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 .
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 and 3-8 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.
In claim 1, lines 9-10, “the body (2) with a diagonal cross section at full length along the direction it extends” is vague and indefinite. It is not clear what structural limitations this phrase implies. Is a “diagonal” a geometric term or the description of an element? Assuming it as a geometric term, it is not clear where the diagonal would be in the body. Also, “the direction it extends” is unclear because it is not clear if “it” refers to the diagonal or the body.
In claim 8, “aircraft and/or helicopter” is alternative and indefinite. It especially makes no sense since a helicopter is inherently an aircraft.
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.
Claims 1 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE102021000547in view of DE102021000547.
WO2010/065639 discloses an ammunition element comprising most claimed elements including a body 100 located on an air vehicle for placing ammunition therein; an aerodynamic surface 102 forming an outer wall of the body; at least one leading edge cover 101 located on the body so as to come into primary contact with the air flow to which the body is exposed when the air vehicle moves; at least one trailing edge cover 103 located on a surface where the air flow leaves the body, wherein the trailing edge cover is in the form of a dome to enable continuity of the aerodynamic surfaces on the body, thus allowing the drag on the air vehicle to be reduced (page 3, paragraph 18). WO2010/065639 fails to show that the dome is in the form of a polygonal dome. DE102021000547 teaches that it is known to have a polygonal dome to perform the same functions as the dome in WO2010/065639. Motivation to combine is the mere substitution of known domes for aircraft to perform the same function. To employ the teachings of DE102021000547 on the ammunition storage element of WO2010/065639 and have a polygonal dome is considered to have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the application’s filing.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Seibel is cited as being of interest since it disclose an ammunition carrier for aircraft.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to J. WOODROW ELDRED whose telephone number is (571)272-6901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30.
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, Troy Chambers can be reached at 571-272-6874. 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.
/J. Woodrow Eldred/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3641
JWE
Prosecution Insights