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 .
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 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.
Examiner's Note.
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and/or columns and line numbers and/or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
The Examiner notes that it has been held that a recitation that a structural element is "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to” perform a function does not limit the claim to a particular structure and thus only requires the ability to so perform the function. (See In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138. See also, MPEP 2111.04) As such, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims and the prior art, the recitations of "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to” will be deemed met by an element in the prior art capable of performing the function recited in connection with "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to”.
The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. SEE MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
1The term “to be” is not a positive limitation inasmuch as the term is in future tense and implies a change in condition in the future. This does not serve to limit the structure in the present tense. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The term “being” are not positive limitations inasmuch as the terms including the word "being" are passive and thus do not serve to clearly limit the structure in an active sense. Appropriate correction is required.
Reference of prior art
Kammerer et al. (EP 3992571, PROJECTILE AND BEARING UNIT FOR A PROJECTILE).
Buttolph. (US 9957045, Space Saving Wing Stowage).
Johnson et al. (US 20200218288, CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES).
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.
Claims 1 and 3-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Kammerer.
Re claim 1 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer discloses:
A tail assembly for a guided projectile (2), said tail assembly comprising:
a fixed part to be connected to the a back of a main body of a projectile (8a), and defining a longitudinal axis (4); and
a movable part (8b) equipped with a plurality of stabilizing fins (10) and mounted to a back of the fixed part (8a), being freely rotatable about said longitudinal axis (¶ 0044, 0053 and item 4);
wherein said movable part is axially movable relative to said
fixed part (8a, 8b) between;
an abutment condition, wherein said fixed part and said movable part are in axial abutment with each other (figs. 1, 2 items 8a and 8b), and
a spaced-apart condition, wherein said fixed part and said movable part are axially spaced apart (fig. 3 items 8a and 8b), thus defining a perimetral gap in between (S2); and wherein the tail assembly comprises an elastic group (50) tending to retain said movable part (8b) in said spaced-apart condition.
Re claim 3 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer, discloses: The tail assembly according to claim I, comprising a connection group which connects said fixed part and said movable part, and which said connection group allows said movable part to rotate freely relative to the fixed part ( about said longitudinal axis and to slide freely relative to said fixed part in a direction of said longitudinal axis (¶ 0044, 0053, and items 12, 58).
Re claim 4 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer, discloses: The tail assembly according to claim 3,wherein said connection group translates integrally with said movable part over said fixed part in the direction of said longitudinal axis (fig. 3 items 8a and 8b).
Re claim 5 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer, discloses: The tail assembly according to claim 4, wherein said elastic group is axially interposed between said fixed part and at least one of said connection group and said movable part (fig. 3 items 12, 58, 8a and 8b);
Re claim 6 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer, discloses: The tail assembly according to claim 3, wherein said connection group comprises a sleeve mounted slidable over said fixed part along said longitudinal axis and locked in rotation about said longitudinal axis relative to said fixed part (fig. 3 items 12 and its components).
Re claim 7 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer, discloses: The tail assembly according to claim 6, wherein said fixed part comprises a main portion (item 8b, vertical portion) and a stem that extends rearwards from a back of said main portion (item 8b, lateral portion) whereon said sleeve is slidably mounted and locked in rotation about the longitudinal axis (items 12 and its components).
Re claim 8 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer, discloses: The tail assembly according to claim 6, wherein said connection group comprises at least one bearing that rotatably coupling said movable part with said sleeve around said longitudinal axis (¶ 0045).
Re claim 9 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer, discloses: The tail assembly according to claim 3, wherein said fixed part comprises a stop member towards which at least one of said connection group and said movable part are configured to move when said at least one of said connection group and said movable part are pressed by said elastic group towards said spaced-apart condition (¶ 0048).
Re claim 10 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer, discloses: The tail assembly according to claim 1 wherein said elastic group comprises at least one disc spring (¶ 0045, items 50).
Re claim 11 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer, discloses: A guided projectile comprising [[a]] the tail assembly according to claim 1 (¶ 0002, 0006, 0014).
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kammerer and further in view of Buttolph.
Re claim 2 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Kammerer fails to teach as disclosed by Buttolph: The tail assembly according to claim 1, wherein said fixed part (12) comprises a flange (20-) which is radially external to said longitudinal axis (X-X) (¶ 0053, item 68),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to add the Buttolph teachings of said fixed part comprises a flange which is radially external to said longitudinal axis into the Kammerer, to achieve a better fastening between the parts and Stronger and Safer Connections.
and said movable part 14) comprises a shoulder end (22) configured to abut axially on said flange (-2I) in said abutment condition and to move axially away from said flange (20)in said spaced-apart condition (shoulder of item 8a and fig. 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEDHAT BADAWI whose telephone number is (571)270-5983. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri during office hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JOSHUA MICHENER can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MEDHAT BADAWI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights