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 is the first office action in response to the above identified patent application filed on 06/06/2025. Claims 17-41 are currently pending and being examined.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 17-25 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 and 17-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,933,249 (Referencing US Patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the referencing US Patent fully encompass the subject matter of the instant application claims and therefore anticipate the claims of the instant application. Since the claims of the instant application are anticipated by the claims of the referencing US Patent, the claims of the instant application are not patentably distinct from the referencing US Patent.
Claims 26-33 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 7-12 of U.S. Patent No. 11,933,249 (Referencing US Patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the referencing US Patent fully encompass the subject matter of the instant application claims and therefore anticipate the claims of the instant application. Since the claims of the instant application are anticipated by the claims of the referencing US Patent, the claims of the instant application are not patentably distinct from the referencing US Patent.
Claims 17-25 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,421,921 (Referencing US Patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the referencing US Patent fully encompass the subject matter of the instant application claims and therefore anticipate the claims of the instant application. Since the claims of the instant application are anticipated by the claims of the referencing US Patent, the claims of the instant application are not patentably distinct from the referencing US Patent.
Claims 26-33 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 11-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,421,921 (Referencing US Patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the referencing US Patent fully encompass the subject matter of the instant application claims and therefore anticipate the claims of the instant application. Since the claims of the instant application are anticipated by the claims of the referencing US Patent, the claims of the instant application are not patentably distinct from the referencing US Patent.
Claims 34-41 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 19-24 of U.S. Patent No. 12,421,921 (Referencing US Patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the referencing US Patent fully encompass the subject matter of the instant application claims and therefore anticipate the claims of the instant application. Since the claims of the instant application are anticipated by the claims of the referencing US Patent, the claims of the instant application are not patentably distinct from the referencing US Patent.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-41 will be allowed upon submission of the corresponding terminal disclaimers.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
With respect to independent claim 17, the prior art of record neither discloses nor makes obvious the combination set forth in the independent claim, particularly "a plurality of thruster modules, at least a portion of a thruster module of the plurality of thruster modules inset into a respective scarfed nozzle of the plurality of scarfed nozzles, the plurality of scarfed nozzles configured to direct exhaust ejected from the plurality of thruster modules along at least the inboard portions of the scarfed nozzles defining portions of the aerospike contour; and secondary fluid injectors configured to eject fluid that joins with the exhaust ejected from the plurality of thruster modules", in combination with the other claim limitations.
With respect to independent claim 26, the prior art of record neither discloses nor makes obvious the combination set forth in the independent claim, particularly "at least a portion of a thruster module of a plurality of thruster modules inset into a respective scarfed nozzle of the plurality of scarfed nozzles, the plurality of scarfed nozzles configured to direct exhaust ejected from the plurality of thruster modules along the aerospike contour collectively defined by inboard surfaces of the plurality of scarfed nozzles, and secondary fluid injectors configured to eject fluid that joins with the exhaust ejected from the plurality of thruster modules", in combination with the other claim limitations.
With respect to independent claim 34, the prior art of record neither discloses nor makes obvious the combination set forth in the independent claim, particularly " at least a portion of a thruster module of a plurality of thruster modules inset into a respective scarfed nozzle of the plurality of scarfed nozzles, the plurality of scarfed nozzles configured to direct exhaust ejected from the plurality of thruster modules along the aerospike contour collectively defined by inboard surfaces of the plurality of scarfed nozzles, and secondary fluid injectors configured to eject fluid that joins with the exhaust ejected from the plurality of thruster modules", in combination with the other claim limitations.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM H RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4831. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-6:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached at 571-270-5426. 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.
/William H Rodriguez/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights