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 office action is in response to an application filed on 4/25/25. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 8/1/25 have been considered by the
Examiner and made of record in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jakubowski, (US 5,583,312) and in view of Provenza (US 2023/0373624 Al)
Regarding Claim 15 Jakubowski teaches A method of ejecting a store from an aircraft, (Pg. 1 – Abstract – “There is provided a renewable energy source ejector rack for retaining and releasing stores (bombs or the like) on an aircraft, which has on-board pressurization capability, employs a single pressurization system for two or more release mechanisms, and uses air or other clean non-pyrotechnic pressurized gases both as the energy source and energy transfer medium” ) determining a first pressure sufficient to provide a first force for actuating one or more store releasing connectors; (Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 28-32- “Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” & See Also Pg. 6 – Col. 4 – lines 9-13 – “In operation, the pressurized gas from the accumulator, when released through the dump valve, actuates the hooks to an open position and simultaneously actuates the ejector pistons to an extended position to thereby release and jettison the store.” (equates to determining a first pressure sufficient to provide a first force for actuating one or more store releasing connectors; as the quote shows the system having a predetermined pressure level to be able to release the securing mechanism)) selecting a system pressure based at least in part on the first force for actuating the one or more store releasing connectors; (Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 28-32- “Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” & See Also Pg. 6 – Col. 4 – lines 9-13 – “In operation, the pressurized gas from the accumulator, when released through the dump valve, actuates the hooks to an open position and simultaneously actuates the ejector pistons to an extended position to thereby release and jettison the store.” (equates to electing a system pressure based at least in part on the first force for actuating the one or more store releasing connectors; as the quote shows the system being repressurized to a determined amount wherein the securing mechanism using the first pressure can be realized.)) using the system pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors; (Pg. 6 – Col. 4 – lines 9-13 – “In operation, the pressurized gas from the accumulator, when released through the dump valve, actuates the hooks to an open position and simultaneously actuates the ejector pistons to an extended position to thereby release and jettison the store.”)
Yet Jakubowski fails to teach comprising: detecting one or more flight parameters of the aircraft; determining from the one or more flight parameters; determining from the one or more flight parameters a second pressure sufficient to provide a second force for ejecting the store; reducing the system pressure to a reduced pressure based at least in part on the second force for ejecting the store; and using the reduced pressure to eject the store from the aircraft.
Provenza teaches comprising: detecting one or more flight parameters of the aircraft; (Pg. 1 – Abstract - “a force adjuster configured to adjust a force setting that determines a force the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, a pitch adjuster configured to adjust a pitch setting that determines a pitch the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions”) determining from the one or more flight parameters (Pg. 1 – Abstract – “and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions” (equates to determining from the one or more flight parameters as the quote shows the flight parameters being monitored and force adjustments being made based on the monitoring )) determining from the one or more flight parameters a second pressure sufficient to provide a second force for ejecting the store; (Pg. 1 – Abstract – “determines a pitch the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions” ) reducing the system pressure to a reduced pressure based at least in part on the second force for ejecting the store; (Pg. 9 – [0029] – “The illustrated force adjuster 304 is configured to selectively adjust the force setting 306 that determines the force that the ejector pistons 314 of the store ejector 302 push the store 300. The force adjuster 304 can be of any suitable configuration for adjusting the force setting 306 depending on the specific construction of the store ejector. For example, but not limited to, the adjustment can be made mechanically, electrically, pneumatically,” (equates to reducing the system pressure to a reduced pressure based at least in part on the second force for ejecting the store; as the quote shows the force used to eject the store can be changed and thus reduced and the force provided can be one of pneumatic means and thus the pressure would be reduced to reduce the force applied to the store.)) and using the reduced pressure to eject the store from the aircraft. (Pg. 9 – [0029] – “The illustrated force adjuster 304 is configured to selectively adjust the force setting 306 that determines the force that the ejector pistons 314 of the store ejector 302 push the store 300. The force adjuster 304 can be of any suitable configuration for adjusting the force setting 306 depending on the specific construction of the store ejector. For example, but not limited to, the adjustment can be made mechanically, electrically, pneumatically,” & See Also Pg. 1 – Abstract - “a force adjuster configured to adjust a force setting that determines a force the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, a pitch adjuster configured to adjust a pitch setting that determines a pitch the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions”) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski to include comprising: detecting one or more flight parameters of the aircraft; determining from the one or more flight parameters; determining from the one or more flight parameters a second pressure sufficient to provide a second force for ejecting the store; reducing the system pressure to a reduced pressure based at least in part on the second force for ejecting the store; and using the reduced pressure to eject the store from the aircraft. As these limitations allow for inflight monitoring of the aircraft to be realized and to modulate pressures applied to the store ejector system based on the environmental data.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include comprising: detecting one or more flight parameters of the aircraft; determining from the one or more flight parameters; determining from the one or more flight parameters a second pressure sufficient to provide a second force for ejecting the store; reducing the system pressure to a reduced pressure based at least in part on the second force for ejecting the store; and using the reduced pressure to eject the store from the aircraft as these limitations allow for real time monitoring to take place within the craft and allow for more precise control of the store ejection to be actualized.
Regarding Claim 16 Jakubowski -Provenza teaches (Jakubowski discloses the following limitations: ) The method of Claim 15, and wherein the control system is on board the aircraft. (Pg. 1 – Abstract – “retaining and releasing stores (bombs or the like) on an aircraft, which has on-board pressurization capability, employs a single pressurization system for two or more release mechanisms,” )
Yet Jakubowski fails to teach wherein a control system is configured to determine the first and second pressures from the one or more flight parameters
Provenza teaches a control system is configured to determine the first and second pressures from the one or more flight parameters (Pg. 1 – Abstract - “a force adjuster configured to adjust a force setting that determines a force the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, a pitch adjuster configured to adjust a pitch setting that determines a pitch the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions” ) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski-Tobias to include a control system is configured to determine the first and second pressures from the one or more flight parameters as this allows environmental conditions and flight specific conditions to be considered when determining the proper forces used to eject a store from an aircraft.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a control system is configured to determine the first and second pressures from the one or more flight parameters as these limitations allow for a more robust understanding of the aircraft’s environment to be considered for the ejection of the aircraft store.
Regarding Claim 17 Jakubowski -Provenza teaches (Jakubowski discloses the following limitations: ) The method of Claim 15, wherein the one or more flight parameters comprise at least one store properties, (Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 28-33 – “Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” (equates to determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more store properties as the pressure falling below a predetermined amount signifies a required amount of pressure to release the store from the aircraft and thus store property is actualized by the required pressure to release.) )
Yet Jakubowski fails to teach wherein the one or more flight parameters comprise at least one or more atmospheric conditions, and one or more flight conditions, and wherein the store properties comprise a weight of the store.
Provenza teaches wherein the one or more flight parameters comprise at least one or more atmospheric conditions, (Pg. 8- [0025] - “The controller 202 can receive any desired number of process parameters 204 from a limited set of just a few key process parameters 204 defining a basic system to a very large and complex set involving very high-speed processing of a hundred or more process parameters 204. The illustrated process parameters 204 include: aircraft forward indicated airspeed, multi-axis accelerations, altitude/temperature, pitch, yaw, roll rates, dynamic pressure” (equates to comprising: determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more atmospheric conditions, as the quote shows the parameters used to determine the proper ejection force for the aircraft store comprises the dynamic pressure of the aircraft and thus the pressure of the surrounding atmosphere. )) and one or more flight conditions, (Pg. 1 – Abstract - “a force adjuster configured to adjust a force setting that determines a force the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, a pitch adjuster configured to adjust a pitch setting that determines a pitch the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions” ) and wherein the store properties comprise a weight of the store. (Pg. 8 – [0025] – “he illustrated store characteristics 206 include mass, store shape, and center of gravity. It is noted that the store characteristics 206 can include any other suitable store characteristics. The process parameters and store characteristics will be collectively referred to herein as "aircraft flight conditions".” )It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski-Tobias to include c wherein the one or more flight parameters comprise at least one or more atmospheric conditions, and one or more flight conditions, and wherein the store properties comprise a weight of the store as this allows environmental conditions and flight specific conditions to be considered when determining the proper forces used to eject a store from an aircraft.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the one or more flight parameters comprise at least one or more atmospheric conditions, and one or more flight conditions, and wherein the store properties comprise a weight of the store as these limitations allow for a more robust understanding of the aircraft’s environment to be considered for the ejection of the aircraft store.
Claim(s) 1-14 & 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jakubowski, (US 5,583,312) and in view of Provenza (US 2023/0373624 Al) and in further view of Tobias (US 2017/0144760 Al)
Regarding Claim 1 Jakubowski teaches A method of ejecting a store from an aircraft, (Pg. 1 – Abstract – “There is provided a renewable energy source ejector rack for retaining and releasing stores (bombs or the like) on an aircraft, which has on-board pressurization capability, employs a single pressurization system for two or more release mechanisms, and uses air or other clean non-pyrotechnic pressurized gases both as the energy source and energy transfer medium” ) comprising: determining one or more parameters based at least on, one or more store properties, (Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 28-33 – “Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” (equates to determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more store properties as the pressure falling below a predetermined amount signifies a required amount of pressure to release the store from the aircraft and thus store property is actualized by the required pressure to release.) ) determining a first pressure and a second pressure relative to one another from the determined one or more parameters, (Pg. 6 – Col. 4 – lines 9-13 – “In operation, the pressurized gas from the accumulator, when released through the dump valve, actuates the hooks to an open position and simultaneously actuates the ejector pistons to an extended position to thereby release and jettison the store.” & See Also Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 18-33 – “Preferably, there are a plurality of release mechanisms and a like number of corresponding actuation systems, each fluidly connected to the source of pressurized gas via a common manifold line. Each actuation system includes an accumulator for receiving and storing pressurized gas from the pressurized gas source at a specified maintenance pressure, a dump valve, and a controller for actuating the dump valve to an open position responsive to a control signal to jettison the store. The dump valve, when actuated, functions to permit the pressurized gas in the accumulator to flow to the release mechanism, thereby actuating the release mechanism to jettison the store. Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” (equates to determining a first pressure and a second pressure relative to one another from the determined one or more parameters as the quote show a pressure for releasing the release mechanism and for ejecting the store of the aircraft and thus a first and second pressure are determined. The pressures are determined based on the parameters as the end of the second quote shows the actual amount of pressure below a predetermined amount and thus the predetermined amount would be a pressure that is for the store property of ejecting.)) the first pressure sufficient to provide a first force to unlock one or more store releasing connectors and the second pressure sufficient to provide a second force to eject the store; (Pg. 6 – Col. 4 – lines 9-13 – “In operation, the pressurized gas from the accumulator, when released through the dump valve, actuates the hooks to an open position and simultaneously actuates the ejector pistons to an extended position to thereby release and jettison the store.” & See Also Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 18-33 – “Preferably, there are a plurality of release mechanisms and a like number of corresponding actuation systems, each fluidly connected to the source of pressurized gas via a common manifold line. Each actuation system includes an accumulator for receiving and storing pressurized gas from the pressurized gas source at a specified maintenance pressure, a dump valve, and a controller for actuating the dump valve to an open position responsive to a control signal to jettison the store. The dump valve, when actuated, functions to permit the pressurized gas in the accumulator to flow to the release mechanism, thereby actuating the release mechanism to jettison the store. Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” (equates to the first pressure sufficient to provide a first force to unlock one or more store releasing connectors and the second pressure sufficient to provide a second force to eject the store; as the quote show a sufficient pressure to actuate the release mechanism of the hooks and the second pressure being sufficient to eject the store from the aircraft.) ) determining a system pressure to generate a flow of pressurized gas, wherein the system pressure is related to one or both of the first and second pressure; (Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 28-33 – “Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” & See Also Pg. 6 – Col. 4 – lines 9-13 – “In operation, the pressurized gas from the accumulator, when released through the dump valve, actuates the hooks to an open position and simultaneously actuates the ejector pistons to an extended position to thereby release and jettison the store.” (equates to determining a system pressure to generate a flow of pressurized gas, wherein the system pressure is related to one or both of the first and second pressure as the quote show an onboard gas being pressurized by the system to ensure the first pressure relating to the hook release mechanism and the second pressure relating to the ejector piston is sufficient for both function to be actualized.)) releasing the flow of pressurized gas to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors using the first pressure; (Pg. 6 – lines 25 – 27 – “The dump valve, when actuated, functions to permit the pressurized gas in the accumulator to flow to the release mechanism,” )
Yet Jakubowski fails to teach comprising: determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more atmospheric conditions, and one or more flight conditions prior to ejecting the store; and symmetrically blocking one or more ejector passages of an ejection system to reduce the system pressure to the second pressure for ejecting the store.
Tobias teaches and symmetrically blocking one or more ejector passages of an ejection system to reduce the system pressure to the second pressure for ejecting the store. (Pg. 29 – [0088] – “The pitch control valve 1200 preferably is configured such that the carousel 1210 can be rotated to adjust the degree to which the occluding portion 1218 blocks each of the ejector passages 1198 and 1199. Accordingly, the pitch control valve 1200 can include a rotational input feature, which is driven by a drive or drive unit. In some embodiments, the rotational input feature is a gear, such as a ring gear or set of annular gear teeth 1212. The annular gear teeth 1212 can be configured to engage with teeth 1236 on a driving gear 1234 driven by a drive or drive unit, such as a motor 1230. In some embodiments, the motor 1230 can be used to rotate the carousel 1210. The motor 1230 can be an electric motor (e.g., a stepper motor). Rotation of the carousel 1210 can enable the occluding portion 1218 to occlude one ejector passage 1198 to a greater extent than another ejector passage 1199, and vice versa. Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston.” & See Also Pg. 7 – Fig. 4A (equates to and symmetrically blocking one or more ejector passages of an ejection system to reduce the system pressure to the second pressure for ejecting the store as the figure and quote show the carousel being configured to block the ejector passages and the quote showing the passage being blocked shows that the pressure supplied for the release of the store comes at a reduced second pressure.))
Yet both fail to teach comprising: determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more atmospheric conditions, and one or more flight conditions prior to ejecting the store;
Provenza teaches comprising: determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more atmospheric conditions, (Pg. 8- [0025] - “The controller 202 can receive any desired number of process parameters 204 from a limited set of just a few key process parameters 204 defining a basic system to a very large and complex set involving very high-speed processing of a hundred or more process parameters 204. The illustrated process parameters 204 include: aircraft forward indicated airspeed, multi-axis accelerations, altitude/temperature, pitch, yaw, roll rates, dynamic pressure” (equates to comprising: determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more atmospheric conditions, as the quote shows the parameters used to determine the proper ejection force for the aircraft store comprises the dynamic pressure of the aircraft and thus the pressure of the surrounding atmosphere. )) and one or more flight conditions prior to ejecting the store; (Pg. 1 – Abstract - “a force adjuster configured to adjust a force setting that determines a force the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, a pitch adjuster configured to adjust a pitch setting that determines a pitch the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions” ) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski-Tobias to include comprising: determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more atmospheric conditions, and one or more flight conditions prior to ejecting the store as this allows environmental conditions and flight specific conditions to be considered when determining the proper forces used to eject a store from an aircraft.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include comprising: determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more atmospheric conditions, and one or more flight conditions prior to ejecting the store as these limitations allow for a more robust understanding of the aircraft’s environment to be considered for the ejection of the aircraft store.
Regarding Claim 2 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches (Jakubowski discloses the following limitations: ) The method of Claim 1, wherein a control system is configured to determine the first and second pressures from the one or more parameters. (Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 18-33 – “Preferably, there are a plurality of release mechanisms and a like number of corresponding actuation systems, each fluidly connected to the source of pressurized gas via a common manifold line. Each actuation system includes an accumulator for receiving and storing pressurized gas from the pressurized gas source at a specified maintenance pressure, a dump valve, and a controller for actuating the dump valve to an open position responsive to a control signal to jettison the store. The dump valve, when actuated, functions to permit the pressurized gas in the accumulator to flow to the release mechanism, thereby actuating the release mechanism to jettison the store. Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” (equates to wherein a control system is configured to determine the first and second pressures from the one or more parameters. As the quote shows the pressure being set to a predetermined value in which would be a large enough pressure to move the weight of the release mechanism and the store and thus the amount of pressure required to do so for the first and second pressures are realized through the predetermined amount.))
Regarding Claim 3 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches (Jakubowski discloses the following limitations: ) The method of Claim 2, wherein the control system is on board the aircraft. (Pg. 1 – Abstract – “retaining and releasing stores (bombs or the like) on an aircraft, which has on-board pressurization capability, employs a single pressurization system for two or more release mechanisms,” )
Regarding Claim 4 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches The method of Claim 1, as previously mapped above.
Yet Jakubowski- Provenza fail to teach further comprising apportioning the flow of pressurized gas between a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage, wherein the apportioning variably obstructs the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage to cause a first ejector piston to extend at a different rate than a second ejector piston, and wherein the first and second ejector pistons act on the store to eject the store from the aircraft.
Tobias teaches further comprising apportioning the flow of pressurized gas between a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage, (Pg. 29 – [0088] – “Rotation of the carousel 1210 can enable the occluding portion 1218 to occlude one ejector passage 1198 to a greater extent than another ejector passage 1199, and vice versa. Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston” (equates to further comprising apportioning the flow of pressurized gas between a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage, as the quote shows the apportioning of the pressure between the different passage allowing for different rates of ejection to occur.)) wherein the apportioning variably obstructs the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage to cause a first ejector piston to extend at a different rate than a second ejector piston, (Pg. 29 – [0088] – “Rotation of the carousel 1210 can enable the occluding portion 1218 to occlude one ejector passage 1198 to a greater extent than another ejector passage 1199, and vice versa. Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston” (equates to wherein the apportioning variably obstructs the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage to cause a first ejector piston to extend at a different rate than a second ejector piston as the quote shows the carousel being configured to block the passage at different amounts, in this example, wherein the pistons then extend at different rates.) ) and wherein the first and second ejector pistons act on the store to eject the store from the aircraft. (Pg. 29 – [0088] – “Varying extension rates between the ejector pistons 1301, 1302 can cause an aircraft store to be ejected from the aircraft at a predetermined pitch with respect to the aircraft.”) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski- Provenza to include further comprising apportioning the flow of pressurized gas between a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage, wherein the apportioning variably obstructs the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage to cause a first ejector piston to extend at a different rate than a second ejector piston, and wherein the first and second ejector pistons act on the store to eject the store from the aircraft as these limitations allow for a variable ejection rate to occur within the aircraft allowing for the store ejection to vary across the system.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include further comprising apportioning the flow of pressurized gas between a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage, wherein the apportioning variably obstructs the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage to cause a first ejector piston to extend at a different rate than a second ejector piston, and wherein the first and second ejector pistons act on the store to eject the store from the aircraft as this allows for the different pitches of the ejection to be possible being different ejector pistons.
Regarding Claim 5 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches The method of Claim 1, as previously mapped above.
Yet Jakubowski- Provenza fails to teach further comprising delaying an opening of a main valve following the actuation of the one or more store releasing connectors.
Tobias teaches delaying an opening of a main valve following the actuation of the one or more store releasing connectors (Pg. 28 – [0081 & 0082] – “The store securing features can include sway braces configured to stabilize the store. In some embodiments, the store securing features are hooks holding the store to the aircraft. In some embodiments, the valve piston 1110 includes a feature that engages the main valve poppet 1132. In the illustrated arrangement, the feature is a shoulder 1116. In some embodiments, the shoulder 1116 is annular and can be broken into a plurality of radial projections from the valve piston 1110. The shoulder 1116 can be positioned at the border between the top portion 1140 and intermediate portion 1150 of the valve piston 1110. Downward movement of the valve piston 1110 can bring the shoulder 1116 into contact with the main valve poppet 1132, as illustrated in FIG. 4D. Thus, the valve piston 1110 and main valve poppet 1132 create a lost motion mechanism. The distance between the shoulder 1116 and the main valve poppet 1132 provides a delay in actuation of the main valve poppet 1132 and, as described below, the release of pressurized gas to the ejection system 1300 to ensure that the store securing features have been released. [0082] Referring to FIG. 4E, further movement of the valve piston 1110 in the downward direction can cause the main valve poppet 1132 to move away from the valve seat 1131 of the lower piston housing 1241. The downward movement of the valve piston 1110 can be limited by a stop surface, which can be defined by the end of an axial extension 1118 from the bottom of the expanded portion 1119. For example, the axial extension 1118 can be configured to come into contact with a shoulder or other surface feature of the lower cap housing 1241 when the valve piston 1110 has moved in an opening direction (e.g., downward in FIGS. 4A-4E) a pre-determined distance, as illustrated in FIG. 4E. Disengagement of the main valve poppet 1132 from the reduced cross-section area 1131 opens the main valve 1130 and creates fluid communication between the valve window 1005 and the intermediate section 1124. Such fluid communication allows high pressure gas from the local reservoir 1004 to enter the ejector passages 1198, 1199” (equates to delaying an opening of a main valve following the actuation of the one or more store releasing connectors. As the quote shows the delay of the pressurized gas to the main valve to ensure the securing features like the hooks would be first released. The paragraph 0082 then goes to describe how the delay is completed with the valve piston and eventually allows for the ejection of the store.) ) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski- Provenza to include further comprising delaying an opening of a main valve following the actuation of the one or more store releasing connectors. As this allows for the ejection to happen only after the release mechanism has been released and ensures a mechanism feature is included to delay the ejection before the hooks are released fully.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include further comprising delaying an opening of a main valve following the actuation of the one or more store releasing connectors as this ensures the ejector piston does not prematurely force the eject out of the aircraft before the release mechanism has disengaged fully.
Regarding Claim 6 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches The method of Claim 1, as previously mapped above.
Yet Jakubowski- Provenza fails to teach wherein the symmetrical blocking is configured to allow a reduction in the second pressure acting on or more ejector pistons in fluid communication with the one or more ejector passages while preserving the flow of the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors.
Tobias teaches wherein the symmetrical blocking is configured to allow a reduction in the second pressure acting on or more ejector pistons in fluid communication with the one or more ejector passages while preserving the flow of the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors. (Pg. 28 – [0081] – “Further movement of the valve piston 1110 in the downward direction can cause a portion ( e.g., the bottom portion 1160) of the valve piston 1110 to actuate a mechanism which releases store securing features holding the store to the aircraft. The store securing features can include sway braces configured to stabilize the store. In some embodiments, the store securing features are hooks holding the store to the aircraft. In some embodiments, the valve piston 1110 includes a feature that engages the main valve poppet 1132. In the illustrated arrangement, the feature is a shoulder 1116. In some embodiments, the shoulder 1116 is annular and can be broken into a plurality of radial projections from the valve piston 1110. The shoulder 1116 can be positioned at the border between the top portion 1140 and intermediate portion 1150 of the valve piston 1110. Downward movement of the valve piston 1110 can bring the shoulder 1116 into contact with the main valve poppet 1132, as illustrated in FIG. 4D. Thus, the valve piston 1110 and main valve poppet 1132 create a lost motion mechanism. The distance between the shoulder 1116 and the main valve poppet 1132 provides a delay in actuation of the main valve poppet 1132 and, as described below, the release of pressurized gas to the ejection system 1300 to ensure that the store securing features have been released.” (equates to wherein the symmetrical blocking is configured to allow a reduction in the second pressure acting on or more ejector pistons in fluid communication with the one or more ejector passages while preserving the flow of the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors as the quote shows the delay of actuation of the main valve poppet allowing for a release of the securing features to happen first and thus a reduction in pressure is actualized to ensure the hooks released before the high pressure gas enters the ejector passages. )) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski- Provenza to include wherein the symmetrical blocking is configured to allow a reduction in the second pressure acting on or more ejector pistons in fluid communication with the one or more ejector passages while preserving the flow of the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors as this allows for the securing mechanisms to be released before the gas is entering the chamber for the ejection of the store ensuring the store can be forcibly launched away only when the hooks are disengaged.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the symmetrical blocking is configured to allow a reduction in the second pressure acting on or more ejector pistons in fluid communication with the one or more ejector passages while preserving the flow of the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors as this allows for a means of ensuring the hooks are disengaged before the ejection of the store takes place ensuring undue damage on the vehicle is mitigated .
Regarding Claim 7 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches The method of Claim 6, as previously mapped above.
Yet Jakubowski -Provenza fails to teach wherein the symmetrical blocking reduces the second pressure acting on one or more ejector pistons to reduce a peak force or acceleration acting on the store.
Tobias teaches wherein the symmetrical blocking reduces the second pressure acting on one or more ejector pistons to reduce a peak force or acceleration acting on the store. (g. 29 – [0088] – “The pitch control valve 1200 preferably is configured such that the carousel 1210 can be rotated to adjust the degree to which the occluding portion 1218 blocks each of the ejector passages 1198 and 1199. Accordingly, the pitch control valve 1200 can include a rotational input feature, which is driven by a drive or drive unit. In some embodiments, the rotational input feature is a gear, such as a ring gear or set of annular gear teeth 1212. The annular gear teeth 1212 can be configured to engage with teeth 1236 on a driving gear 1234 driven by a drive or drive unit, such as a motor 1230. In some embodiments, the motor 1230 can be used to rotate the carousel 1210. The motor 1230 can be an electric motor (e.g., a stepper motor). Rotation of the carousel 1210 can enable the occluding portion 1218 to occlude one ejector passage 1198 to a greater extent than another ejector passage 1199, and vice versa. Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston.”& See Also Pg. 29 – [0088] - “Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston. Varying extension rates between the ejector pistons 1301, 1302 can cause an aircraft store to be ejected from the aircraft at a predetermined pitch with respect to the aircraft. For example, increasing the occlusion of a forward ejector passage with respect to a rear ejector passage can cause the forward ejector piston to extend at a higher rate and/or acceleration than the rear ejector piston.” (equates to wherein the symmetrical blocking reduces the second pressure acting on one or more ejector pistons to reduce a peak force or acceleration acting on the store as the quotes show a passage of one of the ejector passages being blocked more than the other and thus the pressure into the passage is less that the one provided on the other passage and thus the peak force acting on the store is reduced.)) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski- Provenza to include wherein the symmetrical blocking reduces the second pressure acting on one or more ejector pistons to reduce a peak force or acceleration acting on the store as this limitation allows for a different pitch of ejection to be actualized between each of the stores.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the symmetrical blocking reduces the second pressure acting on one or more ejector pistons to reduce a peak force or acceleration acting on the store as this allows for a variety of angles for the store to be released from.
Regarding Claim 8 Jakubowski teaches determining a first pressure sufficient to provide a first force to act on a piston for actuating one or more store releasing connectors( Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 28-32- “Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” & See Also Pg. 6 – Col. 4 – lines 9-13 – “In operation, the pressurized gas from the accumulator, when released through the dump valve, actuates the hooks to an open position and simultaneously actuates the ejector pistons to an extended position to thereby release and jettison the store.” (equates to determining a first pressure sufficient to provide a first force to act on a piston for actuating one or more store releasing connectors; as the quote shows the system having a predetermined pressure level to be able to release the securing mechanism ) and a second pressure sufficient to provide a second force to act on one or more ejector pistons for ejecting a store; (Pg. 6 – Col. 4 – lines 9-13 – “In operation, the pressurized gas from the accumulator, when released through the dump valve, actuates the hooks to an open position and simultaneously actuates the ejector pistons to an extended position to thereby release and jettison the store.) selecting a system pressure, wherein the system pressure is related to one or both of the first pressure and the second pressure; (Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 28-32- “Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” & See Also Pg. 6 – Col. 4 – lines 9-13 – “In operation, the pressurized gas from the accumulator, when released through the dump valve, actuates the hooks to an open position and simultaneously actuates the ejector pistons to an extended position to thereby release and jettison the store.” (equates to selecting a system pressure, wherein the system pressure is related to one or both of the first pressure and the second pressure; as the quote shows the system being repressurized to a determined amount wherein the securing mechanism using the first pressure can be realized.))
Yet Jakubowski fails to teach A computer implemented method, performed by an aircraft store ejector system comprising one or more hardware processors executing program instructions, the method comprising: detecting one or more flight parameters via one or more sensors; determining from the one or more flight parameters; and reducing the second pressure received by an ejection system; the ejection system comprising a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage in fluid communication with a respective one of a first ejector piston and a second ejector piston.
Tobias teaches A computer implemented method, performed by an aircraft store ejector system comprising one or more hardware processors executing program instructions, (Pg. 21 – [0009] – “In some cases, the carousel is driven by a motor whose rotational motion may be controlled by the aircraft on-board computer.”& See Also Pg. 24 – [0057] – “The control system can include any suitable sensors, processors, actuators or other typical or desirable components in addition to those illustrated herein, as will be appreciated by those skilled in the art” ) and reducing the second pressure received by an ejection system; (Pg. 29 – [0088] – “Rotation of the carousel 1210 can enable the occluding portion 1218 to occlude one ejector passage 1198 to a greater extent than another ejector passage 1199, and vice versa” (equates to and reducing the second pressure received by an ejection system as the occlusion of one ejector passage would reduce the pressure experienced by the ejector.) ) the ejection system comprising a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage in fluid communication with a respective one of a first ejector piston and a second ejector piston. (Pg. 28 – [0077] – “ejector passages 1198, 1199” & See Also pg. 29 – [0088] – “Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston.” )
Yet both Jakubowski-Tobias- fails to teach the method comprising: detecting one or more flight parameters via one or more sensors; determining from the one or more flight parameters;
Provenza teaches detecting one or more flight parameters via one or more sensors; (Pg. 8 – [0025] – “The illustrated process parameters 204 are obtained from the pilot console commands and status monitoring 208, the aircraft data bus 210, and auxiliary data sensors 212” & See Also pg. 1 – Abstract - “a force adjuster configured to adjust a force setting that determines a force the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, a pitch adjuster configured to adjust a pitch setting that determines a pitch the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions”) determining from the one or more flight parameters; (Pg. 1 – Abstract – “and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions” (equates to determining from the one or more flight parameters as the quote shows the flight parameters being monitored and force adjustments being made based on the monitoring )) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski-Tobias to include the method comprising: detecting one or more flight parameters via one or more sensors; determining from the one or more flight parameters; as this allows for real time monitoring of the aircraft to be taking place and ensure the pressure for ejecting the store is based on real time data.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the method comprising: detecting one or more flight parameters via one or more sensors; determining from the one or more flight parameters; as this allows for more than predetermined pressure values from the ground to be used to eject the store and rather allows for dynamic updates of the aircraft to be used to ensure the store is ejected as desired.
Regarding Claim 9 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches (Jakubowski Discloses the following limitations: ) The method of Claim 8, wherein the one or more flight parameters comprise at least one store properties, (Pg. 6 – Col. 3 – lines 28-33 – “Significantly, the on-board source of pressurized gas is adapted to re-pressurize the accumulator in the actuation system whenever the pressure in the accumulator falls a predetermined amount below the specified operational pressure.” (equates to determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more store properties as the pressure falling below a predetermined amount signifies a required amount of pressure to release the store from the aircraft and thus store property is actualized by the required pressure to release.) )
Yet Jakubowski-Tobias fails to teach wherein the one or more flight parameters comprise at least one or more atmospheric conditions, and one or more flight conditions, and wherein the store properties comprise a weight of the store.
Provenza teaches wherein the one or more flight parameters comprise at least one or more atmospheric conditions, (Pg. 8- [0025] - “The controller 202 can receive any desired number of process parameters 204 from a limited set of just a few key process parameters 204 defining a basic system to a very large and complex set involving very high-speed processing of a hundred or more process parameters 204. The illustrated process parameters 204 include: aircraft forward indicated airspeed, multi-axis accelerations, altitude/temperature, pitch, yaw, roll rates, dynamic pressure” (equates to comprising: determining one or more parameters based at least on one or more atmospheric conditions, as the quote shows the parameters used to determine the proper ejection force for the aircraft store comprises the dynamic pressure of the aircraft and thus the pressure of the surrounding atmosphere. )) and one or more flight conditions, (Pg. 1 – Abstract - “a force adjuster configured to adjust a force setting that determines a force the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, a pitch adjuster configured to adjust a pitch setting that determines a pitch the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions” ) and wherein the store properties comprise a weight of the store. (Pg. 8 – [0025] – “he illustrated store characteristics 206 include mass, store shape, and center of gravity. It is noted that the store characteristics 206 can include any other suitable store characteristics. The process parameters and store characteristics will be collectively referred to herein as "aircraft flight conditions".” ) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski-Tobias to include c wherein the one or more flight parameters comprise at least one or more atmospheric conditions, and one or more flight conditions, and wherein the store properties comprise a weight of the store as this allows environmental conditions and flight specific conditions to be considered when determining the proper forces used to eject a store from an aircraft.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein the one or more flight parameters comprise at least one or more atmospheric conditions, and one or more flight conditions, and wherein the store properties comprise a weight of the store as these limitations allow for a more robust understanding of the aircraft’s environment to be considered for the ejection of the aircraft store.
Regarding Claim 10 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches (Jakubowski discloses the following limitations: )The method of Claim 8, further comprising using the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors. (Pg. 6 – [Col. 4 – lines 9-12 ] – “In operation, the pressurized gas from the accumulator, when released through the dump valve, actuates the hooks to an open position” )
Regarding Claim 11 Jakubowski- Tobias-Provenza teaches The method of Claim 8, as previously mapped above.
Yet Jakubowski -Tobias fails to teach further comprising using the reduced second pressure to eject the store from the aircraft.
Provenza teaches further comprising using the reduced second pressure to eject the store from the aircraft. (Pg. 9 – [0029] – “The illustrated force adjuster 304 is configured to selectively adjust the force setting 306 that determines the force that the ejector pistons 314 of the store ejector 302 push the store 300. The force adjuster 304 can be of any suitable configuration for adjusting the force setting 306 depending on the specific construction of the store ejector. For example, but not limited to, the adjustment can be made mechanically, electrically, pneumatically,” & See Also Pg. 1 – Abstract - “a force adjuster configured to adjust a force setting that determines a force the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, a pitch adjuster configured to adjust a pitch setting that determines a pitch the ejector pistons of the store ejector to push the store, and a controller configured to continuously receive current flight conditions of the aircraft, to signal the force adjuster to adjust the force setting to a desired force based on the current flight conditions” (equates to further comprising using the reduced second pressure to eject the store from the aircraft. As the first quote shows the ability to change the force applied to the ejector and the force can be applied pneumatically and thus the pressure can be reduced for the ejection of the store.)) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by _ to include further comprising using the reduced second pressure to eject the store from the aircraft as this limitation allows for a change in pressure acting upon the store to be actualized and thus change the pitch angle on the store.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include further comprising using the reduced second pressure to eject the store from the aircraft as this allows for real time changes to take place instead of a predetermined pressure application only be used.
Regarding Claim 12 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches The method of Claim 8, as previously mapped above.
Yet Jakubowski -Provenza fail to teach further comprising moving a main valve carried by the piston and configured to selectively separate a source of pressurized gas from the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage, wherein moving the main valve to an open position allows a flow of pressurized gas from the source of pressurized gas to enter the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage.
Tobias teaches further comprising moving a main valve carried by the piston and configured to selectively separate a source of pressurized gas from the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage, (Pg. 21 – [0006] – “A main valve provides selective fluid communication between the ejector reservoir and the one or more ejector passages.” (equates to comprising moving a main valve carried by the piston and configured to selectively separate a source of pressurized gas from the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage as the quote shows the main valve separating the reservoir pressurized air from the ejector passages.)) wherein moving the main valve to an open position allows a flow of pressurized gas from the source of pressurized gas to enter the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage. (Pg. 21 – [0006]_ “Wherein opening the main valve provides pressurized gas to the ejector passages” ) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system described Jakubowski - Provenza to include further comprising moving a main valve carried by the piston and configured to selectively separate a source of pressurized gas from the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage, wherein moving the main valve to an open position allows a flow of pressurized gas from the source of pressurized gas to enter the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage as this allows for a single mechanism to separate the high pressure from the reservoir from the ejector passages.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include further comprising moving a main valve carried by the piston and configured to selectively separate a source of pressurized gas from the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage, wherein moving the main valve to an open position allows a flow of pressurized gas from the source of pressurized gas to enter the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage as this allows for a single mechanism and means of actuation for delivering the pressurized air from the reservoir to the ejector system.
Regarding Claim 13 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches The method of Claim 8, as previously mapped above.
Yet Jakubowski -Provenza fails to teach further comprising adjusting a control valve, wherein adjusting the control valve comprises rotating the control valve about a first axis to alter a position of a first opening with respect to the first ejector passage and a second opening with respect to the second ejector passage to adjust a flow of a pressurized gas provided to the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage.
Tobias teaches comprising adjusting a control valve (Pg. 21 – [0006] – “comprising adjusting a control valve” ) wherein adjusting the control valve comprises rotating the control valve about a first axis to alter a position of a first opening with respect to the first ejector passage and a second opening with respect to the second ejector passage to adjust a flow of a pressurized gas provided to the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage.( Pg. 29 – [0088] – “Rotation of the carousel 1210 can enable the occluding portion 1218 to occlude one ejector passage 1198 to a greater extent than another ejector passage 1199, and vice versa. Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston” (equates to wherein adjusting the control valve comprises rotating the control valve about a first axis to alter a position of a first opening with respect to the first ejector passage and a second opening with respect to the second ejector passage to adjust a flow of a pressurized gas provided to the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage as the quote shows the rotation of the carousel allowing for the flow of gas to change between each of the ejector passages)). It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski -Provenza to include wherein adjusting the control valve comprises rotating the control valve about a first axis to alter a position of a first opening with respect to the first ejector passage and a second opening with respect to the second ejector passage to adjust a flow of a pressurized gas provided to the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage as this allows for a simple mechanism to be actuated and for the pressurized gas to flow to the ejector passages from the single means of the actuation.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein adjusting the control valve comprises rotating the control valve about a first axis to alter a position of a first opening with respect to the first ejector passage and a second opening with respect to the second ejector passage to adjust a flow of a pressurized gas provided to the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage as this allows for a single mechanism and means of actuation to be realized to allow pressurized ga to flow through the passages to eject the store.
Regarding Claim 14 Jakubowski-Tobias-Provenza teaches (Jakubowski discloses the following limitations: ) The method of Claim 8, wherein the system pressure is provided by a pressurized gas source. (Pg. 6 – Col.3 – lines 13-15 – “More specifically, a stores ejection system is provided for mounting a jettisonable store on an aircraft which includes an on-board source of pressurized non-pyrotechnic gas,” )
Regarding Claim 18 Jakubowski -Provenza teaches The method of Claim 15, as previously mapped above.
Yet Jakubowski -Provenza fails to teach further comprising apportioning the reduced pressure between a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage, wherein the apportioning variably obstructs the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage to cause a first ejector piston to extend at a different rate than a second ejector piston, and wherein the first and second ejector pistons act on the store to eject the store from the aircraft.
Tobias teaches further comprising apportioning the reduced pressure between a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage, ((Pg. 29 – [0088] – “Rotation of the carousel 1210 can enable the occluding portion 1218 to occlude one ejector passage 1198 to a greater extent than another ejector passage 1199, and vice versa. Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston” (equates to further comprising apportioning the flow of pressurized gas between a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage, as the quote shows the apportioning of the pressure between the different passage allowing for different rates of ejection to occur.))) wherein the apportioning variably obstructs the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage to cause a first ejector piston to extend at a different rate than a second ejector piston (Pg. 29 – [0088] – “Rotation of the carousel 1210 can enable the occluding portion 1218 to occlude one ejector passage 1198 to a greater extent than another ejector passage 1199, and vice versa. Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston” (equates to wherein the apportioning variably obstructs the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage to cause a first ejector piston to extend at a different rate than a second ejector piston as the quote shows the carousel being configured to block the passage at different amounts, in this example, wherein the pistons then extend at different rates.) ) and wherein the first and second ejector pistons act on the store to eject the store from the aircraft. (Pg. 29 – [0088] – “Varying extension rates between the ejector pistons 1301, 1302 can cause an aircraft store to be ejected from the aircraft at a predetermined pitch with respect to the aircraft.”) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski- Provenza to include further comprising apportioning the flow of pressurized gas between a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage, wherein the apportioning variably obstructs the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage to cause a first ejector piston to extend at a different rate than a second ejector piston, and wherein the first and second ejector pistons act on the store to eject the store from the aircraft as these limitations allow for a variable ejection rate to occur within the aircraft allowing for the store ejection to vary across the system.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include further comprising apportioning the flow of pressurized gas between a first ejector passage and a second ejector passage, wherein the apportioning variably obstructs the first ejector passage and the second ejector passage to cause a first ejector piston to extend at a different rate than a second ejector piston, and wherein the first and second ejector pistons act on the store to eject the store from the aircraft as this allows for the different pitches of the ejection to be possible being different ejector pistons.
Regarding Claim 19 Jakubowski -Provenza teaches The method of Claim 15, as previously mapped above.
Yet Jakubowski- Provenza fails to teach further comprising delaying an opening of a main valve following the actuation of the one or more store releasing connectors.
Tobias teaches delaying an opening of a main valve following the actuation of the one or more store releasing connectors (Pg. 28 – [0081 & 0082] – “The store securing features can include sway braces configured to stabilize the store. In some embodiments, the store securing features are hooks holding the store to the aircraft. In some embodiments, the valve piston 1110 includes a feature that engages the main valve poppet 1132. In the illustrated arrangement, the feature is a shoulder 1116. In some embodiments, the shoulder 1116 is annular and can be broken into a plurality of radial projections from the valve piston 1110. The shoulder 1116 can be positioned at the border between the top portion 1140 and intermediate portion 1150 of the valve piston 1110. Downward movement of the valve piston 1110 can bring the shoulder 1116 into contact with the main valve poppet 1132, as illustrated in FIG. 4D. Thus, the valve piston 1110 and main valve poppet 1132 create a lost motion mechanism. The distance between the shoulder 1116 and the main valve poppet 1132 provides a delay in actuation of the main valve poppet 1132 and, as described below, the release of pressurized gas to the ejection system 1300 to ensure that the store securing features have been released. [0082] Referring to FIG. 4E, further movement of the valve piston 1110 in the downward direction can cause the main valve poppet 1132 to move away from the valve seat 1131 of the lower piston housing 1241. The downward movement of the valve piston 1110 can be limited by a stop surface, which can be defined by the end of an axial extension 1118 from the bottom of the expanded portion 1119. For example, the axial extension 1118 can be configured to come into contact with a shoulder or other surface feature of the lower cap housing 1241 when the valve piston 1110 has moved in an opening direction (e.g., downward in FIGS. 4A-4E) a pre-determined distance, as illustrated in FIG. 4E. Disengagement of the main valve poppet 1132 from the reduced cross-section area 1131 opens the main valve 1130 and creates fluid communication between the valve window 1005 and the intermediate section 1124. Such fluid communication allows high pressure gas from the local reservoir 1004 to enter the ejector passages 1198, 1199” (equates to delaying an opening of a main valve following the actuation of the one or more store releasing connectors. As the quote shows the delay of the pressurized gas to the main valve to ensure the securing features like the hooks would be first released. The paragraph 0082 then goes to describe how the delay is completed with the valve piston and eventually allows for the ejection of the store.) ) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski- Provenza to include further comprising delaying an opening of a main valve following the actuation of the one or more store releasing connectors. As this allows for the ejection to happen only after the release mechanism has been released and ensures a mechanism feature is included to delay the ejection before the hooks are released fully.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include further comprising delaying an opening of a main valve following the actuation of the one or more store releasing connectors as this ensures the ejector piston does not prematurely force the eject out of the aircraft before the release mechanism has disengaged fully.
Regarding Claim 20 Jakubowski -Provenza teaches The method of Claim 15, as previously mapped above.
Yet Jakubowski -Provenza fails to teach wherein reducing the system pressure to a reduced pressure allows a reduction in the second pressure acting on or more ejector pistons in fluid communication with one or more ejector passages while preserving a flow of the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors, and wherein the reduced pressure reduces the second pressure acting on the one or more ejector pistons to reduce a peak force or acceleration acting on the store.
Tobias teaches wherein reducing the system pressure to a reduced pressure allows a reduction in the second pressure acting on or more ejector pistons in fluid communication with one or more ejector passages while preserving a flow of the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors, (Pg. 28 – [0081] – “Further movement of the valve piston 1110 in the downward direction can cause a portion ( e.g., the bottom portion 1160) of the valve piston 1110 to actuate a mechanism which releases store securing features holding the store to the aircraft. The store securing features can include sway braces configured to stabilize the store. In some embodiments, the store securing features are hooks holding the store to the aircraft. In some embodiments, the valve piston 1110 includes a feature that engages the main valve poppet 1132. In the illustrated arrangement, the feature is a shoulder 1116. In some embodiments, the shoulder 1116 is annular and can be broken into a plurality of radial projections from the valve piston 1110. The shoulder 1116 can be positioned at the border between the top portion 1140 and intermediate portion 1150 of the valve piston 1110. Downward movement of the valve piston 1110 can bring the shoulder 1116 into contact with the main valve poppet 1132, as illustrated in FIG. 4D. Thus, the valve piston 1110 and main valve poppet 1132 create a lost motion mechanism. The distance between the shoulder 1116 and the main valve poppet 1132 provides a delay in actuation of the main valve poppet 1132 and, as described below, the release of pressurized gas to the ejection system 1300 to ensure that the store securing features have been released.” (equates to wherein the symmetrical blocking is configured to allow a reduction in the second pressure acting on or more ejector pistons in fluid communication with the one or more ejector passages while preserving the flow of the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors as the quote shows the delay of actuation of the main valve poppet allowing for a release of the securing features to happen first and thus a reduction in pressure is actualized to ensure the hooks released before the high pressure gas enters the ejector passages. ))and wherein the reduced pressure reduces the second pressure acting on the one or more ejector pistons to reduce a peak force or acceleration acting on the store. (g. 29 – [0088] – “The pitch control valve 1200 preferably is configured such that the carousel 1210 can be rotated to adjust the degree to which the occluding portion 1218 blocks each of the ejector passages 1198 and 1199. Accordingly, the pitch control valve 1200 can include a rotational input feature, which is driven by a drive or drive unit. In some embodiments, the rotational input feature is a gear, such as a ring gear or set of annular gear teeth 1212. The annular gear teeth 1212 can be configured to engage with teeth 1236 on a driving gear 1234 driven by a drive or drive unit, such as a motor 1230. In some embodiments, the motor 1230 can be used to rotate the carousel 1210. The motor 1230 can be an electric motor (e.g., a stepper motor). Rotation of the carousel 1210 can enable the occluding portion 1218 to occlude one ejector passage 1198 to a greater extent than another ejector passage 1199, and vice versa. Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston.”& See Also Pg. 29 – [0088] - “Varying the occlusion between one ejector passage 1198 and another ejector passage 1199 can cause one ejector piston to extend at a different rate than another ejector piston. Varying extension rates between the ejector pistons 1301, 1302 can cause an aircraft store to be ejected from the aircraft at a predetermined pitch with respect to the aircraft. For example, increasing the occlusion of a forward ejector passage with respect to a rear ejector passage can cause the forward ejector piston to extend at a higher rate and/or acceleration than the rear ejector piston.” (equates to wherein the symmetrical blocking reduces the second pressure acting on one or more ejector pistons to reduce a peak force or acceleration acting on the store as the quotes show a passage of one of the ejector passages being blocked more than the other and thus the pressure into the passage is less that the one provided on the other passage and thus the peak force acting on the store is reduced.)) It would have been an advantageous addition to the system disclosed by Jakubowski- Provenza to include wherein reducing the system pressure to a reduced pressure allows a reduction in the second pressure acting on or more ejector pistons in fluid communication with one or more ejector passages while preserving a flow of the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors, and wherein the reduced pressure reduces the second pressure acting on the one or more ejector pistons to reduce a peak force or acceleration acting on the store. as this limitation allows for a different pitch of ejection to be actualized between each of the stores.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include wherein reducing the system pressure to a reduced pressure allows a reduction in the second pressure acting on or more ejector pistons in fluid communication with one or more ejector passages while preserving a flow of the first pressure to actuate the one or more store releasing connectors, and wherein the reduced pressure reduces the second pressure acting on the one or more ejector pistons to reduce a peak force or acceleration acting on the store. as this allows for a variety of angles for the store to be released from.
Conclusion
17. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. IN1247DE2015A . - A system for pneumatic ejection of stores, the system comprising an ejection mechanism having a static end configured on an aircraft and an actuating end configured to jettison the stores, a sealed container fluidly connected to the ejection mechanism and configured to store pressurized fluid, the fluid selectively actuates the ejection mechanism to forcibly jettison the stores and an actuation mechanism functionally coupled to the container and the ejection mechanism.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REECE ANTHONY WAKELY whose telephone number is (571)272-3783. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am-6:00pm EST.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. 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.
/R.A.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
6/22/26
Prosecution Insights