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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 228 in Fig. 5.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 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 1-20 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 1 and its dependent, it is unclear whether term “the tiles” refers to the previously claimed plurality of tiles or a portion (at least two) of the previously claimed plurality of tiles. The same rejection is also applied to term “the tiles” for claim 2 and its dependent, claim 6, claim 10 and its dependents, claim 14 and its dependents, claim 15 and its dependent, and claim 18.
Regarding claim 3, it is unclear whether term “the frame” refers to each of the plurality of frames previously claimed in claim 2 or one (just one) of said previously claimed plurality of frames. The same rejection is also applied to term “the frame” for claim 15 and its dependent
Regarding claim 4 and its dependent,
i) it is unclear whether term “the emitter” refers to each of the plurality of emitters previously claimed in claim 1 or one (just one) of said previously claimed plurality of emitters, the same rejection is also applied to term “the emitter” for claim 5 and claim 15 and its dependent; and
ii) it is unclear whether term “the emitter bodies” refers to the previously claimed plurality of emitter bodies or a portion (at least two) of said previously claimed plurality of emitter bodies.
Regarding claim 11, i) it is unclear whether term “the tiles” refers to the plurality of tiles previously claimed in claim 1 or a portion (at least two) of the said previously claimed plurality of tiles; and ii) due to the ambiguity of claim 10, it is further unclear whether the tiles in claim 11 refers to the tiles in claim 10, or said two claimed tiles refers to different tiles.
Regarding claim 13, i) it is unclear whether term “the tiles” refers to the plurality of tiles previously claimed in claim 1 or a portion (at least two) of the said previously claimed plurality of tiles; ii) due to the ambiguity of claim 10, it is further unclear whether the tiles in claim 13 refers to the tiles in claim 10, or said two claimed tiles refers to different tiles; and iii) it is further under whether recitation “a different subset of the tiles” means the plurality of tiles previously claimed in claim 1 comprising a plurality of subsets of tiles or the two claimed tiles in claims 10 and 13 are different subsets of tiles.
Regarding claim 15 and its dependent, it is unclear whether term “the bracket channel” refers to each of the previously claimed plurality of bracket channels or one (just one) of said previously claimed plurality of bracket channels. The same rejection is also applied to term “the bracket channel” for claim 16.
Regarding claim 19 and its dependent, term “depends into” renders the claim indefinite because: where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “depends” is used by the claim to mean “extends” while the accepted meaning is “to be pending or undecided / to place reliance or trust (according to Merriam-Webster Dictionary)” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6, 10, 13-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NPL - Jia-Richards - Feasibility of a Deep-Space CubeSat Mission with a Stage-Based Electrospray Propulsion System (PROVIDED BY IDS), refers as Jia-Richards thereafter.
Regarding claim 1, Jia-Richards teaches the invention as claimed: An integrated ion thruster unit (comprising a plurality of thrusters as shown in Fig. 5) for a spacecraft (e.g., CubeSats, p. 1, right column, para. 1), the integrated ion thruster unit comprising:
a unit housing (a housing that forms a space where at least the plurality of thrusters in Fig. 5 and a cluster tank in Fig. 4 are placed in) comprising a thrust face (annotated Fig. 5); and
a plurality of tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 for clarification) arranged in an array (the array as shown in Fig. 5) on the thrust face (annotated Fig. 5), wherein each of the tiles (each thruster) comprising:
an emitter (the emitter array that comprises a plurality of emitter bodies of Fig. 2, see p. 2, end of right column and p. 3. Left column, para. 1) comprising a plurality of tips (each of the plurality of emitter bodies comprising a tip as marked in annotated Fig. 2) configured to emit ions (ion beam in Fig. 2) in a thrust direction (as illustrated in annotated Fig. 2, which is the thrust direction facing out from the page in the view of Fig. 5) from an ionic liquid propellant (the ionic liquid per p. 3, left column, para. 1 stored in the cluster tank in Fig. 4) in response to an applied voltage (the voltage respectively provided to the extractor and the plurality of emitter bodies, see Fig. 2); and
an extractor (the extractor, see Fig. 3, p. 3, left column, para. 1) configured to provide a reference voltage (the voltage provided to the extractor referred to the plurality of emitter bodies that is referred to the voltage provided to the plurality of emitter bodies, see Fig. 2) with respect to the emitter (per p. 2, end of right column, each thruster comprising the plurality of emitter bodies of Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
512
842
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
522
830
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Jia-Richards further teaches each of the tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1 for clarification) further comprises: a frame (the frame where the emitter array is housed in, see Fig. 3 and p. 3, left column, para. 1) coupled to the emitter (the emitter array that comprises a plurality of emitter bodies of Fig. 2, see p. 2, end of right column and p. 3. Left column, para. 1) and the extractor (the extractor, see Fig. 3, p. 3, left column, para. 1); wherein the frame (the frame where the emitter array is housed in, see Fig. 3 and p. 3, left column, para. 1) is configured to establish a spaced and oriented relationship (in order for the extractor to be placed above the emitter array and facing outwardly as shown in Figs. 3 and 5) between the emitter (the emitter array that comprises a plurality of emitter bodies of Fig. 2, see p. 2, end of right column and p. 3. Left column, para. 1) and the extractor (the extractor, see Fig. 3, p. 3, left column, para. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Jia-Richards further teaches wherein the emitter (the emitter array that comprises the plurality of emitter bodies of Fig. 2, see p. 2, end of right column and p. 3. Left column, para. 1) further comprises: a base surface (a surface of where the base of each of the plurality of emitter bodies is placed, one base is marked in annotated Fig. 2 for clarification); and a plurality of emitter bodies (the plurality of emitter bodies of Fig. 2, see p. 2, end of right column and p. 3. Left column, para. 1) extending away from the base surface (the surface of where the base of each of the plurality of emitter bodies is placed, one base is marked in annotated Fig. 2 for clarification) in the thrust direction (as illustrated in annotated Fig. 2, which is the thrust direction facing out from the page in the view of Fig. 5), wherein each of the emitter bodies (each of the plurality of emitter bodies of Fig. 2) extends to a corresponding one (a corresponding tip as marked in annotated Fig. 2 in claim 1) of the tips.
PNG
media_image3.png
522
830
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Jia-Richards further teaches wherein each of the tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1 for clarification) defines a width in a range of about 0.25 to 3 centimeters (cm) and a length in a range of about 0.25 to 3 cm (as shown in Figs. 3-4, each tile is shaped as a square with a side length of 1cm), and wherein the plurality of tips (the tips of the plurality of emitter bodies, which is 480 per p. 3, left column, para. 1) numbers in a range between 200 and 10,000 per each of the tiles (see p. 3, left column, para. 1).
Note: the rejections for claim 10 and its dependent below interpreted the claimed one or more reservoirs as a reservoir that provides propellant to all of the plurality of tiles.
Regarding claim 10, Jia-Richards further teaches one or more reservoirs (the cluster tank in Fig. 4 that provides propellant to all of the plurality of thrusters) contained within the unit housing (the housing that forms a space where at least the plurality of thrusters in Fig. 5 and the cluster tank in Fig. 4 are placed in) and configured to contain the ionic liquid propellant (the ionic liquid per p. 3, left column, para. 1 stored in the cluster tank in Fig. 4) for use by the tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1 for clarification) in the array (the array as shown in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 13, Jia-Richards further teaches wherein each of the one or more reservoirs (the cluster tank in Fig. 4) is in fluid communication with a different subset (annotated Fig. 5) of the tiles (the plurality of thrusters) in the array (the array as shown in Fig. 5; per p. 3, right column. Para. 2, the thrust unit comprising mechanisms for staging the plurality of thrusters).
PNG
media_image4.png
521
842
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Note: the rejection for claim 14 below interpreted the claimed brackets as frames that house the emitter.
Regarding claim 14, Jia-Richards further teaches brackets (the frames where each of the emitter arrays of the plurality of thrusters is housed in, see Figs. 3 and 5 and p. 3, left column, para. 1) arranged on the thrust face (annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1) to position the tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1 for clarification) in the array (the array as shown in Fig. 5) with respect to the unit housing (the housing that forms the space where at least the plurality of thrusters in Fig. 5 and the cluster tank in Fig. 4 are placed in), and wherein the tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1 for clarification, which as claimed in claim 1 only requires emitter array and extractor, see Fig. 2 and p. 2, end of right column and p. 3. Left column, para. 1) in the array (the array as shown in Fig. 5) are affixed to the brackets (the frames where each of the emitter arrays of the plurality of thrusters is housed in, see Figs. 3 and 5 and p. 3, left column, para. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Jia-Richards further teaches one or more electrodes (the plurality of emitter bodies of the emitter array that receive the applied voltage, one emitter body is marked in Fig. 2 for clarification) extending within the unit housing (the housing that forms the space where at least the plurality of thrusters in Fig. 5 and the cluster tank in Fig. 4 are placed in) and configured to apply the applied voltage (received from the power source, see annotated Fig. 2) to the ionic liquid propellant (stored in the cluster tank in Fig. 4) in contact with the emitter (the emitter array that comprises a plurality of emitter bodies of Fig. 2, see p. 2, end of right column and p. 3. Left column, para. 1) of each of the plurality of tiles (each of the plurality of thrusters as shown in Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image5.png
522
830
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Jia-Richards further teaches one or more reservoirs (a plurality of reservoirs that forms the cluster tank in Fig. 4 that provides propellant to all of the plurality of thrusters) configured to contain the ionic liquid propellant (the ionic liquid per p. 3, left column, para. 1 stored in the cluster tank in Fig. 4) for use by the tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1 for clarification) in the array (the array as shown in Fig. 5), wherein each of the one or more electrodes (each of the plurality of emitter bodies of the emitter array that receive the applied voltage, one emitter body is marked in Fig. 2 in claim 17 for clarification) extends within a corresponding one (a respective reservoir that coupled only to a respective thruster, e.g., the one as shown in Fig. 3) of the one or more reservoirs (the plurality of reservoirs that forms the cluster tank in Fig. 4 that provides propellant to all of the plurality of thrusters) adjacent to (interpreted as located close to each other and does NOT exclude other component(s) is located therebetween) the thrust face (annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1).
Regarding claim 19, Jia-Richards further teaches a propellant feed system (comprising the cluster tank in Fig. 4) that depends into the unit housing (the housing that forms the space where at least the plurality of thrusters in Fig. 5 and the cluster tank in Fig. 4 are placed in) from the thrust face, wherein the unit housing (the housing that forms the space where at least the plurality of thrusters in Fig. 5 and the cluster tank in Fig. 4 are placed in) encloses at least one additional component region comprising: one or more adjacent additional component regions (where routing mechanisms and staging mechanisms in Fig. 5 are) located adjacent to (interpreted as located close to each other and does NOT exclude other component(s) is located therebetween) the propellant feed system (comprising the cluster tank in Fig. 4) with respect to the thrust direction (as illustrated in annotated Fig. 2 in claim 1, which is the thrust direction facing out from the page in the view of Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 20, Jia-Richards further teaches one or more additional components (routing mechanisms and staging mechanisms in Fig. 5) located in the at least one additional component region (where routing mechanisms and staging mechanisms in Fig. 5 are), wherein the one or more additional components include an electrical power system (EPS) control subsystem (per p. 3, right column, para. 2, routing mechanisms and staging mechanisms in Fig. 5 selectively provides the electrical power provided to different thrusts of the plurality of thrusters in Fig. 5 for stagging).
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.
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 3, 5, 10-12, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NPL - Jia-Richards in view of Lozano 20220195964.
Regarding claim 3, Jia-Richards does not teach wherein the frame comprises: a first surface configured for positioning of the emitter thereon; and a second surface positioned beyond the first surface in the thrust direction and configured for positioning of the extractor thereon.
However, Lozano teaches wherein the frame (270 and 280, Fig. 5) comprises: a first surface (annotated Fig. 5) configured for positioning of the emitter (230 and 240s) thereon; and a second surface (annotated Fig. 5) positioned beyond the first surface (annotated Fig. 5) in the thrust direction (annotated Fig. 5) and configured for positioning of the extractor (260) thereon.
PNG
media_image6.png
511
738
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosed but non-depicted frame of Jia-Richards to be the frame as taught by Lozano, such that
wherein the frame comprises: a first surface configured for positioning of the emitter thereon; and a second surface positioned beyond the first surface in the thrust direction and configured for positioning of the extractor thereon
in order to support and electrically isolate the extractor from the emitter (Lozano, [0064]).
Regarding claim 5, Jia-Richards does not teach wherein the emitter further comprises a wetting surface opposite the base surface, and wherein the emitter is configured to wick the ionic liquid propellant from the wetting surface to the tips.
However, Lozano teaches wherein the emitter (240s and 230, Fig. 5) further comprises a wetting surface (annotated Fig. 5) opposite the base surface (annotated Fig. 5), and wherein the emitter (240s and 230, Fig. 5) is configured to wick (per [0061 and 0053] 240s and 230 are formed by a porous and/or granulated material in order for the propellant passively wicks to the tip of 240) the ionic liquid propellant (220, Fig. 5) from the wetting surface (annotated Fig. 5) to the tips (the tips of the plurality of 240s).
PNG
media_image7.png
511
712
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosed but non-depicted emitter of Jia-Richards to be the emitter as taught by Lozano, such that
wherein the emitter further comprises a wetting surface opposite the base surface, and wherein the emitter is configured to wick the ionic liquid propellant from the wetting surface to the tips
in order to provide propellant flow with a combination of electrical driving force and capillarity (Lozano, [0061]).
Note: the rejections for claim 10 and its dependents below are interpreted the claimed one or more reservoirs as a plurality of reservoirs that each respectively provides propellant to a respective tile of the plurality of tiles (the disclosed reservoir).
Regarding claim 10, Jia-Richards further teaches a source (the cluster thank in Fig. 4 that provides propellant to the plurality of tiles in Fig. 5) contained within the unit housing (the housing that forms the space where at least the plurality of thrusters in Fig. 5 and the cluster tank in Fig. 4 are placed in) and configured to contain the ionic liquid propellant (the ionic liquid per p. 3, left column, para. 1 stored in the cluster tank in Fig. 4) for use by the tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1 for clarification) in the array (the array as shown in Fig. 5).
Jia-Richards does not teach one or more reservoirs contained within the unit housing and configured to contain the ionic liquid propellant for use by the tiles in the array.
However, Lozano teaches a reservoir (a space formed between valve 290 and emitter 230 part, see annotated Fig. 5) formed between the emitter (240s and 230, Fig. 5) and a storage tank (210) configured to contain the ionic liquid propellant (220) for use by the tile (200 that comprises an extractor 260 and an emitter formed by 240s and 230).
PNG
media_image8.png
511
712
media_image8.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Jia-Richards with Lozano’s reservoir, such that
one or more reservoirs contained within the unit housing and configured to contain the ionic liquid propellant for use by the tiles in the array (the modification is to respectively provide Lozano’s reservoir to each of Jia-Richards’ plurality of tiles, which read on the claimed limitation)
in order to prevent liquid propellant from reaching the emitter prior to thruster firing and avoid thruster damage or failure (Lozano, [0025]).
Regarding claim 11, Jia-Richards in view of Lozano further teaches wherein the one or more reservoirs (the plurality of Lozano’s space formed between Lozano’s valve 290 and Lozano’s emitter 230 part in Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5 in claim 10) comprise a porous material (Lozano’s wick 225B in Lozano’s Fig. 9A and [0064] that is formed by porous material per Lozano’s [0053] and is placed between Lozano’s valve 290 and emitter 230 part in Lozano’s Fig. 5) configured to transfer the ionic liquid propellant (Jia-Richard’ ionic liquid per Jia-Richard’ p. 3, left column, para. 1 stored in Jia-Richard’ cluster tank in Jia-Richard’ Fig. 4) towards the tiles (Jia-Richard’ plurality of thrusters as shown in Jia-Richard’ Fig. 5) via capillary action (see Lozano’s [0053 and 0064]).
Regarding claim 12, Jia-Richards in view of Lozano further teaches one or more storage tanks (a plurality of Lozano’s 210 in Lozano’s Fig. 5) enclosed within the unit housing (Jia-Richards’s housing that forms the space where at least Jia-Richards’ plurality of thrusters in Jia-Richards’ Fig. 5 and Jia-Richards’s cluster tank in Jia-Richards’ Fig. 4 are placed in) and configured to store the ionic liquid propellant (Lozano’s 220 in Lozano’s Fig. 5 which is at least a portion of Jia-Richard’ ionic liquid per Jia-Richard’ p. 3, left column, para. 1 stored in Jia-Richard’ cluster tank in Jia-Richard’ Fig. 4) during a pre-operations phase (when Lozano’s valve 290 is not activated as shown in Lozano’s Fig. 9D, propellant is stored in Lozano’s 210 but not in Lozano’s space in Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5 in claim 10) of the spacecraft (Jia-Richard’ CubeSats, per Jia-Richard’ p. 1, right column, para. 1); and one or more valves (a plurality of Lozano’s 290 in Lozano’s Fig. 5) configured to selectively couple the one or more storage tanks (a plurality of Lozano’s 210 in Lozano’s Fig. 5) into fluid communication with the one or more reservoirs (a plurality of Lozano’s space formed between Lozano’s valve 290 and Lozano’s emitter 230 part in Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5 in claim 10).
Note: the rejections for claim 14 and its dependents below are interpreted the claimed brackets are different structures from frames.
Regarding claim 14, Jia-Richards further teaches frames (where each of the emitter arrays of the plurality of thrusters is housed in, see Figs. 3 and 5 and p. 3, left column, para. 1) arranged on the thrust face (annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1) to position the tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1 for clarification) in the array (the array as shown in Fig. 5) with respect to the unit housing (the housing that forms the space where at least the plurality of thrusters in Fig. 5 and the cluster tank in Fig. 4 are placed in), and wherein the tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1 for clarification) in the array (the array as shown in Fig. 5) are affixed in the unit housing via a coupling assembly.
Jia-Richards does not teach said coupling assembly comprising brackets arranged on the thrust face to position the tiles in the array with respect to the unit housing, and wherein the tiles in the array are affixed to the brackets.
However, Lozano teaches a bracket (annotated Fig. 5) arranged on the thrust face (annotated Fig. 5) to position the tile (comprising extractor 260 and emitter formed by 240s and 230, see Fig. 5), and wherein the tile (comprising extractor 260 and emitter formed by 240s and 230, see Fig. 5) is affixed to (via the frame 270 and 280, see Fig. 5) the bracket (annotated Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image9.png
526
712
media_image9.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosed but non-depicted coupling assembly of Jia-Richards to comprising brackets as taught by Lozano, such that
further comprising brackets arranged on the thrust face to position the tiles in the array with respect to the unit housing, and wherein the tiles in the array are affixed to the brackets (the modification is to respectively provide Lozano’s bracket to each of Jia-Richards’ plurality of tiles for electively providing propellant to emitter, and thus, any component/structure required to perform such function is inherently applied to the combination of Jia-Richards in view of Lozano, and said combination reads on the claimed limitation)
in order to prevent liquid propellant from reaching the emitter prior to thruster firing and avoid thruster damage or failure (Lozano, [0025]).
Regarding claim 15, Jia-Richards in view of Lozano further teaches one or more reservoirs (the plurality of Lozano’s space formed between Lozano’s valve 290 and Lozano’s emitter 230 part in Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5, which of each provides propellant to each of Jia-Richards’ plurality of thrusters in Jia-Richards’ Fig. 5) configured to contain the ionic liquid propellant (Lozano’s Fig. 9C shows when Lozano’s valve 290 is activated, propellant is provided from Lozano’s 210 to Lozano’s space between Lozano’s valve 290 and Lozano’s emitter 230) for use by the tiles (Jia-Richard’ plurality of thrusters as shown in Jia-Richard’ Fig. 5) in the array (Jia-Richard’ array in Jia-Richard’ Fig. 5),
wherein each of the tiles (each of Jia-Richard’ plurality of thrusters as shown in Jia-Richard’ Fig. 5) further comprises a frame (Lozano’s 270 and 280 in Lozano’s Fig. 5) coupled to the emitter (Lozano’s 240s and 230 in Lozano’s Fig. 5) and the extractor (Lozano’s 260 in Lozano’s Fig. 5), wherein the emitter (Lozano’s 240s and 230 in Lozano’s Fig. 5) includes a wetting surface (where Lozano’s emitter receives propellant from Lozano’s 225D, see Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5),
wherein the frame (Lozano’s 270 and 280 in Lozano’s Fig. 5) defines a frame channel (Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5) extending therethrough,
wherein each of the brackets (each Lozano’s bracket in Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5) defines a bracket channel (Lozano’s 294 in Lozano’s Figs. 6 and 9C-9D) extending therethrough and registered with the frame channel (Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5) of the tile (the thrust that comprises the extractor, e.g., Lozano’s 260, and the emitter, e.g., Lozano’s 240s and 230) affixed thereto (coupled to Lozano’s bracket as shown in Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5), and
wherein the bracket channel (Lozano’s 294 in Lozano’s Figs. 6 and 9C-9D) couples the frame channel (Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5) and the wetting surface (Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5) of the affixed tile (the thrust that comprises the extractor, e.g., Lozano’s 260, and the emitter, e.g., Lozano’s 240s and 230 and coupled to Lozano’s bracket as shown in Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5) into fluid communication (via Lozano’s wick 225D in Lozano’s Fig. 9C) with the one or more reservoirs (Lozano’s space formed between Lozano’s valve 290 and Lozano’s emitter 230 part in Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image10.png
618
851
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Jia-Richards in view of Lozano further teaches a wick (Lozano’s wick 225D in Lozano’s Fig. 9C) positioned within the bracket channel (Lozano’s 294 in Lozano’s Figs. 6 and 9C-9D) and the registered frame channel (Lozano’s annotated Fig. 5 in claim 15).
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NPL - Jia-Richards.
Regarding claims 7-9, Jia-Richards further teaches wherein the plurality of tiles (the plurality of thrusters, one is marked in annotated Fig. 5 in claim 1 for clarification) in the array (the array as shown in Fig. 5) numbers 32 (see Fig. 5).
Jia-Richards does not teach wherein the plurality of tiles in the array numbers at least fifty / one hundred / five hundred.
However, Jia-Richards further teaches the number of the plurality of tiles (the plurality of thrusters) in the array (the array of the arrangement of the plurality of thrusters) is determined and can be scaled up according to the required power and/or maximum thrust provided by the thruster unit (see Table 1 and p. 3, right column, para. 2).
A particular parameter is a result-effective variable when the variable is known to achieve a recognized result. See In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 620, 195 USPQ 6,8 (CCPA 1977). Therefore, an ordinary skilled worker would recognize that the number of the plurality of tiles in the array is a results-effective variable that controls power and/or maximum thrust. Thus, the claimed limitation of the plurality of tiles in the array numbers at least fifty / one hundred / five hundred is found to be an obvious optimization of the prior art obtainable by an ordinary skilled worker through routine experimentation.
Further, it appears that one of ordinary skills in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the plurality of tiles of Jia-Richards to have the plurality of tiles number at least fifty / one hundred / five hundred, as it involves only increasing the plurality of tiles of Jia-Richards disclosed to require adjustment.
"[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation", In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The presence of a known result-effective variable would be a motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process, MPEP 2144.05(II)(B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the invention of Jia-Richards wherein the
plurality of tiles in the array numbers at least fifty / one hundred / five hundred in order to optimize the required power and/or maximum thrust.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lozano 20190135457 and Perna 20220090587 teaches a tile of an ion thruster unit comprising an emitter comprising a plurality of tips configured to emit ions in a thrust direction from an ionic liquid propellant in response to an applied voltage; a reservoir comprise a porous material configured to transfer the ionic liquid propellant towards the plurality of tips, a tank configured to store the ionic liquid propellant during a pre-operations phase of the spacecraft, and one or more valves configured to selectively couple the one or more storage tanks into fluid communication with the one or more reservoirs.
Zachar 20220260063 and Natisin 11359613 teaches a tile of an ion thruster unit comprising an emitter comprising a plurality of tips configured to emit ions in a thrust direction from an ionic liquid propellant in response to an applied voltage, an extractor configured to provide a reference voltage with respect to the emitter and comprising a plurality of holes receiving the plurality of tips of the emitter, a frame comprising a first surface configured for positioning of the emitter thereon; and a second surface positioned beyond the first surface in the thrust direction and configured for positioning of the extractor thereon.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JINGCHEN LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-6639. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-4:30.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/JINGCHEN LIU/ /GERALD L SUNG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741 Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights