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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-17 in the reply filed on 9/2/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “134” has been used to designate both valve and connector. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “137” has been used to designate both a connector and a tap. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 102 (electric compressor). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the power storage device" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant Admitted Prior Art (AAPA) in view of and Clarke (US PgPub #2022/0055762) and De Israeli (US PgPub #2023/0415904).
For Claims 1 and 10, figure 1 of AAPA disclose a providing an aircraft (20), the aircraft having a gas turbine engine (24) with a gas turbine engine compressor (26), and there being at least one compressed air tap (32) for supplying compressed air from the gas turbine engine compressor to an anti-ice system (30) and to an environmental control system (36) through compressed air connections (137).
While AAPA is silent about mounting an electric engine to the aircraft, the figures of Clarke ‘762 teach mounting an electric engine, the electric engine including an electric motor (2114) driving a propulsor (2116), a power source (2109) is a power storage device for powering the electric motor, an electric compressor (2112) for supplying compressed air, and a nacelle surrounding the electric motor, the power source and the electric compressor, the mounting step including connecting the electric compressor (2112) to the compressed air connections to supply compressed air to the anti-ice system (2105) and to the environmental control system (2111).
While AAPA teaches a gas turbine engine with a compressor to provide air to an environmental system and anti-icing system and Clarke ‘762 teaches an electric engine with a compressor providing air to an anti-icing system and an environmental system, they are silent about retrofitting the propulsion system by removing the gas turbine engine for the electric engine. However, the figures and abstract of De Israeli ‘904 teach removing a gas turbine engine and replacing it with an electric engine while still providing air from a compressor to the environmental system and the anti-icing system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify AAPA and Clarke ‘762 with the method of retrofitting a turbine engine with an electric engine as taught by De Israeli ‘904. The motivation to do so would be to provide a more environmentally friendly propulsion system.
For Claim 2, AAPA discloses the engine is attached to the aircraft through a pylon.
For Claim 3, while AAPA is silent about the power source being a battery, the figures of Clarke ‘762 teach that the power source (2109) is a power storage device also within the nacelle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify AAPA with the electric engine having a power storage device as taught by Clarke ‘762. The motivation to do so would be to provide a more environmentally friendly propulsion system.
For Claims 4 and 11, while AAPA is silent about a bus bar receiving power from a power storage device mounted in the wing. However, the figures of Clarke ‘762 teach an electric engine with the power source (2109) is a bus bar receiving power from a power storage device (2703) mounting in a wing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify AAPA with the power storage device in the wing as taught by Clarke ‘762. The motivation to do so would be to provide a more environmentally friendly propulsion system.
For Claims 5 and 12, while AAPA is silent about the power storage device powering the electric compressor. However, the figures of Clarke ‘762 teach that the power storage device (2109) also powers the electric compressor (2112). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify AAPA with the power storage device powering the electric compressor as taught by Clarke ‘762. The motivation to do so would be to provide a more environmentally friendly propulsion system.
For Claims 6, 8, 13, and 15, while AAPA is silent about an air inlet, the figures and paragraph [0046] of Clarke ‘762 teach an air inlet (2113) in the forward face of the nacelle that communicates through the nacelle to the electric compressor (2112). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify AAPA with the inlet of Clarke ‘762. The motivation to do so would be to provide needed air to the compressor.
For Claims 7 and 14, while AAPA in view of Clarke ‘762 are silent about a scoop inlet, the Examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art to have side scoop inlets to provide air to an electric compressor. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify AAPA and Clarke ‘762 with the known side scoops. The motivation to do so would be to provide the needed air to the system.
For Claims 9 and 16, while AAPA is silent about the power storage device is a battery, the figures of Clarke ‘762 teach that the power storage device (2109) is a battery. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify AAPA with the battery of Clarke ‘762. The motivation to do so would be to provide a more environmentally friendly propulsion system.
For Claim 17, while AAPA is silent about the power storage device is a battery, the figures of Clarke ‘762 teach that the power storage device (2109) is a battery. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify AAPA with the battery of Clarke ‘762. The motivation to do so would be to provide a more environmentally friendly propulsion system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 which teach similar electric engine aircraft, and retrofits.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP J BONZELL whose telephone number is (571)270-3663. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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 Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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.
/PHILIP J BONZELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642 10/6/2026
