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 § 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.
Claims 1-6, 8-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Afonso et al. (US 11325708 B2), hereafter Afonso, in view of Schneider et al. (US 20110146686 A1), hereafter Schneider.
Regarding Claim 1, Afonso discloses a vehicle (102, Fig. 1), comprising:
an internal cabin (100, Fig. 1);
a plurality of passenger service units (PSUs) within the internal cabin (108, Fig. 1).
Afonso is silent about an emergency oxygen system within the internal cabin; wherein the emergency oxygen system is separate and distinct from the plurality of PSUs.
Schneider teaches an emergency oxygen system (Fig. 2, oxygen supply 28), wherein the emergency oxygen system is separate and distinct (oxygen supply 28 is a distinct system, and Schneider’s invention is directed at removing the emergency oxygen system from any existing PSUs to make it an independent system, see [0003] and [0066]-[0067], for example).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the vehicle of Afonso with the emergency oxygen system that is separate and distinct, as taught by Schneider, whereby Schneider’s oxygen system is separated from Afonso’s PSUs, with a reasonable expectation of success, to ensure sufficient oxygen supply to passengers while allowing for cabin seat reconfiguration without the oxygen system having to be modified, resulting in reduced maintenance time and cost (Schneider, [0065]-[0067]).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Afonso teaches the vehicle of claim 1, further comprising one or more stowage bin assemblies within the internal cabin (Afonso, 112, Fig. 1).
While modified Afonso teaches wherein one or more of the plurality of PSUs are outboard of the stowage bin assemblies (Fig. 1), Afonso does not specifically teach wherein one or more of the plurality of PSUs are disposed between the one or more stowage bin assemblies and the emergency oxygen system. However, Schneider teaches wherein the emergency oxygen system is located along the outboard wall of the internal cabin between Schneider’s storage compartment 18 and the outboard wall (Fig. 2, oxygen supply 28, for example).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to arrange modified Afonso’s emergency oxygen system at the location along the outboard wall of the cabin, as taught by Schneider, whereby modified Afonso’s one or more of the plurality of PSUs are disposed between the one or more of stowage bin assemblies and the emergency oxygen system, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to maximize valuable overhead storage and PSU space, as well as achieve the desirable result of allowing for cabin seat reconfiguration without the oxygen system having to be changed (Schneider, [0065]-[0067]), resulting in reduced maintenance time and cost.
Regarding Claim 3, modified Afonso teaches the vehicle of claim 1, wherein the emergency oxygen system comprises a plurality of oxygen assemblies (Schneider, receptacle compartments 34), and wherein the plurality of oxygen assemblies are uncoupled from seat pitch (Schneider, [0065]-[0067]).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Afonso teaches the vehicle of claim 3, wherein each of the plurality of oxygen assemblies comprises a mask (Schneider, oxygen mask 24) and a fluid conduit (Schneider, hose 26).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Afonso teaches the vehicle of claim 4, wherein the emergency oxygen system further comprises an oxygen supply in fluid communication with the plurality of oxygen assemblies (Schneider, [0038] “central oxygen bottle connected via a connection line to the system”, examiner further notes [0063], “oxygen line 30…is attached to an oxygen feed…”).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Afonso teaches the vehicle of claim 5, wherein the oxygen supply comprises an oxygen canister fluidly coupled to the fluid conduit (Schneider, [0038] “central oxygen bottle connected via a connection line to the system”).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Afonso teaches the vehicle of claim 3, wherein the emergency oxygen system further comprises a rail (Schneider, housing 32) extending along a length of the internal cabin (Schneider, Fig. 4, examiner notes housing 32 extends along a length of the internal cabin), wherein the rail retains the plurality of oxygen assemblies (Schneider, Fig. 4, housing 32 retains receptacle compartments 34).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Afonso teaches the vehicle of claim 1.
While modified Afonso teaches wherein one or more of the plurality of PSUs are outboard of the stowage bin assemblies (Fig. 1), Afonso does not specifically teach wherein the emergency oxygen system is disposed between a sidewall of the vehicle and the plurality of PSUs. However, Schneider teaches wherein the emergency oxygen system is located along the outboard wall of the internal cabin between Schneider’s storage compartment 18 and the outboard wall (Schneider, Fig. 1, location of oxygen supply 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to arrange modified Afonso’s emergency oxygen system at the location along the outboard wall of the cabin, as taught by Schneider, whereby modified Afonso’s emergency oxygen system is disposed between a sidewall of the vehicle and the plurality of PSUs. Afonso’s PSUs are located inboard of the sidewall (see Afonso, Fig. 1, for example). Schneider’s emergency oxygen system is clearly disposed along the sidewall of Schneider’s vehicle (see Schneider, Fig. 1, for example). It would have been obvious to place the emergency oxygen system of Schneider in the same location when combining the oxygen system with Afonso’s vehicle, because this would have maximized valuable overhead storage and PSU space, as well as achieved the desirable result of allowing for cabin seat reconfiguration without the oxygen system having to be changed (Schneider, [0065]-[0067]), resulting in reduced maintenance time and cost.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Afonso teaches the vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a partition wall that separates the emergency oxygen system from the plurality of PSUs (Schneider, [0070], examiner notes housing 32 includes sidewalls which separate the emergency oxygen system from other cabin elements, including any PSUs).
Regarding Claim 11, Afonso discloses a method, comprising:
providing a plurality of passenger service units (PSUs) (108, Fig. 1) within an internal cabin (100, Fig. 1) of a vehicle (102, Fig. 1), and
Afonso is silent about providing an emergency oxygen system within the internal cabin, wherein the emergency oxygen system is separate and distinct from the plurality of PSUs.
Schneider teaches an emergency oxygen system (Fig. 2, oxygen supply 28), wherein the emergency oxygen system is separate and distinct (oxygen supply 28 is a distinct system, and Schneider’s invention is directed at removing the emergency oxygen system from PSUs to make it an independent system, see [0003] and [0066]-[0067], for example).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the vehicle of Afonso with the emergency oxygen system that is separate and distinct, as taught by Schneider, whereby Schneider’s oxygen system is separated from Afonso’s PSUs, with a reasonable expectation of success, to ensure sufficient oxygen supply to passengers while allowing for cabin seat reconfiguration without the oxygen system having to be modified, resulting in reduced maintenance time and cost (Schneider, [0065]-[0067]).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Afonso teaches the method of claim 11, and one or more stowage bin assemblies (Afonso, 112, Fig. 1).
While modified Afonso teaches wherein one or more of the plurality of PSUs are outboard of the stowage bin assemblies (Afonso, Fig. 1), Afonso does not specifically teach disposing one or more of the plurality of PSUs between one or more stowage bin assemblies and the emergency oxygen system. However, Schneider teaches wherein the emergency oxygen system is located along the outboard wall of the internal cabin (Fig. 2, oxygen supply 28, for example).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to dispose modified Afonso’s emergency oxygen system to the location along the outboard wall of the cabin, as taught by Schneider, resulting in disposing one or more of the plurality of PSUs between one or more stowage bin assemblies and the emergency oxygen system of modified Afonso, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to ensure sufficient oxygen supply to passengers while allowing for cabin seat reconfiguration without the oxygen system having to be modified, resulting in reduced maintenance time and cost (Schneider, [0065]-[0067]).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Afonso teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the emergency oxygen system comprises a plurality of oxygen assemblies (Schneider, receptacle compartments 34), wherein each of the plurality of oxygen assemblies comprises a mask (Schneider, oxygen mask 24) and a fluid conduit (Schneider, hose 26).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Afonso teaches the method of claim 13, further comprising fluidly coupling an oxygen supply with the plurality of oxygen assemblies (Schneider, [0038] “central oxygen bottle connected via a connection line to the system”, examiner further notes [0063], “oxygen line 30…is attached to an oxygen feed…”).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Afonso teaches the method of claim 14, wherein said fluidly coupling comprises fluidly coupling an oxygen canister to the fluid conduit (Schneider, [0038] “central oxygen bottle connected via a connection line to the system”).
Regarding Claim 17, modified Afonso teaches the method of claim 13, further comprising retaining the plurality of oxygen assemblies by a rail (Schneider, housing 32) extending along a length of the internal cabin (Schneider, Fig. 4, housing 32 extends along a length of the internal cabin).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Afonso teaches the method of claim 11.
While modified Afonso teaches wherein one or more of the plurality of PSUs are outboard of the stowage bin assemblies (Fig. 1), Afonso does not specifically teach disposing the emergency oxygen system between a sidewall of the vehicle and the plurality of PSUs. However, Schneider teaches wherein the emergency oxygen system is located along the outboard wall of the internal cabin between Schneider’s storage compartment 18 and the outboard wall (Schneider, Fig. 1, location of oxygen supply 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to arrange modified Afonso’s emergency oxygen system at the location along the outboard wall of the cabin, as taught by Schneider, whereby modified Afonso’s emergency oxygen system is disposed between a sidewall of the vehicle and the plurality of PSUs. Afonso’s PSUs are located inboard of the sidewall (see Afonso, Fig. 1, for example). Schneider’s emergency oxygen system is clearly disposed along the sidewall of Schneider’s vehicle (see Schneider, Fig. 1, for example). It would have been obvious to place the emergency oxygen system of Schneider in the same location when combining the oxygen system with Afonso’s vehicle, because this would have maximized valuable overhead storage and PSU space, as well as achieved the desirable result of allowing for cabin seat reconfiguration without the oxygen system having to be changed (Schneider, [0065]-[0067]), resulting in reduced maintenance time and cost.
Regarding Claim 19, modified Afonso teaches the method of claim 11, further comprising separating the emergency oxygen system from the plurality of PSUs by a partition wall (Schneider, [0070], examiner notes housing 32 includes sidewalls which separate the emergency oxygen system from other cabin elements, including any PSUs).
Regarding Claim 20, Afonso discloses a vehicle (102, Fig. 1), comprising:
an internal cabin (100, Fig. 1);
a plurality of passenger service units (PSUs) within the internal cabin (108, Fig. 1); and
one or more stowage bin assemblies within the internal cabin (overhead bin assembly 14).
Afonso is silent about an emergency oxygen system within the internal cabin, wherein the emergency oxygen system comprises:
a plurality of oxygen assemblies, wherein each of the plurality of oxygen assemblies comprises a mask and a fluid conduit;
a rail extending along a length of the internal cabin, wherein the rail retains the plurality of oxygen assemblies; and
an oxygen supply in fluid communication with the plurality of oxygen assemblies,
wherein the emergency oxygen system is separate and distinct from the plurality of PSUs.
Schneider teaches an emergency oxygen system (Fig. 2, oxygen supply 28), wherein the emergency oxygen system comprises:
a plurality of oxygen assemblies (receptacle compartments 34), wherein each of the plurality of oxygen assemblies comprises a mask (oxygen mask 24) and a fluid conduit (hose 26);
a rail extending along a length of a similar internal cabin (32, Fig. 3), wherein the rail retains the plurality of oxygen assemblies (para. [0070]); and
an oxygen supply in fluid communication with the plurality of oxygen assemblies ([0038] “central oxygen bottle connected via a connection line to the system”, examiner further notes [0063], “oxygen line 30…is attached to an oxygen feed…”),
wherein the emergency oxygen system is separate and distinct (examiner notes oxygen supply 28 is a distinct system, and Schneider’s invention is directed at removing the emergency oxygen system from PSUs to make it an independent system, see [0003] and [0066]-[0067], for example).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the vehicle of Afonso with the emergency oxygen system, plurality of oxygen assemblies, rail, and oxygen supply that is separate and distinct, as taught by Schneider, whereby Schneider’s oxygen system is separated from Afonso’s PSUs, with a reasonable expectation of success, to ensure sufficient oxygen supply to passengers while allowing for cabin seat reconfiguration without the oxygen system having to be modified, resulting in reduced maintenance time and cost (Schneider, [0065]-[0067]).
While modified Afonso teaches wherein one or more of the plurality of PSUs are outboard of the stowage bin assemblies (Fig. 1), Afonso does not specifically teach wherein one or more of the plurality of PSUs are disposed between the one or more stowage bin assemblies and the emergency oxygen system. However, Schneider teaches wherein the emergency oxygen system is located along the outboard wall of the internal cabin between Schneider’s storage compartment 18 and the outboard wall (Fig. 2, oxygen supply 28, for example).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to arrange modified Afonso’s emergency oxygen system at the location along the outboard wall of the cabin, as taught by Schneider, whereby modified Afonso’s one or more of the plurality of PSUs are disposed between the one or more of stowage bin assemblies and the emergency oxygen system, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to maximize valuable overhead storage and PSU space, as well as achieve the desirable result of allowing for cabin seat reconfiguration without the oxygen system having to be changed (Schneider, [0065]-[0067]), resulting in reduced maintenance time and cost.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Afonso as applied above, in further view of Howlett (GB 2237207 A), hereafter Howlett.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Afonso teaches the vehicle of claim 5, wherein the oxygen supply comprises an oxygen tank (Schneider, [0038] “central oxygen bottle connected via a connection line to the system”) fluidly coupled to a plurality of fluid conduits (Schneider, [0063] “attachment points…are provided for attaching the oxygen masks 24 using the hoses 26”).
Modified Afonso is silent about wherein the oxygen supply comprises an oxygen tank fluidly coupled to a plurality of fluid conduits via a manifold.
Howlett teaches a manifold (manifold 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the vehicle of modified Afonso with the manifold as taught by Howlett, with a reasonable expectation of success. Both references are from the same field of endeavor of emergency oxygen systems. One having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine modified Afonso with Howlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of providing individual fluid conduits to each mask, allowing for activation of oxygen supply to individual masks as needed, increasing efficiency of the emergency oxygen system while reducing the risk of system leaks.
Regarding Claim 16, modified Afonso teaches the method of claim 14, wherein said fluidly coupling comprises fluidly coupling an oxygen tank (Schneider, [0038] “central oxygen bottle connected via a connection line to the system”) to a plurality of fluid conduits (Schneider, [0063] “attachment points…are provided for attaching the oxygen masks 24 using the hoses 26”).
Modified Afonso is silent about wherein said fluidly coupling comprises fluidly coupling an oxygen to a plurality of fluid conduits via a manifold.
Howlett teaches a manifold (manifold 16).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the vehicle of modified Afonso with the manifold as taught by Howlett, with a reasonable expectation of success. Both references are from the same field of endeavor of emergency oxygen systems. One having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine modified Afonso with Howlett because this would have achieved the desirable result of providing individual fluid conduits to each mask, allowing for activation of oxygen supply to individual masks as needed, increasing efficiency of the emergency oxygen system while reducing the risk of leaks.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lang et al. (US 9751629 B2) teaches a distinct oxygen module.
Levine (US 4481945 A) teaches a distinct oxygen system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNA LYNN GORDON whose telephone number is (571)270-5323. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-4:30pm.
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, JOSHUA HUSON can be reached on 571-270-5301. 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.
/ANNA L. GORDON/Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642