CTNF 19/072,022 CTNF 89541 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims Claims 1-20 of U.S. Application No. 19/072,022 filed on 03/06/2025 have been examined. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20 AIA 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) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21 AIA Claim s 1- 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Schaub et al. [US 2023/0419842 A1] , hereinafter referred to as Schaub, in view of Dooley et al. [EP 1953365 A2] , hereinafter referred to as Dooley . As to Claim 1, 10 and 17, Schaub discloses a computer-implemented method comprising: determining fuel consumption data for an aerial vehicle ([see at least 0043], determination of fuel consumption by engine control of the aircraft) ; determining carbon emissions data for the aerial vehicle based on (i) volume data indicative of a real-time volume of the first type of aviation fuel ([see at least 0054 and 0056-0057], real-time determination of carbon savings based on amount of fuel used by the aircraft) , (ii) a first carbon emissions factor for the first type of aviation fuel, and (iii) a second carbon emissions factor for the second type of aviation fuel ([see at least 0026, 0045 and 0057], carbon emission is determined with reference to the nominal impact of non-sustainable aviation fuel which has not been chosen) ; causing a rendering of the fuel consumption data via a display of the aerial vehicle ([see at least 0067 and fig. 4H], display of fuel usage value on a cockpit display device) ; and causing transmission of the carbon emissions data to a datastore associated with the aerial vehicle ([see at least 0045], storage of data in database 130). Schaub does not explicitly disclose that provides a comparison between (i) first fuel consumption data associated with a first type of aviation fuel being utilized by the aerial vehicle and (ii) second fuel consumption data associated with a second type of aviation fuel that is not being utilized by the aerial vehicle. However Dooley, wherein the configuration of the dynamic routing is based upon customer holiday usage of collection services ([see at least 0024-0025], provide the pilot with comparison data related to consumption values of a conventional reference fuel). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have modified Schaub so as to provides a comparison between (i) first fuel consumption data associated with a first type of aviation fuel being utilized by the aerial vehicle and (ii) second fuel consumption data associated with a second type of aviation fuel that is not being utilized by the aerial vehicle . with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine Schaub and Dooley because this to provide the pilot with improved information in a situation in which new types of fuel, such as sustainable aviation fuel, are used [0024 and 0025]. As to Claim 2, 11 and 18, Schaub discloses a computer-implemented method , wherein the first type of aviation fuel is a sustainable aviation fuel and the second type of aviation fuel is a conventional aviation fuel ([see at least 0026 and 0045]). As to Claim 3, 12 and 19, Schaub discloses a computer-implemented method , wherein the datastore is a communication data bus memory of the aerial vehicle ([see at least 0045], 130). As to Claim 4, 13 and 20, Schaub discloses a computer-implemented method , wherein the display is a flight management system (FMS) display of the aerial vehicle ([see at least 0030]). As to Claim 5, Schaub discloses a computer-implemented method, further comprising: causing transmission of the carbon emissions data to a control station system that is communicatively coupled to the aerial vehicle ([see at least 0046]). As to Claim 6, Schaub discloses a computer-implemented method, further comprising: correlating an aerial vehicle identifier with the carbon emissions data to format the carbon emissions data according to a carbon offsetting and reduction protocol ([see at least 0067 and 0069]). As to Claim 7, Schaub discloses a computer-implemented method, further comprising: causing a rendering of (i) the fuel consumption data and (ii) the volume data indicative of the real-time volume of the first type of aviation fuel via the display of the aerial vehicle ([see at least 0067 and Fig. 4H]). As to Claim 8, Schaub discloses a computer-implemented method, further comprising: configuring one or more carbon credits for the aerial vehicle based on the carbon emissions data ([see at least 0067 and 0069]). As to Claim 9, Schaub discloses a computer-implemented method, further comprising: configuring one or more carbon credits for the aerial vehicle based on (i) the carbon emissions data and (ii) a carbon emissions target during a flight of the aerial vehicle ([see at least 0067 and 0069]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to 0 whose telephone number is (469)295-9189. The examiner can normally be reached on Flex schedule. 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, Fadey Jabr can be reached on 572-272-1516. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /YAZAN A SOOFI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668 Application/Control Number: 19/072,022 Page 2 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 19/072,022 Page 3 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 19/072,022 Page 4 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 19/072,022 Page 5 Art Unit: 3668 Application/Control Number: 19/072,022 Page 6 Art Unit: 3668
Prosecution Insights