DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) filled on 12/08/2025 is being considered in the examination of this application.
Drawings
3. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a plurality of overhead stowage compartments, wherein the passenger supply channel of the at least one passenger supply system is arranged at a bottom of the plurality of overhead stowage compartments” in claim 11 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Specification
4. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
5. Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
a. Claim 2: the term “or” in line 4 should be rewritten as “and/or” and the term “or both” should be removed for the purpose of clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. 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.
7. Claim 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
8. Claim 7, lines 2-5, recites the limitation “a further passenger service unit mounted in the passenger supply channel at a distance, in a longitudinal direction, from the passenger supply channel, wherein the infill panel has a length in the longitudinal direction of the passenger supply channel corresponding to the distance between the passenger service units” which renders the claim indefinite, since the claimed configuration does not correspond to the configuration disclosed in the applicant’s specification. Is the further PSU mounted in or away from the PSC in the longitudinal direction? And, is the length of the infill panel corresponding to the distance of the PSUs? Accordingly, the claimed subject matter is not consistence with the applicant’s disclosure. See MPEP 2173.03. Furthermore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the longitudinal direction of the passenger supply channel” and “the distance between the passenger service units” in the claim.
Claims not addressed are rejected based on their dependency from a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
10. Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being (a)(1) as being anticipated by Wirth et al. (US 2014/0329452 A1), hereinafter “Wirth”.
11. Regarding Claim 1, Wirth discloses a passenger supply system (Abstract and paras. [0079], [0085] and [0102]; passenger supply system (PSS) 24 and passenger supply channel (PSC) 12 including opening 76 (i.e., collectively forming a passenger supply system) as seen in FIGS. 1-2) for an aircraft, comprising:
a passenger supply channel (12);
a passenger service unit (36) having a main body (PSU 36 by definition include a main body as clearly seen in FIGS. 2-5B, 7, 11 and 7), wherein the passenger service unit is configured to be mounted into the passenger supply channel (para. [0103]; PSU 36 mounted within an opening 76 of PSC 12 as seen in FIGS. 5A-66 and 10); and
an infill panel (28) configured to be mounted (FIGS. 6 and 10) into the passenger supply channel (12),
wherein a portion of the main body of the passenger service unit overlaps an end of the infill panel (paras. [0087]-[0088]; overlapping area 44 of PSU 36 overlaps with crossover area 34 of panel 28 as clearly seen in FIGS. 5A-7).
12. Regarding Claim 2, Wirth discloses the passenger supply system of claim 1, wherein the passenger supply channel faces downwards in a vertical direction and has a bottom edge (para. [0102]; PSC 12, by definition facing a downward vertical direction, includes a lining panel that defines by the rims rims of lining panel 74 the channel opening 76 of PSC 12 as seen in FIG. 10), and,
wherein the portion of the main body overlapping the infill panel is arranged below the bottom edge of the passenger supply channel (overlapping area of 44 of PSU 36 clearly arranged between below lining panel 74 as seen in FIGS. 5A-7 and 10), or
wherein an entire bottom portion of the main body of the passenger service unit is arranged below the bottom edge (para. [0087]; touch panel 42 of PSU 36 clearly arranged between below lining panel 74 as seen in FIGS. 5A-7 and 10), or
both.
13. Regarding Claim 3, Wirth discloses the passenger supply system of claim 2, wherein a circumference of the main body overlaps a first infill panel, a second infill panel, and the bottom edge on two sides of the passenger supply channel (the circumference of PSU 36 clearly overlaps left and right panels 28 as well as the bottom edge defined by lining panel on at least two sides as clearly seen in FIGS. 7 and 10).
14. Regarding Claim 4, Wirth discloses the passenger supply system of claim 1, wherein the portion of the main body overlapping the infill panel is chamfered (overlapping area 44 of PSU is clearly chamfered in the same manner as the applicant’s as seen in FIGS. 5A-5B and 7).
15. Regarding Claim 5, Wirth discloses the passenger supply system of claim 1, further comprising:
a light source arranged at a top surface of the main body (para. [0087]; reading lamps 38 as seen in FIGS. 4 and 7).
16. Regarding Claim 7, Wirth discloses the passenger supply system of claim 1, further comprising:
a further passenger service unit mounted in the passenger supply channel at a distance, in a longitudinal direction, from the passenger supply channel (paras. [0106]; additional PSUs 36 mounted longitudinally in opening 76 of PSC 12 as seen in FIGS. 2, 17-18),
wherein the infill panel has a length in the longitudinal direction of the passenger supply channel corresponding to the distance between the passenger service units (panel 28 includes a length in the longitudinal direction which corresponds to distance between PSUs 36 as seen in FIGS. 6-8A and 17A-18).
17. Regarding Claim 8, Wirth discloses the passenger supply system of claim 7, wherein a longitudinal end of the infill panel is machined after cutting the infill panel to have the length (panel 28 has the length which includes a longitudinal end as seen in FIG. 2 and 6, note the limitation “machined after cutting the infill panel to have the length” is a product by process limitation and is therefore not required by the claim, see MPEP 2113(I)).
18. Regarding Claim 9, Wirth discloses the passenger supply system of claim 1, wherein the infill panel comprises an extruded profile (panel 28 by definition includes a profile as seen in FIGS. 5A-5B, note the limitation “extruded” is a product by process limitation and is therefore not required by the claim, see MPEP 2113(I)).
19. Regarding Claim 10, Wirth discloses an aircraft (Abstract and para. [0085]), comprising:
at least one passenger supply system of claim 1 (the system discussed above, regarding claim 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
20. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
21. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fabry et al. (US 2024/0343390 A1), hereinafter “Fabry”.
22. Regarding Claim 6, Wirth discloses the passenger supply system of claim 5.
Wirth is silent regarding the light source specifically indicates a passenger call.
Fabry discloses a passenger service unit (Fabry Abstract and para. [0052]) the light source specifically indicates a passenger call (para. [0074]; PSU 106 includes attendant call button/lights 408 as seen in FIG. 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention the invention of Wirth as taught by Fabry such that the light source specifically indicates a passenger call in order to increase the capability of the passenger service unit by enabling the light source to also serve as means for passengers to call the attendant.
23. Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wirth et al. (US 2014/0329452 A1), in view of Schneider (US 2011/0240796 A1).
24. Regarding Claim 11, Wirth discloses the aircraft of claim 10, further comprising: a plurality of overhead stowage compartments (para. [0079]; the aircraft inherently comprises a plurality of stowage compartments as clearly seen in FIGS. 1, 7 and 9),
Wirth is silent regarding the passenger supply channel of the at least one passenger supply system is arranged specifically at a bottom of the plurality of overhead stowage compartments.
Schneider discloses a passenger supply system (Schneider Abstract and FIG. 1) wherein the passenger supply channel of the at least one passenger supply system is arranged at a bottom of the plurality of overhead stowage compartments (paras. [0049], [0052] and [0058]; service channel 210 arranged at a bottom of luggage compartments 210 as seen in FIGS. 1-3 and 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Wirth as taught by Schneider such that the passenger supply channel of the at least one passenger supply system is arranged at a bottom of the plurality of overhead stowage compartments in order to improve the accessibility of the passenger service unit by passengers in a seated position.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Schevardo (US 2012/0230530 A1), Stoeffler et al. (US 2019/0193858 A1), Freund et al. (US 9487296 B2), Freund et al. (US 10414499 B2), Movsesian et al. (US 10850852 B2), Roeper (US 5707028 A), Fluchte et al. (DE 102022110452 A1), Schmid et al. (DE 102010034410 A1) individually disclose a passenger supply system for an aircraft, comprising: a passenger supply channel; a passenger service unit having a main body, wherein the passenger service unit is configured to be mounted into the passenger supply channel; and an infill panel configured to be mounted into the passenger supply channel
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this or any earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Arfan Sinaki, whose telephone number is 571-272-7185. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 10:00 am to 6:00 pm 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, Joshua J. Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. The fax number for the organization to which 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.
/ARFAN Y. SINAKI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights