DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Provisional Application No. 63/228,661, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
The prior application does not provide support for at least wherein a length of the wireless power receiver coil is the same length when the landing gear is in the retracted position and in the extended position; wherein the wireless power receiver coil is in a first orientation when the landing gear is in the retracted position and wherein the wireless power receiver coil is in a different orientation when the landing gear is in the extended position; wherein the wireless power receiver coil has a first shape when the landing gear is in the retracted position and the wireless power receiver coil has a second shape when the landing gear is in the extended position; wherein the wireless power receiver coil length stays the same when the landing gear moves between the retracted position and the extended position; wherein the landing pad is elevated; wherein a length of the wireless power receiver coil is longer when the landing gear is in the extended position and shorter when the landing gear is in the retracted position; wherein the wireless power receiver coil is configured to retract around a wheel when the landing gear moves from the extended position to the retracted position; wherein the wireless power receiver coil is configured to join together at two locations when the landing gear moves from the retracted position to the extended position; wherein the wireless power receiver coil is surrounded by a flexible conduit; wherein the wireless power receiver coil is wrapped around landing legs of the drone, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is connected to wheel elements, wherein the wheel elements move along the landing legs when the landing legs move between a folded and un-folded position.
Accordingly, the effective filling date of claims 1, 6, 8-9 and 12 is 08/03/2021, and the effective filling date of claims 2-5, 7, 10-11 and 13-15 is 08/01/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) filled on 01/03/2023 and 09/21/2024 is being considered in the examination of this application.
Drawings
4. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) cancelled from the claim(s):
a. The device as defined in claims 1 and 4, including “the wireless power receiver coil length stays the same when the landing gear moves between the retracted position and the extended position” in claim 5;
b. The “landing feet” in claims 8-9;
c. The device as defined in claims 1 and 10, including “the wireless power receiver coil is configured to retract around a wheel when the landing gear moves from the extended position to the retracted position” in claim 11;
d. The “wireless power receiver coil is configured to join together at two locations when the landing gear moves from the retracted position to the extended position” in claim 13;
e. The device as defined in claim 1, including “the wireless power receiver coil is wrapped around landing legs of the drone” and “the wireless power receiver coil is connected to wheel elements, wherein the wheel elements move along the landing legs when the landing legs move between a folded and un-folded position” in claim 15.
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
5. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the use of indefinite language such “may have” which should be removed from the abstract. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
6. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Drones with wireless power receiver coils connected to landing gears.
7. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
a. para. [0041]: the term “piston (106)” should be rewritten as --piston (107)--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
8. Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
a. Claim 6, line 2: the term “receiver power” should be rewritten as --receive power-- for the purpose of grammatical comprehension.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
9. 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.
10. Claims 5, 7, 11, 13 and 15 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.
11. Claim 5, lines 1-2, recites the limitation “the wireless power receiver coil length stays the same when the landing gear moves between the retracted position and the extended position” which renders the claim uncertain, since claim 4 is a non-generic claim that encompasses embodiments of the device shown in FIGS. 3-5 of the applicant’s disclosure, whereas the claimed configuration is directed to an embodiment of the device shown in FIGS. 1-2. Therefore, the claim is indefinite because the claimed subject matter is inconsistent with applicant’s specification (see MPEP 2173.03). Appropriate correction is required.
12. Claim 7, recites the limitation “wherein the landing pad is elevated” which renders the intended scope of the claim unascertainable, since the claimed invention is drawn to the device, and the landing pad is merely functionally recited and is therefore not required by the claimed invention. The landing pad must either be positively recited or at least a connection between the device and the landing pad must be positively recited in order to obviate such indefinitess. Appropriate correction is required.
13. Claim 11, lines 1-2, recites the limitation “wherein the wireless power receiver coil is configured to retract around a wheel when the landing gear moves from the extended position to the retracted position” which renders the claim uncertain, since claim 10 appears to be drawn to embodiments of the device shown in FIGS. 1-2 and 7A-7B, whereas the claimed configuration is directed to an embodiment of the device shown in FIGS. 5-6. Therefore, the claim is indefinite because the claimed subject matter is inconsistent with applicant’s specification (see MPEP 2173.03). Appropriate correction is required.
14. Claim 13, lines 1-2, recites the limitation “the wireless power receiver coil is configured to join together at two locations when the landing gear moves from the retracted position to the extended position” which renders the intended scope of the claim unascertainable, since it is unclear as to exactly what the coil is joined with. Is the coil composed of multiple elements that when joined form the coil, or does different portions of the same coil come into contact with each other?
15. Claim 15, lines 1-3, recites the limitation “wherein the wireless power receiver coil is wrapped around landing legs of the drone, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is connected to wheel elements, wherein the wheel elements move along the landing legs when the landing legs move between a folded and un-folded position” which renders the claim uncertain, since the claimed configuration is drawn to distinct embodiments of the applicant’s disclosure. For example, the limitations in lines 1-2 are drawn to the embodiment of the device shown in FIGS. 1-2, whereas the limitations in lines 2-3 are best understood to be drawn to the embodiment of the device shown in FIGS. 5-6. Therefore, the claim is indefinite because the claimed subject matter is inconsistent with applicant’s specification (see MPEP 2173.03). Furthermore, it is unclear as to whether “a folded position and un-folded position” is considered to be the same as or distinct from the “retracted” and “extended” positions as recited in claim 1. As a note, there does not appear to be any instance where the “coil is connected to wheel elements” in the disclosed embodiments, nor is this shown in the figures. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
16. 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
17. Claim(s) 1-3, 6-8 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2018/0056794 A1), hereinafter “Kim”, cited on the IDS filed on 01/03/2023.
18. Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses a device (Abstract and FIG. 2) comprising:
a wireless power receiver coil attached to a landing gear of a drone (paras. [0066] and [0076]; power receivers 170 including power receiving coils 174, the receivers 170 provided at a predetermined point of each landing leg 150 as seen in FIGS. 2-3 and 5A),
wherein the wireless power receiver coil is closer to the drone when the landing gear is in a retracted position and farther away from the drone when the landing gear is in an extended position (para. [0075]; landing legs 150 are both foldable and a variable length structure, as such each coil 170 must be closer to the UAV 100 when the legs 150 are in a retracted position and father away from the UAV 100 when the legs 150 are in an extended position).
19. Regarding Claim 2, Kim discloses the device of claim 1, wherein a length of the wireless power receiver coil is the same length when the landing gear is in the retracted position and in the extended position (para. [0076]; coil 174 is would around in the coil winding rod 172 of the receiver 170 located on a fixed point of leg 150, as such the length of coil must be the same in both retracted and extended positions as seen in FIGS. 2-3, 5A and 6).
20. Regarding Claim 3, Kim discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is in a first orientation when the landing gear is in the retracted position and wherein the wireless power receiver coil is in a different orientation when the landing gear is in the extended position (with consideration of the landing legs 150 being foldable, the orientation of each coil 174 must be in a different orientation when the legs 150 are in extended and retracted positions).
21. Regarding Claim 6, Kim discloses she device of claim 1, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is configured to, when the landing gear is in the extended position and the landing gear is on a landing pad, receiver power inductively from a wireless power transmitter coil in the landing pad (paras. [0064]-[0066] and [0082]-[0083]; legs 150 in the extended position and land on charging station 200, coils 170 receive power inductively via respective power transmitting coils 218 disposed inside groove structure 216 in the charging platform 240 within charging station 200 as seen in FIGS. 2-3, 5A and 6).
22. Regarding Claim 7, Kim discloses she device of claim 1, wherein the landing pad is elevated (para. [0070]; charging station 200 elevated via vehicle 290 as seen in FIG. 3).
23. Regarding Claim 8, Kim discloses the device of claim 9, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is attached to retractable elements of landing feet of the landing gear (with consideration of the legs being of variable structure, the legs 150 including multiple sections with different cross sections, and the coils 170 being mounted at the distal end of each portion of the leg 150 having the smaller cross section as seen in FIGS. 2-3).
24. Regarding Claim 12, Kim discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is configured to separate when the landing gear moves from the extended position to the retracted position (with consideration of each landing leg 150 being retractable, each coil 174 is structurally capable of separating from the charging platform 240 and charging station 200 when the landing legs 150 move from the extended position to the retracted position).
25. Regarding Claim 13, Kim discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is configured to join together at two locations when the landing gear moves from the retracted position to the extended position (with consideration of the landing legs 150 being foldable and variable in length, the coils 170 are capable of being joined together when the landing legs move from the retracted position to the extended position).
26. Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 8 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Su et al. (CN 112357078 A), hereinafter “Su”, cited on the IDS filed on 01/03/2023 [see attached translational document for any reference made to the text].
27. Regarding Claim 1, Su discloses a device (Abstract and FIGS. 1-2) comprising:
a wireless power receiver coil attached to a landing gear of a drone (pp. 5-7; mutual inductance coil 5011 attached to landing gear 5/51/501 of a UAV as seen in FIG. 4),
wherein the wireless power receiver coil is closer to the drone when the landing gear is in a retracted position and farther away from the drone when the landing gear is in an extended position (p. 6; landing gear 5/51/501 is retractable such that coil 5011 is closer to the UAV in the retracted position of the landing gear and farther away from the UAV when the landing gear is in the extended position as seen in FIGS. 3-4).
28. Regarding Claim 2, Su discloses the device of claim 1, wherein a length of the wireless power receiver coil is the same length when the landing gear is in the retracted position and in the extended position (length of coil 5011 is the same length in both the retracted and extended positions of the landing gear 5/51/501).
29. Regarding Claim 3, Su discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is in a first orientation when the landing gear is in the retracted position and wherein the wireless power receiver coil is in a different orientation when the landing gear is in the extended position (with consideration of the landing gear 5/51/501 being retractable, the orientation of coil 5011 must be in a different orientation when the landing gear is in the retracted and extended positions).
30. Regarding Claim 6, Su discloses she device of claim 1, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is configured to, when the landing gear is in the extended position and the landing gear is on a landing pad, receiver power inductively from a wireless power transmitter coil in the landing pad (pp. 6-7; coil 5011 configured to transmit wireless power via coil 5011 and mutual inductance coil 01 of charging platform 00 when the UAV is on the charging platform 00, as such the coil is structurally cable of receiving power inductively from coil 01 when the landing gear is in the extended position and on the charging platform 00 as seen in FIG. 5).
31. Regarding Claim 8, Su discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is attached to retractable elements of landing feet of the landing gear (with consideration of the landing gear being retractable and including elements as seen in FIG. 5, the coil 5011 must be attached to retractable elements of landing feet of the landing gear as clearly seen in FIGS. 3-4).
32. Regarding Claim 12, Su discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is configured to separate when the landing gear moves from the extended position to the retracted position (pp. 6-7; with consideration of the landing gear 5/51/501 being retractable, the coil 5011 is structurally capable of separating from the ground of the charging platform 00 when the landing gear moves from the extended position to the extended position as seen in FIGS. 3-5).
33. Regarding Claim 13, Su discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the wireless power receiver coil is configured to join together at two locations when the landing gear moves from the retracted position to the extended position (with consideration of the landing gear 5/51/501 being retractable, the coils 5011 are capable of being joined together when the landing legs move from the retracted position to the extended position).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
34. 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.
35. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2018/0056794 A1), in view of Lawrence (US 2010/0025526 A1).
36. Regarding Claim 9, Kim discloses the device of claim 8.
Kim is silent regarding the retractable elements are extended when the landing gear is in the extended position and are retracted into the landing feet when the landing gear is in the retracted position.
Lawrence discloses a device (Lawrence Abstract and FIG. 11) wherein the retractable elements are extended when the landing gear is in the extended position and are retracted into the landing feet when the landing gear is in the retracted position (paras. [0032]-[0035]; landing gear 66 configured to deploy and retract, the landing gear 66 including landing struts 68 with telescoping sections 74/76, section 76 extended when the landing gear 66 is in the extended position, section 76 retracted into section 74 when the landing gear 66 is in the retracted positions as clearly seen in FIGS. 12-14B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Kim as taught by Lawrence such that the retractable elements are extended when the landing gear is in the extended position and are retracted into the landing feet when the landing gear is in the retracted position in order to provide clearance between the body of the drone and the ground when the landing gear is in the extended position and the drone is on the ground, and preventing any obstruction between the drone and foreign objects during flight by having the retractable elements retracted in the retracted position of the landing gear.
37. Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su et al. (CN 112357078 A), in view of Kim et al. (KR 20230147785 A), hereinafter “Kim II”.
38. Regarding Claim 14, Su discloses the device of claim 1.
Su is silent regarding the wireless power receiver coil is surrounded by a flexible conduit.
Kim II discloses a device (Kim Abstract and FIG. 4) wherein the wireless power receiver coil is surrounded by a flexible conduit (pp. 3-4; insulating layer 20 wrapped around conductor 20 which includes wire 22, wire 22 being a composite of aggregate conductors in which a plurality of wires are joined together and twisted at a constant pitch, further layer 20 is made of rubber such as ethylene propylene rubber which is by definition flexible).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effect filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Su as taught by Kim II such that the wireless power receiver coil is surrounded by a flexible conduit in order to protect the coil from environmental damage.
(Kim II is being relied upon in the rejection of this claim due to the variance in the effective filling dates between claims 1 and 14, as discussed above, under the priority section).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims as well as overcoming drawing objections and 112(b) rejections set forth in this Office action.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Park (US 2018/0257502 A1), Passley (US 11597515 B2), Fujita et al. (US 2025/0019099 A1), Bugash et al. (US 8686590 B2), Kim (US 2018/0044015 A1), Kodaira et al. (US 11167653 B2), Cai et al. (CN 109193858 A), Cai et al. (CN 108688496 A), Chai et al. (CN 115580034 A) and Sherman et al. (CN 115703372 A) individually disclose a device comprising wireless power receiver coils connected to landing legs.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this or any earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Arfan Sinaki, whose telephone number is 571-272-7185. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 10:00 am to 6:00 pm EST.
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 J. Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. The fax number for the organization to which 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.
/ARFAN Y. SINAKI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3642