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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendments and remarks filed on 04/16/2025. The Applicant has amended claims 1, 8, 14, and 19. Claims 2, 9, and 15 have been cancelled, no new claims have been added and no new matter has been introduced. Claims 1, 3 - 8, 10 - 14, and 16 - 20 are currently pending in the application and are addressed below.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 04/16/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 3 - 8, 10 - 14, and 16 - 20 remain pending in the application.
Reply to Applicant’s Remarks
Applicant’s remarks filed 04/16/2025 have been fully considered and are addressed as follows:
Claim Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. 102/103:
Applicant’s arguments (see Arguments/Remarks, filed 04/16/2025) with respect to claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 have been fully considered but, respectfully, are not persuasive.
Regarding the Applicant’s arguments that “anticipation requires the disclosure in a single prior art reference of each element of the claim under consideration.”, “anticipation requires the presence in a single prior art reference disclosure of each and every element of the claimed invention, arranged as in the claim.”, and, “The references do not teach or suggest Claims 1, 8, or 14 For the reasons set forth with respect to the §102 rejection of Claim 1, the Patent Office has not shown through objective evidence that the references teach or suggest all of the features of Claims 1, 8, or 14. Absent objective evidence supporting the Patent Office's assertions, those assertions amount to mere conclusory statements insufficient to sustain a rejection under § 103. Under KSR, a prima facie case of obviousness has not been established for Claims 1, 8, or 14. Claims 3-7, 10-13, and 16-20 depend from Claims 1, 8, and 14 respectively.”, the Applicant's arguments are moot in view of the art being applied for the amended claim limitations.
Regarding the Applicant’s arguments that “Claim 1 has been amended to include the features of Claim 2; therefore Claim 1 is distinct from Hobbs. Assuming, arguendo, that there is reasonable motivation to combine Hobbs and Gallo, the Patent Office has not shown that such combination teaches or suggests all of the features of Claim 1. Specifically, Gallo discloses "[s]ome of these computer program instructions, when running, may steer the AV 100 to perform modelling maneuvers ... to generate APM features in a sequence of different steps to arrive at an accurate APM that reproduces the behavior of the AV 100." (Gallo, para.[0021]). Gallo defines "APM" to mean "Aircraft Performance Model". By contrast, Claim 1 describes an acquisition orbit for the purpose of presenting different angles and orientations to the signal sources and determining an relative aircraft location, not for producing an aircraft performance model to replicate the maneuvers. Claim 1 is therefore patentably distinct from Hobbs because Hobbs fails to teach at least the above features.”, “For the reasons set forth with respect to Claim 1, Claim 8 is patentably distinct from Hobbs because Hobbs fails to teach at least the above features.”, and, “For the reasons set forth with respect to Claim 1, Claim 14 is patentably distinct from Hobbs because Hobbs fails to teach at least the above features.”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Gallo discloses “execute an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals to places the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations with respect to the at least two radio signals and provide a plurality of radio signal samples” (see at least Gallo, [¶0021, 0039, 0040], “The AV 100 may be commanded with the flight control system to automatically perform certain maneuvers and collect data (via telemetry) in real time that serve to generate an APM. [] Some of these computer program instructions, when running, may steer the AV 100 to perform modelling maneuvers. Said maneuvers advantageously provide data that can be collected and used to generate APM features in a sequence of different steps to arrive at an accurate APM that reproduces the behavior of the AV”. Modeling maneuvers corresponds to an acquisition orbit procedure used to collect data. Gallo further discloses the type of data collected including but not limited to: “[¶0039, 0040] The present example mathematically demonstrates how a series of modelling maneuvers and measures under particular conditions are used to generate data to be collected in order to determine parameters of each particular model by means of least squares (LS).
Position (WGS84):
{λ, φ, h} Geodetic coordinates
Linear speed (LLS):
u Absolute horizontal speed
χ True bearing
w Absolute vertical speed
v Module of the absolute speed
γ Absolute (geometric) path angle
μ Absolute bank angle…[]”
Therefore, Gallo in combination with HOBBS teach the claim limitations and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of Gallo to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of executing an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals, for the purpose of generating data, including position and orientation, to be collected in order to determine the location of the aerial vehicle with respect to the radio signals and the landing location to enable it to execute a landing procedure at the landing location.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1, 3 - 8, 10 - 14, and 16 - 20 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.
Claims 1 and 14 recite “execute an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals to places the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations with respect to the at least two radio signals and provide a plurality of radio signal samples”.
The term “to places” is grammatically incorrect and causes the Claim to have more than one reasonable interpretation, for example, “execute an acquisition orbit procedure… to place the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations…” or “execute an acquisition orbit procedure… that places the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations…”, thus Claims 1 and 14 are rejected as being indefinite.
Similarly, Claim 8 recites “executing an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals to places the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations with respect to the at least two radio signals and provide a plurality of radio signal samples”. Claim 8 is indefinite for the same reasons as discussed above for Claims 1 and 14. Furthermore, “provide a plurality of radio signal samples” should read “providing a plurality of radio signal samples”. Thus, Claim 8 is rejected as being indefinite.
Dependent Claims 3 - 7, 10 - 13, and 16 – 20 are rejected as being indefinite in view of their dependency upon rejected independent Claims 1, 8, and 14.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 6 – 8, 13, 14, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180357910 HOBBS et.al. (HOBBS hereafter), in view of US 20180314776 Gallo et. al. (Gallo hereafter).
Regarding Claim 1, (CURRENTLY AMENDED), HOBBS discloses An aerial vehicle (see at least HOBBS [¶0017, Fig 1], “some embodiments of the technology disclosed herein relate to an automated landing solution for unmanned aerial vehicles”) comprising:
an antenna (see at least HOBBS [¶0057], “command/telemetry interface [] can include an antenna”);
one or more sensors configured for navigation and maneuvering (see at least HOBBS [¶0003, 0019], “[0003] The UAV can include a position determination and aircraft navigation system, which may include a radio receiver to receive the ranging signals; a positioning circuit”, “and a flight control system”; “[0019] Any of a number of techniques can be used to navigate the aircraft independently to the general area of the landing pad 102. For example, GPS, LORAN, beacons, other aids to navigation (ATON), dead reckoning, or other navigational systems or techniques can be used to navigate and fly the vehicle to the general area of the desired landing pad”); and
at least one processor (see at least HOBBS [¶0062],“a single microprocessor [] system can be used to implement the functions of one or more of aircraft control system 822, flight control circuit 836, positioning circuit 834, other aircraft components 825, as well as portions command/telemetry interface [], sensors”) in data communication with the antenna and a memory storing processor executable code (see at least HOBBS [¶0062], “components such as processing devices, memory components, communications buses and so on can be shared among two or more of these multiple functional units.”) for configuring the at least one processor to:
receive at least two radio signals (see at least HOBBS [¶0017], “a plurality of ranging radios are disposed at predetermined positions on the landing pad. These radios broadcast signals that can be detected by a receiver on the UAV”);
determine a relative location of the aerial vehicle with respect to the at least two radio signals based on the plurality of radio signal samples (see at least HOBBS [¶0049, 0051, Figs. 1, 6, 7], “[0051] a UAV can determine its range to multiple positioning radios (e.g., positioning radios 122).”, “the aircraft determines its position as its altitude or vertical distance above the pad, V, range or horizontal distance from the center of the pad, H, and its angle of attack, φ.”);
determine a landing location relative to the at least two radio signals (see at least HOBBS [¶0018, 0051, Fig. 7], “[0018] four positioning radios 122 are provided to transmit positioning information to allow UAV 101 to locate its position relative to a target point of the landing pad”); and
execute a landing procedure at the landing location (see at least HOBBS [¶0018, 0051, Figs. 1, 6, 7], “[0018] positioning radios 122 allows UAV 101 to locate and land on a target point of landing pad”).
HOBBS does not explicitly disclose execute an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals to places the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations with respect to the at least two radio signals and provide a plurality of radio signal samples;
However, Gallo is directed towards a Computer-implemented method and system for modelling performance of a fixed-wing aerial vehicle, Gallo discloses execute an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals to places the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations with respect to the at least two radio signals and provide a plurality of radio signal samples (see at least Gallo, [¶0021, 0039, 0040], “The AV 100 may be commanded with the flight control system to automatically perform certain maneuvers and collect data (via telemetry) in real time that serve to generate an APM. At least some of these tasks may be coded in a computer program. Some of these computer program instructions, when running, may steer the AV 100 to perform modelling maneuvers. Said maneuvers advantageously provide data that can be collected and used to generate APM features in a sequence of different steps to arrive at an accurate APM that reproduces the behavior of the AV”, “The present example mathematically demonstrates how a series of modelling maneuvers and measures under particular conditions are used to generate data to be collected in order to determine parameters of each particular model by means of least squares (LS).
Position (WGS84):
{λ, φ, h} Geodetic coordinates
Linear speed (LLS):
u Absolute horizontal speed
χ True bearing
w Absolute vertical speed
v Module of the absolute speed
γ Absolute (geometric) path angle
μ Absolute bank angle…[]”, i.e., Modeling maneuver refers to acquisition orbit procedure and position and orientation data is included in the collected telemetry data).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of Gallo to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of executing an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals, for the purpose of generating data, including position and orientation, to be collected in order to determine the location of the aerial vehicle with respect to the radio signals and the landing location to enable it to safely execute a landing procedure at the landing location.
Regarding Claim 6, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS and Gallo in combination disclose The aerial vehicle of Claim 1 as discussed above, HOBBS further discloses further comprising at least one camera (see at least HOBBS [¶0030], “the aircraft (e.g., UAV 101) can use an optical sensor such as a camera or other image sensor”) in data communication with the at least one processor (see at least HOBBS [¶0062]), wherein the at least one processor is further configured to:
receive an image stream from the at least one camera (see at least HOBBS [¶0030, Figs. 1, 3], “the aircraft (e.g., UAV 101) can use an optical sensor such as a camera or other image sensor to detect the pad and identify its center when it is within visual range of the pad. This can be used to supplement information obtained from the positioning radios or can be used as a backup methodology.”); and
locate the landing location in the image stream (see at least HOBBS [¶0030, Figs. 1, 3], “detect the pad and identify its center when it is within visual range of the pad”).
Regarding Claim 7, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS and Gallo in combination disclose The aerial vehicle of Claim 1 as discussed above, HOBBS further discloses wherein: the at least one processor (see at least HOBBS [¶0062]) is further configured to receive a relative separation between the at least two radio signals (see at least HOBBS [¶0061, Fig. 8], “Positioning circuit 834 can be included to compute the aircraft's current relative position based on real-time information included in the ranging signals received by ranging radio 832.”, the real-time information included in the ranging signals can include the distance, i.e., separation, between them); and
determining a relative location of the aerial vehicle comprises triangulation including the relative separation (see at least HOBBS [¶0061, Fig. 8], “positioning circuit 834 can be designed to perform the multilateration or trilateration, or other positioning computations [e.g., triangulation] that are used to determine the aircraft position, relative to the landing pad, based on the ranging signals.”).
Regarding Claim 8, (CURRENTLY AMENDED), HOBBS discloses A method comprising:
receiving at least two radio signals from two ground-based radio sources (see at least HOBBS [¶0017], “a plurality of ranging radios are disposed at predetermined positions on the landing pad. These radios broadcast signals that can be detected by a receiver on the UAV”);
determining a relative location of the aerial vehicle with respect to the two ground-based radio sources based on the plurality of radio signal samples (see at least HOBBS [¶0049, 0051, Figs. 1, 6, 7], “[0051] a UAV can determine its range to multiple positioning radios (e.g., positioning radios 122).”, “the aircraft determines its position as its altitude or vertical distance above the pad, V, range or horizontal distance from the center of the pad, H, and its angle of attack, φ.”);
determining a landing location relative to the two ground-based radio sources (see at least HOBBS [¶0018, 0051, Fig. 7], “[0018] four positioning radios 122 are provided to transmit positioning information to allow UAV 101 to locate its position relative to a target point of the landing pad”); and
executing a landing procedure at the landing location (see at least HOBBS [¶0018, 0051, Figs. 1, 6, 7], “[0018] positioning radios 122 allows UAV 101 to locate and land on a target point of landing pad”).
HOBBS does not explicitly disclose executing an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals to places the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations with respect to the two ground-based radio sources and provide a plurality of radio signal samples;
However, Gallo is directed towards a Computer-implemented method and system for modelling performance of a fixed-wing aerial vehicle, Gallo discloses executing an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals to places the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations with respect to the two ground-based radio sources and provide a plurality of radio signal samples (see at least Gallo, [¶0021, 0039, 0040], “The AV 100 may be commanded with the flight control system to automatically perform certain maneuvers and collect data (via telemetry) in real time that serve to generate an APM. At least some of these tasks may be coded in a computer program. Some of these computer program instructions, when running, may steer the AV 100 to perform modelling maneuvers. Said maneuvers advantageously provide data that can be collected and used to generate APM features in a sequence of different steps to arrive at an accurate APM that reproduces the behavior of the AV”, “The present example mathematically demonstrates how a series of modelling maneuvers and measures under particular conditions are used to generate data to be collected in order to determine parameters of each particular model by means of least squares (LS).
Position (WGS84):
{λ, φ, h} Geodetic coordinates
Linear speed (LLS):
u Absolute horizontal speed
χ True bearing
w Absolute vertical speed
v Module of the absolute speed
γ Absolute (geometric) path angle
μ Absolute bank angle…[]”, i.e., Modeling maneuver refers to acquisition orbit procedure and position and orientation data is included in the collected telemetry data).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of Gallo to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of executing an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals, for the purpose of generating data, including position and orientation, to be collected in order to determine the location of the aerial vehicle with respect to the radio signals and the landing location to enable it to safely execute a landing procedure at the landing location.
Regarding Claim 13, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS and Gallo in combination disclose The method of Claim 8 as discussed above, HOBBS further discloses further comprising receiving a relative separation between the two ground-based radio sources (see at least HOBBS [¶0061, Fig. 8], “Positioning circuit 834 can be included to compute the aircraft's current relative position based on real-time information included in the ranging signals received by ranging radio 832.”, the real-time information included in the ranging signals can include the distance, i.e., separation, between them), wherein determining a relative location of the aerial vehicle comprises triangulation including the relative separation (see at least HOBBS [¶0061, Fig. 8], “positioning circuit 834 can be designed to perform the multilateration or trilateration, or other positioning computations [e.g., triangulation] that are used to determine the aircraft position, relative to the landing pad, based on the ranging signals.”).
Regarding Claim 14, (CURRENTLY AMENDED) HOBBS discloses A system comprising:
two ground-based radio sources (see at least HOBBS [¶0017, Fig. 1], “a plurality of ranging radios are disposed at predetermined positions on the landing pad.”); and
an aerial vehicle (see at least HOBBS [¶0017, Fig. 1], “some embodiments of the technology disclosed herein relate to an automated landing solution for unmanned aerial vehicles”) comprising:
an antenna (see at least HOBBS [¶0057], “command/telemetry interface [] can include an antenna”);
one or more sensors configured for navigation and maneuvering (see at least HOBBS [¶0003, 0019], “[0003] The UAV can include a position determination and aircraft navigation system, which may include a radio receiver to receive the ranging signals; a positioning circuit”, “and a flight control system”; “[0019] Any of a number of techniques can be used to navigate the aircraft independently to the general area of the landing pad 102. For example, GPS, LORAN, beacons, other aids to navigation (ATON), dead reckoning, or other navigational systems or techniques can be used to navigate and fly the vehicle to the general area of the desired landing pad”); and
at least one processor (see at least HOBBS [¶0062], “a single microprocessor [] system can be used to implement the functions of one or more of aircraft control system 822, flight control circuit 836, positioning circuit 834, other aircraft components 825, as well as portions command/telemetry interface [], sensors”) in data communication with the antenna and a memory storing processor executable code (see at least HOBBS [¶0062], “components such as processing devices, memory components, communications buses and so on can be shared among two or more of these multiple functional units.”) for configuring the at least one processor to:
receive radio signals from the two ground-based radio sources (see at least HOBBS [¶0017, Fig. 1], “a plurality of ranging radios are disposed at predetermined positions on the landing pad. These radios broadcast signals that can be detected by a receiver on the UAV”);
determine a relative location of the aerial vehicle with respect to the two ground-based radio sources based on the plurality of radio signal samples (see at least [¶0049, 0051, Figs. 1, 6, 7], “[0049] In the example implementation having four positioning radios 122, the UAV can compute four spheres by ranging to each of the four positioning radios 122. The intersection of these four spheres determines the location of the UAV as shown at 612 (only two transmitters shown for clarity of illustration). This technique can allow the aircraft to determine its vertical distance, horizontal distance, and angle to landing pad”);
determine a landing location relative to the two ground-based radio sources (see at least [¶0018, 0051, Figs. 1, 6, 7], “[0018] four positioning radios 122 are provided to transmit positioning information to allow UAV 101 to locate its position relative to a target point of the landing pad”); and
execute a landing procedure at the landing location (see at least [¶0018, 0051, Figs. 1, 6, 7], “[0018] positioning radios 122 allows UAV 101 to locate and land on a target point of landing pad”).
HOBBS does not explicitly disclose execute an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals to places the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations with respect to the at least two radio signals and provide a plurality of radio signal samples;
However, Gallo is directed towards a Computer-implemented method and system for modelling performance of a fixed-wing aerial vehicle, Gallo discloses execute an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals to places the aerial vehicle in different positions and orientations with respect to the at least two radio signals and provide a plurality of radio signal samples (see at least Gallo, [¶0021, 0039, 0040], “The AV 100 may be commanded with the flight control system to automatically perform certain maneuvers and collect data (via telemetry) in real time that serve to generate an APM. At least some of these tasks may be coded in a computer program. Some of these computer program instructions, when running, may steer the AV 100 to perform modelling maneuvers. Said maneuvers advantageously provide data that can be collected and used to generate APM features in a sequence of different steps to arrive at an accurate APM that reproduces the behavior of the AV”, “The present example mathematically demonstrates how a series of modelling maneuvers and measures under particular conditions are used to generate data to be collected in order to determine parameters of each particular model by means of least squares (LS).
Position (WGS84):
{λ, φ, h} Geodetic coordinates
Linear speed (LLS):
u Absolute horizontal speed
χ True bearing
w Absolute vertical speed
v Module of the absolute speed
γ Absolute (geometric) path angle
μ Absolute bank angle…[]”, i.e., Modeling maneuver refers to acquisition orbit procedure and position and orientation data is included in the collected telemetry data).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of Gallo to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of executing an acquisition orbit procedure while receiving the at least two radio signals, for the purpose of generating data, including position and orientation, to be collected in order to determine the location of the aerial vehicle with respect to the radio signals and the landing location to enable it to safely execute a landing procedure at the landing location.
Regarding Claim 19, (CURRENTLY AMENDED), HOBBS and Gallo in combination The system of Claim 14 as discussed above, Gallo further discloses wherein the one or more sensors comprise and IMU, a magnetometer, and air data system (see at least Gallo, [¶0030, Fig.3], ”The state estimator 320 may fusion GPS 322, IMU 325 (e.g., solid-state accelerometers 329 and gyros 324), magnetometer 328, wind vanes 326 (providing direct observation of angle-of-attack and angle-of-sideslip). The air data system 310 provides observations of true airspeed, pressure and temperature to produce an estimate”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of Gallo to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of one or more sensors comprising an IMU, i.e., an inertial measurement unit, a magnetometer, and an air data system, for the purpose of providing accurate and cost-efficient Aircraft Performance Model (APM). An accurate APM can significantly improve the performance of the aircraft control and navigation systems, as taught by Gallo.
Regarding Claim 20, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS and Gallo in combination The system of Claim 14 as discussed above, HOBBS further discloses wherein: the at least one processor (see at least HOBBS [¶0062]) is further configured to receive a relative separation between the two ground-based radio sources (see at least HOBBS [¶0061, Fig. 8], “Positioning circuit 834 can be included to compute the aircraft's current relative position based on real-time information included in the ranging signals received by ranging radio 832.”, the real-time information included in the ranging signals can include the distance, i.e., separation, between them); and
determining a relative location of the aerial vehicle comprises triangulation including the relative separation (see at least HOBBS [¶0061, Fig. 8], “positioning circuit 834 can be designed to perform the multilateration or trilateration, or other positioning computations [e.g., triangulation] that are used to determine the aircraft position, relative to the landing pad, based on the ranging signals.”).
Claims 3, 4, 10, 11, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180357910 HOBBS et.al., in view of US 20180314776 Gallo et. al., and further in view of US 20180090013 PARK et. al. (PARK hereafter).
Regarding Claim 3, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS and Gallo in combination disclose The aerial vehicle of Claim 1 as discussed above, but do not explicitly disclose further comprising an altimeter in data communication with the at least one processor, wherein:
the at least one processor is further configured to determine an altitude based on the altimeter; and
the relative location of the aerial vehicle comprises the altitude.
However, PARK is directed towards Unmanned Aircraft and Operation Thereof, PARK discloses further comprising an altimeter (see at least PARK, [¶0233, Fig. 4], “the altitude dimension is obtained from an onboard sensor of the vehicle (e.g., one of the drone sensors 62, such as drone altimeter 66).”) in data communication with the at least one processor (see at least PARK, [¶0233, Fig. 4], “the drone location determination unit (DLU) 64, which comprises processor circuitry 70, may be considered a vehicle location determination processor configured to determine location of the vehicle with respect to three dimensions, wherein location of the vehicle with respect to at least two of the dimensions is obtained using a terrestrial or satellite navigation system (e.g., GNSS), and wherein one of the three dimension is an altitude dimension”), wherein:
the at least one processor is further configured to determine an altitude based on the altimeter (see at least PARK, [¶0233, Fig. 4]); and
the relative location of the aerial vehicle comprises the altitude (see at least PARK, [¶0233, Fig. 4]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of PARK to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use an altimeter in data communication with the at least one processor, to determine an altitude based on the altimeter, and the relative location of the aerial vehicle, for the purpose of enabling the aerial vehicle to determine location with respect to three dimensions, wherein one of the three dimension is an altitude dimension, as taught by PARK.
Regarding Claim 4, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS, Gallo and PARK in combination disclose The aerial vehicle of Claim 3 as discussed above, PARK further discloses wherein: the altimeter comprises a barometric altimeter (see at least PARK, [¶0230], “the altitude coordinate may be determined, and a spatial position resolved, by the use of either pressure altimeter, radar altimeter or accelerometer sensors”, Examiner notes that pressure altimeter refers to barometric pressure altimeter, or barometric altimeter);
the at least one processor is further configured to receive a ground level barometric altimeter signal via the antenna (see at least PARK, [¶0232, Fig. 3A] “If a pressure altimeter is used to determine an altitude coordinate, then a correction may be applied per a current local barometric pressure data object which is sent by communications infrastructure (RSU) 30”); and
determining the relative altitude comprises comparing the ground level barometric altimeter signal to a measurement from the barometric altimeter (see at least PARK, [¶0232, Fig. 3A] “when the location determination unit (LDU) 64 uses the onboard altitude sensor to provide the 3rd dimension, the value received from the pressure sensor may not be accurate as it needs to be corrected for the current barometric pressure, which changes with the weather. For that reason, the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 sends in a VCO the current barometric pressure at the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30. As the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 is on the ground and likely knows its altitude and the current barometric pressure, the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 can calculate the correction factor.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of PARK to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of receiving a ground level barometric altimeter signal and determining the relative altitude by comparing the ground level barometric altimeter signal to a measurement from the barometric altimeter for the purpose of calculating a correction factor for current barometric pressure, which changes with the weather, as taught by PARK.
Regarding Claim 10, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS and Gallo in combination disclose The method of Claim 8 as discussed above, but do not explicitly disclose further comprising determining an altitude based on an altimeter, wherein the relative location of the aerial vehicle comprises the altitude.
However, PARK is directed towards Unmanned Aircraft and Operation Thereof, PARK discloses further comprising determining an altitude based on an altimeter (see at least PARK, [¶0233, Fig. 4], “the altitude dimension is obtained from an onboard sensor of the vehicle (e.g., one of the drone sensors 62, such as drone altimeter 66).”), wherein the relative location of the aerial vehicle comprises the altitude (see at least PARK, [¶0233, Fig. 4], “the drone location determination unit (DLU) 64, which comprises processor circuitry 70, may be considered a vehicle location determination processor configured to determine location of the vehicle with respect to three dimensions, wherein location of the vehicle with respect to at least two of the dimensions is obtained using a terrestrial or satellite navigation system (e.g., GNSS), and wherein one of the three dimension is an altitude dimension”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of PARK to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of determining an altitude based on an altimeter, and the relative location of the aerial vehicle, by enabling the aerial vehicle to determine location with respect to three dimensions, wherein one of the three dimension is an altitude dimension, as taught by PARK.
Regarding Claim 11, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS, Gallo and PARK in combination disclose The method of Claim 10 as discussed above, PARK further discloses further comprising: performing a ground level barometric altitude measurement via at least one of the two ground-based radio sources (see at least PARK, [¶0232, Fig. 3A], “the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 sends in a VCO the current barometric pressure at the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30. As the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 is on the ground and likely knows its altitude and the current barometric pressure, the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 can calculate the correction factor.”); and
comparing the ground level barometric altitude measurement to an aerial vehicle barometric altimeter measurement (see at least PARK, [¶0232, Fig. 3A] “If a pressure altimeter is used to determine an altitude coordinate, then a correction may be applied per a current local barometric pressure data object which is sent by communications infrastructure (RSU) 30”), wherein the altimeter comprises a barometric altimeter (see at least PARK, [¶0230], “the altitude coordinate may be determined, and a spatial position resolved, by the use of either pressure altimeter, radar altimeter or accelerometer sensors”. The pressure altimeter refers to barometric pressure altimeter, or barometric altimeter).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of PARK to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique performing a ground level barometric altitude measurement and comparing the ground level barometric altitude measurement to an aerial vehicle barometric altimeter measurement for the purpose of calculating a correction factor for current barometric pressure, which changes with the weather, as taught by PARK.
Regarding Claim 16, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS and Gallo in combination disclose The system of Claim 14 as discussed above, but do not explicitly disclose further comprising an altimeter in data communication with the at least one processor, wherein:
the at least one processor is further configured to determine an altitude based on the altimeter; and
the relative location of the aerial vehicle comprises the altitude.
However, PARK discloses further comprising an altimeter (see at least PARK, [¶0233, Fig. 4], “the altitude dimension is obtained from an onboard sensor of the vehicle (e.g., one of the drone sensors 62, such as drone altimeter 66).”) in data communication with the at least one processor (see at least PARK, [¶0233, Fig. 4], “the drone location determination unit (DLU) 64, which comprises processor circuitry 70, may be considered a vehicle location determination processor configured to determine location of the vehicle with respect to three dimensions, wherein location of the vehicle with respect to at least two of the dimensions is obtained using a terrestrial or satellite navigation system (e.g., GNSS), and wherein one of the three dimension is an altitude dimension”), wherein:
the at least one processor is further configured to determine an altitude based on the altimeter (see at least PARK, [¶0233, Fig. 4]); and
the relative location of the aerial vehicle comprises the altitude (see at least PARK, [¶0233, Fig. 4]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of PARK to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use an altimeter in data communication with the at least one processor, to determine an altitude based on the altimeter, and the relative location of the aerial vehicle, for the purpose of enabling the aerial vehicle to determine location with respect to three dimensions, wherein one of the three dimension is an altitude dimension, as taught by PARK.
Regarding Claim 17, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS, Gallo and PARK in combination disclose The system of Claim 16 as discussed above, PARK further discloses wherein: the altimeter comprises a barometric altimeter (see at least PARK, [¶0230], “the altitude coordinate may be determined, and a spatial position resolved, by the use of either pressure altimeter, radar altimeter or accelerometer sensors”, Examiner notes that pressure altimeter refers to barometric pressure altimeter, or barometric altimeter);
each ground-based radio source is configured to perform a ground level barometric altitude measurement (see at least PARK, [¶0232, Fig. 3A] “the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 sends in a VCO the current barometric pressure at the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30. As the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 is on the ground and likely knows its altitude and the current barometric pressure, the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 can calculate the correction factor.”);
the at least one processor is further configured to receive the ground level barometric altitude measurement via the antenna (see at least PARK, [¶0232, Fig. 3A] “If a pressure altimeter is used to determine an altitude coordinate, then a correction may be applied per a current local barometric pressure data object which is sent by communications infrastructure (RSU) 30”); and
determining the relative altitude comprises comparing the ground level barometric altitude measurement signal to a measurement from the barometric altimeter (see at least PARK, [¶0232, Fig. 3A] “when the location determination unit (LDU) 64 uses the onboard altitude sensor to provide the 3rd dimension, the value received from the pressure sensor may not be accurate as it needs to be corrected for the current barometric pressure, which changes with the weather. For that reason, the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 sends in a VCO the current barometric pressure at the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30. As the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 is on the ground and likely knows its altitude and the current barometric pressure, the communications infrastructure (RSU) 30 can calculate the correction factor.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of PARK to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of receiving a ground level barometric altimeter signal and determining the relative altitude by comparing the ground level barometric altimeter signal to a measurement from the barometric altimeter for the purpose of calculating a correction factor for current barometric pressure, which changes with the weather, as taught by PARK.
Claims 5, 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180357910 HOBBS et.al., in view of US 20180314776 Gallo et. al., further in view of US 20180090013 PARK et. al., and further in view of US 20170285631 Bethke et. al., (Bethke hereafter).
Regarding Claim 5, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS and Gallo in combination disclose The aerial vehicle of Claim 1 as discussed above, HOBBS further discloses receive a location corresponding to each of the at least two radio signals (see at least [¶0018, 0051, Fig. 7], “[0018] four positioning radios 122 are provided to transmit positioning information to allow UAV 101 to locate its position relative to a target point of the landing pad”).
HOBBS and Gallo do not explicitly disclose further comprising a data storage element in data communication with the at least one processor, wherein:
the at least one processor is further configured to: retrieve a stored terrain map from the data storage device; and
determining the relative location comprises comparing the received locations to the stored terrain map.
However, Bethke is directed towards Methods, systems, and apparatus, including computer programs encoded on computer storage media, for unmanned aerial vehicle modular command priority determination and filtering system. Bethke discloses further comprising a data storage element in data communication with the at least one processor (see at least Bethke, [¶0117] Data collected by the devices may be stored on the device collecting the data, or the data may be stored on non-volatile memory 718 of the UAV processing system 600.”), wherein: the at least one processor is further configured to: retrieve a stored terrain map from the data storage device (see at least Bethke, [¶0064], “the UAV 202 can store information describing terrain of a geographic area”); and
determining the relative location comprises comparing the received locations to the stored terrain map (see at least Bethke, [¶0064], “the UAV 202 can store information describing terrain of a geographic area, and can compare its location (e.g., using a GNSS receiver) with the terrain information, and determine that the UAV 202 is within a threshold distance of upcoming terrain”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of Bethke to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of retrieving a stored terrain map from the data storage device, receiving a location corresponding to each of the at least two radio signals, and determining the relative location by comparing the received locations to the stored terrain map, as taught by Bethke, to allow the UAVs to perform complicated maneuvers while maintaining safe operation of the UAV (e.g., the UAV will not exceed air speed limits, the UAV will remain in an approved geofence, the UAV will not perform a maneuver not commensurate with its flight capabilities). In this way, application programs can be executed on UAVs, and operators of UAV flights can have assurances that the flights will be safe.
Regarding Claim 12, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS and Gallo in combination disclose The method of Claim 8 as discussed above, HOBBS further discloses receiving a location corresponding to each of the two ground-based radio sources (see at least [¶0018, 0051, Fig. 7], “[0018] four positioning radios 122 are provided to transmit positioning information to allow UAV 101 to locate its position relative to a target point of the landing pad”).
HOBBS and Gallo do not explicitly disclose and comparing the received locations to a terrain map.
However, Bethke is directed towards Methods, systems, and apparatus, including computer programs encoded on computer storage media, for unmanned aerial vehicle modular command priority determination and filtering system. Bethke discloses comparing the received locations to a terrain map (see at least Bethke, [¶0064], “the UAV 202 can store information describing terrain of a geographic area, and can compare its location (e.g., using a GNSS receiver) with the terrain information, and determine that the UAV 202 is within a threshold distance of upcoming terrain”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of Bethke to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of receiving a location corresponding to each of the two ground-based radio sources and comparing the received locations to a terrain map, as taught by Bethke, to allow the UAVs to perform complicated maneuvers while maintaining safe operation of the UAV (e.g., the UAV will not exceed air speed limits, the UAV will remain in an approved geofence, the UAV will not perform a maneuver not commensurate with its flight capabilities). In this way, application programs can be executed on UAVs, and operators of UAV flights can have assurances that the flights will be safe.
Regarding Claim 18, (ORIGINAL), HOBBS and Gallo in combination disclose The system of Claim 14 as discussed above, HOBBS further discloses receive a location corresponding to each of the two ground-based radio sources (see at least [¶0018, 0051, Fig. 7], “[0018] four positioning radios 122 are provided to transmit positioning information to allow UAV 101 to locate its position relative to a target point of the landing pad”).
HOBBS and Gallo do not explicitly disclose wherein: the aerial vehicle further comprises a data storage element in data communication with the at least one processor;
the at least one processor is further configured to:
retrieve a stored terrain map from the data storage device; and
determining the relative location comprises comparing the received locations to the stored terrain map.
However, Bethke discloses wherein: the aerial vehicle further comprises a data storage element in data communication with the at least one processor (see at least Bethke, [¶0117] Data collected by the devices may be stored on the device collecting the data, or the data may be stored on non-volatile memory 718 of the UAV processing system 600.”);
the at least one processor is further configured to: retrieve a stored terrain map from the data storage device (see at least Bethke, [¶0064], “the UAV 202 can store information describing terrain of a geographic area”); and
determining the relative location comprises comparing the received locations to the stored terrain map (see at least Bethke, [¶0064], “the UAV 202 can store information describing terrain of a geographic area, and can compare its location (e.g., using a GNSS receiver) with the terrain information, and determine that the UAV 202 is within a threshold distance of upcoming terrain”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have considered the teachings of Bethke to modify HOBBS, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use the technique of retrieving a stored terrain map from the data storage device, receive a location corresponding to each of the two ground-based radio sources, and determining the relative location by comparing the received locations to the stored terrain map, as taught by Bethke, to allow the UAVs to perform complicated maneuvers while maintaining safe operation of the UAV (e.g., the UAV will not exceed air speed limits, the UAV will remain in an approved geofence, the UAV will not perform a maneuver not commensurate with its flight capabilities). In this way, application programs can be executed on UAVs, and operators of UAV flights can have assurances that the flights will be safe.
Additional References Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ryan et al. (US 20120299763) discloses An aircraft avionics system and method for automatically determining an aircraft position based on transmissions from UAT ground stations and determines one or more possible positions for the aircraft at which the aircraft is at the determined distances from respective UAT ground stations. The system and method also may use dead reckoning or VOR or ADF signals and may also determine the position of an aircraft by determining true bearings to Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) ground stations (Abstract).
Conclusion
Examiner notes that the fundamentals of the rejection are based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language. Any reference to specific figures, column, line and paragraphs should not be considered limiting in any way, the entire cited reference, as well as any secondary teaching reference(s), are considered to provide relevant disclosure relating to the claimed invention. Applicant is kindly invited to consider the reference as a whole. References are to be interpreted as by one of ordinary skill in the art rather than as by a novice. See MPEP 2141. Therefore, the relevant inquiry when interpreting a reference is not what the reference expressly discloses on its face but what the reference would teach or suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Examiner encourages Applicant to fill out and submit form PTO-SB-439 to allow internet communications in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 (MPEP 502.03). Should the need arise to perfect applicant-proposed or examiner’s amendments, authorization for e-mail correspondence would have already been authorized and would save time.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Neit J. Nieves Flores whose telephone number is (703)756-5864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0930-1800 AST.
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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached at (571) 272-4896. 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.
/Neit J. Nieves Flores/
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3664
/RACHID BENDIDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights