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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/10/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment/Argument
Amendment and argument filed on 03/10/2026 are considered. Independent claims 1 and 7 are amended.
With a further search consideration a prior art, Steele et al US 20030210169 A1 is found teaching the amended limitation. The prior art is combined with the primary reference to address the independent and dependent claims. Please see the claim rejection below.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Protection means (MP)… in claim 7 and 12
telecommunication means and measuring means… in claim 7
design means… in claim 7
isolation means… in claim 12
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The protection means is interpreted as switches and contactors.
Telecommunication means is interpreted as Iridium® and Starlink®, nanosatellites of the CubeSat® type or VHF (for “Very High Frequency”) or UHF (“Ultra High Frequency”) radios.
Isolation means is interpreted as transistors and thyristor.
Measuring means is interpreted as electro-optical sensors.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5-7, 9,10, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dwyer et al. (US 20090234583 A1) (“hereinafter Dwyer”) in view of Jinkins et al. (US 20130328715 A1) (“hereinafter Jinkins”), Ryan et al (US 4023408 A) herein after “Ryan” and Steele et al US 20030210169 A1 herein after “Steele”.
Regarding claim 1 Dwyer teaches a method for preventing, in real time, risk of
atmospheric disturbances for an aircraft in the air or on the ground, the aircraft including at least one sensor, the method comprising ([0001] The invention relates to lightning detection and warning systems, and systems which, by providing a warning of an impending lightning strike, prevent lightning from damaging electronic devices. Para [0026] A block diagram of an exemplary lightning monitoring and early warning system 100 is shown in FIG. 1)
acquisition, by the least one sensor, data corresponding to said risks (para 26, In avionic applications, box 105 is also preferably crush resistant, so that the data can survive a plane crash, analogous to a "black box". [0027] Detectors 101-103 include an x-ray detector 110, such as a NaI PMT. System 100 also includes an electric field detector and/or magnetic field detector 115. Detector 115 is shown connected to antenna 118.);
implementation of a protection of electronic components on board the aircraft which are liable to be damaged if the aircraft passes through said at least one critical area (para [0031] FIG. 2 shows use of a lightning detector 101 according to the invention to predict the timing and location of an impending lightning strike and to initiate a signal which is used to protect an electronic device. Upon determination of an impending lightning strike within a given area monitored by lightning detector 101, antenna 118 transmits a warning signal that actuates an electronic switch 230. Electronic switch 230 protects electronic device 240 by shunting power delivered to electronic device 240 by supply lines 231, such as to ground),
Dwyer does not clearly teach development, from said data, of a predictive map
of at least one critical area corresponding to at least one determined level of risk of disturbance,
wherein said at least one acquisition comprises measurement, by the aircraft, of the electric field, the magnetic field, the electric and magnetic radio waves, and remote reception of data for measuring the electric field, the magnetic field, the electric radio waves and the magnetic radio waves produced by at least two other aircraft in the air or on the ground and/or ground stations,
and a phase shift between the electric and magnetic fields enabling a position of the atmospheric disturbance to be determined by correlating the measurements obtained by the aircraft with the measurement data transmitted by said other aircraft and/or ground stations, in order to locate the position of the atmospheric disturbance on the predictive map.
the remote reception comprising receiving measurement data transmitted by said at least two other aircraft and/or ground stations, the transmitted data including measurements of electric and magnetic fields and associated position and time information
Jinkins teaches development, from said data, of a predictive map of at least one critical area corresponding to at least one determined level of risk of disturbance (Fig. 1-3, para 43. Processor 15 and/or detector 23 can also utilize the lightning data to determine the presence of a convective cell or weather hazard in one embodiment. For example, if weather detector 23 indicates that lightning is occurring at a particular heading or a particular direction from the aircraft and MMWR data indicates that weather is located in that direction, processor 15 can mark that cell on display 16 as being a convective cell because lightning indicates the presence of a conductive cell which may contain hail, lightning or high turbulence.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Jinkins into Dwyer for the purpose of preventing an aircraft, electronic devices and the passengers on bord from possible atmospheric disturbances by locating the level of atmospheric disturbances in the route of the aircraft.
The combination of Dwyer and Jinkins does not clearly teach wherein said at least one acquisition comprises measurement, by the aircraft, of the electric field, the magnetic field, the electric and magnetic radio waves, and remote reception of data for measuring the electric field, the magnetic field, the electric radio waves and the magnetic radio waves produced by at least two other aircraft in the air or on the ground and/or ground stations,
and a phase shift between the electric and magnetic fields enabling a position of the atmospheric disturbance to be determined by correlating the measurements obtained by the aircraft with the measurement data transmitted by said other aircraft and/or ground stations, in order to locate the position of the atmospheric disturbance on the predictive map.
Ryan teaches wherein said at least one acquisition comprises measurement, by the aircraft, of the electric field, the magnetic field, the electric and magnetic radio waves, and remote reception of data for measuring the electric field, the magnetic field, the electric radio waves and the magnetic radio waves produced by at least two other aircraft in the air or on the ground and/or ground stations (Col 1, line 43 A common antenna may be used for both the storm mapping system as well as the automatic direction finder.
Col 7, line 47. Automatic Direction Finders (ADF) are in common use in aircraft. These direction finders receive broadcast signals and display the direction of the transmitting station relative to the aircraft heading. Usually indication is by a mechanical pointer. These direction finders make use of the electric and magnetic fields radiated by the transmitting station.
Col 11, line 20. The block diagram of FIG. 4A illustrates the storm scope apparatus. In particular, a trio of sensors are used including electric field sensor 10, which may comprise a whip antenna or the like, and a pair of crossed magnetic field sensors 11 and 12 which may comprise ferrite core antennas for respectively detecting crossed magnetic field components. The output of each of the antennas is provided as an input to one of the tuned receivers 13, 14 and 15. Each of the receivers is broadly tuned with the center frequency of approximately 50 kilohertz.)
Here examiner views the aircraft receive (i.e., remote reception of data) electric and magnetic radiations transmitted or produced by stations. The electric and magnetic field are measured by sensors 10, 11 and 12 located in an antenna The receivers 13 (for electric wave) and receiver 14 and 15 for magnetic wave are tuned with center frequency of 50 Khz which is within the range of a radio wave frequency (3 khz -300 Ghz). Therefore, electric and magnetic radio waves are or can be received or detected by the aircraft in remote location transmitted by the aircraft or stations.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Ryan into Dwyer for the purpose of detecting electric and magnetic radio waves in remote location by the aircrafts so that the atmospheric turbulence can be avoided by the aircrafts.
The combination of Dwyer, Jinkins and Ryan does not clearly teach the remote reception comprising receiving measurement data transmitted by said at least two other aircraft and/or ground stations, the transmitted data including measurements of electric and magnetic fields and associated position and time information,
and a phase shift between the electric and magnetic fields enabling a position of the atmospheric disturbance to be determined by correlating the measurements obtained by the aircraft with the measurement data transmitted by said other aircraft and/or ground stations, in order to locate the position of the atmospheric disturbance on the predictive map.
Steele teaches the remote reception comprising receiving measurement data transmitted by said at least two other aircraft and/or ground stations, the transmitted data including measurements of electric and magnetic fields and associated position and time information (para [0023] In either aspect of the invention, the illustrated ground based sensor arrays and corresponding receiving systems 120, 121, 122, 124, and 125 are positioned in locations at an end of runway 115 to detect and determine air turbulence in the vicinity of the runway end. Para [0024] A received signal path length, illustrated as 130-135, between aircraft and sensor array/receiving systems depends on the position of aircraft 110, the locations of sensor array/receiving systems, 120-125, and the spatial angle between aircraft 110 and the sensor array. [0034] S.sub.r(t) is the received signal as a function of time)
From Fig. 1 and above paragraph examiner views the ground sensors as the remote receptors receiving signal (i.e., measured electromagnetic data), position and time information from the aircraft 110.
and a phase shift between the electric and magnetic fields enabling a position of the atmospheric disturbance to be determined by correlating the measurements obtained by the aircraft with the measurement data transmitted by said other aircraft and/or ground stations, in order to locate the position of the atmospheric disturbance on the predictive map. (para [0007] Each of the sensor elements is in communication with a corresponding receiving system that is operable to receive and process electromagnetic energy that is emanating from an approaching or departing aircraft. A determination is then made regarding air or wake turbulence by determining a rate of change of signal phase among selected sets of signals received at the receiving systems. A turbulence map is then determined from the determined rate of change of the phase and the angle of the received signal. [0053] FIG. 10 illustrates a flow chart 1000 of an exemplary processing to determine air turbulence in accordance with the principles of the present invention. In this case, the phase of the signal received at an I-th receiving system is established as a reference phase signal, at block 1010. The phase of the signal received at a next or subsequent (j-th) receiving system is then obtained, at block 1020. The difference between the signal phases received at the selected i-th and j-th receiving system is then determined, at block 1030)
From above passages examiner views from a phase change information of electromagnetic energy (i.e., electric and magnetic field) determined by a comparison (i.e., correlation) between the received signal (i.e., from measured data from the air craft) and the ground station reference signal, a turbulence map (i.e., locate the position of the atmospheric disturbance) is determined.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Steele into Dwyer for the purpose of detecting electric and magnetic radio waves in remote location and determining a phase shift between electric and magnetic field of atmospheric turbulence between measured data and received electromagnetic data to locate position and time in a map of the atmospheric turbulence so that the atmospheric turbulence can be informed to the aircrafts and avoided by the aircrafts.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Dwyer, Jinkins, Ryan and Steele teach the method according to claim 1, Dwyer teaches comprising remote storage, in real time, of the acquired data (Fig. 2 para [0028] Lightning detectors 101-103 also include a recorder (e.g. non-volatile memory) 117 for recording the x-ray data and the electric field or magnetic field data. Lightning detectors 101-103 also include a clock 121 coupled to the recorder 117 for providing a date and time of day associated with the x-ray data and electric field or magnetic field data. Para [0029]… Prior knowledge of the timing and location of an impending lightning can be used to avoid false alarms, such as by transmitting a warning signal that actuates an electronic switch that disables the security device. Transmissions are preferably over-the-air, but can also be wired or fiber-optic communication links.).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Dwyer, Jinkins, Ryan and Steele teach the method according to claim 1, Dwyer teaches wherein implementation of the protection of the electronic components comprises deactivating of said components and/or isolating said components ((para [0031] FIG. 2 shows use of a lightning detector 101 according to the invention to predict the timing and location of an impending lightning strike and to initiate a signal which is used to protect an electronic device. Upon determination of an impending lightning strike within a given area monitored by lightning detector 101, antenna 118 transmits a warning signal that actuates an electronic switch 230. Electronic switch 230 protects electronic device 240 by shunting power delivered to electronic device 240 by supply lines 231, such as to ground)
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Dwyer, Jinkins, Ryan and Steele teach the method according to claim 1, Dwyer teaches wherein the atmospheric disturbances comprise a lightning strike and/or an exposure to cosmic and/or ionising rays (para [0001] The invention relates to lightning detection and warning systems, and systems which, by providing a warning of an impending lightning strike, prevent lightning from damaging electronic devices.)
Claim 7 is rejected accordingly as claim 1 above, having same subject matter/limitations.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Dwyer, Jinkins, Ryan and Steele teach the device according to claim 7, Dwyer teaches wherein the acquisition means (MQ) include at least one electro-optical sensor configured to measure the near peripheral electric and magnetic field ([0041] Along with the x-ray detectors, the research and testing center was equipped with instrumentation for measuring optical emission and electric and magnetic fields plus dE/dt measurements.).
Claim 10 is rejected accordingly as claim 3 above, having same subject matter/limitations.
Claim 12 is rejected accordingly as claim 5 above, having same subject matter/limitations.
Claim 13 is rejected accordingly as claim 6 above, having same subject matter/limitations.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Dwyer, Jinkins, Ryan and Steele teach an aircraft comprising a device for preventing, in real time, risk of atmospheric disturbances (DIS) according claim 7 (Dwyer – para [29-0031] FIG. 2 shows use of a lightning detector 101 according to the invention to predict the timing and location of an impending lightning strike and to initiate a signal which is used to protect an electronic device. Para [0033] Homeland security can benefit from the invention. By eliminating or at least significantly reducing false alarms induced by lightning, combat readiness can be improved. For example, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and similar surveillance systems can benefit from the invention. In addition, security devices can be protected from lightning strikes, thus improving their reliability and up-time.).
Claim(s) 4, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dwyer, Jinkins, Ryan and Steele in view of Patton et al. (US20180276351A1) (“hereinafter Patton”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Dwyer, Jinkins, Ryan and Steele teaches the method according to claim 1, however the combination does not clearly teach wherein the development of the predictive map comprises implementation of at least one supervised or unsupervised deep learning machine.
Patton teaches wherein the development of the predictive map comprises implementation of at least one supervised or unsupervised deep learning machine (para [0036] Thus, there is a need in the vehicle routing field to create a new and useful system 200 and method 100, such as for event-based vehicle routing. This invention provides such new and useful system 200 and method 100.. para [0046]… The vehicle 210 can include locomotion mechanisms (e.g., rotors, motor, etc.), communication mechanisms (e.g., WiFi, BLE, cellular, etc.), vehicle sensors (e.g., on-board sensors, etc.), processing systems (e.g., CPU, GPU), and/or any other suitable component. Vehicle sensors can include any one or more of: optical sensors… proximity sensors (e.g., radar, electromagnetic sensor, ultrasonic sensor, light detection and ranging, light amplification for detection and ranging, line laser scanner, laser detection and ranging, airborne laser swath mapping, laser altimetry, sonar, etc.), movement sensors (e.g., position, velocity, and/or acceleration sensors; accelerometers; gyroscopes; etc.), location sensors (e.g., GPS sensors, compass data, etc.), odometer, altimeter, environmental sensors (e.g., pressure, temperature, etc.), light sensors (e.g., infrared sensors, ambient light sensors, etc. para [0124] Additionally or alternatively, components of the system 200 and/or suitable portions of the method 100 can apply artificial intelligence approaches (e.g., machine learning approaches, etc.) including any one or more of: supervised learning (e.g., using logistic regression, using back propagation neural networks, using random forests, decision trees, etc.), unsupervised learning ).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated Patton (directed to using learning machine) into Dwyer (directed to protecting electronic device from atmospheric disturbances) for the purpose of protecting vehicle properties from external disturbances by estimating weather condition in the route by using a supervised or unsupervised learning technique.
Claim 11 is rejected accordingly as claim 4 above, having same subject matter/limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bent et al. (US 4792806 A) discusses lightning position and tracking method.
Uman et al. (US 4276576 A) discusses lightning activated relay.
Flourens et al. (US20170336453A1) discusses on-board system for evaluating lightning strike.
Blanc-Paques et al. (US20170336806A1) discusses aerial vehicle electromagnetic avoidance and utilization system.
Cooney (US20090322147A1) discusses aircraft with isolated ground.
Schwinn et al. (US 20020075170 A1) is related to lightning detection processing and displaying a map, messages and issues a warning for lightning ahead on an aircraft’s route.
Patricelli, F., Baltgalvis, J., Polichr, R., & Orphan, V. J. (1978, December). Real-Time X-Ray Inspection of Composite Aircraft Structures (Final Report AIRTASK No. OTR Rework, Work Unit No. GA801). Prepared for Naval Air Systems Command, Department of the Navy.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARAD TIMILSINA whose telephone number is (571)272-7104. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00.
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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at 571-270-0349. 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.
/SHARAD TIMILSINA/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights