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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Zhou (CN 113733953 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Zhou discloses a capsule for mounting a drone comprising: a body having a first space for accommodating a drone (cavity, p2) and a second space provided to surround at least a portion of the first space(ballast tank and pump Element 10); a base portion provided in the first space so that a drone is mounted (lifting device, Fig. 3.); and a valve (Drain Hole 8 is described as a valve, page 7) provided in the body to open or close the second space so that external fluid is introduced into the second space.
Regarding Claim 2, Zhou discloses a capsule for mounting a drone of claim 1, further comprising a charging unit (bottom of page 7) provided in the first space and configured to charge a battery of the drone mounted on the base portion.
Regarding Claim 3, Zhou discloses a capsule for mounting a drone of claim 1, wherein the base portion is provided to be able to move up and down in the first space. (See Lift in Fig. 3.)
Regarding Claim 4, Zhou discloses a capsule for mounting a drone of claim 1, wherein the body further includes a cover provided to be opened or closed so as to open the first space to the outside. (Element 2)
Regarding Claim 7, Zhou discloses a capsule for mounting a drone of claim 1, wherein the body further includes a thrust generating unit for generating a propulsive force under a surface of water. (Element 7)
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 113733953 A) in view of LV (CN 112249275 A).
Regarding Claim 5, Zhou discloses capsule for mounting a drone of claim 4, but does not explicitly disclose wherein an antenna for communicating with the drone is provided on the cover.
LV discloses a a capsule for mounting of a drone wherein an antenna for communicating with the drone is provided on the cover. (Element 5.) It would have been obvious at the time of filing for a person of ordinary skill in the marine art to add the antenna of LV to the cover of Zhou which can be accomplished with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to add the antenna is to facilitate wireless communications.
Claims 6, 8, 11, 12, 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 113733953 A) in view of Smoker (US 20150008280 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Zho discloses a submarine surveillance and reconnaissance system comprising: one or more capsules for mounting drones connected to the submarine, wherein each of the capsules for mounting drones includes a body having a first space for accommodating a drone and a second space provided to surround at least a portion of the first space, a base portion provided in the first space so that a drone is mounted, and a valve provided in the body to open or close the second space so that external fluid is introduced into the second space (See rejection Claim 1) but does not explicitly disclose a submarine.
Smoker discloses a capsule for mounting a drone further comprising a submarine (Element 601). It would have been obvious at the time of filing for a person of ordinary skill in the marine art to use a submarine to launch the capsule of Zhou which can be accomplished with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify Zhou is to increase the range.
Regarding Claim 11, Zho in view of Smoker discloses a submarine surveillance and reconnaissance system of claim 8, wherein the capsules for mounting drones are accommodated inside the submarine or provided to be discharged to an outside of the submarine. (See Smoker Fig. 1.)
Regarding Claim 12, Zho in view of Smoker discloses submarine surveillance and reconnaissance system of claim 11, wherein the body further includes a thrust generating unit for generating a propulsive force under a surface of water, and the thrust generating unit is provided to operate when the capsules for mounting drones are discharged to the outside of the submarine. (See rejection Claim 7 above.)
Regarding Claim 14, Zho in view of Smoker discloses submarine surveillance and reconnaissance system of claim 11, wherein, when the capsules for mounting drones are recovered to the submarine, the valve is opened and water is introduced into the second space. (Zhou is capable of being operated in this manner by using the ballast tank. See MPEP 2114.)
Regarding Claim 6, Zho in view of Smoker discloses capsule for mounting a drone of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose (in the combination proposed) wherein the body further includes one or more control wings provided to be unfolded.
Smoker discloses wherein the body further includes one or more control wings provided to be unfolded. (Element 105) It would have been obvious at the time of filing for a person of ordinary skill in the marine art to use add wings to launch the capsule of Zhou which can be accomplished with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify Zhou is to facilitate steering the capsule.
Claims 13, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 113733953 A) and in view of Smoker and further in view of LV (CN 112249275 A)
Regar
Regarding Claim 13, Zho in view of Smoker discloses submarine surveillance and reconnaissance system of claim 11, wherein the body includes one or more control wings provided to be unfolded, the control wings are provided to be selectively unfolded as necessary when the capsules for mounting drones are discharged to the outside of the submarine, and the body is maintained level through the control wings but does not explicitly disclose so that only an antenna is exposed on the surface of water when the capsules for mounting drones are discharged to the outside of the submarine and the drone is separated from the capsules for mounting drones.
LV discloses a a capsule for mounting of a drone wherein an antenna for communicating with the drone is provided on the cover. (Element 5.) It would have been obvious at the time of filing for a person of ordinary skill in the marine art to add the antenna of LV to the cover of Zhou which can be accomplished with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to add the antenna is to facilitate wireless communications, and the capsule is capable of being operated so only the antenna is exposed.
Regarding Claim 15, Zho in view of Smoker and further in view of LV discloses the submarine surveillance and reconnaissance system of claim 11, wherein the body further includes a cover provided to be opened or closed so as to open the first space to the outside, an antenna for communicating with the drone and the submarine is provided on the cover, and the body is maintained level through the control wings so that only an antenna is exposed on the surface of water when the capsule for mounting drones is discharged to the outside of the submarine and the drone is separated from the capsule for mounting drones. (See rejection 13 above.)
Claim 9, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou (CN 113733953 A) in view of Smoker (US 20150008280 A1) and further in view of Hu (CN 105539788 A).
Regarding Claim 10, Zhou in view of Smoker discloses the submarine surveillance and reconnaissance system of claim 8, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the body is connected to the submarine through a cable, and the cable includes a communication line and a power line.
Hu discloses wherein the body is connected to the submarine through a cable, and the cable includes a communication line and a power line. (Element 29) It would have been obvious at the time of filing for a person of ordinary skill in the marine art to use a cable with the capsule of Zhou which can be accomplished with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify Zhou is to increase the power that can be delivered for charging.
Regarding Claim 9, Zhou in view of Smoker and further in view of Hu discloses submarine surveillance and reconnaissance system of claim 8, but does not explicitly disclose (in the previous combination) wherein one or more drones to which predetermined missions are set are accommodated inside the one or more capsules for mounting drones, and some drones of the one or more drones have different missions from remaining drones.
Hu discloses wherein one or more drones to which predetermined missions are set are accommodated inside the one or more capsules for mounting drones, and some drones of the one or more drones have different missions from remaining drones. (Fig. 1.) It would have been obvious at the time of filing for a person of ordinary skill in the marine art to place several drones with different mission in the capsule of Zhou which can be accomplished with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to modify Zhou is to use it like a carrier for multiple missions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW POLAY whose telephone number is (408)918-9746. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 Pacific.
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, Joe Morano can be reached at 5712726684. 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.
/ANDREW POLAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3615 30 Sept 2025