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
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 15 and 25 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 (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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210138913 A1 Geiss; Michael and further in view of US 20210339881 A1 Bevirt; JoeBen et al. in view of US 20220011782 A1 Mikic; Gregor Veble et al.
Regarding Claim 15, Geiss teaches, A control apparatus for an aircraft, the aircraft including: at least one power generator configured to generate electric power (fig. 3, element 220); at least one first battery configured to store electric power (fig. 3, element 210); at least one first electric motor configured to operate using electric power supplied from the power generator and the first battery (fig. 3, element 240); at least one first diode including an anode connected to a side of the power generator, and a cathode connected to a side of the first battery (fig. 3, element 315 para 0123 diode); at least one second battery configured to store electric power (fig. 3, elements 210a and 210b); at least one second electric motor configured to operate using electric power supplied from the power generator and the second battery (fig. 3, element 240b); at least one second diode including an anode connected to the side of the power generator, and a cathode connected to a side of the second battery (fig. 3, element 315b); and a plurality of rotors configured to generate thrust acting on a fuselage (fig. 1, element 108), wherein each of the rotors is driven by one of the first electric motor or the second electric motor, or by both the first electric motor and the second electric motor (para 0086),
the rotors are vertical rotors configured to generate thrust in a vertical direction, the vertical rotors arranged on one side of a center line of the fuselage in a left-right direction are two or more in number and the vertical rotors arranged on an other side of the center line of the fuselage are two or more in number, the vertical rotors driven by the first electric motor are arranged in point symmetry with respect to a center of gravity of the fuselage (para 0050), the vertical rotors driven by the second electric motor are arranged in point symmetry with respect to the center of gravity of the fuselage, the first electric motor and the second electric motor are provided at each of the rotors, and two of the vertical rotors arranged in point symmetry with respect to the center of gravity of the fuselage rotates in different directions (fig. 1D), but is silent on, the control apparatus comprises one or more processors that execute computer-executable instructions stored in a memory, the one or more processors execute the computer-executable instructions to cause the control device to: calculate an output power command value for each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor to provide a calculated output power command value for each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor; control each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor based on the calculated output power command value; monitor a state of charge, which is an SOC, of each of the first battery and the second battery; determine, based on the SOC of each of the first battery and the second battery, whether a difference between the SOC of the first battery and the SOC of the second battery satisfies a prescribed condition; and decrease output power to one of the first electric motor or the second electric motor below the calculated output power command value and increase output power to the other of the first electric motor or the second electric motor above the calculated output power command value in a case where the difference between the SOC of the first battery and the SOC of the second battery satisfies the prescribed condition.
However, Bevirt teaches, the control apparatus comprises one or more processors that execute computer-executable instructions stored in a memory (para 0060),
the one or more processors execute the computer-executable instructions to cause the control device to: calculate an output power command value for each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor to provide a calculated output power command value for each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor (para 0088 and figs 4-6);
control each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor based on the output power command value (para 0060); monitor a state of charge, which is an SOC, of each of the first battery and the second battery (para0046); determine, based on the SOC of each of the first battery and the second battery, whether a difference between the SOC of the first battery and the SOC of the second battery satisfies a prescribed condition (fig. 19);
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aircraft taught by Geiss with the flight computer by Bevirt with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to combine is to determine the failure status and additional power requirements of other motors.
Furthermore, Mikic teaches, the control apparatus comprises one or more processors that execute computer-executable instructions stored in a memory (para 0055 onboard processor, 0056), the one or more processors execute the computer-executable instructions to cause the control device to: calculate an output power command value for each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor (para 0043); control each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor based on the output power command value (para 0043); monitor a state of charge, which is an SOC, of each of the first battery and the second battery (para 0053 and 0054, processor/battery Management System BMS); determine, based on the SOC of each of the first battery and the second battery, whether a difference between the SOC of the first battery and the SOC of the second battery satisfies a prescribed condition (para 0054, BMS energy system conditions equal to prescribed conditions); and decrease output power to one of the first electric motor or the second electric motor below the output power command value and increase output power to the other of the first electric motor or the second electric motor above the output power command value in a case where the difference between the SOC of the first battery and the SOC of the second battery satisfies the prescribed condition (0056 “the aircraft can operate one or more flight components and/or battery at reduced capacity when at low SoC (and/or high DoD) and/or load balance across multiple batteries (e.g., packs, cells, etc.) such that all batteries simultaneously satisfy the condition and/or meet the threshold at the same initial time”.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aircraft taught by Geiss with the processors taught by Mikic with a reasonable expectation of success in order to “allow for a burst of power used for landing the aircraft” (para 0029).
Regarding claim 16, Geiss as modified teaches, the control apparatus for the aircraft according to claim 15, Mikic teaches, wherein one of the first electric motor or the second electric motor is connected to the first battery or the second battery, whichever has a lower SOC, and the other of the first electric motor or the second electric motor is connected to the first battery or the second battery, whichever has a higher SOC ( para 0041 and para 0074).
Regarding claims 17 Geiss as modified teaches, wherein in a case where the difference between the SOC of the first battery and the SOC of the second battery is equal to or more than a first prescribed value, and the SOC of the first battery is lower than the SOC of the second battery (pare 0074 uneven distribution of charge based on SOC), the one or more processors cause the control device to decrease output power of the first electric motor below the calculated output power command value and to increase output power of the second electric motor above the calculated output power command value (para 0092).
Regarding claims 18 Geiss as modified teaches, the control apparatus for the aircraft according to claim 15, Mikic teaches, , wherein in a case where the difference between the SOC of the first battery and the SOC of the second battery is greater than or equal to a first prescribed value, the SOC of the first battery is lower than the SOC of the second battery, and the SOC of the first battery is less than a second prescribed value (pare 0074 uneven distribution of charge based on SOC), the one or more processors cause the control device to decrease output power of the first electric motor below the output power command value and to increase output power of the second electric motor above the output power command value (para 0092).
Regarding claims 19 Geiss as modified teaches, the control apparatus for the aircraft according to claim 15, Mikic teaches, wherein a number of the rotors arranged on one side of a center line of the fuselage in a left-right direction is equal to a number of the rotors arranged on another side of the center line (fig. 14A, element 1-6), among the rotors arranged on the one side, a number of the rotors driven by the first electric motor is equal to a number of the rotors driven by the second electric motor (fig. 14A and 14B), and among the rotors arranged on the other side, a number of the rotors driven by the first electric motor is equal to a number of the rotors driven by the second electric motor (fig. 14A and 14B).
Claim 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geiss and further in view of Bevirt in view of US 20200079520 A1 Demizu; Ricardo Takeshi et al.
Regarding claims 25 Geiss teaches, a control apparatus for an aircraft, the aircraft including: at least one power generator configured to generate electric power (fig. 3, element 220); at least one first battery configured to store electric power (fig. 3, element 210a); at least one first electric motor configured to operate using electric power supplied from the power generator and the first battery (fig. 3, element 240a); at least one first diode include an anode connected to a side of the power generator and a cathode connected to a side of the first battery (fig. 3, element 315a para 0123 diode); at least one second battery configured to store electric power (fig. 3, element 210b); at least one second electric motor configured to operate using electric power supplied from the power generator and the second battery (fig. 3, elements 240b and 210b); at least one second diode including an anode connected to the side of the power generator and a cathode connected to a side of the second battery (fig. 3, element 315b); and a plurality of rotors configured to generate thrust acting on a fuselage (fig. 1, element 108),
But is silent on, the plurality of rotors are vertical rotors configured to generate thrust in a vertical direction, wherein the vertical rotors arranged on one side of a center line of the fuselage in a left-right direction are two or more in number the vertical rotors arranged on the other side are two or more in number, among the rotors arranged on the one side, a number of the rotors driven by the first electric motor is equal to a number of the rotors driven by the second electric motor, among the rotors arranged on the other side, a number of the rotors driven by the first electric motor is equal to a number of the rotors driven by the second electric motor, the rotors driven by the first electric motor are arranged in point symmetry with respect to a center of gravity of the fuselage, the first electric motor and the second electric motor are provided at each of the rotors, and two of the vertical rotors arranged in point symmetry with respect to the center of gravity of the fuselage rotates in different directions, the rotors driven by the second electric motor are arranged in point symmetry with respect to the center of gravity of the fuselage,
However, Bevirt teaches, the plurality of rotors are vertical rotors configured to generate thrust in a vertical direction (figs. 1C and 1D), wherein the vertical rotors arranged on one side of a center line of the fuselage in a left-right direction are two or more in number the vertical rotors arranged on the other side are two or more in number (figs. 1C and 1D), among the rotors arranged on the one side, a number of the rotors driven by the first electric motor is equal to a number of the rotors driven by the second electric motor (fig. 2B), among the rotors arranged on the other side, a number of the rotors driven by the first electric motor is equal to a number of the rotors driven by the second electric motor (fig. 2B), the rotors driven by the first electric motor are arranged in point symmetry with respect to a center of gravity of the fuselage (fig. 2B),
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aircraft taught by Geiss with the vertical rotors taught by Bevirt with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation to combine is to balance the lift of the.
Furthermore, Demizu teaches, the first electric motor and the second electric motor are provided at each of the rotors (fig. 19),
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the aircraft taught by Geiss with the first and second electric motors taught by Demize with a reasonable expectation of success so that “failure of one motor can be compensated by another motor of the pair connected to the common gearbox” (para 0064).
Bevirt teaches, and two of the vertical rotors arranged in point symmetry with respect to the center of gravity of the fuselage rotates in different directions (fig. 1D rotors have opposite leading edge),
Demizu teaches, the rotors driven by the second electric motor are arranged in point symmetry with respect to the center of gravity of the fuselage (fig. 18),
Geiss further teaches, the control apparatus comprises one or more processors that execute computer-executable instructions stored in a memory (para 0055 onboard processor, 0056), the one or more processors execute the computer-executable instructions to cause the control device to: calculate an output power command value for each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor (para 0043)
Bevirt teaches, to provide a calculated output power command value for each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor(para 0088 and figs 4-6);
Geiss teaches, control each of the first electric motor and the second electric motor based on the calculated output power command value (para 0043); monitor a state of charge, which is an SOC, of each of the first battery and the second battery (para 0053 and 0054, processor/battery Management System BMS); determine, based on the SOC of each of the first battery and the second battery, whether a difference between the SOC of the first battery and the SOC of the second battery satisfies a prescribed condition (para 0054, BMS energy system conditions equal to prescribed conditions); and decrease output power to one of the first electric motor or the second electric motor below the calculated output power command value and increase output power to the other of the first electric motor or the second electric motor above the output power command value in a case where the difference between the SOC of the first battery and the SOC of the second battery satisfies the prescribed condition (para 0074, load balancing, 0056 “the aircraft can operate one or more flight components and/or battery at reduced capacity when at low SoC (and/or high DoD) and/or load balance across multiple batteries (e.g., packs, cells, etc.) such that all batteries simultaneously satisfy the condition and/or meet the threshold at the same initial time”.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CINDI M. CURRY whose telephone number is (469)295-9296. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-4:30 M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua J. Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. The fax 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.
/C.M.C/
Examiner
Art Unit 3642
/JOSHUA J MICHENER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642