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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a rotational driving force applying unit configured to apply a rotational driving force to the propeller” and “a pitch angle changing unit configured to change a pitch angle of the plurality of blades” in claims 1 and 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2024/0190554 A1 to Haldeman et al.
Regarding claim 1:
Haldeman teaches a propeller device (a ducted fan 106) that is provided in an airframe (including fuselage 102 and wings 104) and generates lift or thrust for the airframe (¶ 0017), the propeller device comprising:
a propeller (rotor assembly 108) including a plurality of blades (rotor blades 114);
a rotational driving force applying unit configured to apply a rotational driving force to the propeller (¶ 0017-0018: a rotor power mechanism 136 configured to provide rotational energy to the rotor assembly, which may be an electric motor);
a pitch angle changing unit configured to change a pitch angle of the plurality of blades (¶ 0019: translation of crosshead 134 pushes pins 162, causing rotation of rotor blades 114 about pitch-change axes 154; ¶ 0024: an actuator 400 causes translation of control tube 132 and crosshead 134);
a duct (see fig. 2) including a tubular body (duct 112), a duct hub (stator hub 120), and a duct stator (a stator vane 122), wherein the tubular body is configured to surround an outer periphery of the propeller, the duct hub is located inside the tubular body, the duct stator is configured to connect the duct hub and the tubular body, and the duct hub and the duct stator are disposed downstream of the propeller in an air flow direction in the tubular body (¶ 0017; as shown in fig. 2); and
a support member (fig. 2: attachment post 124) that is supported by the airframe, extends along a rotational axis of the propeller, and is configured to support the duct hub (¶ 0017: attachment post 124 supports the ducted fan 106 for rotation about tilt axis 118; stator hub 120 is supported by attachment post 124 and stator vanes 122; see figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 7:
Haldeman teaches a flying object (aircraft 100) comprising:
an airframe (including fuselage 102 and wing 104); and
a propeller device (a ducted fan 106) provided in the airframe and configured to generate lift or thrust for the airframe (¶ 0017: rotation of rotor blades 114 about mast axis 116 generates lift while operating in helicopter mode and thrust while operating in airplane mode),
wherein the propeller device includes:
a propeller (rotor assembly 108) including a plurality of blades (rotor blades 114);
a rotational driving force applying unit configured to apply a rotational driving force to the propeller (¶ 0017-0018: a rotor power mechanism 136 configured to provide rotational energy to the rotor assembly, which may be an electric motor);
a pitch angle changing unit configured to change a pitch angle of the plurality of blades (¶ 0019: translation of crosshead 134 pushes pins 162, causing rotation of rotor blades 114 about pitch-change axes 154; ¶ 0024: an actuator 400 causes translation of control tube 132 and crosshead 134);
a duct (see fig. 2) including a tubular body (duct 112), a duct hub (stator hub 120), and a duct stator (a stator vane 122), wherein the tubular body is configured to surround an outer periphery of the propeller, the duct hub is located inside the tubular body, the duct stator is configured to connect the duct hub and the tubular body, and the duct hub and the duct stator are disposed downstream of the propeller in an air flow direction in the tubular body (¶ 0017; as shown in fig. 2); and
a support member (fig. 2: attachment post 124) that is supported by the airframe, extends along a rotational axis of the propeller, and is configured to support the duct hub (¶ 0017: attachment post 124 supports the ducted fan 106 for rotation about tilt axis 118; stator hub 120 is supported by attachment post 124 and stator vanes 122; see figs. 1-2).
a support member (fig. 2: attachment post 124) that is supported by the airframe, extends along a rotational axis of the propeller (¶ 0017: the ducted fan 106 rotates about tilt axis 118), and is configured to support the duct hub (¶ 0017: stator hub 120 is supported by attachment post 124 and stator vanes 122; see figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 8:
Haldeman teaches the flying object according to claim 7, wherein
the flying object is a vertical take-off and landing aircraft (¶ 0007, 0017).
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) 1-3 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,548,630 B2 to Amante et al. in view of US 2024/0190554 A1 to Haldeman et al.
Regarding claim 1:
Amante teaches a propeller device that is provided in an airframe (including fuselage 103 and wings 105) and generates lift or thrust for the airframe (c. 2, ℓ. 66–c. 2, ℓ. 11: each duct 107 has a rotor 109 which may generate thrust or lift), the propeller device comprising:
a propeller (rotor 109) including a plurality of blades (blades 111);
a rotational driving force applying unit configured to apply a rotational driving force to the propeller (c. 2, ℓ. 3-4: “Each duct 107 houses a power plant for driving an attached rotor 109 in rotation”; c. 2, ℓ. 61-62: a motor that drives rotor 109);
a duct (107) including a tubular body (cowling 123), a duct hub (central hub 113), and a duct stator (one of stators 115), wherein the tubular body is configured to surround an outer periphery of the propeller, the duct hub is located inside the tubular body, the duct stator is configured to connect the duct hub and the tubular body (c. 2, ℓ. 25-36; see fig. 2), and the duct hub and the duct stator are disposed downstream of the propeller in an air flow direction in the tubular body (see fig. 1); and
a support member (inner hub assembly 130) that is supported by the airframe (through spindle 119, see figs. 3-4), extends along a rotational axis of the propeller (see fig. 3: the rotational axis extends through the center of inner hub assembly 130), and is configured to support the duct hub (c. 2, ℓ. 54-65: inner hub assembly 130 is part of the structural framework of duct 107 and supports the outer hub 113).
Amante teaches that the pitch of the blades can be selectively controlled, but does not specifically disclose a pitch angle changing unit configured to change a pitch angle of the plurality of blades.
Haldeman teaches a propeller device (a ducted fan 106) that is provided in an airframe (including fuselage 102 and wings 104) and generates lift or thrust for the airframe (¶ 0017), the propeller device comprising:
a propeller (rotor assembly 108) including a plurality of blades (rotor blades 114);
a rotational driving force applying unit configured to apply a rotational driving force to the propeller (¶ 0017-0018: a rotor power mechanism 136 configured to provide rotational energy to the rotor assembly, which may be an electric motor);
a pitch angle changing unit configured to change a pitch angle of the plurality of blades (¶ 0019: translation of crosshead 134 pushes pins 162, causing rotation of rotor blades 114 about pitch-change axes 154; ¶ 0024: an actuator 400 causes translation of control tube 132 and crosshead 134).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have provided the propeller device of Amante with a pitch angle changing unit configured to change a pitch angle of the plurality of blades, using the teachings of Haldeman, to provide a compact height profile and minimize weight, thereby maximizing control system stiffness and minimizing lost motion (Haldeman ¶ 0024).
Regarding claim 2:
Amante, as modified, provides the propeller device according to claim 1, wherein
the pitch angle changing unit includes a crosshead configured to change the pitch angle by pivoting the plurality of blades (Haldeman ¶ 0019: “to impart rotation of rotor blade 114 about pitch-change axis 154 in response to translation of crosshead 134 along mast axis 116”), and
when changing the pitch angle of the plurality of blades, the crosshead moves while being guided by the support member (Haldeman ¶ 0027: “Translation of control tube 132 may be aided by a splined interface of internal splines 420 located on guide sleeve 406 and external splines 422 (FIG. 4) on ball screw 412”; ¶ 0025: guide sleeve 406 is secured to bracket 210 — stator hub 120 of Haldeman is analogous to the structural hub of Amante).
Regarding claim 3:
Amante, as modified, provides the propeller device according to claim 1, wherein
the pitch angle changing unit includes: a crosshead configured to change the pitch angle by pivoting the plurality of blades; and a rod connected to the crosshead (Haldeman ¶ 0019: crosshead 134 and control tube 132),
the support member includes an insertion hole extending along the rotational axis (as modified — the structural hub of Amante is analogous to stator hub 120 of Haldeman, as depicted in fig. 3; an insertion hole around mast axis 116 is provided in bottom bracket 210 at the location of bottom mast bearing 214; see examiner annotations to Haldeman fig. 3 in Item A below), and
the rod is inserted into the insertion hole so as to be movable relative to the support member (as modified — the rod is shown to be inserted into the aperture, see Item A below, and the rod is disclosed to be movable relative to the support brackets, see Haldeman ¶ 0023-0024).
PNG
media_image1.png
879
892
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Item A: Detail taken from fig. 3 of Haldeman et al., with examiner-added annotations
Regarding claim 7:
Amante teaches a flying object (aircraft 101) comprising:
an airframe (including fuselage 103 and wings 105); and
a propeller device provided in the airframe and configured to generate lift or thrust for the airframe (c. 2, ℓ. 66–c. 2, ℓ. 11: each duct 107 has a rotor 109 which may generate thrust or lift),
wherein the propeller device includes:
a propeller (rotor 109) including a plurality of blades (blades 111);
a rotational driving force applying unit configured to apply a rotational driving force to the propeller (c. 2, ℓ. 3-4: “Each duct 107 houses a power plant for driving an attached rotor 109 in rotation”; c. 2, ℓ. 61-62: a motor that drives rotor 109);
a duct (107) including a tubular body (cowling 123), a duct hub (central hub 113), and a duct stator (one of stators 115), wherein the tubular body is configured to surround an outer periphery of the propeller, the duct hub is located inside the tubular body, the duct stator is configured to connect the duct hub and the tubular body (c. 2, ℓ. 25-36; see fig. 2), and the duct hub and the duct stator are disposed downstream of the propeller in an air flow direction in the tubular body (see fig. 1); and
a support member (inner hub assembly 130) that is supported by the airframe (through spindle 119, see figs. 3-4), extends along a rotational axis of the propeller (see fig. 3: the rotational axis extends through the center of inner hub assembly 130), and is configured to support the duct hub (c. 2, ℓ. 54-65: inner hub assembly 130 is part of the structural framework of duct 107 and supports the outer hub 113).
Amante teaches that the pitch of the blades can be selectively controlled, but does not specifically disclose a pitch angle changing unit configured to change a pitch angle of the plurality of blades.
Haldeman teaches a flying object (aircraft 100) comprising:
an airframe (including fuselage 102 and wing 104); and
a propeller device (a ducted fan 106) provided in the airframe and configured to generate lift or thrust for the airframe (¶ 0017: rotation of rotor blades 114 about mast axis 116 generates lift while operating in helicopter mode and thrust while operating in airplane mode),
wherein the propeller device includes:
a propeller (rotor assembly 108) including a plurality of blades (rotor blades 114);
a rotational driving force applying unit configured to apply a rotational driving force to the propeller (¶ 0017-0018: a rotor power mechanism 136 configured to provide rotational energy to the rotor assembly, which may be an electric motor); and
a pitch angle changing unit configured to change a pitch angle of the plurality of blades (¶ 0019: translation of crosshead 134 pushes pins 162, causing rotation of rotor blades 114 about pitch-change axes 154; ¶ 0024: an actuator 400 causes translation of control tube 132 and crosshead 134).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have provided the propeller device of Amante with a pitch angle changing unit configured to change a pitch angle of the plurality of blades, using the teachings of Haldeman, to provide a compact height profile and minimize weight, thereby maximizing control system stiffness and minimizing lost motion (Haldeman ¶ 0024).
Regarding claim 8:
Amante, as modified, provides the flying object according to claim 7, wherein
the flying object is a vertical take-off and landing aircraft (Amante c. 2, ℓ. 7-16).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,548,630 B2 to Amante et al. in view of US 2024/0190554 A1 to Haldeman et al., as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 10,501,173 B1 to Douglas et al.
Regarding claim 6:
Amante, as modified, provides the propeller device according to claim 1. Amante discloses a motor that drives the rotor (c. 2, ℓ. 54-65), but does not specifically disclose a motor which includes a stator and a rotor.
Haldeman teaches a rotational driving force applying unit for a rotor assembly comprising an electric motor (¶ 0017: electric motor 136), where the rotor mast (130) is the drive shaft of the electric motor (¶ 0022), and the rotor mast is rotatably supported via bearings (212, 214) in brackets coupled to the stator hub (¶ 0023), but does not specifically disclose that the electric motor includes a stator and a rotor.
Douglas teaches an electric motor for use in aircraft propeller devices and which includes (see fig. 3) a motor-stator (314) and a motor-rotor (316), wherein the rotor is rotatably supported via a bearing assembly (320) which “can be fixedly mounted to the aircraft such as, for example, to an aircraft bulkhead or other support structure” (c. 8, ℓ. 21-34).
Similar to the propeller devices of Amante and Haldeman, the output shaft of the motor disclosed by Douglas may be the driveshaft of the thrust-rotor (Douglas c. 8, ℓ. 6-16: shaft 312 can be a single shaft extending from the propeller to magnet support structure 322), and the motor is disclosed to be suitable for use in aircraft configured to transition between vertical and horizontal flight (Douglas c. 1, ℓ. 6-40). It is considered that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have reasonable expectations of success in implementing the teachings of Douglas to a propeller device as taught by Amante and Thompson, with predictable results.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have configured the propeller device of Amante such that the motor is an electric motor including a stator and a rotor, and the support member rotatably supports the rotor via a bearing, using the teachings of Haldeman and Douglas, for the purpose of driving the rotor in rotation and because it is a known device disclosed to be suitable for the purpose. Such modification could advantageously allow “more precise control of the spacing between the fixed and rotating magnets, and a lighter overall design” (Douglas c. 9, ℓ. 56-67).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11,420,762 B2 to Thompson et al. teaches an aircraft with ducted fans similar to that disclosed by Haldeman et al.
US 4,371,133 to Edgley teaches an aircraft with a fuselage supported propeller having a duct and stator blades.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Richard Green whose telephone number is (571)270-5380. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 9:00 to 5:00 MT.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at (571) 272-6909. 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.
/Richard Green/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Prosecution Insights