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 the Claims
This first non-final action is in response to applicant's amendment filing on April 07, 2026. Claim 1-20 were cancelled. Claims 21-40 are pending and have been considered as follows.
Examiner's response
Applicant’s arguments/amendments with respect to the Claim and Specification objections have been considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objections to the Specification and Claims have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments/arguments with respect to the rejections to claims under 35 U.S.C 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections to claims under 35 U.S.C 112(b) have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim rejections under 101 have been considered but not persuasive. Applicant argued that the claims are directed to a machine-implemented method of physically configuring, deploying, and controlling drone fleets in two distinct operational modes, with automated regulatory-compliance-based mode selection, schedule-driven receiver dispatch, on-board camera event detection, and immutable audit logging.
The Examiner has carefully considered applicant’s arguments and respectfully disagrees. Specifically, these claims (e.g. Claim 21) are drawn to the platform that coordinates the operators, receivers and administrators. As presented, the claims are merely a scheduling system implemented on a computer and do not overcome the 101 rejections. Implementing a machine is just using a generic computer to implement the abstract idea. Applicant’s argument that they are controlling physical machines in the real world is not reflected in the claims. The method is to manage and automate drone fleets. While the claim indicates that the drones can be used in two modes (thereby further defining the drones being managed) nothing in the claim is actually controlling the drones. It is merely monitoring their movement/actions and making a record of those movement/actions. This whole system appears to be merely a workflow management system.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim rejections under 35 USC 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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Analysis of Claim 21
In January, 2019 (updated October 2019), the USPTO released new examination guidelines setting forth a two-step inquiry for determining whether a claim is directed to non-statutory subject matter. According to the guidelines, a claim is directed to non-statutory subject matter if:
STEP 1: the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter), or
STEP 2: the claim recites a judicial exception, e.g. an abstract idea, without reciting additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as determined using the following analysis:
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
Using the two-step inquiry, it is clear that Claim 21 is directed toward non-statutory subject matter, as shown below:
STEP 1: Does Claim 21 fall within one of the statutory categories? Yes. The claim is directed toward a method (process) which falls within one of the statutory categories.
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon or an abstract idea? Yes, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
With regard to STEP 2A (PRONG 1), the guidelines provide three groupings of subject matter that are considered abstract ideas:
Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations;
Certain methods of organizing human activity – fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions); and
Mental processes – concepts that are practicably performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion).
Claim 21. A method used to manage and automate drone fleets, through a platform as a service, characterized in that the method comprises:
the drones being configured for use in two modes:
a remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs), wherein an operator controls each drone via a touch screen of a remote control of the drone, and
an unmanned aerial systems (UAS) wherein autonomous flights of the drones are programmed and dispatched from the platform, the platform selecting between the RPAs mode and the UAS mode based on aeronautical regulations of a jurisdiction in which the drones operate: and
the platform being organized into a plurality of client accounts, wherein each of account of the plurality of client accounts has the following configuration: operators, receivers, and an administrator, and wherein:
the operators are in charge of piloting the drones in the remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode, and each operator enters the platform with an associated routine and password via an interface integrated in a touch screen of a remote control of the drones, and an operator's work is mandatory in areas where aeronautical regulations of a country require it;
the receivers are entered into the platform responsive to creation of the client account with assignment of receiver schedules and vacation periods, the platform routing alarm alert notifications to available receivers based on the assigned receiver schedules and vacation periods, and in case of a problem detected by on-board cameras in a particular drone used in the remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode or in the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode, the receivers are responsible for attending an alarm alert notification and going to an event site to execute corrective actions responsive to the problem detected by the drone; and
the administrator has access to the platform through private login through a web page associated with the platform, the web page being compatible for use on computers and smartphones, the administrator enters the web page using a password or digital certificate to access a database with statistics of each event, the administrator organizes and controls operation of the client account, plans tasks for the operators and the receivers, and keeps data of the receivers and the operators up to date, in case of a problem detected by an on-board camera in a drone operating in the remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode or in the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode, the administrator and the receivers receive the alarm alert notification to review the problem live and have access to review detail, and only the administrator is qualified and enabled to cancel the alarm alert notification, if the alarm alert notification is canceled, the cancellation action is registered in the platform as an immutable record without being able to be that cannot be deleted from the database, and a box is displayed in a user interface of the computer or smartphone for the administrator to input a reason for the cancellation of the alarm alert.
Claim 21 as a whole recites a method of organizing human interactions. Specifically, those limitations shown above as emphasized in bold print are a method specifically coordinating and linking events detected by drones to different personals and tracking information concerning those events and their status reasonably falls within commercial interaction/business relations. Further, those limitations highlighted above reasonably fall within managing personal behavior in that the event communicated with computer and personals (which based on the specification informs technicians). Thus, the claims recite an abstract idea.
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? No, the claim does not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
With regard to STEP 2A (prong 2), whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, the guidelines provide the following exemplary considerations that are indicative that an additional element (or combination of elements) may have integrated the judicial exception into a practical application:
an additional element reflects an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field;
an additional element that applies or uses a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition;
an additional element implements a judicial exception with, or uses a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim;
an additional element effects a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing; and
an additional element applies or uses the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
While the guidelines further state that the exemplary considerations are not an exhaustive list and that there may be other examples of integrating the exception into a practical application, the guidelines also list examples in which a judicial exception has not been integrated into a practical application:
an additional element merely recites the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea;
an additional element adds insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception; and
an additional element does no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use.
Claim 21. A method used to manage and automate drone fleets, through a platform as a service, characterized in that the method comprises:
the drones being configured for use in two modes:
a remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs), wherein an operator controls each drone via a touch screen of a remote control of the drone, and
an unmanned aerial systems (UAS) wherein autonomous flights of the drones are programmed and dispatched from the platform, the platform selecting between the RPAs mode and the UAS mode based on aeronautical regulations of a jurisdiction in which the drones operate: and
the platform being organized into a plurality of client accounts, wherein each of account of the plurality of client accounts has the following configuration: operators, receivers, and an administrator, and wherein:
the operators are in charge of piloting the drones in the remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode, and each operator enters the platform with an associated routine and password via an interface integrated in a touch screen of a remote control of the drones, and an operator's work is mandatory in areas where aeronautical regulations of a country require it;
the receivers are entered into the platform responsive to creation of the client account with assignment of receiver schedules and vacation periods, the platform routing alarm alert notifications to available receivers based on the assigned receiver schedules and vacation periods, and in case of a problem detected by on-board cameras in a particular drone used in the remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode or in the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode, the receivers are responsible for attending an alarm alert notification and going to an event site to execute corrective actions responsive to the problem detected by the drone; and
the administrator has access to the platform through private login through a web page associated with the platform, the web page being compatible for use on computers and smartphones, the administrator enters the web page using a password or digital certificate to access a database with statistics of each event, the administrator organizes and controls operation of the client account, plans tasks for the operators and the receivers, and keeps data of the receivers and the operators up to date, in case of a problem detected by an on-board camera in a drone operating in the remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode or in the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode, the administrator and the receivers receive the alarm alert notification to review the problem live and have access to review detail, and only the administrator is qualified and enabled to cancel the alarm alert notification, if the alarm alert notification is canceled, the cancellation action is registered in the platform as an immutable record without being able to be that cannot be deleted from the database, and a box is displayed in a user interface of the computer or smartphone for the administrator to input a reason for the cancellation of the alarm alert.
Claim 21 does not recite any of the exemplary considerations that are indicative of an organizing human interactions having been integrated into a practical application. The limitation of the drones being configured for use in two modes: a remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs), wherein an operator controls each drone via a touch screen of a remote control of the drone, and an unmanned aerial systems (UAS) wherein autonomous flights of the drones are programmed and dispatched from the platform, the platform selecting between the RPAs mode and the UAS mode based on aeronautical regulations of a jurisdiction in which the drones operate merely include implement organizing human interactions on a computer or vehicle environment, or merely use a computer/vehicle as a tool to perform an abstract idea is indicative that the judicial exception has not been integrated into a practical application. Thus, it is clear that the organizing human interactions is merely implemented on a computer/vehicle platform, which is indicative of the organizing human interactions having not been integrated into a practical application.
In addition, the limitation of “a box is displayed in a user interface of the computer or smartphone for the administrator to input a reason for the cancellation of the alarm alert” is recited at a high level of generality and amounts to mere data displaying, which is a form of insignificant extra solution activity.
As such, the additional limitations of Claim 21 do not integrate the abstract idea into practical application.
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? No, the claim does not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
With regard to STEP 2B, whether the claims recite additional elements that provide significantly more than the recited judicial exception, the guidelines specify that the pre-guideline procedure is still in effect. Specifically, examiners should continue to consider whether an additional element or combination of elements:
adds a specific limitation or combination of limitations that are not well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field, which is indicative that an inventive concept may be present; or
simply appends well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, which is indicative that an inventive concept may not be present.
CONCLUSION
Thus, since Claim 21 is: (a) directed toward an abstract idea, (b) does not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, and (c) does not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, it is clear that claim 21 is directed towards non-statutory subject matter.
Dependent claims 22-40 further limit the abstract idea without integrating the abstract idea into practical application or adding significantly more, as the limitations are either further part of the mental process or are additional elements that do not integrate the abstract idea into practical application using a similar analysis as applied to Claim 21 above.
As such, claims 21-40 are rejected under 35 USC 101 as being drawn to an abstract idea without significantly more, and thus are ineligible.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 21-30, 33-37, 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over by Horelik (US 20200346751) in view of Nelson (US 20210373982 A1) in view of Zimmers (US 9015256 B1)
Regarding claim 21, Horelik teaches a method used to manage and automate drone fleets, through a platform as a service, characterized in that the method comprises:
the drones being configured for use in two modes:
a remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs), wherein an operator controls each drone via a touch screen of a remote control of the drone ( Horelik [0118] Once the UAV is at the emergency location, the emergency network entity operator is able to take over control of the UAV via the GUI 143. The emergency network entity operator has the option to take over control of the UAV at any time, even during the auto-dispatch/auto-navigation operation. When the UAV has completed its mission, the emergency network entity operator can activate a “home” button on the GUI 143 for that particular UAV, and the flight controller 294 will auto-navigate the UAV back to its home base without any need for action by the emergency network entity operation. The UAV will land and dock at its home base location), and
an unmanned aerial systems (UAS) wherein autonomous flights of the drones are programmed and dispatched from the platform (Horelik, Figs. 9-10 and corresponding paragraphs), the platform selecting between the RPAs mode and the UAS mode based on aeronautical regulations of a jurisdiction in which the drones operate; [0118] UAVs may be auto-dispatched by the emergency data manager 100 (UAV mode) and auto-dispatch settings may be setup for each emergency network entity using the GUI 143, … Once the UAV is at an emergency location, the emergency network entity operator is able to take over control of the UAV via the GUI 143. The emergency network entity operator has the option to take over control (RPAs mode) of the UAV at any time, even during the auto-dispatch/auto-navigation operation. Mode switches from UAV mode to RPAs mode depending on geo location, and
the platform being organized into a plurality of client accounts, wherein each of account of the plurality of client accounts has the following configuration: operators, receivers, and an administrator (Horelik [0019] The emergency data manager 100 may automatically determine emergency type when possible, based on available data, such as fire, medical, police, HAZMAT etc. Based on the emergency type and in some implementations, as severity level, a UAV may be automatically dispatched by the emergency data manager 100 and a data feed provided to the GUI 143; [0108] Each of the UAVs may be configured with various capabilities, equipment, sensors, etc., such as cameras, microphones, thermal cameras, etc., to enable certain surveillance capabilities (“surveillance drones”), and wherein:
the operators are in charge of piloting the drones in the remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode, and each operator enters the platform with an associated routine and password via an interface integrated in a touch screen of a remote control of the drones, and an operator's work is mandatory in areas where aeronautical regulations of a country require it (Horelik [0118], the emergency network entity operator is able to take over control of the UAV via the GUI 143. The emergency network entity operator has the option to take over control of the UAV at any time, even during the auto-dispatch/auto-navigation operation; Please see more references in Prior Art session regarding this limitation);
the receivers are entered into the platform responsive to creation of the client account with assignment of receiver schedules and vacation periods, the platform routing alarm alert notifications to available receivers based on the assigned receiver schedules and vacation periods,
and in case of a problem detected by on-board cameras in a particular drone used in the remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode or in the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode, the receivers are responsible for attending an alarm alert notification and going to an event site to execute corrective actions responsive to the problem detected by the drone; (Horelik [0019]-- The emergency data manager 100 may automatically determine emergency type when possible based on available data, such as fire, medical, police, HAZMAT etc. Based on the emergency type and in some implementations, as severity level, a UAV may be automatically dispatched by the emergency data manager 100 and a data feed provided to the GUI 143; [0108] Each of the UAVs may be configured with various capabilities, equipment, sensors, etc., such as cameras, microphones, thermal cameras, etc., to enable certain surveillance capabilities (“surveillance drones”) ) and
the administrator organizes and controls operation of the client account, plans tasks for the operators and the receivers, and keeps data of the receivers and the operators up to date, in case of a problem detected by an on-board camera in a drone operating in the remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode or in the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode, the administrator and the receivers receive the alarm alert notification to review the problem live and have access to review detail (Horelik, [0084] –[0088]The emergency data manager 100, via the geofence module 375, is operative to filter all incoming emergency data related to devices 160, alarms 196 and sensors 197 by geofences; [0036] The emergency data manager 100 may operate as an interface between the emergency networks 170, databases 120 and devices 160, to provide emergency data to the emergency networks 170; The emergency data manager 100 may, under some circumstances and for certain types of emergency data, store obtained emergency data in one or more databases which may be distributed databases. Protected data may be stored in protected data database 191; [0080] The emergency data manager 100 determines which of the emergency networks 170 and associated emergency responder devices 150 have authorization to receive particular types of emergency data. The emergency network managers 379 are operative to access emergency network profiles 335 and determine access levels to emergency data for emergency network entities and personnel. For example, a given emergency network 170 or emergency responder device 150 may, in certain circumstances, be granted access only to a particular subset of emergency data. For example, a police officer may only be given access to the location emergency data, while an EMT (emergency medical technician) may only be given access to an additional data emergency data. However, a given emergency network such as a national or regional emergency network, or associated emergency responder device 150, may be given differential access to the entirety of the emergency data, or to particular emergency data categories within the databases based on any factor or set of factors. A management portal may be provided by emergency network managers 379 to determine which emergency data categories are returned from one of the emergency networks 170 to a particular emergency network 170 or emergency responder device 150. Other data services corresponding to the various databases 120 may also be coordinated with respect to granting access to protected data), and
Horelik does not explicitly teach but Nelson teaches limitation of only the administrator is qualified and enabled to cancel the alarm alert notification, if the alarm alert notification is canceled, the cancellation action is registered in the platform as an immutable record without being able to be that cannot be deleted from the database, and a box is displayed in a user interface of the computer or smartphone for the administrator to input a reason for the cancellation of the alarm alert (Nelson [0090] reader manager determines to simply drop the notification, But if reader manager 418 determines that the reader has previously learned of the notification entry, reader manager 418 informs the corresponding parent of the entry in the local reader hierarchical state data structure to remove the entry from its collection because due to the immutable nature of the object entry; Please see more references in Prior Art session regarding this limitation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, emergency response services provided by drones, as taught by Horelik, only administrator being qualified and enabled to cancel the alarm alert notification, as taught by Nelson, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using only administrator being qualified and enabled to cancel the alarm alert notification to protect system integrity, ensure accountability, and prevent unauthorized changes to security settings.
While Horelik teaches reroute routing alarm alert notifications and receivers are entered into the platform responsive to creation of the client account with assignment of receiver schedules and vacation periods (Horelik [0050] an emergency alert 105 may be triggered by a device 160 in any of various ways such as, but not limited to, device fall detection, by the user pressing a soft button or a physical button (i.e. a “panic button”), a voice command, a gesture, or autonomously based on alarm 196 data or sensor 197 data such via a smoke, carbon-monoxide, burglar alarm, or some other alarm, motion detector, camera, etc. In some situations, the user may confirm the emergency or provide authorization for sending the emergency alert 105. In one example, an alarm data 198 from a burglar of fire alarm may be sent to one of various screener networks 195. Screener network personnel may place a call to a keyholder and request further validation. If the alarm is validated by the keyholder, the screener network personnel may assign a priority score to the alarm and send it as a prioritized alarm to the emergency data manager 100. Some alarm data 198 that does not first pass through one of the screener networks 195 is received by the emergency data manager 100 as unprioritized alarm data. The emergency data manager 100 is operative to perform alarm verification and scoring procedures to determine whether the alarm data should be pushed to one of the emergency networks 170), Horelik as modified by Nilson does not explicitly teach but Zimmers teaches the platform routing alarm alert notifications to available receivers based on the assigned receiver schedules and vacation periods ([0046]-[0060] An alert is send to affected areas.[0073] An alert was sent to a subscriber based upon the priority of the alert, the type of the alert or subscriber preferences. Please see more references in Prior Art session regarding this limitation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, emergency response services provided by drones, as taught by Horelik as modified by Nilson, the platform routing alarm alert notifications to available receivers based on the assigned receiver schedules and vacation periods, as taught by Zimmers, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using the platform routing alarm alert notifications to available receivers based on the assigned receiver schedules and vacation periods to ensures the right person gets the alert at the right time.
Regarding claim 22, Horelik teaches the operator detects the event through an image obtained by the drone on-board camera of the drone and projected on the screen of the remote-control of the drone. (Horelik, Figs. 9-10).
Regarding claim 23, Horelik teaches characterized in that upon detection of the event, the operator activates the alarm alert notification by pressing a button displayed on a touch screen of the remote control of the drone ([0042] an emergency alert 105 may be triggered by a device 160 in any of various ways such as, but not limited to, device fall detection, by the user pressing a soft button or a physical button (i.e. a “panic button”)).
Regarding claim 24, Horelik teaches characterized in that the alarm alert notification is sent directly to the receivers, taking as a criterion the receivers that are closest to a location of the event ([0051] the emergency data manager 100 is operative to push the ELS or AML data to the appropriate emergency network 170 based on a geofence analysis using the geofence database 101 ).
Regarding claim 25, Horelik teaches the platform is designed to adapt to public sector organizations configurable for integration into public sector organizations comprising one or more of police, firefighters, civil protection agencies. emergency services, ambulance services, and border control brigades. wherein the platform is configured to assign differentiated alarm alert notifications corresponding to configurable event categories comprising one or more of robbery. assault. public disorder, fire, accident, terrorist attack, and detection of explosive elements, and to route each alarm alert notification to receivers associated with the corresponding event category. and wherein the administrator monitors all event detections across the client account in real time ([0003]- [0004] An emergency network may be owned and operated by a public organization run by a municipality, county or city, or by a private organization such as a corporation or college campus. Emergency assistance provided can include medical, caregivers, firefighting, police, military, paramilitary, border patrol, lifeguard, security services, or any combination thereof. These personnel may be referred to as “Emergency Service Providers” (ESPs) or “emergency responders,” or “responders.” In existing systems ESPs or responders are dispatched by dispatch operators who communicate with responders via radio dispatch systems. [0087] In the context of emergency services, one or more geofences may correspond to the jurisdictional boundaries of an emergency network 170. The emergency network 170 may be operated by a public entity and may be for example, a public safety answering point (PSAP), a police department, a fire department, a federal disaster management agency, national highway police, etc., which have jurisdiction over a designated area and, sometimes, overlapping areas. Geofences are used to define the jurisdictional boundaries using various Geographic Information System (GIS) formats. A GIS file format refers to one or more standards for encoding geographical information into a computer file; [0117] FIG. 11 depicts example protocols to be used and/or implemented in generating a UAV dispatch recommendation in various scenarios or for automatic UAV dispatch by the emergency data manager 100 for a given emergency type meeting the given criteria. Using the example protocols, a UAV may be dispatched for surveillance and/or response for emergencies such as, but not limited to, a building fire, a person having a heart attack, a robbery in-progress, a roadblock during a medical emergency, a victim of a got shot who is losing blood, etc. However, UAVs may also be dispatched for non-emergency situations as shown).
Regarding claim 26, Horelik teaches characterized in that the platform is configured to assign differentiated alarm alert signal notifications to correspond to different categories of receivers according to a type of event detected, to send the alarm alert signal notification to the receivers associated with the type of event detected. and simultaneously transmit the alarm alert notification to the administrator for real-time monitoring of receiver response (Horelik, [0080]).
Regarding claim 27, Horelik teaches characterized in that the platform has three configurable options: perimeter limits classified into: radius distance according to coordinates of a physical location of a detected parameter, and configuration by sectorial perimeter limit, such as state, region, city or municipality borders, such that the perimeter limit allows configuring a minimum and maximum number of the receivers that receive the alarm alert notification, and that are located within the configured perimeter limit(Fig. 6- 8 and corresponding paragraphs, [0080]-[0087]);
the drones operating in remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode or in the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode are able to automatically recognize the receivers that are closest and most expedient to the event location, to differentiate to which receivers send the alarm alert notification (Fig. 6- 8 and corresponding paragraphs, [0080]- [0087]); and
configuration to add an option for assigning differentiated time ranges, to assign minimum and maximum quantities of receivers associated with an event, according to demands of one or more activities associated with the event (Figs. 6- 8 and corresponding paragraphs, [0080]- [0087]).
Regarding claim 28, Horelik teaches characterized in that in the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode, autonomous flights are programmed from the platform, a monitoring area is assigned to each drone, and a monitoring area is assigned to each drone is configured to detect a problem autonomously within the assigned monitoring area. (Figs. 9-11 and corresponding paragraphs).
Regarding claim 29, Horelik teaches characterized in that the monitoring area represents a potential forest fire hazard ([0112]- [0125] In a fire emergency as depicted, the surveillance UAV may be able to locate a fire in a building and identify persons in need of emergency assistance).
Regarding claim 30, Horelik teaches, characterized in that autonomous flights are programmed to identify people and/or motorized vehicles crossing a perimeter boundary ([0124]).
Regarding claim 33, Horelik teaches characterized in that the alarm alert notification issued by the operators is transmitted through an emergency call with voice recording, made directly to the receivers, to ensure receipt of the alarm alert notification, a link with an identifier containing the date and time associated with the event is sent to the receivers, and the alarm alert notification is transmitted to the administrator to monitor the activity of the receivers (Horelik, [0056]-[0059, [0067], Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 34, Horelik teaches characterized in that the alarm alert notification issued by the operators allows the receivers and the administrator to view the link from any internet-connected PC or smartphone with iOS or Android operating systems, and for the receivers and the administrator to: review a live transmission of the event, the live transmission having a limited time duration; open a GPS location map with detailed distances and fastest routes to the event site; and visualize on a location map, one or more receivers going to the event location (Horelik, [0056]-[0059], [0067]).
Regarding claim 35, Horelik teaches characterized in that the platform leaves a record in the database wherein the record is only accessible to the administrator, who logs in with the administrator's credentials in the client account, and wherein the record comprises: an excerpt of the recording with time (configurable); high resolution images (configurable); images with different zoom levels (configurable); thermal imaging (configurable); and hyperspectral imaging (configurable) ([0067] determine authorization and access levels to protected data stored in the protected data database 191 or in the other databases 120 ).
Regarding claim 36, Horelik teaches characterized in that event log information and data associated with a procedure carried out is automatically stored in a private cloud, in a private session of the client account associated with the platform (Horelik, [0056]- [0059], [0067]).
Regarding claim 37, Horelik teaches characterized in that the administrator has at the administrator's disposal specific functions for special cases, the specific functions including one or more of: interlocking of the remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode or the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode at the site of the event so that a first drone continues recording in case of a particular event until its autonomy allows it, once its battery is consumed to return autonomously to its charging base; activation of the platform through a direct option, the platform allowing the administrator to synchronize other unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode drones that are associated with a particular client account to go to the site of the event to provide support, and to allow the first drone to return to its charging base, at an end of its autonomy; tracking of people and motorized vehicles, in the case of remotely piloted aerial vehicles (RPAs) mode drones, by selecting an object via the touch screen associated with the drone and, in the case of unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode drone, automatically detecting in response to selection of a configured object crossing a protected and configured boundary or perimeter, and for both modes, the platform being configured to predict a destination or route of the selected object; and prediction and prevention of forest fires by analysis of terrain parameters, where the unmanned aerial systems (UAS) mode drones remotely and autonomously detect elements that represent risks within a wide area of terrain ([0056], [0110], [0145]-[0153]).
Regarding claim 39, Horelik teaches characterized in that alarm signal notifications are configurable, and allow assigning different categories of events, with different receivers assigned, each alarm signal notification is assigned to be transmitted to the receivers corresponding to its area (Horelik [0135], [0157]).
Regarding claim 40, Horelik teaches characterized in that each client account has a system for processing statistical data on activity associated with performance of each of the receivers using an algorithm to evaluate actions of the receivers based on the following set of variables: response time in answering a call; response time to open a link sent; response time to press an option to go to a location associated with an event; response time to a place of an event; type of mobilization to an event site: on foot, bicycle, motorcycle, car, van, truck, tank, helicopter, airplane (configurable and editable by the administrator); geographical distance to an event site; vehicular traffic on a destination route; and contour lines of an affected territory (Horelik [0004][0135][0157] Figs. 4 and 5 and corresponding paragraphs ).
Claims 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over by Horelik (US 20200346751) in view of Nelson (US 20210373982 A1) in view of Zimmers (US 9015256 B1) in view of Ming ( CN 105719486 A machine translation)
Regarding claim 31, Horelik as modified by Nelson as modified by Zimmers does not explicitly teach but Ming teaches characterized in that autonomous flights are programmed by integrating a neural network to classify images and recognize prediction intervals (Fig. 6 -7 and corresponding paragraphs The convolutional neural network classification. through off-line training a convolutional neural network, sample the pedestrian with white binary contour image with different distances, different stature, the output is the probability of pedestrian, so as to realize the identification determination for the pedestrian, it uses convolutional neural network structure after classifying the same vehicle type).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, emergency response services provided by drones, as taught by Horelik as modified by Nelson as modified by Zimmers, integrating a neural network to classify images and recognize prediction intervals, as taught by Ming, as Horelik, Zimmers, Ming and Nelson are directed to vehicle control (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using integrating a neural network to classify images and recognize prediction intervals to improve the system’s efficacy and robustness.
Regarding claim 32, Horelik as modified by Nelson as modified by Zimmers does not explicitly teach but Ming teaches characterized in that the neural network classifies images and recognizes prediction intervals considering the following set of variables: ambient temperature, surface temperature, assignment of isotherms, historical data on forest fires, according to dates and geographic area, percentage of humidity and precipitation, thermal imaging, hyperspectral imaging, measurement distance, fire detection, wind speed and direction, contour lines (Figs. 6 -7 and corresponding paragraphs The convolutional neural network classification. through off-line training a convolutional neural network, sample the pedestrian with white binary contour image with different distances, different stature, the output is the probability of pedestrian, so as to realize the identification determination for the pedestrian, it uses convolutional neural network structure after classifying the same vehicle type).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, emergency response services provided by drones, as taught by Horelik as modified by Nelson, integrating a neural network to classify images and recognize prediction intervals, as taught by Ming, as Horelik, Zimmers, Ming and Nelson are directed to vehicle control (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using integrating a neural network to classify images and recognize prediction intervals to improve the system’s efficacy and robustness.
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over by Horelik (US 20200346751 A1) in view of Nelson (US 20210373982 A1) in view of Zimmers (US 9015256 B1) in view of Trurdle (US 2017092109 A1)
Regarding claim 38, Horelik as modified by Nelson as modified by Zimmers does not explicitly teach but Trurdle teaches the limitation of characterized in that a database is created in the private cloud to obtain statistics associated with performance of the receivers, a listing of receivers who attend specific requests, a listing of journeys of the receivers to locations of each event and times that each receiver takes to reach each location (Trurdle[0184]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, emergency response services provided by drones, as taught by Horelik as modified by Nelson as modified by Zimmers, obtaining statistics associated with performance of the receivers, as taught by Trurdle, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using obtaining statistics associated with performance of the receivers to improve the system’s efficacy.
Prior Art
Please refer to form 892 for cited references.
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when responding to this action.
It is noted that any specific citation, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275,277 (CCPA 1968)).
Oakley (US20150232181A1) teaches describes an unmanned aerial vehicle/unmanned aircraft system with a flight controller that can receive instructions for control, which could be interpreted as enabling mode changes between different operational states. Operate in autonomous mode (UAV) when no remote pilot station is engaged. Switch to RPAS mode when a remote pilot station and a wireless link are connected and licensed (Oakley[0078] and an associated plug which connects to the LCD screen on the front side of the hand-held remote control unit; [0003] unmanned aerial vehicle/unmanned aircraft system (UAV)/(UAS) helicopter with a built-in autopilot and navigation system that allows for simple flight and usage by remote control, ground station control and non-remote control users. [0011]-[0012] The autopilot is connected to a wireless communication transmitter/receiver in the second layer, which transmits and receives wireless instructions from the ground station. The autopilot is also connected to a standard RC receiver and has an electrical connector board that connects it to the autopilot. This separate connection allows the standard RC wireless transmitter/receiver to send separate instructions to the autopilot for vehicle control.)
Liu (CN101710243A) teaches ( abstract) at different flight environment, vehicles have three kinds of application models automatic mode, fixed mode and composite mode, and in each application model, formulated the selection strategy of remote control mode priority, effective switching of remote control mode and effective combination of instruction have been realized, potential conflict when having avoided the coexistence of multiple remote control mode. If FAA rules prohibit certain autonomous functions in a given area, the system can automatically select a compliant mode (e.g., fixed mode) without manual intervention.
Vogl (US6959327B1) (System for routing messages based on presence and schedule) teaches the distribution of events or messages to individuals based on aggregated calendar presence, scheduling restrictions, and active/inactive time blocks.
Beaman (US 20190199534 A1) teaches ([0003]) autonomous drones which include unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and remotely piloted aircraft (RPA), may be used by private and corporate entities subject to pending to regulations implemented by various aviation authorities such as the Federal Aviation Admiration (FAA).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JINGLI WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8040. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9 am-5 pm EST.
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 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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 571-272-100.
/J.W./
Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
