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 .
Response to Arguments/Amendments
The amendment filed January 29th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 4-10, 27, and 31-40 are currently pending in the Application.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C 103 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.
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 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, 4-9, 27, and 31-37, and 39-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 20210329503, to Zhang et al. (hereinafter Zhang), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20230156554, to Ferdi et al (hereinafter Ferdi), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20220150780, to Chen et al (hereinafter Chen).
Regarding claim 1, and commensurate claim 27, and 31 Zhang teaches An Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) flight control method, comprising: detecting, by an Unmanned Aerial System Service Supplier (USS), a requirement for switching a control device for the UAV; requesting, by the USS, a Session Management Function (SMF) to switch; the control device for the UAV from a first control device to a second control device based on a management and control strategy, (See at least [0016-0017] “ after determining that the control device of the UAV needs to be handed over, the UTM may specifically enable, by sending the hosting command by using the policy control function network element, the policy function network element to indicate that the session management function network element needs to hand over the control device of the UAV. In an embodiment of the first aspect of this application, before that the UTM determines that the control device of the UAV needs to be handed over, the method further includes: The UTM receives a hosting request message from the UAV, where the hosting request message is used to request to hand over the control device of the UAV; and that the UTM determines that the control device of the UAV needs to be handed over includes: The UTM determines, based on the hosting request message, that the control device of the UAV needs to be handed over”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0035-0036] “when the first device receives the control right release command, the first device initiates release of the control right of the second device on the UAV, thereby implementing the release of the control right of the control device on the UAV. Therefore, in this embodiment, the control right of the control device on the UAV is released, thereby clarifying control over a control device of a UAV that accesses a communications network. In an embodiment of the fourth aspect of this application, the control right release command further includes a reason for releasing the control right of the second device on the UAV and/or information about the second device..”)
Zhang does not explicitly teach, however Ferdi teaches, wherein the management and control strategy is used for performing switching of the control device for the UAV in response to the requirement for switching the control device for the UAV being detected; and switching, by the SMF, the control device for the UAV from the first control device to the second control device based on the management and control strategy; wherein detecting, by the USS, the requirement for switching the control device for the UAV comprises: (See at least paragraph [0148-0153] “At operation 3A-2a, the WTRU (e.g., the UAV) may receive a C2 communication link selection and switching policy from the network entity (e.g., the USS/UTM 220) (e.g., via a UAS Application Enabler (UAE) layer). At operation 3A-2b, the WTRU (e.g., the UAV-C 212) may receive a C2 communication link selection and switching policy from the network entity (e.g., the USS/UTM 220) (e.g., via UAE layer). The content of the policy may be as described herein. At operation 3A-3a, the WTRU (e.g., the UAV) may select a primary mode of communication based on C2 communication link selection and switching policy. At operation 3A-3b, the WTRU (e.g., the UAV-C 212) may select a primary mode of communication based on C2 communication link selection and switching policy. At operation 3A-4, the WTRU (e.g., the UAV 211 and/or the UAV-C 212) may negotiate (e.g., over the primary link) with its peer: usage of redundant C2 links and/or C2 link QoS thresholds as described herein based on the received policy. At operation 3A-5a, the WTRU (e.g., the UAV) may notify the network entity (e.g., the USS/UTM 220) (e.g., via the UAE layer) about the current active C2 communication mode. At operation 3A-5b, the WTRU (e.g., UAV-C 212) may notify the network entity (e.g., the USS/UTM 220) (e.g., via the UAE layer) about the current active C2 communication mode. At operation 3A-6, the WTRU (e.g., the UAV 211 or/and the UAV-C 212) may perform C2 communication (e.g., direct or indirect) with its peer, while monitoring the current C2 link against the negotiated QoS thresholds for C2 switching. FIG. 3B is a diagram illustrating a procedure for an C2 communication mode switching using UE (UAE-C as UAS Application Enabler Client) assistance with network (UAE-S 221 as UAS Application Enabler Server) control, based on the network entity (e.g., the USS/UTM 220) policy. The UAE layer (UAE-C and UAE-S) provides an adaptation layer for the application layer one the WTRU side as a UAE-C and on the server side as a UAE-S. Referring to FIG. 3B, for illustrative purposes, the initial mode of C2 communication selected is direct and the WTRU switches to an indirect mode of C2 communication. It is understood that the reverse scenario (e.g., indirect to direct) is also possible using similar steps.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0165] “At operation 3C-3, the UTM 220 may check if the UAV-C 212 is authorized to be associated with or control the UAV 211 identified by the UAV id. For example, the UTM 220 may check that the UAV id requested by the UAV-C 212 corresponds to a UAV 211 that is authorized/available and that whose owner/pilot certificate match that of the UAV-C 212.”). Still further, (See at least paragraph [0157] “At operation 3B-3, the UAS server may check that/determine whether the WTRU (e.g., UAV 211 and/or UAV-C 212) is authorized to switch to the target C2 link, based on the network entity (e.g., the USS/UTM 220) policy and C2 links QoS parameters received from the WTRU.”)
detecting, by the USS, the first control device satisfying a control device switching condition when the UAV performs a legal behavior, (See at least paragraph [0203] “The representative procedure may be triggered by: (1) at operation 13-2a, the WTRU/UAV 211 sending to or towards the UTM 220 a request message to establish C2 communications with the UTM 220 for UTM-based navigation (e.g., the C2 communication request message (e.g., a container in a NAS transport message) may include information about any of: (i) a UAV flight plan, and/or (ii) a mission type (e.g., reference to pre-authorized flight plan), among others) and the network (e.g., a network entity) may forward and/or send the C2 communication request message to the UTM 220 (e.g., via a NEF), for example along with the UAV WTRU id; and (2) at operation 13-2b, the UTM 220 may check that the UAV 211 is authorized for UTM-based navigation based on the UAV 211 and the mission information (e.g., directly following a successful operation 12-0 and/or based on one or more other internal/external triggers). The UTM 220 may allocate a new UAS id upon or after successful authorization.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0096] “UAV 211 with autonomous flying capabilities may be able to fly according to a pre-scheduled flight plan under the supervision of a UTM 220 (e.g., the C2 communication link between UAV 211 and UTM 220 that may be used for flight monitoring, dynamic route updates, and/or occasional navigation).”)
wherein the control device switching condition comprises a breakdown of the first control device, an overload of the first control device, or a quality of a communication connection between the first control device and the UAV reducing to a preset value. (See at least paragraph [0091-0093] “In certain representative embodiments, methods, apparatus and systems may be implemented for C2 Communication Path Switching from direct communications (e.g., a direct link) to network-assisted communications or from network assisted communications to direct communications (e.g., a direct link). For example, a UAV may establish redundant direct/network assisted C2 connections based on authorization parameters received from the network/USS/UTM (e.g., the network entity).In certain examples, a UAV may receive QoS threshold parameters from the network/USS/UTM (e.g., the network entity) to monitor the direct link quality and may trigger a switch from direct communications to network assisted communications on condition that or when the direct link quality becomes unacceptable based on those QoS threshold (e.g., the direct link quality is less than a threshold level). In certain representative embodiments, methods, apparatus and systems may be implemented for C2 Communication Path Switching from direct communications (e.g., a direct link) or network-assisted communications to UTM-navigated communications. For example, during a link switch, the UAV may receive from network/USS/UTM (e.g., the network entity) an indication (e.g., a policy) on how to handle the old connection (e.g., to maintain or to release the old connection). The UAV may receive from the network/USS/UTM (e.g., the network entity) an indication of the C2 communication type to be used on the new connection (e.g., a Direct type, a Network-Assisted type or a UTM-navigated type).”)
Additionally, Chen teaches, wherein the method further comprises:in response to detecting the requirement and after determining to switch the control device for the UAV from the first control device to the second control device, continuing to monitor, by the USS, whether the requirement is satisfied continuously: (See at least paragraph [0074] “a triggering condition may be used to determine whether a corresponding CHO command can be executed. The UE may continuously evaluate the triggering condition of each CHO command that remains valid. If a triggering condition is satisfied (e.g., a target cell signal quality is above a given threshold within a time period TTT), the UE may select from one of the following options (e.g., based on the NW configuration, based on predefined configuration, etc.): [0075] (1) The UE may directly execute the corresponding CHO command without any notification to the source base station.”).
and in response to the requirement being canceled within a buffer duration during continuous monitoring, not switching, by the SMF, the control device for the UAV from the first control device to the second control device. (See at least paragraph [0087] “If a leaving condition is present, a UE may continuously evaluate the leaving condition associated with each CHO command. When the leaving condition is satisfied (e.g., the target cell signal quality is below a given threshold within a time period TTT), the UE may consider the corresponding CHO command as being invalid and release radio resources associated with the CHO command.”).
Zhang as modified by Ferdi, and Chen are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, wireless communication systems implementing handover and switching procedures based network architectures . 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 the UAV control device switching procedures of Zhang to incorporate the teachings of switching condition of Ferdi, and with the timer-based cancelation mechanism as taught by Chen. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because switching a UAV/s control device is a safety operation, therefore incorporating a buffer period before committing to the switch avoid unnecessary and potential disruption cause by signal fluctuations, as Chen mechanism is designed to solve the handover.
Regarding claim 4, Zhang as modified by Ferdi, and Chen discloses the claimed features of claim 1 and Zhang further disclose, wherein switching the control device for the UAV from the first control device to the second control device based on the management and control strategy, comprises: releasing a communication connection between the UAV and the first control device; and establishing a communication connection between the UAV and the second control device. (See at least [0017] “where the hosting request message is used to request to hand over the control device of the UAV”). Further, (See at least [0018] “that the UTM sends the hosting command to the network device includes: The UTM sends the hosting command to a policy control function network element, to enable the policy control function network element to indicate that the session management function network element needs to hand over the control device of the UAV.”).
Regarding claim 5, and commensurate claim 33, Zhang as modified by Ferdi, and Chen discloses the claimed features of claim 4 and Zhang further disclose, wherein establishing the communication connection between the UAV and the second control device comprises: transmitting address information of the second control device to a User Plane Function (UPF), wherein the communication connection between the UAV and the second control device is established by the UPF based on the address information. (See at least [0133] [0153] [0156] “address information or identification information of the to-be-handed-over-to control device of the UAV. Optionally, the information further includes address information of a user plane function network element corresponding to the to-be-handed-over-to control device of the UAV. The address information of the user plane function network element corresponding to the to-be-handed-over-to control device of the UAV is used by the network device to determine the user plane function network element corresponding to the control device that is of the UAV and to which the UAV is to hand over the control device.”).
Regarding claim 6, and commensurate claim 34 Zhang as modified by Ferdi, and Chen discloses the claimed features of claim 1 and Zhang further disclose, wherein the second control device comprises at least one of: a UAV Controller (UAVC); or an Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM). (See at least [0114] “each embodiment of this application is applied to an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) 1, and the UAS 1 includes a UAV 11 and a UAV control device 12. The UAV control device 12 is configured to control the UAV 11,”).
Regarding claim 7, and commensurate claim 35, Zhang as modified by Ferdi, and Chen discloses the claimed features of claim 1 and Zhang further disclose, wherein the management and control strategy comprises at least one of: a management and control strategy for a single UAV; a management and control strategy for a group of UAVs, wherein the group of UAVs comprises one or more UAVs; or a management and control strategy for any UAV. (See at least [0007] “The unmanned aerial vehicle traffic management UTM network element determines that the control device of the unmanned aerial vehicle UAV needs to be handed over; and the UTM sends the hosting command to the network device, to enable the network device to indicate, according to the hosting command, that the UAV needs to hand over the control device of the UAV, where the hosting command is used to hand over the control device of the UAV, and the hosting command includes indication information used for handing over the control device of the UAV and information about the UAV.”).
Regarding claim 8, and commensurate claim 36, Zhang as modified by Ferdi, and Chen discloses the claimed features of claim 1 and Zhang further disclose, further comprising at least one of: pre-configuring, by the SMF, the management and control strategy; obtaining, by the SMF, the management and control strategy from a Unified Data Repository (UDR); or obtaining, by the SMF, the management and control strategy from the UTM of the UAV. (See at least [0115] “The session management function network element is a session management function (SMF) entity in the 5G communications system. The user plane function network element is configured to connect to functions such as a PDU session point outside a data network, data table routing and forwarding, and a user plane part for policy rule execution. The user plane function network element is a user plane function (UPF) entity in the 5G communications system. A policy control function network element is configured to: support a unified policy framework in managing network behavior, provide a policy rule for a control plane network element, and the like. The policy control function network element is a policy control function (PCF) entity in the 5G communications system.”).
Regarding claim 9, and commensurate claim 37, Zhang as modified by Ferdi, and Chen discloses the claimed features of claim 8 and Zhang further disclose, wherein obtaining, by the SMF, the management and control strategy from the UDR comprises: transmitting, by the SMF, a request for the management and control strategy to a Network Exposure Function (NEF); and receiving a response from the NEF, wherein the response comprises the management and control strategy from the UDR. (See at least [0064] “The unmanned aerial vehicle traffic management UTM network element sends a control right release command to the first device, where the control right release command is used to release a control right of a second device on an unmanned aerial vehicle UAV, and the control right release command includes: indication information used for releasing the control right of the second device on the UAV and information about the UAV; and the first device receives the control right release command from the UTM, and initiating, based on the control right release command, release of the control right of the second device on the UAV.”).
Regarding claim 39, and commensurate claim 40, Zhang as modified by Ferdi, and Chen discloses the claimed features of claim 7, Zhang fails to explicitly disclose, however Ferdi discloses, wherein the group of UAVs is obtained by one of: collecting UAVs with communication connections belong to a same Digital Network Name into one group; collecting UAVs used for a same purpose into one group; or collecting UAVs with communication connections being established through a same network slice into one group. (See at least paragraph [0203] “The representative procedure may be triggered by: (1) at operation 13-2a, the WTRU/UAV 211 sending to or towards the UTM 220 a request message to establish C2 communications with the UTM 220 for UTM-based navigation (e.g., the C2 communication request message (e.g., a container in a NAS transport message) may include information about any of: (i) a UAV flight plan, and/or (ii) a mission type (e.g., reference to pre-authorized flight plan), among others) and the network (e.g., a network entity) may forward and/or send the C2 communication request message to the UTM 220 (e.g., via a NEF), for example along with the UAV WTRU id; and (2) at operation 13-2b, the UTM 220 may check that the UAV 211 is authorized for UTM-based navigation based on the UAV 211 and the mission information (e.g., directly following a successful operation 12-0 and/or based on one or more other internal/external triggers). The UTM 220 may allocate a new UAS id upon or after successful authorization.”). Further, (See at least paragraph [0096] “UAV 211 with autonomous flying capabilities may be able to fly according to a pre-scheduled flight plan under the supervision of a UTM 220 (e.g., the C2 communication link between UAV 211 and UTM 220 that may be used for flight monitoring, dynamic route updates, and/or occasional navigation).”)
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 the UAV control device switching procedures of Zhang to incorporate the teachings of switching condition of Ferdi, and Chen for the same motivation reasons in claim 1.
Claims 10, and 38, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 20210329503, to Zhang et al. (hereinafter Zhang), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20230156554, to Ferdi et al (hereinafter Ferdi), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20220150780, to Chen et al (hereinafter Chen), and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20210329460, to Liao et al (hereinafter Liao),
Regarding claim 10, and commensurate claim 38, Zhang as modified by Ferdi, and Chen discloses the claimed features of claim 8, Zhang does not explicitly discloses, however Liao discloses, wherein obtaining the management and control strategy from the UTM of the UAV,comprises at least one of: obtaining the management and control strategy from the UTM during an authentication and authorization process of establishing the communication connection between the UAV and the first control device; or obtaining the management and control strategy from the UTM in response to detecting the requirement for switching the control device from the UAV. (See at least [0103] “The CN 112 and/or the CN 114 (e.g., an AMF in the 3GPP network) performs an authentication procedure, checks the subscription of both UEs, and then forwards the UAS information, (e.g., meta data) and discovery information to the UTM 116. The UTM 116 associate the UAV 106 and the UAV controller 104 and identifies both as the UAS 102 by allocating a temporary UAS ID, which can be used to manage the UAS 102. The CN 112 and/or the CN 114 provides the UAS ID to the UAV controller 104 and the UAV 106 in the registration accept message. The UAV 106 and the UAV controller 104 use the UAS ID to interact with the 3GPP network and UTM 116 for UAS operation.”).
Zhang as modified by Liao, are analogous art because they are in the same field of endeavor, communication systems. 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 the system of Zhang as modified by Ferdi, and Chen to incorporate the teachings of Liao such that the “authentication ” of Liao aid in the teachings of Zhang because allowing a UAV authenticate will aid in communication security, therefore leading to increased safety.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Wesam Almadhrhi whose telephone number is (571) 270-3844. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30 AM - 5PM Mon-Fri Eastern Alt Fri.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anne Antonucci can be reached on (313) 446-6519. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WESAM NMN ALMADHRHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666