Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/045,746

IMPROVED MANEUVERABILITY AERIAL VEHICLE AND A METHOD IMPLEMENTED FOR THIS PURPOSE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Oct 06, 2020
Examiner
GORDON, ANNA L
Art Unit
3642
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Aerotor Unmanned Systems Ltd.
OA Round
6 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
6-7
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
70 granted / 98 resolved
+19.4% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+33.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
130
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
46.4%
+6.4% vs TC avg
§102
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
§112
32.7%
-7.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 98 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/12/2016 has been entered. 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. Claims 1, 4, 6-10 and 20 are rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (CN 104494820 A), cited by Applicant in IDS dated 01/16/2025, in view of Mores et al. (US 11052998 B2), hereafter Mores. Regarding Claim 1, Lin discloses an aerial vehicle (Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of rotors (1, Fig. 1), each of the plurality of rotors having at least one blade (11, Figs. 1-2), wherein the aerial vehicle is enabled to modify a pitch angle (a) of the at least one blade of each of the plurality of rotors (para. [0008]); wherein: the aerial vehicle is a quadcopter drone (Fig. 1); the aerial vehicle enables maneuvering in the yaw plane of the aerial vehicle by modifying the pitch angles (a) of the at least one blade, without changing a rotational speed of the at least one blade (para. [0010]); the axis of movement of the plurality of rotors are distanced from each other such that there is no overlap of a rotor blade rotation circles of any of the plurality of rotors (Fig. 1); each pair of rotors consists of one rotor rotating clockwise and one rotor rotating counter-clockwise (Fig. 5 and para. [0011]), wherein diagonally opposite rotors of the plurality of rotors rotate in the same direction (Fig. 5); and the plurality of the rotors are powered mechanically driven by a single propulsion system (2, Fig. 1) configured to simultaneously distribute torque to each of the plurality of rotors via a main drive shaft coupled to the propulsion system and one or more gear assemblies (gearbox, Abstract) configured to split and distribute the torque among the plurality of rotors (Abstract). Lin is silent about wherein an axis of movement of at least two pairs of the aerial vehicle's plurality of rotors are fixedly tilted in a symmetrical configuration in relation to the aerial vehicle's yaw plane, so that each of the at least two pairs of rotors of the aerial vehicle converges towards another point on the same level along a longitudinal axis plane of the aerial vehicle while creating an angle (y) between rotation planes of corresponding rotors of the at least two pairs of the plurality of rotors, which is less than 180° and greater than 140°. Mores teaches similar two pairs of rotors wherein an axis of movement (rotor axis 12a-12d, for example, Fig. 4) of the at least two pairs of similar rotors (examiner notes the first pair is interpreted as 7a, 8b, and the second pair is interpreted as 8c, 7d) are fixedly tilted in a symmetrical configuration in relation to the aerial vehicle's yaw plane (first lateral inclination angle 13a, and second lateral inclination angle, 13b, Fig. 4, and Col. 16, lines 28-56, examiner notes the first and second lateral inclination angles both “preferably amounts to 5 degrees”, which is the same, symmetrical, angle), so that each of the at least two pairs of rotors of the aerial vehicle converges towards another point on the same level along a longitudinal axis plane of the aerial vehicle (Fig. 4, examiner notes rotor axes 12a-12c converge towards plane of 1a) while creating an angle (y) between rotation planes of corresponding rotors of the at least two pairs of the plurality of rotors (Fig. 4, examiner notes an angle is created by the convergence of the rotation planes of rotors 7a, 8b and 8c, 7d, additionally see Col. 16, lines 28-36), which is less than 180° and greater than 140° (Col. 16, lines 40-42, examiner notes inclination angle 13a of thrust producing units 3a and 3c, is disclosed as “preferably” 5 degrees, which would result in a convergence of the rotation planes of 170, which is less than 180 and greater than 140). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the at least two pairs of Lin’s plurality of rotors to be fixedly tilted as taught by Mores, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide reduced gust sensitivity and to increase the maneuverability of the aircraft (Mores, Col. 16, lines 8-18). Regarding Claim 4, modified Lin teaches the aerial vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the propulsion system has an internal combustion engine (Lin, para. [0017], “gasoline…as fuel, adopts…aero-engine as power”. Regarding Claim 6, Lin discloses a method for providing improved maneuverability in a yaw plane (para. [0030], for example) of a multi-blade aerial vehicle (Fig. 1) comprising: providing the axis of movement of at least two pairs of rotors of the multi-blade aerial vehicle (axis of movement of 1, Fig. 1), each rotor of the at least two pairs of rotors having a blade (11, Figs. 1-2), wherein: the multi-blade aerial vehicle is a quadcopter drone (Fig. 1); the multi-blade aerial vehicle enables maneuvering in the yaw plane of the multi-blade aerial vehicle by modifying the pitch angles (a) of the at least one blade, without changing a rotational speed of the at least one blade (para. [0030] and Fig. 5); the axis of movement of the rotors are distanced from each other such that there is no overlap of a rotor blade rotation circles of any of the four rotors (Fig. 1); and each pair of rotors consists of one rotor rotating clockwise and one rotor rotating counter-clockwise (Fig. 5), wherein diagonally opposite rotors of the at least two pairs of rotors rotate in the same direction (Fig. 5); and the plurality of the rotors are powered mechanically driven by a single propulsion system (2, Fig. 1) configured to simultaneously distribute torque to each of the plurality of rotors via a main drive shaft coupled to the propulsion system and one or more gear assemblies (gearbox, Abstract ) configured to split and distribute the torque among the plurality of rotors (Abstract); wherein the multi-blade aerial vehicle is enabled to modify a pitch angle (a) of the blades of the at least two pairs of rotors (para. [0010]). Lin is silent about wherein the at least two pairs of rotors are fixedly tilted in a symmetrical configuration in relation to the multi-blade aerial vehicle's yaw plane so that the axes of movement of the rotors converge in the direction of the at least two pairs of rotors, each of the at least two pairs of rotors towards another point on the same level along a longitudinal axis plane of the multi-blade aerial vehicle, while creating an angle (y) between the rotation planes of the blades of each pair, which is less than 180° and greater than 140° wherein the multi-blade aerial vehicle is enabled to modify a pitch angle (a) of the blades of the at least two pairs of rotors. Mores teaches similar two pairs of rotors fixedly tilted in a symmetrical configuration in relation to the multi-blade aerial vehicle's yaw plane so that the axes of movement of the rotors (rotor axis 12a-12d, for example, Fig. 4) converge in the direction of the at least two pairs of rotors (examiner notes the first pair is interpreted as 7a, 8b, and the second pair is interpreted as 8c, 7d), each of the at least two pairs of rotors towards another point on the same level along a longitudinal axis plane of the multi-blade aerial vehicle (first lateral inclination angle 13a, and second lateral inclination angle, 13b, Fig. 4, and Col. 16, lines 28-56, examiner notes the first and second lateral inclination angles both “preferably amounts to 5 degrees”, which is the same, symmetrical, angle), while creating an angle (y) between the rotation planes of the blades of each pair (Fig. 4, examiner notes an angle is created by the convergence of the rotation planes of rotors 7a, 8b and 8c, 7d, additionally see Col. 16, lines 28-36), which is less than 180° and greater than 140° (Col. 16, lines 40-42, examiner notes inclination angle 13a of thrust producing units 3a and 3c, is disclosed as “preferably” 5 degrees, which would result in a convergence of the rotation planes of 170, which is less than 180 and greater than 140). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the at least two pairs of Lin’s plurality of rotors to be fixedly tilted as taught by Mores, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide reduced gust sensitivity and to increase the maneuverability of the aircraft (Mores, Col. 16, lines 8-18). Regarding Claim 7, modified Lin teaches the method of Claim 6, further comprising: maneuvering the multi-blade aerial vehicle to yaw by increasing the pitch angle (a) of a first set of diagonally opposite rotors of the at least two pairs of rotors tilted in the symmetrical configuration in relation to the multi-blade aerial vehicle's yaw plane, and reducing the pitch angle (a) of a second set of diagonally opposite rotors of the at least two pairs of rotors tilted in the symmetrical configuration in relation to the multi-blade aerial vehicle's yaw plane (para. [0030] and Fig. 5). Regarding Claim 8, Lin discloses an aerial vehicle (Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of rotors (1, Fig. 1), each of the plurality of rotors having at least one blade (11, Figs. 1-2), wherein the aerial vehicle is enabled to modify a pitch angle (a) of the at least one blade of each of the plurality of rotors (para. [0008]); wherein the plurality of rotors includes forward rotors (3 and 4, Fig. 5, for example) and rearward rotors (1 and 2, Fig. 5, for example) and said aerial vehicle is formed with a first geometrical dimension (x) between the forward rotors and the rearward rotors (dimension between forward and rearward rotors, Fig. 5) and a second geometrical dimension (y) between each rotor of the forward rotors and between each rotor of the rearward rotors (dimension between each of the forward rotors and each of the rearward rotors, Fig. 5); wherein: the aerial vehicle is a quadcopter drone (Fig. 5); the aerial vehicle enables maneuvering in the yaw plane of the aerial vehicle by modifying the pitch angles (a) of the at least one blade, without changing a rotational speed of the at least one blade (para. [0010]); each of the plurality of rotors is distanced from each other such that there is no overlap of a rotor blade rotation circles of any of the plurality of rotors (Fig. 5); each pair of rotors consists of one rotor rotating clockwise and one rotor rotating counter-clockwise, wherein diagonally opposite rotors of the plurality of rotors rotate in the same direction (Fig. 5); and the plurality of the rotors are powered mechanically driven by a single propulsion system (2, Fig. 1) configured to simultaneously distribute torque to each of the plurality of rotors via a main drive shaft coupled to the propulsion system and one or more gear assemblies (gearbox, Abstract) configured to split and distribute the torque among the plurality of rotors (Abstract). Lin is silent about an axis of movement of each of the plurality of rotors is fixed in a tilted symmetrical configuration. Mores teaches an axis of movement of similar rotors is fixed in a tilted symmetrical configuration (rotor axis 12a-12d, for example, Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the axis of movement of each of Lin’s plurality of rotors to be fixed in a tilted symmetrical configuration, as taught by Mores, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide reduced gust sensitivity and to increase the maneuverability of the aircraft (Mores, Col. 16, lines 8-18). Regarding Claim 9, modified Lin teaches the aerial vehicle according to claim 8, wherein the aerial vehicle is a quadcopter drone with four rotors (Lin, Fig. 5), wherein the forward rotors comprise a forward pair of rotors (Lin, 3 and 4, Fig. 5) and the rearward rotors comprise a rearward pair of rotors (Lin, 1 and 2, Fig. 5), and the first geometrical dimension (x) is between the forward pair of rotors and the rearward pair of rotors and the second geometrical dimension (y) is between each rotor of the forward pair of rotors and between each rotor of the rearward pair of rotors (Lin, Fig. 5). Regarding Claim 10, modified Lin teaches the aerial vehicle of claim 8, wherein the axis of movement of each of the plurality of rotors is tilted toward the center of the aerial vehicle (Mores, first lateral inclination angle 13a, and second lateral inclination angle, 13b). Regarding Claim 20, modified Lin teaches the aerial vehicle of claim 8, wherein the propulsion system has an internal combustion engine (Lin, para. [0017], “gasoline…as fuel, adopts…aero-engine as power”). Claim 5 is rejected under U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Lin as applied above, in view of Harmon et al. (US 20120209456 A1), hereafter Harmon. Regarding Claim 5, modified Lin teaches the aerial vehicle according to claim 1. Modified Lin is silent about wherein the propulsion system is a hybrid system, and is comprised of an internal combustion engine in tandem with an electric engine. Harmon teaches a similar internal combustion engine in tandem with an electric engine to make a hybrid system (Claim 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure the propulsion system of modified Lin as a hybrid system comprised of an internal combustion engine in tandem with an electric engine, as taught by Harmon, with a reasonable expectation of success, with the benefits of more efficient propulsion (Harmon, para. [0100]). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4-10, and 20, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Taya (TW 201536632 A) teaches a variable pitch quadcopter. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to ANNA LYNN GORDON whose telephone number is (571)270-5323. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-4:30pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, JOSHUA HUSON can be reached on 571-270-5301. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ANNA L. GORDON/Examiner, Art Unit 4186 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 06, 2020
Application Filed
Dec 02, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jun 07, 2023
Response Filed
Jul 18, 2023
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 29, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 31, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 16, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 27, 2024
Response Filed
Nov 20, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 02, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 12, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 12, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600462
Device for piloting an aircraft and associated method
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12584433
DEFLECTOR EXHAUST NOZZLE FOR AS350/EC130 AND FOR OTHER SINGLE ENGINE HELICOPTERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12576984
FUSELAGE FOR AN AIRCRAFT OR SPACECRAFT, AND AIRCRAFT OR SPACECRAFT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570395
Winglet Control Surfaces and Methods for Use Therewith
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557910
FLEXIBLE SUPPORT DEVICE FOR CHAIR BACK TILTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
71%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.5%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 98 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month