Office Action 2: Final Rejection (2024-08-02)
Rejection types: 103 - Obviousness

CLAIMS:
THE CLAIMS

1\. (Original) A coupling system configured to secure one or more struts to a wing of an aircraft, the coupling system comprising:
one or more splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing.

2\. (Original) The coupling system of claim 1, wherein the one or more splice straps are integrally formed with the one or more struts and the wing.

3\. (Original) The coupling system of claim 1, wherein a rear surface of the one or more struts are linearly aligned with a front surface of a front spar of the wing.

4\. (Original) The coupling system of claim 3, wherein an engine is secured to the one or more struts distally from the wing.

5\. (Currently amended) The coupling system of claim 1, wherein the one or more splice straps secure to both the one or more struts and one or more ribs of the wing.

6\. (Original) The coupling system of claim 5, wherein the one or more splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs; and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs.

7\. (Original) The coupling system of claim 6, wherein the one or more upper splice straps comprise a first upper splice strap and a second upper splice strap, and wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise a first lower splice strap and a second lower splice strap.

8\. (Original) The coupling system of claim 7, wherein the one or more upper splice straps further comprise a third upper splice strap between the first upper splice strap and the second upper splice strap, and wherein the one or more lower splice straps further comprise a third lower splice strap between the first lower splice strap and the second lower splice strap.

9\. (Currently amended) The coupling system of claim 5, wherein the one more splice straps are vertically and longitudinally aligned with the one or more struts and the one or more ribs.

10\. (Original) The coupling system of claim 1, further comprising one or more fairings covering at least a portion of the one or more splice straps.

11\. (Currently amended) The coupling system of claim 1, further comprising one or more mounting plates between the one or more splice straps\[\[,\]\] and the one or more struts, and between the one or more splice straps and the wing.

12\. (Original) The coupling system of claim 1, further comprising one or more spanning plates configured to span across a plurality of ribs, wherein the one or more splice straps are coupled to the one or more spanning plates.

13\. (Original) A method for securing one or more struts to a wing of an aircraft, the method comprising:
securing, by one or more splice straps, the one or more struts to the wing.

14\. (Original) The method of claim 13, wherein said securing comprises integrally forming the one or more splice straps with the one or more struts and the wing.

15\. (Currently amended) The method of claim 13, wherein said securing comprises securing the one or more splice straps to both the one or more struts and one or more ribs of the wing.

16\. (Original) The method of claim 15, wherein the one or more splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs; and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs.

17\. (Original) The method of claim 15, wherein said securing further comprises vertically and longitudinally aligning the one more splice straps with the strut and the one or more ribs.

18\. (Currently amended) An aircraft comprising\[\[;\]\]:
a fuselage;
a wing extending from the fuselage, wherein the wing comprises a front spar and one or more ribs;
one or more struts, wherein a rear surface of the one or more struts are linearly aligned with a front surface of the front spar;
an engine secured to the one or more struts distally from the wing; and
a coupling system securing the one or more struts to the wing, the coupling system comprising:one or more splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing, wherein the one or more splice straps are integrally formed with the one or more struts and the wing, wherein the one or more splice straps secure to both the one or more struts and the one or more ribs, and wherein the one or more splice straps are vertically and longitudinally aligned with the one or more struts and the one or more ribs.

19\. (Original) The aircraft of claim 18, wherein the one or more splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs; and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs.

Page 5

20\. (Currently amended) The aircraft of claim 19, wherein the one or more upper splice straps comprise:
a first upper splice strap;
a second upper splice strap;
a third upper splice strap between the first upper splice strap and the second upper splice strap\[\[;\]\], n wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise:
a first lower splice strap;
a second lower splice strap; and
a third lower splice strap between the first lower splice strap and the second lower splice strap.

21\. (New) The aircraft of claim 20, further comprising:
an upper mounting plate that spans over the one or more struts and the wing, wherein the upper mounting plate provide a base on which the first upper splice strap, the second upper splice strap, and the third upper splice strap securely mount to the one or more struts and the wing, wherein the first upper splice strap is secured directly over a first rib, and wherein the second upper splice strap is securely directly over a second rib; and
a lower mounting plate that spans below the one or more struts and the wing, wherein the lower mounting plate provides a base on which the first lower splice strap, the second lower splice strap, and the third lower splice strap securely mount to the one or more struts and the wing, wherein the first lower splice strap is secured directly under the first rib, and wherein the second lower splice strap is secured directly under the second rib.

Amendment Under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111 Page 6

22\. (New) The coupling system of claim 1, further comprising:
a first lateral brace secured to first outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and a front spar of the wing;
a second lateral brace secured to a second outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and the front spar of the wing, wherein the second outer lateral surface is opposite from the first lateral surface.

OFFICE 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 .
Response to Amendments
The amendment filed 16th May 2024  has been entered. Claims 1-22 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have not overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 6th March 2024.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 17 line 2, “…the strut…” should read “…the one or more strut …” for the purpose of clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9-10, and 12-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stanley et al. (US 3,848,832) in view of Behzadpour et al. (US 2022/0033060).
Regarding claims 1 and 5-6, Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) a coupling system configured to secure one or more struts (6) to a wing (10) of an aircraft (Col. 1 Lines 65-67),
wherein the coupling system secures the one or more struts (6) to a one or more ribs of the wing (clearly shown in the figure below; struts are coupled to the top and bottom surface of the ribs (also seen in figure 3)),
PNG
media_image1.png
375
665
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the coupling system comprising:
one or more splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing,
wherein the one or more splice straps secure to both the one or more struts and a one or more ribs of the wing, and
wherein the one or more splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs; and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs.
Behzadpour et al. ‘060 teaches (figures 4-5) a wing assembly (120) comprising the outer wing front spar (212)  and the outer wing rear spar (214) coupled to the center wing front spar (152) and center wing rear spar (154) via spar splice plates (216, 218) respectively (Para 0114; two splice plates secure outer wing spars and center wing spars on front and rear of the wing).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Behzadpour et al. ‘060 to configure the coupling system comprising:
one or more splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing,
wherein the one or more splice straps is secure to both the one or more struts and one or more ribs of the wing, and
wherein the one or more splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs (one or more splice straps couples the rear end of the one or more struts and the front end of the one or more ribs); and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs (one or more splice straps couples the rear end of the one or more struts and the front end of the one or more ribs).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would transfer loads between the strut and the wing. (Para 0114).
Regarding claim 2, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system wherein the one or more splice straps are integrally formed with the one or more struts and the wing (splice straps connects struts and the wing, thus splice straps are integral part of a coupling system).
Regarding claim 3, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system wherein a rear surface of the one or more struts (6) are linearly aligned with a front surface of a front spar (14) of the wing (clearly seen in figure 2) (Col. 1 Line 68, Col. 2 Lines 1-3;  rear surface of the strut (6) abuts the front spar linearly in a longitudinal direction).
Regarding claim 4, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system wherein an engine (2) is secured to the one or more struts (6) distally from the wing (10) (Col. 1 Lines 64-68; Col. 2 Lines 22-25, 52-59; engine is secured to the strut via arch assembly (16)).
Regarding claim 9, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system wherein the one or more splice straps are vertically and longitudinally aligned with the one or more struts and the one or more ribs (the one or more splice straps aligns and couples the one or more struts and the one or more ribs at the top and bottom surfaces of the one or more struts and the one or more ribs i.e., the one or more splice strips are vertically aligned and the one or more splice straps extends in a longitudinal direction i.e., longitudinally aligned).
Regarding claim 10, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system further comprising one or more fairings covering at least a portion of the one or more splice straps (Col. 2 Lines 60-67; nacelle (4) and wing skin (clearly shown in the figure above) encloses the splice straps).
Regarding claim 12, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system further comprising one or more spanning plates/front spar (14)  configured to span across a plurality of ribs, wherein the one or more splice straps are coupled to the one or more spanning plates (Col. 1 Lines 68; Col. 2 Lines 1-3; front spar extends in the spanwise direction i.e., span across a plurality of ribs and is sandwiched between the strut and rib of the wing (clearly seen in figure 2); the splice strap connects the strut and the rib of the wing, thus the sandwiched front spar is connected/coupled to the splice strap).
Regarding claim 13 and 15-16, Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) a method for securing one or more struts (6) to a wing (10) of an aircraft (Col. 1 Lines 65-67),
wherein the method comprises securing the one or more struts (6) to the wing (10) (clearly shown in the figure below; struts are secured at the top and bottom surface of the ribs of the wing (also seen in figure 3)),
PNG
media_image1.png
375
665
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the method comprising:
securing, by one or more splice straps, the one or more struts to the wing,
wherein said securing comprises securing the one or more splice straps to both the one or more struts and a one or more ribs of the wing, and
wherein the one or more splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs; and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs.
Behzadpour et al. ‘060 teaches (figures 4-5) a wing assembly (120) comprising the outer wing front spar (212)  and the outer wing rear spar (214) coupled to the center wing front spar (152) and center wing rear spar (154) via spar splice plates (216, 218) respectively (Para 0114; splice plates are secured to both outer wing spars and center wing spars; two splice plates secure outer wing spars and center wing spars on front and rear of the wing).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Behzadpour et al. ‘060 to configure the method comprising:
securing, by one or more splice straps, the one or more struts to the wing,
wherein said securing comprises securing the one or more splice straps to both the one or more struts and one or more ribs of the wing, and
wherein the one or more splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs (one or more splice straps couples the rear end of the one or more struts and the front end of the one or more ribs); and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs (one or more splice straps couples the rear end of the one or more struts and the front end of the one or more ribs).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would transfer loads between the strut and the wing. (Para 0114).
Regarding claim 14, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the method wherein said securing comprises integrally forming the one or more splice straps to the one or more struts and the wing (splice straps connects struts and the wing, thus splice straps are integral part of a coupling system).
Regarding claim 17, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the method wherein said securing further comprises vertically and longitudinally aligning the one or more splice straps with the one or more struts and the one or more ribs (the one or more splice straps aligns and couples the one or more struts and the one or more ribs at the top and bottom surfaces of the one or more struts and the one or more ribs i.e., the one or more splice strips are vertically aligned and the one or more splice straps extends in a longitudinal direction i.e., longitudinally aligned).
Regarding claims 18-19, Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) an aircraft comprising:
a fuselage (aircraft has fuselage that holds crew, passengers and cargo);
a wing (10) extending from the fuselage, wherein wing comprises a front spar (14) and one or more ribs (clearly shown in the figure below) (Col. 2 Lines 1-3);
one or more struts (6), wherein a rear surface of the one or more struts are linearly aligned with a front surface of the spar (clearly seen in figure 2) (Col. 1 Line 68, Col. 2 Lines 1-3;  rear surface of the strut (6) abuts the front spar linearly in a longitudinal direction),
an engine (2) secured to the one or more struts (6) distally from the wing (10) (Col. 1 Lines 64-68; Col. 2 Lines 22-25, 52-59; engine is secured to the strut via arch assembly (16)),
a coupling system securing the one or more struts (6) to the wing (10) (clearly shown in the figure below; struts are coupled to the top and bottom surface of the ribs (also seen in figure 3)) (Col. 1 Lines 65-67),
PNG
media_image1.png
375
665
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the aircraft comprising the coupling system comprising:
one or more splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing,
wherein the one or more splice straps are integrally formed with the one or more struts and the wing,
wherein the one or more splice straps secure to both the one or more struts and the one or more ribs,
wherein the one or more splice straps are vertically and longitudinally aligned with the one or more struts and the one or more ribs, and
wherein the one or more splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs; and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs.
Behzadpour et al. ‘060 teaches (figures 4-5) a wing assembly (120) comprising the outer wing front spar (212)  and the outer wing rear spar (214) coupled to the center wing front spar (152) and center wing rear spar (154) via spar splice plates (216, 218) respectively (Para 0114; splice plates are secured to both outer wing spars and center wing spars; two splice plates secure outer wing spars and center wing spars on front and rear of the wing).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Behzadpour et al. ‘060 to configure the aircraft comprising the coupling system comprising:
one or more splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing,
wherein the one or more splice straps are integrally formed with the one or more struts and the wing (splice straps connects struts and the wing, thus splice straps are integral part of a coupling system),
wherein the one or more splice straps secure to both the one or more struts and the one or more ribs,
wherein the one or more splice straps are vertically and longitudinally aligned with the strut and the one or more ribs (the one or more splice straps aligns and couples the one or more struts and the one or more ribs at the top and bottom surfaces of the one or more struts and the one or more ribs i.e., the one or more splice strips are vertically aligned and the one or more splice straps extends in a longitudinal direction i.e., longitudinally aligned), and
wherein the one or more splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs (one or more splice straps couples the rear end of the one or more struts and the front end of the one or more ribs); and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs (one or more splice straps couples the rear end of the one or more struts and the front end of the one or more ribs).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would transfer loads between the strut and the wing. (Para 0114).
Claim(s) 7-8 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stanley et al. (US 3,848,832) and Behzadpour et al. (US 2022/0033060) as applied to claims 6 and 19 above, and further in view of Brodell et al. (US 5,524,847).
Regarding claims 7-8, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system where the one or more upper splice straps comprise a first upper splice strap and wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise a first lower splice strap (at least one splice strap is present on both the top and bottom surfaces which couples the struts and ribs),
but it is silent about the coupling system wherein the one or more upper splice straps comprise a second upper splice strap, and wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise a second lower splice strap, and
wherein the one or more upper splice straps further comprise a third upper splice strap between the first upper splice strap and the second upper splice strap, and wherein the one or more lower splice straps further comprise a third lower splice strap between the first lower splice strap and the second lower splice strap.
Brodell et al. ‘847 teaches (figures 1-2) an engine mounted on the aircraft  by a pylon (60) extending between the engine and an aircraft wing (62) wherein a pylon beam (64) is united with the intermediate cowl (34) by a separable joint such as the bolted joint (74)  (Col. 5 Lines 39-50; 3 bolted joint unites the pylon beam with the intermediate cowl; bolted joint is analogous to splice strap as both couples two structures).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Brodell et al. ‘847 to configure the coupling system wherein the one or more upper splice straps comprise a second upper splice strap, and wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise a second lower splice strap, and
wherein the one or more upper splice straps further comprise a third upper splice strap between the first upper splice strap and the second upper splice strap, and wherein the one or more lower splice straps further comprise a third lower splice strap between the first lower splice strap and the second lower splice strap.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would reinforce the coupling system.
Regarding claim 20, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the aircraft wherein the one or more upper splice straps comprise:
a first upper splice strap (at least one splice strap is present on both the top and bottom surfaces which couples the struts and ribs); and
wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise:
a first lower splice strap (at least one splice strap is present on both the top and bottom surfaces which couples the struts and ribs),
but it is silent about the aircraft wherein the one or more upper splice straps comprise:
a second upper splice strap; and
a third upper splice strap between the first upper splice strap and the second upper splice strap; and
wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise:
a second lower splice strap; and
a third lower splice strap between the first lower splice strap and the second lower splice strap.
Brodell et al. ‘847 teaches (figures 1-2) an engine mounted on the aircraft  by a pylon (60) extending between the engine and an aircraft wing (62) wherein a pylon beam (64) is united with the intermediate cowl (34) by a separable joint such as the bolted joint (74)  (Col. 5 Lines 39-50; 3 bolted joint unites the pylon beam with the intermediate cowl; bolted joint is analogous to splice strap as both couples two structures).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Brodell et al. ‘847 to configure the aircraft wherein the one or more upper splice straps comprise:
a second upper splice strap; and
a third upper splice strap between the first upper splice strap and the second upper splice strap; and
wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise:
a second lower splice strap; and
a third lower splice strap between the first lower splice strap and the second lower splice strap.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would reinforce the coupling system.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stanley et al. (US 3,848,832) and Behzadpour et al. (US 2022/0033060) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu (CN 201660965).
Regarding claim 11, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system of claim 1 but it is silent about the coupling system comprising one or more mounting plates between the one or more splice straps and the one or more struts, and between the one or more splice straps and the wing.
Liu ‘965 teaches (figures 1-7) cantilever beam (2) connected to an extension beam (clearly shown in the figure below) at the upper flange (31) and lower flange (32) via an inner layer splice plate/mounting plate (40, 42), wing outer plate/splice strap (41, 43) and bolt (7) (clearly seen in figure 7) (English Translation Pg. 3 Lines 11-28).
PNG
media_image2.png
286
584
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Liu ‘965 to configure the coupling system comprising one or more mounting plates between the one or more splice straps and the one or more struts, and between the one or more splice straps and the wing.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would provide uniform surface for mounting the splice straps.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stanley et al. (US 3,848,832) and Behzadpour et al. (US 2022/0033060) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pautis et al. (US 2016/0229545)
Regarding claim 22, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system further comprising first outer lateral surface of the one or more struts , a front spar (14) of the wing and a second outer lateral surface of the one or more struts (strut has two lateral surfaces) (lateral surface on one side of the strut is shown in the figure below) (Col. 2 Line 3),
PNG
media_image3.png
375
665
media_image3.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the coupling system further comprising:
a first lateral brace secured to first outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and a front spar of the wing;
a second lateral brace secured to a second outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and the front spar of the wing, wherein the second outer lateral surface is opposite from the first lateral surface.
Pautis et al. ‘545 teaches (figures 2-5e) a pylon box/strut (6a) comprising two outer lateral surfaces (clearly shown in the figure below) wherein two lateral braces (clearly shown in the figure below) are secured to two outer lateral surfaces of the pylon box/strut (6a) and a front spar (34a) of the wing (clearly seen in the figure below) (Para 0051, 0054)
PNG
media_image4.png
395
534
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Pautis et al. ‘545 to configure the coupling system further comprising:
a first lateral brace secured to first outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and a front spar of the wing;
a second lateral brace secured to a second outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and the front spar of the wing, wherein the second outer lateral surface is opposite from the first lateral surface.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would reinforce the coupling system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 is 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 16th May 2024 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument regarding combination of Stanley ‘832 and Behzadpour ‘060 in claims 1, 6, 13, 16 and 18-19, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references.  Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art.  See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Stanley ‘832 teaches coupling strut to a rib of a wing of an aircraft and Behzadpour ‘060 teaches coupling the outer wing front spar and the outer wing rear spar (214) via splice plates. Since coupling is being done on a wing portion of an aircraft in both Stanley ‘832 and Behzadpour ‘060 it would have been obvious to use splice plates of Behzadpour ‘060 to couple strut to a rib of a wing in Stanley ‘832. Also the coupling system couples on top and bottom portion of the wing and couples rear portions of the strut to front portions of the rib.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.  Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL.  See MPEP § 706.07(a).  Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.  In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action.  In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: REMARKS
The present application includes claims 1-20. Claims 5, 9, 11, 15, 18, and 20 have been amended. New claims 21 and 22 have been added.1
Claims 5, 9, 11, 15, 17, 18, and 20 were objected to due to informalities. The claims have been clarified to render the objections moot.
Claims 1-6, 9, 10, and 12-19 were rejected as being unpatentable over U.S. 3,848,832 ("Stanley") in view of U.S. 2022/0033060 ("Behzadpour"). Claim 1 recites, in part, "one or more splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing." Claims 13 and 18 recite similar limitations.
The claims are clear that the splice strap(s) secure strut(s) to a wing. The claims do not recite that the splice strap(s) secure a first strut to a second strut.
The Office Action acknowledges that Stanely does not describe, teach, or suggest "one or more splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing." See March 6, 2024 Office Action at pages 5, 8, and 11. In an attempt to overcome these acknowledged deficiencies, the
Office Action relies on Behzadpour. See id.
However, Behzadpour discloses spar splice plates 216 and 218 that couple two spars together. See Behzadpour at [0114]. In particular, Behzadpour discloses the "outer wing front spar 212 and the outer wing rear spar 214 may extend continuously between the outer wing stout rib 232 and the wing tip 126, and may also be coupled (e.g., via spar splice plates 216, 218) respectively to the center wing front spar 152 and center wing rear spar 154 ...." See id.
As shown in Figure 5 (reproduced below), in particular, the spar splice plate 216 couples to front faces of the center wing front spar 152 and the outer wing front spar 212, while the spar splice plate 218 couples to rear faces of the center wing front spar 152 and the outer wing front
spar 212.
As shown above, the spar splice plate 216 mounts to front faces of the spars, and the spar splice plate 218 mounts to rear faces of the spars.
Again, the spar splice plates of Behzadpour connect two spars together. See id at [0114], [0138], [0164], and Figure 5. Like Stanley, Behzadpour also does not expressly or necessarily describe, teach, or suggest splice straps that secure a strut to a wing.
es, or suggests "one or more splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing," asrecited in claim 1. Claims 13 and 18 recite similar limitations. For at least these reasons, the proposed combination of Stanely in view of Behzadpour does not render claims 1, 13, 18, and the claims depending therefrom unpatentable.
Additionally, claim 6 recites, in part, "one or more upper splice straps extending over a
1 The fee for the new claims is $200.
first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs; and one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs." Claims 16 and 19 recite similar limitations.
The Office Action acknowledges that Stanely does not expressly or necessarily describe, teach, or suggest these limitations. See March 6, 2024 Office Action at pages 5, 8, and 11. As such, the Office Action relies on Behzadpour. See id.
However, as explained above, Behzadpour discloses spar splice plates 216 and 218 on front faces and rear faces, respectively, of spars. The spar splice plates of Behzadpour are not disposed over top surfaces or below bottom of anything, in general, and certainly not over or below struts and/or ribs.
Neither Stanely, nor Behzadpour (alone or in combination with one another) describes, teaches, or suggests "one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs; and one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs," as recited in claim 6, for example. For at least these additional reasons, the proposed combination does not render claims 6, 16, and 19 unpatentable.
Claims 7, 8, and 20 were rejected as being unpatentable over Stanley in view of Behzadpour and U.S. 5,524,847 ("Brodell"). Claim 11 was rejected as being unpatentable over Stanely in view of Behzadpour and CN 201660965 ("Liu"). The Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration of these rejections for at least the reasons set forth with respect to Stanley and Behzadpour.
In general, the Office Action makes various statements regarding the pending claims and the cited references that are now moot in light of the above. Thus, the Applicant will not address such statements at the present time. However, the Applicant expressly reserves the right to challenge such statements in the future should the need arise (e.g., if such statements should become relevant by appearing in a rejection of any current or future claim).
The Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration of the claim rejections for at least the reasons discussed above. If the Examiner has any questions or the Applicant can be of any
assistance, the Examiner is invited to contact the undersigned attorney.
Respectfully Submitted, Date: May 16, 2024
/Joseph M. Butscher/
Joseph M. Butscher Reg. No 48,326THE SMALL PATENT LAW GROUP, LLC 1423 Strassner Dr. Suite 100
Brentwood, MO 63144 (314)584-4083 jbutscher@splglaw.com

NEXT OFFICE 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection.  Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.  Applicant's submission filed on 4th September 2024 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 11-13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 11 line 2, “…between the one or more splice straps and…” should read “…between the splice straps and…” for the purpose of consistency.
In claim 12 lines 2-3, “…wherein the one or more splice straps are…” should read “…wherein the splice straps are…” for the purpose of consistency.
In claim 13 line 5, “…wing, provide a base…” should read “…wing, a base…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-12 and 22 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.
Claim 1 recites “…the one or more mounting plates are configured to provide a base on which one or more of the splice straps securely mount to one or both the one or more struts or the wing, and wherein the one or more of the splice straps are secured directly to one or more ribs of the wings…” which renders the claim indefinite as there are two contrasting limitations i.e., splice straps securely mounted to one or more mounting plates and splice straps secured directly to one or more ribs of the wings. For the purpose of the examination the limitation is interpreted as ““…the one or more mounting plates are configured to provide a base on which one or more of the splice straps securely mount to one or both the one or more struts or the wing, and wherein the one or more of the splice straps are secured directly over one or more ribs of the wings…”.
Claims not addressed above are rejected due to their dependency on rejected base claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 9-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stanley et al. (US 3,848,832) in view of Nakashima et al. (US 2018/0113425).
Regarding claims 1 and 5-6, Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) a coupling system configured to secure one or more struts (6) to a wing (10) of an aircraft (Col. 1 Lines 65-67),
wherein the coupling system secures the one or more struts (6) to a one or more ribs of the wing, and wherein the coupling system is directly over the one or more ribs of the wing (clearly shown in the figure below; struts are coupled to the top and bottom surface of the ribs (also seen in figure 3)),
PNG
media_image1.png
375
665
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the coupling system comprising:
splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing;
one or more mounting plates configured to span over or below the one or more struts and the wing, wherein the one or more mounting plates are configured to provide a base on which one or more of the splice straps securely mount to one or both the one or more struts or the wing, and wherein the one or more of the splice straps are secured directly over one or more ribs of the wings,
wherein the splice straps secure to both the one or more struts and the one or more ribs of the wing, and
wherein the splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs; and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs.
Nakashima et al. ‘425 teaches (figures 1-3) a shear joint/coupling type semi-wing junction wherein upper skin (52) and lower skin (54) are held and supported by structure consisting of shims, a rib and splices wherein splice elements/straps (62 ,64) splice together different parts of the semi-wing to form a unified integrated structure and shims/mounting plate (66, 72) are disposed between splice elements (62, 64) and skins (52, 54) to fill gaps between splices and skins (Para 0005-0007).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Nakashima et al. ‘425 to configure the coupling system comprising:
splice straps that secure the one or more struts to the wing (struts and wing spliced to form a unified integrates structure);
one or more mounting plates configured to span over or below the one or more struts and the wing, wherein the one or more mounting plates are configured to provide a base on which one or more of the splice straps securely mount to one or both the one or more struts or the wing, and wherein the one or more of the splice straps are secured directly over  one or more ribs of the wings,
wherein the splice straps secure to both the one or more struts and the one or more ribs of the wing, and
wherein the splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs (one or more splice straps couples the rear end of the one or more struts and the front end of the one or more ribs); and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs (one or more splice straps couples the rear end of the one or more struts and the front end of the one or more ribs).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would transfer loads between the strut and the wing and avoid bending and shear stress (Para 0006).
Regarding claim 2, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system wherein the splice straps are integrally formed with the one or more struts and the wing (splice straps connects struts and the wing, thus splice straps are integral part of a coupling system).
Regarding claim 3, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system wherein a rear surface of the one or more struts (6) are linearly aligned with a front surface of a front spar (14) of the wing (clearly seen in figure 2) (Col. 1 Line 68, Col. 2 Lines 1-3;  rear surface of the strut (6) abuts the front spar linearly in a longitudinal direction).
Regarding claim 4, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system wherein an engine (2) is secured to the one or more struts (6) distally from the wing (10) (Col. 1 Lines 64-68; Col. 2 Lines 22-25, 52-59; engine is secured to the strut via arch assembly (16)).
Regarding claim 9, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system wherein the splice straps are vertically and longitudinally aligned with the one or more struts and the one or more ribs (the one or more splice straps aligns and couples the one or more struts and the one or more ribs at the top and bottom surfaces of the one or more struts and the one or more ribs i.e., the one or more splice strips are vertically aligned and the one or more splice straps extends in a longitudinal direction i.e., longitudinally aligned).
Regarding claim 10, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system further comprising one or more fairings covering at least a portion of the splice straps (Col. 2 Lines 60-67; nacelle (4) and wing skin (clearly shown in the figure above) encloses the splice straps).
Regarding claim 11, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system wherein the one or more mounting plates are between the splice straps and the one or more struts, and between the splice straps and the wing (as modified by Nakashima et al. ‘425).
Regarding claim 12, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system further comprising one or more spanning plates/front spar (14)  configured to span across the one or more ribs, wherein the splice straps are coupled to the one or more spanning plates (Col. 1 Lines 68; Col. 2 Lines 1-3; front spar extends in the spanwise direction i.e., span across a plurality of ribs and is sandwiched between the strut and rib of the wing (clearly seen in figure 2); the splice strap connects the strut and the rib of the wing, thus the sandwiched front spar is connected/coupled to the splice strap).
Regarding claim 13 and 15-16, Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) a method for securing one or more struts (6) to a wing (10) of an aircraft (Col. 1 Lines 65-67),
wherein the method comprises securing the one or more struts (6) to the wing (10) (clearly shown in the figure below; struts are secured at the top and bottom surface of the ribs of the wing (also seen in figure 3)),
PNG
media_image1.png
375
665
media_image1.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the method comprising:
securing, by splice straps, the one or more struts to the wing,
providing, by one or more mounting plates that span over or below the one or more struts and the wings, a base on which one or more of the splice straps securely mount to one or both the one or more struts or the wing;
securing the one or more of the splice straps to one or more ribs of the wing,
wherein said securing comprises securing the splice straps to both the one or more struts and the one or more ribs of the wing, and
wherein the one or more splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs; and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs.
Nakashima et al. ‘425 teaches (figures 1-3) a shear joint/coupling type semi-wing junction wherein upper skin (52) and lower skin (54) are held and supported by structure consisting of shims, a rib and splices wherein splice elements/straps (62 ,64) splice together different parts of the semi-wing to form a unified integrated structure and shims/mounting plate (66, 72) are disposed between splice elements (62, 64) and skins (52, 54) to fill gaps between splices and skins (Para 0005-0007).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Nakashima et al. ‘425 to configure the method comprising:
securing, by splice straps, the one or more struts to the wing (struts and wing spliced to form a unified integrates structure),
providing, by one or more mounting plates that span over or below the one or more struts and the wings, a base on which one or more of the splice straps securely mount to one or both the one or more struts or the wing;
securing the one or more of the splice straps to one or more ribs of the wing,
wherein said securing comprises securing the splice straps to both the one or more struts and the one or more ribs of the wing, and
wherein the splice straps comprise:
one or more upper splice straps extending over a first top surface of a rear end of the one or more struts and a second top surface of a front end of the one or more ribs (one or more splice straps couples the rear end of the one or more struts and the front end of the one or more ribs); and
one or more lower splice straps extending over a first bottom surface of the rear end of the one or more struts and a second bottom surface of the front end of the one or more ribs  (one or more splice straps couples the rear end of the one or more struts and the front end of the one or more ribs).
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would transfer loads between the strut and the wing and avoid bending and shear stress (Para 0006).
Regarding claim 14, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the method wherein said securing comprises integrally forming the splice straps with the one or more struts and the wing (splice straps connects struts and the wing, thus splice straps are integral part of a coupling system).
Regarding claim 17, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the method wherein said securing further comprises vertically and longitudinally aligning the splice straps with the one or more struts and the one or more ribs (the one or more splice straps aligns and couples the one or more struts and the one or more ribs at the top and bottom surfaces of the one or more struts and the one or more ribs i.e., the one or more splice strips are vertically aligned and the one or more splice straps extends in a longitudinal direction i.e., longitudinally aligned).
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stanley et al. (US 3,848,832) and Nakashima et al. (US 2018/0113425) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Brodell et al. (US 5,524,847).
Regarding claims 7-8, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system where the one or more upper splice straps comprise a first upper splice strap and wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise a first lower splice strap (at least one splice strap is present on both the top and bottom surfaces which couples the struts and ribs),
but it is silent about the coupling system wherein the one or more upper splice straps comprise a second upper splice strap, and wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise a second lower splice strap, and
wherein the one or more upper splice straps further comprise a third upper splice strap between the first upper splice strap and the second upper splice strap, and wherein the one or more lower splice straps further comprise a third lower splice strap between the first lower splice strap and the second lower splice strap.
Brodell et al. ‘847 teaches (figures 1-2) an engine mounted on the aircraft  by a pylon (60) extending between the engine and an aircraft wing (62) wherein a pylon beam (64) is united with the intermediate cowl (34) by a separable joint such as the bolted joint (74)  (Col. 5 Lines 39-50; 3 bolted joint unites the pylon beam with the intermediate cowl; bolted joint is analogous to splice strap as both couples two structures).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Brodell et al. ‘847 to configure the coupling system wherein the one or more upper splice straps comprise a second upper splice strap, and wherein the one or more lower splice straps comprise a second lower splice strap, and
wherein the one or more upper splice straps further comprise a third upper splice strap between the first upper splice strap and the second upper splice strap, and wherein the one or more lower splice straps further comprise a third lower splice strap between the first lower splice strap and the second lower splice strap.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would reinforce the coupling system.
Claim(s) 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stanley et al. (US 3,848,832) and Nakashima et al. (US 2018/0113425) as applied to claims 1 and 13, and further in view of Pautis et al. (US 2016/0229545)
Regarding claim 22, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the coupling system further comprising a first outer lateral surface of the one or more struts, a front spar (14) of the wing and a second outer lateral surface of the one or more struts (strut has two lateral surfaces) (lateral surface on one side of the strut is shown in the figure below) (Col. 2 Line 3),
PNG
media_image2.png
375
665
media_image2.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the coupling system further comprising:
a first lateral brace secured to first outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and a front spar of the wing;
a second lateral brace secured to a second outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and the front spar of the wing, wherein the second outer lateral surface is opposite from the first lateral surface.
Pautis et al. ‘545 teaches (figures 2-5e) a pylon box/strut (6a) comprising two outer lateral surfaces (clearly shown in the figure below) wherein two lateral braces (clearly shown in the figure below) are secured to two outer lateral surfaces of the pylon box/strut (6a) and a front spar (34a) of the wing (clearly seen in the figure below) (Para 0051, 0054)
PNG
media_image3.png
395
534
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Pautis et al. ‘545 to configure the coupling system further comprising:
a first lateral brace secured to first outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and a front spar of the wing;
a second lateral brace secured to a second outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and the front spar of the wing, wherein the second outer lateral surface is opposite from the first lateral surface.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would reinforce the coupling system.
Regarding claim 23, modified Stanley et al. ‘832 teaches (figures 1-2) the method further comprising a first outer lateral surface of the one or more struts, a front spar (14) of the wing and a second outer lateral surface of the one or more struts (strut has two lateral surfaces) (lateral surface on one side of the strut is shown in the figure below) (Col. 2 Line 3),
PNG
media_image2.png
375
665
media_image2.png
Greyscale
but it is silent about the method further comprising:
securing a first lateral brace to a first outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and a front spar of the wing;
securing a second lateral brace to a second outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and the front spar of the wing, wherein the second outer lateral surface is opposite from the first lateral surface.
Pautis et al. ‘545 teaches (figures 2-5e) a pylon box/strut (6a) comprising two outer lateral surfaces (clearly shown in the figure below) wherein two lateral braces (clearly shown in the figure below) are secured to two outer lateral surfaces of the pylon box/strut (6a) and a front spar (34a) of the wing (clearly seen in the figure below) (Para 0051, 0054)
PNG
media_image3.png
395
534
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Stanley et al. ‘832 to incorporate the teachings of Pautis et al. ‘545 to configure the method further comprising:
securing a first lateral brace to a first outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and a front spar of the wing;
securing a second lateral brace to a second outer lateral surface of the one or more struts and the front spar of the wing, wherein the second outer lateral surface is opposite from the first lateral surface.
One of ordinary skill in art would recognize that doing so would reinforce the coupling system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18 and 24 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4th September 2024, with respect to amended claims 1 and 13 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.  However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Stanley et al. (US 3,848,832) in and Nakashima et al. (US 2018/0113425)
Conclusion

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US20160229545A1: [content unavailable]
Ref US20220033060: Claims:
1. A wing assembly for an aircraft, comprising:
a center wing structure, including:
a pair of center wing outboard ends and a pair of engine mounting locations respectively on opposite sides of a wing centerline;
a center wing front spar and a center wing rear spar each having a spar terminal end at each of the center wing outboard ends;
 a pair of outer wing structures, each including:
an outer wing front spar and an outer wing rear spar configured to be coupled respectively to the center wing front spar and the center wing rear spar to define a wing joint coupling the outer wing structure to the center wing structure; and
 wherein the center wing structure is configured such that the spar terminal ends of the center wing front spar and the center wing rear spar at each wing joint are located no further inboard than an engine centerline associated with the engine mounting location, and no further outboard of the engine centerline than ten percent of a distance between the engine centerline and the wing centerline.
2. The wing assembly of claim 1, wherein each wing joint includes:
a front spar splice plate coupling the center wing front spar to the outer wing front spar; and a rear spar splice plate coupling the center wing rear spar to the outer wing rear spar.
3. The wing assembly of claim 1, wherein:
the center wing structure includes a center wing stout rib at each of the center wing outboard ends; each of the outer wing structures includes an outer wing stout rib at an outer wing inboard end; and at each wing joint, the outer wing stout rib and the center wing stout rib are configured to be in back-to-back arrangement and mechanically fastened to each other.
4. The wing assembly of claim 1, wherein each of the outer wing structures comprises:
an outer wing upper skin panel and an outer wing lower skin panel coupled to the outer wing front spar and the outer wing rear spar; and wherein at least one of the outer wing upper skin panel and outer wing lower skin panel is comprised of acreage plies defining a panel thickness that is constant along a spanwise direction from an outer wing inboard end toward a wing tip.
5. The wing assembly of claim 1, wherein each of the outer wing structures comprises:
an outer wing upper skin panel and an outer wing lower skin panel coupled to the outer wing front spar and the outer wing rear spar, at least one of the outer wing upper skin panel and outer wing lower skin panel is comprised of acreage plies; and one or more 0-degree strip sets coupled to at least one of the outer wing upper skin panel and the outer wing lower skin panel, each 0-degree strip set extends in a spanwise direction, and each includes one or more 0-degree ply strips interleaved within the acreage plies.
6. The wing assembly of claim 1, wherein each of the outer wing structures comprises:
an outer wing upper skin panel and an outer wing lower skin panel coupled to the outer wing front spar and the outer wing rear spar, at least one of the outer wing upper skin panel and outer wing lower skin panel is comprised of acreage plies; and one or more planks bonded to an inner surface of at least one of the upper skin panel and the lower skin panel and extending in a spanwise direction, each plank comprised of a stack of plank plies of narrower width than the acreage plies.
7. The wing assembly of claim 6, wherein:
each plank has a plank bending stiffness that is approximately 40-60 percent of a combined plank-skin portion bending stiffness of the plank and a skin panel portion of the upper skin panel or lower skin panel supported by the plank; and the skin panel portion having a panel portion width defined as one of the following:
the panel portion width extending between midpoints respectively located on opposite sides of the plank, each midpoint located midway between the plank and an immediately adjacent plank;
the panel portion width extending between a spar on one side of the plank and, on an opposite side of the plank, a midpoint between the plank and an immediately adjacent plank.
8. The wing assembly of claim 1, wherein each of the outer wing structures comprises:
an outer wing upper skin panel and an outer wing lower skin panel coupled to the outer wing front spar and the outer wing rear spar; one or more outer wing stringers coupled to at least one of the outer wing upper skin panel and the outer wing lower skin panel; and the one or more outer wing stringers extend in a spanwise direction, and each outer wing stringer has a hat-shaped cross section.
9. The wing assembly of claim 1, further comprising:
an outer wing upper panel assembly and an outer wing lower panel assembly each extending along a spanwise direction and coupled to the outer wing front spar and the outer wing rear spar, each panel assembly including:
an outer skin panel comprised of acreage plies and having a panel thickness that is constant along a spanwise direction; and
a hat section panel coupled to an inner side of the outer skin panel and having a plurality of generally parallel hat-shaped sections each extending in a spanwise direction.
10. The wing assembly of claim 9, wherein:
the hat section panel is comprised of a plurality of hat section panel plies; each of the hat-shaped sections includes a pair of hat section flanges, a pair of hat section webs extending outwardly respectively from the hat section flanges, and a hat section cap interconnecting the hat section webs; and each of the hat section caps contains one or more 0-degree ply strips interleaved within the hat section panel plies of the hat section panel.
11. A method of manufacturing a wing assembly of an aircraft, comprising:
coupling an outer wing inboard end of each one of a pair of outer wing structures respectively to opposing center wing outboard ends of a center wing structure to define a pair of wing joints coupling the outer wing structures to the center wing structure; and wherein the center wing structure has a center wing front spar and a center wing rear spar, each having a spar terminal end at each of the center wing outboard ends, and an engine mounting location on each of opposing sides of a wing centerline, and each of opposing spar terminal ends of the center wing front spar and the center wing rear spar at each wing joint are located no further inboard than an engine centerline associated with the engine mounting location, and no further outboard of the engine centerline than ten percent of a distance between the engine centerline and the wing centerline.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein coupling each outer wing structure to the center wing structure includes:
coupling, using a front spar splice plate, the center wing front spar to an outer wing front spar of the outer wing structure; and coupling, using a rear spar splice plate, the center wing rear spar to an outer wing rear spar of the outer wing structure.
13. The method of claim 11, wherein coupling each outer wing structure to the center wing structure includes:
coupling an outer wing stout rib on the outer wing inboard end of the outer wing structure, to a center wing stout rib on the center wing outboard end of the center wing structure, such that the outer wing stout rib and the center wing stout rib are in back-to-back arrangement.
14. The method of claim 11, further comprising:
laying up at least one of an outer wing upper skin panel and an outer wing lower skin panel to include acreage plies defining a panel thickness that is constant along a spanwise direction from the outer wing inboard end to a wing tip; and coupling the outer wing upper skin panel and the outer wing lower skin panel to an outer wing front spar and an outer wing rear spar of each of the outer wing structures.
15. The method of claim 11, further comprising:
interleaving one or more 0-degree ply strips within acreage plies of at least one of an outer wing upper skin panel and an outer wing lower skin panel, the 0-degree ply strips extending in a spanwise direction; and coupling the outer wing upper skin panel and the outer wing lower skin panel to an outer wing front spar and an outer wing rear spar of each of the outer wing structures.
16. The method of claim 11, further comprising:
bonding one or more planks bonded to an inner surface of at least one of an outer wing upper skin panel and an outer wing lower skin panel of each outer wing structure, each plank extending in a spanwise direction and comprised of a stack of plank plies; and coupling the outer wing upper skin panel and the outer wing lower skin panel to an outer wing front spar and an outer wing rear spar of each of the outer wing structures.
17. The method of claim 16, further comprising:
laying up each plank to have a plank bending stiffness that is approximately 40-60 percent of a combined plank-skin portion bending stiffness of the plank and a skin panel portion; the skin panel portion having a panel portion width defined as one of the following:
the panel portion width extends between midpoints respectively located on opposite sides of the plank, each midpoint located midway between the plank and an immediately adjacent plank;
the panel portion width extends between a spar on one side of the plank and, on an opposite side of the plank, a midpoint between the plank and an immediately adjacent plank.
18. The method of claim 11, further comprising:
bonding one or more outer wing stringers to at least one of an outer wing upper skin panel and an outer wing lower skin panel of each outer wing structure, each outer wing stringer extending in a spanwise direction and comprised of a plurality of stringer plies and having a stringer cap containing one or more 0-degree ply strips; and coupling the outer wing upper skin panel and the outer wing lower skin panel to an outer wing front spar and an outer wing rear spar of an outer wing structure.
19. The method of claim 11, further comprising:
bonding a hat section panel to an outer skin panel of at least one of an outer wing upper panel assembly and an outer wing lower panel assembly, the hat section panel has a plurality of generally parallel hat-shaped sections each extending in a spanwise direction, the outer skin panel is comprised of acreage plies having a panel thickness that is constant along a spanwise direction; and coupling the outer wing upper panel assembly and the outer wing lower panel assembly to an outer wing front spar and an outer wing rear spar of an outer wing structure.
20. A method of loading a wing assembly of an aircraft, comprising:
providing a wing assembly having a pair of outer wing structures each joined to a center wing structure, the center wing structure including:
a pair of center wing outboard ends and a pair of engine mounting locations respectively on opposite sides of a wing centerline;
a center wing front spar and a center wing rear spar each having a spar terminal end at each of the center wing outboard ends;
 the pair of outer wing structures each including:
an outer wing front spar and an outer wing rear spar coupled respectively to the center wing front spar and the center wing rear spar to define a wing joint coupling the outer wing structure to the center wing structure;
 wherein the spar terminal ends of the center wing front spar and the center wing rear spar at each wing joint are located no further inboard than an engine centerline associated with the engine mounting location, and no further outboard of the engine centerline than ten percent of a distance between the engine centerline and the wing centerline; placing the wing assembly in a ground static loading condition; and placing the wing assembly in a dynamic loading condition.
Ref CN201660965: Claims:
1. modified steel frame beam column rigid joint that beam-ends reinforcement-edge of a wing scab weakens, be connected with post (1) by semi girder (2), it is characterized in that, semi girder (2) and post (1) fix, in the binding end place of semi girder (2) and post (1) bottom flange respectively be provided with one with post and semi girder (2) the top flange cover plate and the bottom flange cover plate (60,61) of secure bond simultaneously; Semi girder (2) is connected by web scab (8) bolt (7) with beam (3) web, and semi girder (2) then respectively is connected and fixed by double-deck scab with the last bottom flange of beam (3), and outer scab middle part, the edge of a wing is provided with weakening portion (5).
2. the modified steel frame beam column rigid joint that beam-ends as claimed in claim 1 reinforcement-edge of a wing scab weakens, it is characterized in that, described weakening portion (5) is the arc notch of symmetry, and is separately positioned on the both sides at outer scab in top flange and the outer scab in bottom flange (41,43) middle part.
3. the modified steel frame beam column rigid joint that beam-ends as claimed in claim 1 or 2 reinforcement-edge of a wing scab weakens is characterized in that, the internal layer scab in the described double-deck scab, and outer scab is longer than at its two ends.
4. the modified steel frame beam column rigid joint that weakens of beam-ends reinforcement-edge of a wing scab as claimed in claim 1 or 2 is characterized in that semi girder (2) be that full welding is fixed with post (1).
5. the modified steel frame beam column rigid joint that beam-ends as claimed in claim 3 reinforcement-edge of a wing scab weakens is characterized in that, semi girder (2) is that full welding is fixing with post (1).
6. the modified steel frame beam column rigid joint that weakens of beam-ends reinforcement-edge of a wing scab as claimed in claim 1 or 2 is characterized in that described post (1) is for having the box column or the I shape post of square-section.
7. the modified steel frame beam column rigid joint that beam-ends as claimed in claim 4 reinforcement-edge of a wing scab weakens is characterized in that, described post (1) is for having the box column of square-section.
8. the modified steel frame beam column rigid joint that beam-ends as claimed in claim 4 reinforcement-edge of a wing scab weakens is characterized in that, is equipped with diaphragm (10) in described box column (1) or the I shape post (1).
9. the modified steel frame beam column rigid joint that weakens as each described beam-ends reinforcement-edge of a wing scab in the claim 1,2,5,7,8, it is characterized in that each the double-deck scab that connects the last bottom flange of described semi girder (2) and described beam (3) is connected and fixed with bolt (7).
10. the modified steel frame beam column rigid joint that weakens as the end reinforcement-edge of a wing scab of each described beam in the claim 1,2,5,7,8, it is characterized in that, the top flange cover plate (60) that is positioned at semi girder (2) top flange is a trapezium structure, its with post (1) one side what combine is trapezoidal base; The bottom flange cover plate (61) that is positioned at semi girder (2) bottom flange then is rectangular configuration.
Ref US20160229545: Claims:
1. An aircraft assembly comprising a wing element, a turbofan engine and an engine attachment pylon, the engine comprising a rear part arranged under the wing element, which is equipped with a wing structure, the pylon comprising a primary structure for transmitting loads from the engine to the wing structure, the primary structure comprising a pylon box, and the assembly also comprising an attachment for attaching the primary structure to the engine,
the wing structure comprising two wing boxes that follow one another in a wingspan direction of the wing element, and the pylon box being arranged between the wing boxes and fixed to each of the latter.
2. The assembly according to claim 1, wherein the two wing boxes form an internal box and an external box, the internal box being delimited by an external lateral panel and the external box being delimited by an internal lateral panel, the pylon box being delimited by an external lateral panel and by an internal lateral panel, and wherein it has a first mechanical connection between the external lateral panel of the internal wing box and the internal lateral panel of the pylon box, and also a second mechanical connection between the internal lateral panel of the external wing box and the external lateral panel of the pylon box.
3. The assembly according to claim 2, wherein the external lateral panel of the internal wing box is pressed against the internal lateral panel of the pylon box, and in that the internal lateral panel of the external wing box is pressed against the external lateral panel of the pylon box.
4. The assembly according to claim 2, wherein the first and second mechanical connections are each produced by shear pins and/or bolts, the shear pins and/or bolts preferably having axes substantially parallel to the wingspan direction.
5. The assembly according to claim 1, wherein the pylon box and the internal and external wing boxes are each delimited by lower spars and upper spars, the lower spars of the pylon box ensuring surface continuity between the lower spars of the internal and external wing boxes, and the upper spars of the pylon box ensuring surface continuity between the upper spars of the internal and external wing boxes.
6. The assembly according to claim 1, wherein the pylon box has internal transverse box stiffening ribs.
7. The assembly according to claim 1, wherein the pylon box extends forwards beyond the internal and external wing boxes.
8. The assembly according to claim 1, wherein the pylon box and the internal and external wing boxes are each delimited by a rear closing rib, the rear closing rib of the pylon box ensuring surface continuity between the rear closing ribs of the internal and external wing boxes.
9. The assembly according to claim 1, wherein the pylon box has a cross section in the overall shape of a quadrilateral, preferably square or rectangular, the cross section having a changing size along the pylon box.
10. The assembly according to claim 1, wherein the primary structure also has an intermediate structure interposed between the pylon box and the attachment for attaching the primary structure to the engine, the intermediate structure taking the form of a fitting, preferably having the overall shape of a pyramid.
11. The assembly according to claim 1, wherein the pylon box bears, at its front end, a part of the attachment for attaching the primary structure to the engine.
12. The assembly according to claim 1, wherein a front part of the attachment for attaching the primary structure to the engine is connected to an external shroud of an intermediate casing of the engine, this external shroud extending in the rearward axial continuation of a fan casing, or in that this front part of the attachment for attaching the primary structure to the engine is connected to an internal shroud of the intermediate casing of the engine.
13. A method for mounting an assembly according to claim 1, comprising the following successive steps of:
a) fixing at least one part of the pylon box to the internal wing box; and then b) fixing the external wing box to the at least one part of the pylon box.
14. The mounting method according to claim 13, wherein the pylon box is delimited by upper spars mounted on the assembly after step b).
15. An aircraft comprising at least one assembly according to claim 1.
Ref US3848832: Claims:
1. In combination, a winged aircraft having an A-frame-like strut cantilevered forward from the leading edge structure of each wing thereof, said strut comprising a pair of forwardly cantilevered beams and an inverted U-shaped transom interconnecting the forward end portions of the beams, and an engine for the aircraft suspended from the transom portion of the strut within the inside concave recess of the transom.
2. The combination according to claim 1 wherein 
[Truncated to input limit]