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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/16/2025 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ng, K. et al., US 20190301931 A1 (hereinafter Ng) and in view of Han, W. et al., CN 109187884 A (hereinafter Han).
Regarding claim 1, Ng teaches a vehicle system, comprising: an arial vehicle (para [0027] last sentence; the device in fig. 8 is coupled in a drone); a collection arm (fig. 8, this is the arm starting from the air inlet) configured to collect an aerosol sample (para [0026] lines 9-14) from a cloud (fig. 1 element 19 is a cloud) located above the ground (drone is above the ground), the collection arm including a collection tube (fig. 8 shows the collection arm from the inlet extends all the way to the Raman spectrometer where samples are collected in a membrane); and a detection module operatively connected to the collection arm (fig. 8 Raman spectrometer ris the detection module), configured to analyze a composition of the from the cloud (Raman spectrometer analyze the composition of the from the cloud).
Ng does not teach collection arm extending outwardly from the arial vehicle, and “wherein the arial vehicle and the detection module are coupled to one another to define a fluid channel between through which the particles in the collection tube can exit and return to ambient”.
Han, from the same field of endeavor as Ng, teaches collection arm extending outwardly from the arial vehicle (fig. 1 element 3, p. 4 para 6 line 16) and a fluid channel between through which the particles in the collection tube can exit and return to ambient (fig. 1 elements 8 and 4, p. 4 para 6 line 5 and lines 21-22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Han to Ng to have collection arm extending outwardly from the arial vehicle and a fluid channel between through which the particles in the collection tube can exit and return to ambient in order to ensure the gas balance in the sealed container (para 6 lines 21-22).
Ng, when modified by Han, does not explicitly teach wherein the arial vehicle and the detection module are coupled to one another to define a fluid channel.
The limitation “wherein the arial vehicle and the detection module are coupled to one another to define a fluid channel” is simply a rearrangement of parts, see MPEP 2144.04-C, In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
It is obvious for an ordinary skilled of the arts to move elements 8 and 4 between the drone and the monitoring system 1, which is equated to element 136 of the instant application, in order to have a stable unmanned aerial vehicle monitoring system (elements 8 and 4 are closer to the center of mass of the unmanned aerial vehicle monitoring system).
Regarding claim 3, Ng teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the collection arm defines: a plenum (the plenum is the tube from air inlet to the air pump in fig. 8) between an outward projection of the collection arm and the detection module (this is shown in fig. 8), the collection arm having an opening configured to receive aerosol particles from the cloud and into the plenum (sampling air enters the inlet into the tube plenum as shown in fig. 8); wherein the collection tube is fluidly connected to the plenum to collect the sample (samples are collected in the Raman scattering spectrometer in fig. 8).
Regarding claim 5, Ng teaches the system of claim 4, further “comprising a pump disposed in the collection tube downstream of the collection medium configured to draw the aerosol particles through the opening in the collection arm, through the inlet of the collection tube, and into or onto the collection medium” (this is the air pump 17 in fig. 8).
Regarding claim 6, Ng teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the detection module includes an optical detection module (Raman spectrometer is an optical detection module as shown in fig. 7).
Regarding claim 7, Ng teaches “the system of claim 6, wherein the optical detection module includes a radiation source configured to transmit an interrogation beam through the plenum to interrogate the collection medium” (this is shown in fig. 7, where the plenum tube is at the membrane 135).
Regarding claim 8, Ng teaches the system of claim 7, “wherein the optical detection module further includes a radiation receiver configured to receive a return signal through the plenum from the collection medium” (this is shown in fig. 7, elements 13 is where the radiation receiver).
Regarding claim 9, Ng teaches the system of claim 8, “wherein the optical detection module further includes a composition determination module configured to receive data from the radiation receiver to determine a chemical composition of the aerosol particles in the collection medium” (this is the Signal processor and display shown in fig. 8, para [0027] lines 8-11).
Regarding claim 10, Ng teaches the system of claim 8, wherein a length of the collection tube is configured to provide a standoff distance between the detection module and the cloud (fig. 1 shows the inlet collection tube 3 is at a standoff distance between the detection module and the cloud sample 19).
Regarding claim 11, Ng teaches the system of claim 10, wherein a shape of the collection arm is configured to enclose a path of the interrogation beam and a path of the return signal within the plenum (this is the cylindrical shape as shown in fig. 7; the plenum ends at the surface of the membrane in element 135).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ng Han as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of Schneider, T. W., et al., US 20080007728 A1 (hereinafter Schneider).
Regarding claim 4, the modified device of Ng fails to teach the system of claim 3, further comprising a collection medium disposed at an inlet of the collection tube configured to collect aerosol particles from the cloud and condense the aerosol particles onto the collection medium.
Schneider, from the same field of endeavor as Ng, teaches the system of claim 3, further comprising a collection medium (Fig. 5 elements 18, 20, 30 and 40) disposed at an inlet of the collection tube (these filters are located at the inlet of the device 10, para [0021] lines 1-15) configured to collect aerosol particles from the cloud (all these filters collect aerosol from the cloud) and condense the aerosol particles onto the collection medium (para [0040] lines 1-5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Schneider to the modified device of Ng to have the system of claim 3, further comprising a collection medium disposed at an inlet of the collection tube configured to collect aerosol particles from the cloud and condense the aerosol particles onto the collection medium in order to interrogate the condense aerosol using a Raman-based detection system (para [0041] lines 3-5).
Claim(s) 12, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ng Han as applied to claim(s) 11 above, and further in view of Michalski, J., et al., US 8205512 B1 (hereinafter Michalski).
Regarding claim 12, the modified of Ng does not teach the system of claim 11, wherein the collection tube is L-shaped having a short end and a long side wherein the inlet of the collection tube is disposed in the short end of the collection tube and on an opposite end of the long side of the collection tube than the detection module. Regarding claim 13, the modified of Ng does not teach the system of claim 12, wherein the inlet of the collection tube is disposed on an inner surface of the collection arm, proximate the opening in the collection arm, wherein the collection medium is disposed in the inlet of the collection tube.
Michalski, from the same field of endeavor as Ng, teaches the system of claim 11, wherein the collection tube is L-shaped (the tube from element 216 to 222 is L-shaped, col 2 lines 53-67) having a short end (the length where element 216 is located is shorter) and a long side (the length where detector 222 is located is longer) wherein the inlet of the collection tube is disposed in the short end of the collection tube (the inlet is at element 216) and on an opposite end of the long side of the collection tube than the detection module (detector 222 is at the opposite side of element 216 as shown in Fig. 2). Also, Michalski teaches the system of claim 12, wherein the inlet of the collection tube is disposed on an inner surface of the collection arm (Fig. 2 shows element 206 is at the inner surface of element 202), “proximate the opening in the collection arm, wherein the collection medium is disposed in the inlet of the collection tube” (the collection medium corresponds to element 216, which is proximate to the opening of 202 and inside element 206 as shown in Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Michalski to the modified device of Ng to have the system of claim 11, wherein the collection tube is L-shaped having a short end and a long side wherein the inlet of the collection tube is disposed in the short end of the collection tube and on an opposite end of the long side of the collection tube than the detection module and the system of claim 12, wherein the inlet of the collection tube is disposed on an inner surface of the collection arm, proximate the opening in the collection arm, wherein the collection medium is disposed in the inlet of the collection tube in order to enable a user to switch between the collection mode and the detection mode for collection and identification of particulates in the air (col 2 lines 42-47).
Claim(s) 14, 15, 16, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ng Han as applied to claim(s) 11 above, and further in view of Sullivan, B., US 7319039 B2 (hereinafter Sullivan).
Regarding claim 14, Schneider does not teach the system of claim 1, wherein the mobile platform further includes a communications module configured to communicate with a controller to guide the mobile platform to one or more positions in space relative to the cloud. Regarding claim 15, Schneider does not teach the system of claim 14, wherein the controller includes a remote and/or on-ground controller. Regarding claim 17, Schneider does not teach the system of claim 1, wherein the mobile platform further includes a navigation module configured to guide the mobile platform to one or more positions in space relative to the cloud without communication from a remote or on-ground controller.
Sullivan, from the same field of endeavor as Schneider, teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the mobile platform further includes a communications module configured to communicate with a controller to guide the mobile platform to one or more positions in space relative to the cloud (Fig. 1 element 11 is the communications module that controls the UAV, col 3 lines 29-37), wherein the controller includes a remote and/or on-ground controller (col 4 lines 54-55), and wherein the mobile platform further includes a navigation module configured to guide the mobile platform to one or more positions in space relative to the cloud without communication from a remote or on-ground controller (the GPS is the navigation module).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Sullivan to Schneider to have the system of claim 1, wherein the mobile platform further includes a communications module configured to communicate with a controller to guide the mobile platform to one or more positions in space relative to the cloud, the system of claim 14, wherein the controller includes a remote and/or on-ground controller, and wherein the mobile platform further includes a navigation module configured to guide the mobile platform to one or more positions in space relative to the cloud without communication from a remote or on-ground controller in order to broadcast position information of the aircraft to station on the ground (col 3 lines 35-37).
Regarding claim 16, Schneider does not teach the system of claim 15, wherein the communications module is operatively connected to the optical detection module and further configured to communicate the composition of the cloud to the controller and/or a user.
Sullivan, from the same field of endeavor as Schneider, teaches the system of claim 15, wherein the communications module is operatively connected to the optical detection module (Fig. 1 shows element 11 is connected to spectrometer 9) and further configured to communicate the composition of the cloud to the controller and/or a user (col 5 lines 33-36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Sullivan to Schneider to have the system of claim 15, wherein the communications module is operatively connected to the optical detection module and further configured to communicate the composition of the cloud to the controller and/or a user in order to alarm the ground station if a bioagent is around and defensive measures can be taken to protect personnel (col 5 lines 33-38).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERTO FABIAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8-12, 1-5).
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached at (571) 272-2287. 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.
/ROBERTO FABIAN JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877