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 .
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 4 and 18-21 are no longer rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-13, 15, and 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuhaus (US20190217475A1) in view of Erickson (US20220152769A1).
Claim 1
Neuhaus teaches an aircraft structural element (vehicle component, 1) configured to be assemblable into an aircraft structure (Figure 1A), the aircraft structural element comprising an integrally formed photogrammetry target. (¶0028 teaches the workpieces/components have embedded reference points. A reference point is an analogous term for a target. ¶0058 teaches that the apparatus uses a position-measurement system (4) in order to determine to position of each component (1), and that the system can be photogrammetry system. Therefore, since Neuhaus teaches targets on the component and a photogrammetry system to track the component, the reference teaches the claimed photogrammetry target.)
Neuhaus does not explicitly disclose an external surface having an integrally formed target ; wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target is a portion of the external surface which is raised, recessed or textured with respect to a surrounding portion of the external surface surrounding the integrally formed photogrammetry target, and wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target and the external surface are a single piece of a common material composition.
However, Erickson teaches an external surface having an integrally formed target (Figures 1 and 11-13 teach a tool (102) that includes an indexing feature (104) on the external surface (¶0132). The indexing feature is an analogous target (see ¶0137) that is formed in an outer surface of the tool (¶0133) and is therefore considered integrally formed.); wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target is a portion of the external surface which is raised, recessed or textured (¶0161 teaches the indexing feature includes an interfacing structure for interaction with the sensor (184). The interfacing structure is shown in Figure 18 as a series of raised portions forming a texture. ¶0164 teaches the interfacing structure can be a groove, which is a recessed portion.) with respect to a surrounding portion of the external surface surrounding the integrally formed photogrammetry target (See Figure 18), and wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target and the external surface are a single piece of a common material composition. (¶0133 teaches the indexing feature is formed in the surface of the tool, which means it is of the same material.)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to apply the known indexing feature targets of Erickson to the components of Neuhaus in order to enable the measurement apparatus to perform locating and indexing operations. (See Erickson ¶0169)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to apply the known indexing feature targets of Erickson to the components of Neuhaus because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to apply a known technique to a known method/apparatus to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
The predictable result is that the targets of Neuhaus will be made from protrusions of the material of the workpieces or recesses in the material of the workpiece as disclosed in Erickson.
Claim 3
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 1, wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target comprises a recessed portion of the external surface (Erickson ¶0164 teaches the interfacing structure can be a groove, which is a recessed portion.) the recessed portion being recessed relative to adjacent portions of the external surface (¶0164 teaches the groove is formed in the surface, which is interpreted as being recessed relative to the surrounding surface.) and the recessed portion is a recess in the external surface of the aircraft structural element. (Neuhaus teaches the components (1) are aircraft structural components in Figure 1A and that they have physically embedded reference points in ¶0028. Erickson, ¶0164 teaches the groove is formed in the surface, which is interpreted as being recessed relative to the surrounding surface.)
Claim 4
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 3, wherein the recessed portion is adjacent a protruding portion of the integrally formed photogrammetry target (Erickson, ¶0167 teaches the use of a combination of structures includes grooves and ridges.), and wherein the protruding portion protrudes relative to the surrounding portion of the external surface. (Erickson, Figure 18 shows an example of a protruding portion that is structured as claimed.)
Claim 5
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft structural element according claim 1, wherein the aircraft structural element, the integrally formed photogrammetry target and the external surface are formed of a common material composition and are a single piece. (Erickson, ¶0133 teaches the interfacing structures are formed in the surface of the tool. Combining this teaching to the targets and workpiece in Neuhaus results in a target, surface and workpiece that are a single piece and made from the same material.)
Claim 7
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 1, wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target comprises a textured surface of the external surface and the surrounding portion of the external surface is smooth. (Erickson, ¶0167 teaches that the surface can includes grooves and ridges, which describes a texture. Figure 18 shows the areas outside of the indexing features is “smooth”. It is noted that the claim does not define what degree of “smooth” is required to meet the limitation.)
Claim 8
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 1, wherein the external surface comprises a plurality of integrally formed photogrammetry targets (Erickson, Figures 17 and 18 show two examples of a plurality of targets (indexing features/interfacing structures). Neuhaus also discloses physically embedded reference points (plural), meaning that there are a plurality of the targets on the components.), wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target is included in the plurality of integrally formed photogrammetry targets. (Erickson, Figures 17 and 18 show two examples of a plurality of targets (indexing features/interfacing structures). Neuhaus also discloses physically embedded reference points (plural), meaning that there are a plurality of the targets on the components.)
Claim 9
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 8, wherein the plurality of integrally formed photogrammetry targets comprises the integrally formed photogrammetry target and at least two additional integrally formed photogrammetry targets. (Erickson, Figure 18 shows a plurality of targets (indexing features/interfacing structures) which includes at least three as required by the claim. Neuhaus also discloses physically embedded reference points (plural), meaning that there are a plurality of the targets on the components.)
Claim 10
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 8, wherein the plurality of integrally formed photogrammetry targets include integrally formed photogrammetry targets distributed across the external surface such that at least three of the integrally formed photogrammetry targets (Erickson, Figure 18 shows the targets (104/192) are located on the surface of the tool.) are visible from any rotational orientation of the aircraft structural element. (Since the targets of Erickson (104/192) are on the surface of the component as claimed, they can be viewed/are visible regardless of which orientation the component is placed in. The claim does not specify what the targets are required to be visible to or where the viewer is located in relation to the element.)
Claim 11
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 8, wherein each integrally formed photogrammetry target of the plurality of integrally formed photogrammetry targets has a different shape or size. (Claim 8 requires at least two targets. Erickson teaches the targets (104/192) can be a combination of two structures (grooves/ridges/apertures/protrusions/edges), which means the two targets are two different structures/shapes.)
Claim 12
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 1, further comprising a sensor disposed on or within the aircraft structural element (Neuhaus, ¶0021 teaches an embedded sensor within the vehicle component.), wherein the sensor is configured to: sense a parameter during assembly of the aircraft structural element into the aircraft structure using the aircraft structural element (Neuhaus, ¶0059 teaches the sensors determine status data and communicate it in real time during the production process.); and output a signal indicative of the parameter during assembly of the aircraft structural element into the aircraft structure. (¶0013 teaches the sensor system are provided with data communication capabilities with the computer system such that the status of the components can be determined at any point in time.)
Claim 13
Neuhaus teaches a photogrammetry system (¶0041) comprising: an aircraft structural element (1) configured to be assemblable into an aircraft structure (Figure 1A), the aircraft structural element having an integrally formed photogrammetry target (¶0028 teaches the workpieces/components have embedded reference points. A reference point is an analogous term for a target. ¶0058 teaches that the apparatus uses a position-measurement system (4) in order to determine to position of each component (1), and that the system can be photogrammetry system. Therefore, since Neuhaus teaches targets on the component and a photogrammetry system to track the component, the reference teaches the claimed photogrammetry target.); a photogrammetry imaging device (Figure 3, Item 4 is a position-measurement system that can be a photogrammetry system (¶0058).), and a photogrammetry processor (¶0064 teaches the position-measurement system (4) interacts with a computer based control system (30). A computer has a processor.), wherein the photogrammetry imaging device and photogrammetry processor are configured to determine a position or orientation of the integrally formed photogrammetry target. (¶0058 teaches that the position-measurement system (4) is used to determine the position (3) of the component (1). ¶0014 teaches that the production system includes a measurement system for determining the current position of the components in three dimensional space, which includes the coordinates of the references points and the orientation of the component.)
Neuhaus does not explicitly disclose an external surface having an integrally formed target; wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target is a portion of the external surface which is raised, recessed or textured with respect to a surrounding portion of the external surface surrounding the integrally formed photogrammetry target, and wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target and the external surface are a single piece of a common material composition.
However, Erickson teaches an external surface having an integrally formed target (Figures 1 and 11-13 teach a tool (102) that includes an indexing feature (104) on the external surface (¶0132). The indexing feature is an analogous target (see ¶0137) that is formed in an outer surface of the tool (¶0133) and is therefore considered integrally formed.); wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target is a portion of the external surface which is raised, recessed or textured (¶0161 teaches the indexing feature includes an interfacing structure for interaction with the sensor (184). The interfacing structure is shown in Figure 18 as a series of raised portions forming a texture. ¶0164 teaches the interfacing structure can be a groove, which is a recessed portion.) with respect to a surrounding portion of the external surface surrounding the integrally formed photogrammetry target (See Figure 18), and wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target and the external surface are a single piece of a common material composition. (¶0133 teaches the indexing feature is formed in the surface of the tool, which means it is of the same material.)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to apply the known indexing feature targets of Erickson to the components of Neuhaus in order to enable the measurement apparatus to perform locating and indexing operations. (See Erickson ¶0169)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to apply the known indexing feature targets of Erickson to the components of Neuhaus because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to apply a known technique to a known method/apparatus to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
The predictable result is that the targets of Neuhaus will be made from protrusions of the material of the workpieces or recesses in the material of the workpiece as disclosed in Erickson.
Claim 15
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft assembly system comprising the photogrammetry system according to claim 13, and further comprising an assembly coordinator configured to receive signals from the photogrammetry system indicative of the position or the orientation of the aircraft structural element. (Neuhaus, ¶0064 teaches the position-measurement system (4) interacts with a computer based control system (30). ¶0058 teaches that the position-measurement system (4) is used to determine the position (3) of the component (1). ¶0014 teaches that the production system includes a measurement system for determining the current position of the components in three dimensional space, which includes the coordinates of the references points and the orientation of the component.)
Claim 17
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft assembly system of claim 15, wherein the aircraft assembly system further comprises: a manufacturing tool (Neuhaus, Figure 3, Item 2, positioner unit), wherein the assembly coordinator and the manufacturing tool are configured to perform a step of assembly of the aircraft structure based on the received signal indicative of the position or the orientation of the aircraft structural element from the photogrammetry system. (Neuhaus, Figure 3 shows the computer control system (which is the assembly coordinator) includes positioner agents (22) that control the positioner units (2). ¶0014 teaches that the production system includes a measurement system for determining the current position of the components in three dimensional space, which includes the coordinates of the references points and the orientation of the component.)
Claim 18
Neuhaus teaches a method of assembling an aircraft structure (¶0008 teaches that the invention pertains to a production system for assembly of vehicle components. Figure 3 shows the components (1) are aircraft fuselage parts.) comprising: assembling an aircraft structure (fuselage) which includes an aircraft structural element (1) as a component of the aircraft structure; determining, during assembly of the aircraft structure, a position or orientation of a photogrammetry target using a photogrammetry system (¶0028 teaches the workpieces/components have embedded reference points. A reference point is an analogous term for a target. ¶0058 teaches that the apparatus uses a position-measurement system (4) in order to determine to position of each component (1), and that the system can be photogrammetry system. Therefore, since Neuhaus teaches targets on the component and a photogrammetry system to track the component, the reference teaches the claimed photogrammetry target.), wherein the photogrammetry target is a portion of the aircraft structural element for assembly into the aircraft structure (¶0028 teaches the workpieces/components have embedded reference points.), determining a position or an orientation of the aircraft structural element based on the position or the orientation of the integrally formed photogrammetry target (Neuhaus, ¶0028 teaches the components have embedded reference points that provide information about the datum reference of the parts. ¶0058 teaches that the position-measurement system (4) is used to determine the position (3) of the component (1). ¶0014 teaches that the production system includes a measurement system for determining the current position of the components in three dimensional space, which includes the coordinates of the references points and the orientation of the component.); and performing a step of the assembling of the aircraft structure based on the position or the orientation of the aircraft structural element. (¶0062 teaches the controlling of the positioner units (2) based on the status data (12), which includes positional data. ¶0057 teaches the use of the positioner units to move the components into the assembly position.)
Neuhaus does not explicitly disclose an external surface having an integrally formed target; wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target is a portion of the external surface which is raised, recessed or textured with respect to a surrounding portion of the external surface surrounding the integrally formed photogrammetry target, and wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target and the external surface are a single piece of a common material composition.
However, Erickson teaches an external surface having an integrally formed target (Figures 1 and 11-13 teach a tool (102) that includes an indexing feature (104) on the external surface (¶0132). The indexing feature is an analogous target (see ¶0137) that is formed in an outer surface of the tool (¶0133) and is therefore considered integrally formed.); wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target is a portion of the external surface which is raised, recessed or textured (¶0161 teaches the indexing feature includes an interfacing structure for interaction with the sensor (184). The interfacing structure is shown in Figure 18 as a series of raised portions forming a texture. ¶0164 teaches the interfacing structure can be a groove, which is a recessed portion.) with respect to a surrounding portion of the external surface surrounding the integrally formed photogrammetry target (See Figure 18), and wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target and the external surface are a single piece of a common material composition. (¶0133 teaches the indexing feature is formed in the surface of the tool, which means it is of the same material.)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to apply the known indexing feature targets of Erickson to the components of Neuhaus in order to enable the measurement apparatus to perform locating and indexing operations. (See Erickson ¶0169)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to apply the known indexing feature targets of Erickson to the components of Neuhaus because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to apply a known technique to a known method/apparatus to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
The predictable result is that the targets of Neuhaus will be made from protrusions of the material of the workpieces or recesses in the material of the workpiece as disclosed in Erickson.
Claim 19
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the method of claim 18, further comprising: receiving a signal from a sensor located on or within the aircraft structural element of the aircraft structure (Neuhaus ¶0021 teaches the use of sensors located within the components. , wherein the sensor is configured to sense a parameter during the assembling of the aircraft structure using the aircraft structural element (Neuhaus, ¶0059 teaches the sensors determine status data and communicate it in real time during the production process.), and the signal is indicative of the parameter during the assembling of the aircraft structure (Neuhaus ¶0039 teaches options for the sensed parameters, including proximity during the assembly process.), and wherein the step of the assembling of the aircraft structure based on the position or the orientation of the aircraft structural element is based on the received signal. (Neuhaus, ¶0059 teaches the sensors communicate status data (12) during the production process. ¶0061 teaches that the control system (30) receives status data (12) from the components and controls movements of the components via the positioner units (2).)
Claim 20
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the method of claim 19, wherein the sensed parameter is indicative of a contact between the aircraft structural element and a second aircraft structural element for attaching to the aircraft structural element during assembly (Neuhaus, ¶0039 teaches the sensors can be proximity sensors that improve the handling of the components to minimize gaps between the components or other means. A minimization of the gap is the improving of contact between the components or other means.), and wherein the step of the assembling of the aircraft structure based on the position or the orientation of the aircraft structural element is further based on whether the signal received from the sensor indicates the contact between the aircraft structural element and the second aircraft structural element. (¶0059 teaches that the method includes a step of determining status data (including the proximity data) and said status data is communicated during the process. ¶0062 teaches the controlling of the positioner units (2) based on the status data (12) to move the component from an assembly position to a nominal assembly position. The nominal assembly position is where the component is in position to be secured to another component.)
Claim 21
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the method of claim 19, wherein the sensed parameter is indicative of a strain experienced by the aircraft structural element during assembly of the aircraft structure (Neuhaus, ¶0039 teaches the sensor can be a strain sensor and that the data received is used to minimize internal strains within a component during moving of the component into position.), and wherein the step of the assembling of the aircraft structure based on the position or the orientation of the aircraft structural element is further based on maintaining the strain indicated by the sensed parameter below a threshold value. (¶0059 teaches that the component (1) notifies regarding a critical strain (a threshold value) during the production process. ¶0063 teaches that the production system keeps strains below an upper limit during the production process.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuhaus (US20190217475A1) in view of Erickson (US20220152769A1), as applied in Claim 1, further in view of Montgomery (US20080277057A1).
Claim 6
Neuhaus in view of McKay teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 1, wherein the aircraft structural element, external surface and the integrally formed photogrammetry target are formed of the common composite material composition and are the single piece (Erickson, ¶0133 teaches the interfacing structures are formed in the surface of the tool. Combining this teaching to the targets and workpiece in Neuhaus results in a target, surface and workpiece that are a single piece and made from the same material.) and wherein the common material composition is a common composite material composition (Neuhaus ¶0055 teaches the component is made from composite material.)
Neuhaus in view of Erickson does not explicitly disclose wherein the composite material composition includes plies forming layers of the common composite material composition.
However, Montgomery (US20080277057A1) teaches the composite material composition includes plies forming layers of the common composite material composition. (Figure 1 teaches a laminate structure (10) that can be used for a fuselage section (See Figure 15 and ¶0046) that includes layers (12) of composite (¶0032).)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the known composite material made from plies of Montgomery to the composite material of Neuhaus in view of Erickson in order to use a composite material structure that has relatively high inherent damping qualities without materially reducing the stiffness and other mechanical performance characteristics of the structure. (See Montgomery ¶0005)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to combine the known composite material made from plies of Montgomery to the composite material of Neuhaus in view of Erickson because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to combine prior art structures according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuhaus (US20190217475A1) in view of Erickson (US20220152769A1), as applied in Claim 13, further in view of Bry (US20160340016A1).
Claim 14
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the photogrammetry system according to claim 13.
Neuhaus in view of Erickson does not explicitly disclose a plurality of photogrammetry imaging devices which include the photogrammetry imaging device.
However, Bry teaches the photogrammetry system further comprises a plurality of photogrammetry imaging devices which include the photogrammetry imaging device. (Figure 1 shows a plurality of imaging devices (101).)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the known plurality of imaging devices technique from Bry to the system of Neuhaus in view of Erickson in order to take images of the entire workpiece and cover a predetermined path of the movement of the workpiece. (See Bry ¶0024)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to apply the known plurality of imaging devices technique from Bry to the system of Neuhaus in view of Erickson because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to apply a known technique to a known method/apparatus to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
The predictable result is that the system of Neuhaus will use a plurality of imaging devices.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuhaus (US20190217475A1) in view of Erickson (US20220152769A1), as applied in Claim 15, further in view of Bry (US20160340016A1).
Claim 16
Neuhaus in view of Erickson teaches the aircraft assembly system according to claim 15.
Neuhaus in view of Erickson does not explicitly disclose the aircraft assembly system further comprises: a display, wherein the assembly coordinator the is configured to output information to the display indicative of the position or the orientation of the aircraft structural element, and the display is configured to display the information.
However, Bry teaches the aircraft assembly system further comprises: a display, wherein the assembly coordinator the is configured to output information to the display indicative of the position or the orientation of the aircraft structural element, and the display is configured to display the information. (¶0051 teaches the system includes a display device that displays the position and displacement of the first structure.)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the known display device technique from Bry to the system of Neuhaus in view of Erickson in order to allow operators to follow and control the displacement of the first structure. (See Bry ¶0051)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to apply the known display device technique from Bry to the system of Neuhaus in view of Erickson because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to apply a known technique to a known method/apparatus to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
The predictable result is that the system of Neuhaus will use a display device.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuhaus (US20190217475A1) in view of Erickson (US20220152769A1), as applied in Claim 18, further in view of Montgomery (US20080277057A1).
Claim 22
Neuhaus in view of McKay teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 18, wherein the aircraft structural element, external surface and the integrally formed photogrammetry target are formed of the common composite material composition and are the single piece (Erickson, ¶0133 teaches the interfacing structures are formed in the surface of the tool. Combining this teaching to the targets and workpiece in Neuhaus results in a target, surface and workpiece that are a single piece and made from the same material.) and wherein the common material composition is a common composite material composition (Neuhaus ¶0055 teaches the component is made from composite material.)
Neuhaus in view of Erickson does not explicitly disclose wherein the composite material composition is a multilayered composition that includes plies forming layers of the common composite material composition.
However, Montgomery teaches the composite material composition includes plies forming layers of the common composite material composition. (Figure 1 teaches a laminate structure (10) that can be used for a fuselage section (See Figure 15 and ¶0046) that includes layers (12) of composite (¶0032).)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine the known composite material made from plies of Montgomery to the composite material of Neuhaus in view of Erickson in order to use a composite material structure that has relatively high inherent damping qualities without materially reducing the stiffness and other mechanical performance characteristics of the structure. (See Montgomery ¶0005)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to combine the known composite material made from plies of Montgomery to the composite material of Neuhaus in view of Erickson because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to combine prior art structures according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neuhaus (US20190217475A1) in view of Pryor (US5956417A).
Claim 1
Neuhaus teaches an aircraft structural element (vehicle component, 1) configured to be assemblable into an aircraft structure (Figure 1A), the aircraft structural element comprising an integrally formed photogrammetry target. (¶0028 teaches the workpieces/components have embedded reference points. A reference point is an analogous term for a target. ¶0058 teaches that the apparatus uses a position-measurement system (4) in order to determine to position of each component (1), and that the system can be photogrammetry system. Therefore, since Neuhaus teaches targets on the component and a photogrammetry system to track the component, the reference teaches the claimed photogrammetry target.)
Neuhaus does not explicitly disclose an external surface having an integrally formed target ; wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target is a portion of the external surface which is raised, recessed or textured with respect to a surrounding portion of the external surface surrounding the integrally formed photogrammetry target, and wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target and the external surface are a single piece of a common material composition.
However, Pryor teaches an external surface having an integrally formed target (Figure 7, Item 702, 708 are targets for a processing system (FEP) using a camera (10) and a processor (20).); wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target is a portion of the external surface which is raised, recessed or textured (Figure 7 shows the targets can be bumps or depressions.) with respect to a surrounding portion of the external surface surrounding the integrally formed photogrammetry target (See Figure 7), and wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target and the external surface are a single piece of a common material composition. (Col. 9 Lines 59-64 describe the targets as “cast-in”, which means they are made with the material of the main workpiece (700).)
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to apply the known indexing targets of Pryor to the components of Neuhaus in order to provide a more unusual target to provide a better chance for a good signature. (Pryor Col. 9 Lines 59-64)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was effectively filed, to apply the known indexing feature targets of Pryor to the components of Neuhaus because it has been held to be prima facie obvious to apply a known technique to a known method/apparatus to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
The predictable result is that the targets of Neuhaus will be made from protrusions of the material of the workpieces or recesses in the material of the workpiece as disclosed in Pryor.
Claim 2
Neuhaus in view of Pryor teaches the aircraft structural element according to claim 1, wherein the integrally formed photogrammetry target comprises a protruding portion of the external surface (Pryor, Figure 7, Items 702/704/708), the protruding portion protruding relative to the surrounding portion adjacent portions of the external surface, and wherein the protruding portion and the external surface of the aircraft structural element are formed of the common material composition and are a single piece. (Pryor, Figure 7 shows various protruding portions (702/704/708) that are made from the cast material (700) and a single piece with the material.)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 05/01/2026, with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The anticipation rejections using Bry have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 05/01/2026, with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but are moot as that combination (Neuhaus and McKay) is no longer relied upon.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found on the PTO-892 Notice of References Cited Form.
Document
Date
Description of Relevant Subject Matter
US20110295408A1
2010-05-27
Figure 4 shows targets (201, 202, 203) on multiple sides of the workpiece.
US20120285024A1
2011-05-11
Figure 1 teaches a photogrammetry system where workpieces (10, 20) have a plurality of targets (1, 2, 3) (5, 6, 7).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael W Hotchkiss whose telephone number is (571)272-3854. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 0800-1600.
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, Sunil K Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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.
/MICHAEL W HOTCHKISS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3726
Prosecution Insights