b]. Furthermore, Baldwin’s eccentric actuator 44 is arranged on a first side (first side) of Song’s second median plane [d] opposite a second side (second side), as taught by Stone, of the second median plane [d] where the attachment mast is located [p] ([p] is the location where cowl portion 410a is affixed to the aircraft wing (not shown) at hinge 412, 412a-b), and the actuating axis [b] of which is offset circumferentially, as taught by Stone, with respect to the first median plane [c]; and Stone’s two other actuators 430b, 430c arranged on either side of Song’s first median plane [x], symmetrically, as taught by Gormley, with respect to Song’s first median plane [x].
Regarding Claim 4, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Song further teaches
a fixed part 72b of the actuator 70b, 170b is fixed on a front frame 46 of the deflection cascade support (portion 46 is the support for the deflection cascade, seen in Figs. 4-6), or on a fixed longitudinal beam 74b of the reverser 44, extending rearwardly (seen in Fig. 6) from the front frame 46 of the cascade support ([0059-60; 0068]; Figs. 4-6).
Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, as discussed so far, does not teach a fixed part of the eccentric actuator is fixed on a front frame of the deflection cascade support, or on a fixed longitudinal beam of the reverser, extending rearwardly from the front frame of the cascade support.
However, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin teaches a thrust reverser 44 comprising a fixed structure 46, a movable structure 48 comprising one or two movable reverser cowls 48 each equipped with a radially internal reverser cowl wall 56 delimiting the secondary flow path 30 radially outwards, at least one deflection cascade 52, and an actuating system 58, 158. The actuating system 58, 158 consisting of one or more actuators 44 (eccentric actuator 44), 430b, 430c, as taught by Baldwin and Stone. Each actuator 44, 430b, 430c comprising Song’s actuating member 74b that is translatably movable (move in a substantial axial direction) and centered on an actuating axis [b]. Baldwin’s eccentric actuator 44 is fixed on a front frame 46 of the deflection cascade support (portion 46 is the support for the deflection cascade), or on a fixed longitudinal beam 74b of the reverser 44, extending rearwardly (seen in Fig. 6) from the front frame 46 of the cascade support.
Regarding Claim 6, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Song further teaches
the reverser 44 has a C-shaped, D-shaped or O-shaped cowl architecture (o-shaped cowl architecture is inherent from “translating cowls 48 are typically circumferentially spaced around the nacelle 12” with fan cowl 42 surrounding the fan, and the translating cowls 48 located aft of the fan cowl) ([0059; 0068]; Fig. 2).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, and further in view of Werquin 2020/0018259.
Regarding Claim 3, as best understood, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Song further teaches
one (top one in Fig. 2) of said two movable reverser cowls 48 includes a beam 74b on which are secured: means (hydraulic inherent from hydraulic damper 70b) for guiding the movable reverser cowl 48 in translation (move in a substantial axial direction); an attachment fitting 72b for the movable actuating member 74b of the actuator 70b ([0068-69; 0081]; Fig. 4).
Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin does not teach a beam on which are secured: a part of the locking means for the two movable cowls.
Werquin teaches
a beam 30 on which are secured: a part 36 of the locking means 36 for the actuator 1 ([0040-43; 0046]; Figs. 6-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the beam 74b of Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin to include Werquin’s part 36 of the locking means 36, in order to prevent the deployment of the movable surface 5 of a thrust reverser 6 (Werquin [0046], ll. 56-63). Note, Werquin’s part 36 of the locking means 36 is applied for its stated and intended use of preventing the deployment of the movable surface, and not for its location in the prior art.
Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, and Werquin, as discussed so far, does not teach one of said two movable reverser cowls includes a beam on which are secured: an attachment fitting for the movable actuating member of the eccentric actuator.
However, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, and Werquin teaches a propulsion unit (seen in Fig. 1) for an aircraft 2 comprising a turbomachine 10, Gormley’s a mast 56 for attaching the turbomachine, a nacelle 12 including at least one fan cowl 42, as well as a thrust reverser 44 comprising a fixed structure 46, a movable structure 48 comprising one or two movable reverser cowls 48 each equipped with a radially internal reverser cowl wall 56 delimiting the secondary flow path 30 radially outwards, at least one deflection cascade 52, a first median plane [c] of the reverser 44 passing through the longitudinal central axis 36, as well as a second median plane [d] of the reverser 44 passing through the longitudinal central axis 36 and perpendicular to the first median plane [c], an actuating system 58, 158 for moving the movable structure between its advanced direct thrust position (stowed position) and its retracted reverse thrust position (deployed position). The actuating system 58, 158 consisting of one or more actuators 44, 430b, 430c, as taught by Baldwin and Stone. Baldwin’s eccentric actuator 44 and the other actuators 430b, 430c, each comprise Song’s actuating member 74b that is translatably movable (move in a substantial axial direction) and centered on an actuating axis [b]. Therefore, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, and Werquin’s one of said two movable reverser cowls 48 of said two movable reverser cowls 48 includes a beam 74b on which are secured: an attachment fitting 72b for the movable actuating member 74b of Baldwin’s eccentric actuator 44.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, and further in view of Tabouret 2020/0291894.
Regarding Claim 5, as best understood, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1. However, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin does not teach associated with at least one of said one or two movable reverser cowls, at least one member for limiting the bending of said movable cowl in the retracted reverse thrust position, in the event of a malfunction of one or more actuators.
Tabouret teaches a movable reverser cowl 31 that includes at least one member 50 (energy storage device 50 comprises an elastic return device such as a spring) that is positioned against the movable reverser cowl 31 in whatever position the cowl 31 is in: closed [stowed position], open [retracted thrust position], or intermediate position. ([0081-84, 0090, 0102-103]; Fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to provide the one or two movable reverser cowls 48 of Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin to include at least one member 40, 50, as taught by Tabouret, in order to “avoid bending constraints of the avoidance panel 40” (Tabouret [0090], ll. 17-19). Note, Tabouret’s at least one member 50 is applied for its stated and intended use of avoid bending constraints of an object and not for its location in the prior art.
Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, and Tabouret, as discussed so far, does not teach at least one member for limiting the bending of said movable cowl in the retracted reverse thrust position, in the event of a malfunction of one or more actuators.
However, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, and Tabouret teaches a propulsion unit (seen in Fig. 1) for an aircraft 2 comprising a turbomachine 10, a mast 56 for attaching the turbomachine, a nacelle 12 including at least one fan cowl 42, as well as a thrust reverser 44 comprising a fixed structure 46, a movable structure 48 comprising one or two movable reverser cowls 48, at least one deflection cascade 52, a first median plane [c] of the reverser 44 passing through the longitudinal central axis 36, as well as a second median plane [d] of the reverser 44 passing through the longitudinal central axis 36 and perpendicular to the first median plane [c], an actuating system 58, 158 for moving the movable structure between its advanced direct thrust position (stowed position) and its retracted reverse thrust position (deployed position), and Tabouret’s at least one member 50 associated with at least one of said one or two movable reverser cowls 48. The actuating system 58, 158 consisting of one or more actuators 44, 430b, 430c, as taught by Baldwin and Stone. Each actuator 44, 430b, 430c comprising Song’s actuating member 74b that is translatably movable (move in a substantial axial direction) and centered on an actuating axis [b]. Therefore, Song in view of Gormley, Stone, and Baldwin, and Tabouret’s at least one member 50 associated with at least one of said one or two movable reverser cowls 48 is capable of limiting the bending of said movable cowl in the retracted reverse thrust position, in the event of a malfunction of one or more actuators, because it has been held that “apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does.” Hewlett-Packard Co. v Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990). See MPEP 2114 II, and a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). See MPEP 2114 II. In this case, the applied prior art is identical to the claimed structure and is capable of operating as claimed and as discussed above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACEK LISOWSKI whose telephone number is (408) 918-7635. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 10 am - 6 pm 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, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached on (571) 270-5426. 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.
/JACEK LISOWSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights