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 non-final action is in response to applicant's amendment on Oct. 15, 2025. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been considered as follows.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant’s amendments/arguments with respect to the rejections to claims under 35 U.S.C 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections to claims under 35 U.S.C 112 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments/arguments with respect to the rejections to claims under 35 U.S.C 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections to claims under 35 U.S.C 101 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments/arguments with respect to claim rejections under 35 U.S.C 103 have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-9, 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over by Esteban (US 20180253092 A1) in view of Hayakawa (US 20220032874 A1) in view of Ziemba (US 20170148332 A1 ) in view of Soon (US 2010312388A1)
Regarding claim 1, Esteban teaches a mobile body authentication apparatus comprising
at least one memory configured to store instructions ( [0080] when running on a computer a digital signal processor, an application specific integrated circuit, a microprocessor, a microcontroller or any other form of programmable hardware. Such instructions may be stored on a digital data storage medium), and
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to ( [0038] stored in the internal database, [0080] a computer program is presented comprising computer executable instructions for implementing the described method, when running on a computer a digital signal processor, an application specific integrated circuit, a microprocessor, a microcontroller or any other form of programmable hardware. Such instructions may be stored on a digital data storage medium),
acquire, from an autonomously movable mobile body, remote identification information which includes a repair history of the mobile body and is information for managing a remote operation of the mobile body ([0045] receiving at a base station of the mobile communications network, identification parameters of the UAV, among which are the UAV identifier and the user identifier (these identification parameters may also include identification parameters of the UAV in the mobile network such as the IMSI and/or LMSI and/or MSISDN and identification parameters of the SIM of the UAV; [0046] [0047] the mobile network authenticating to the UAV from the identification parameters received and if this authentication is unsuccessful, denying access to the mobile network to the UAV and ending the method),
position information indicating a current position of the mobile body ( [0010], [0133], [0133] The UAV can know its location (for example through GPS) at all times. In one embodiment, the UAV compares its location with the Geo-Fence map and when the UAV, detects that it has left the authorized zone (pre-loaded) it warns the ASA (the CCSU) and the latter may deny it flight authorization. On the other hand, as discussed below, the CCSU monitors the UAV and therefore knows the location of the UAV at all times. In an alternative or simultaneous embodiment, when the CCSU detects that the UAV has left an authorized zone (or has entered a restricted zone), it can send a flight authorization denial message to the UAV. [0136] ), time information indicating a current time in the mobile body ([0038]-[0041]) , and authentication information ( [0038]-[0045], [0053] a verification code of the UAV) ;
execute an authentication based on all or part of the remote identification information, ([0017] authenticating in the CCSU the user and the UAV based at least on their identifiers (checking at least that such identifiers are registered in an Aviation Safety Agent as allowed) and if authentication has been successful, sending a response of successful authentication from the CCSU to the UAV and if authentication has not been successful, ending the method); and
output a result of the authentication ([0026] if authentication has been successful, sending to a server called Centralized Control System of UAVs, CCSU, through a mobile communications network, an UAV identifier and the user identifier; [0027] if a successful authentication message is received from the CCSU, sending to the CCSU an authorization request including the characteristics of the flight for which the UAV requests authorization).
Esteban does not explicitly teach but Hayakawa teaches the specific limitations of a mobile body authentication apparatus (Fig. 4 and corresponding paragraphs). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, the authentication, authorization and monitoring of the UAV flight, as taught by Esteban, using a mobile body authentication apparatus to implement authentication, as taught by Hayakawa, as Esteban and Hayakawa are directed to vehicle authentication (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using a mobile body authentication apparatus to implement authentication to improve flexibility of authentication process.
Esteban as modified by Hayakawa does not teach but Ziemba teaches transmit, in a case where the authentication has failed, an instruction for causing the mobile body, that is a transmission source of the authentication information, to be forced to land via a terminal apparatus that is connected to the mobile body authentication apparatus and transmitted an authentication instruction to the mobile body authentication apparatus ([0033] wherein if the UAS is in the high security level zone, and has compatible software on board, then a preprogrammed landing routine is initiated by a command from the beacon causing the UAS to land at a landing site for capture; wherein if the UAS is in the high security zone, and does not have compatible software on board, then a set of RF commands are sent from the beacon causing it to initiate a preprogrammed landing routine to fly the UAS to an original launch site and land; wherein if the UAS is not in the high security zone, and has compatible software on board, then a preprogrammed landing routine is initiated by a command from the beacon causing the UAS to fly to its original launch site and land; wherein if the UAS is not in the high security zone, and does not have compatible software on board, then a set of RF commands are sent from the beacon causing the UAS to fly to its original launch site and land; and wherein if the UAS is inside the no-fly zone the DDS is configured to disrupt the communication link between UAS and its controller by constantly sending LoC signals). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, the authentication, authorization and monitoring of the UAV flight, as taught by Esteban as modified by Hayakawa, transmitting an instruction for causing the mobile body to be forced to land, as taught by Ziemba , as Ziemba, Esteban and Hayakawa are directed to vehicle authentication (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using transmitting an instruction for causing the mobile body to be forced to land to capture the unauthorized mobile body.
Esteban as modified by Hayakawa as modified by Ziemba does not explicitly teach but Soon (US2010312388A1) teaches remote identification information, which includes a repair history of the mobile body, the all or part of the acquired information includes the repair history (to retrieve a maintained history from an object identification [0110]-[0111] Object maintenance database 604 may contain information about the maintenance history for a given object identified in object identification database 602 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, the authentication, authorization and monitoring of the UAV flight, as taught by Esteban as modified by Hayakawa as modified Ziemba, transmitting an instruction for causing the mobile body to be forced to land, as taught by Soon , as Ziemba, Soon, Esteban and Hayakawa are directed to vehicle authentication (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using remote identification information including a repair history of the mobile body to accurately authenticate the mobile body.
Regarding claims 11 and 12, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 1, which is commensurate in scope to claims 11 and 12, with claim 1 being drawn to an apparatus, claims 11 and 12 being drawn to a corresponding method and medium respectively.
Regarding claim 2, Esteban teaches at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: receive the instruction ([0038], [0080]); and receive the authentication instruction; and based on receiving the authentication instruction, acquire the remote identification information, the position information, the time information, and the authentication information, and execute the authentication of the time information of the mobile body with another time information indicating another current time in the mobile body authentication apparatus ([0038]-[0045], [0164] authentication may be more complex and include more stages. it can be checked if the date and time of access is allowed for the user (the module NAAVI will include information on the date and time allowed for each user for this) and/or it can be checked whether the user has fully or partially restricted (in these zones) access due to security policies or depending on a profile that is assigned to it (e.g., quarantine, parental control . . . ) [0175]-[0185] the flight conditions with the conditions at that time of other flights that are being monitored will be verified to avoid potential conflicts in the airspace. when performing autonomous driving along the route, sharing the driving plan vehicle position information and time information).
Regarding claims 13 and 17, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 2, which is commensurate in scope to claims 13 and 17, with claim 2 being drawn to an apparatus, claims 13 and 17 being drawn to a corresponding method and medium respectively.
Regarding claim 3, Esteban teaches the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to:
receive the authentication instruction ([0038], [0080]); and
based on receiving the authentication instruction, acquire the remote identification information, the position information, the time information, and the authentication information, and execute authentication of the position information on the mobile body with another position information indicating another current position of the mobile body authentication apparatus ([0038]-[0045], [0135]-[0137] driving plan creation system in which both a driving plan creation device 100B, which generates driving plans such as an automatic driving mode and a remote driving mode along a route of a vehicle, and a remote driving service center 200B share the driving plan and the vehicle position, and collate whether the action of the other party is operating correctly).
Regarding claims 14 and 18, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 3, which is commensurate in scope to claims 14 and 18, with claim 3 being drawn to an apparatus, claims 14 and 18 being drawn to a corresponding method and medium respectively.
Regarding claim 4, Esteban teaches the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to: receive the authentication instruction from the terminal apparatus that is connected to the mobile body authentication apparatus; and notify, in the case where the authentication has failed, the terminal apparatus that authentication has failed ([0047]-[0048]).
Regarding claims 15 and 19, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 4, which is commensurate in scope to claims 15 and 19, with claim 4 being drawn to an apparatus, claims 15 and 19 being drawn to a corresponding method and medium respectively.
Regarding claim 5, Esteban teaches wherein the authentication comprising authenticating the time information and the position information with another time information and position information that are set in advance as an operation plan of operating the mobile body according to the remote identification information ( [0009] real time monitoring of the UAV; [0011], [0131-[0134] ).
Regarding claims 16 and 20, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 5, which is commensurate in scope to claims 16 and 20, with claim 5 being drawn to an apparatus, claims 16 and 20 being drawn to a corresponding method and medium respectively.
Regarding claim 6, Esteban teaches wherein the authentication information is information in which information including the remote identification information, the position information, and the time information is concealed ( [0123] a verification code of the UAV ).
Regarding claim 7, Esteban teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to transmit, in case of the authentication has failed, alert information to the mobile body that is a transmission source of the authentication information, the alert information preventing the mobile body from illegally moving without permission. ([0126] authentication process; [0160], [0015] if authentication has not been successful, denying access to the UAV to the user and terminating the method).
Regarding claim 8, Esteban teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to transmit, when the authentication has failed, an instruction indicating to stop the use of the remote identification information to a management apparatus that manages the remote identification information ( [0126] authentication process; [0160], [0015] if authentication has not been successful, denying access to the UAV to the user and terminating the method).
Regarding claim 9, Esteban teaches wherein the authentication comprises authenticating the remote identification information with available remote identification information managed by the management apparatus. ( [0045]-[0047] ).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over by Esteban (US 20180253092 A1) in view of Hayakawa (US 20220032874 A1) in view of Ziemba (US 20170148332 A1 ) in view of Soon (US2010312388A1) in view of Kaneko (US 20220012319 A1) in view of Lei (US 20220272533)
Regarding claim 10, Esteban as modified by Hayakawa as modified by Ziemba as modified by Soon does not explicitly teach but Kaneko teaches and the management apparatus is connected to the mobile body authentication apparatus (Fig. 1, management apparatus 3), and Lei taches wherein the management apparatus manages a plurality of remote identification information, including the remote identification, on each of a plurality of mobile bodies the plurality of mobile bodies includes the mobile body ([0140] If the UAS authentication fails, it indicates that the device in the UAS is invalid and cannot access a mobile communications network), and based on the management apparatus having received the instruction, the management apparatus changes the state of the remote identification information to an unable state ( [0168] The UAS authentication status identifier is used to indicate a UAS authentication status. The UAS authentication status of the first terminal device may include four states: UAS authentication successful, UAS authentication failed, UAS authentication to be completed, and UAS authentication to be performed. For example, when the UAS authentication status identifier is 01, it indicates that the authentication succeeds. When the UAS authentication status identifier is 00, it indicates that the authentication fails. When the UAS authentication status identifier is 10, it indicates that the authentication is to be completed. When the UAS authentication status identifier is 11, it indicates that the authentication is to be performed. The UAS authentication result includes UAS authentication successful and UAS authentication failed. For example, if the UAS authentication result is UAS authentication successful, the UAS authentication status identifier may be updated to 01. Likewise, if the UAS authentication result is UAS authentication failed, the UAS authentication status may be updated to 00).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the present invention to modify, the authentication, authorization and monitoring of the UAV flight, as taught by Esteban as modified by Hayakawa as modified by Ziemba as modified by Soon, using a management apparatus, as taught by Kaneko, changing the state of the remote identification information, as taught by Lei, as Ziemba, Soon, Lei, Kaneko, Esteban and Hayakawa are directed to vehicle authentication (same field of endeavor), and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the established utility using a management apparatus to change the state of the remote identification information to improve flexibility and efficiency of authentication process.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. For example only, Zhang (US 20210345117) teaches using the UTM may be used to pair the uncrewed aerial vehicle controller with the uncrewed aerial vehicle, identify the uncrewed aerial system, and authorize an operation on the uncrewed aerial system; and may further manage and intervene communication between the uncrewed aerial vehicle controller and the uncrewed aerial vehicle.
Coop (US 20070241908 A1) teaches an object identification stores a maintenance history (in order to store information relating to the service and maintenance history of onboard aircraft components, it has been proposed to use RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) tags which are associated with, and often affixed to the aircraft components).
Howard (US 20220070008 A1) teaches forcing an aircraft to ground when it was not authorization( [0002] Under some circumstances, a device may be remotely initialized by a CIK-initialized device. In this CIK-less method, a remote device, such as a device on board an aircraft, may send an authorization request to the CIK-initialized device, typically a ground-based device. CIK-initialized device may then authorize the remote device for device initialization.[0003] Once the remote device is out of range of the ground-based CIK-initialized device, the remote device may lose authorization. For example, power surges, software faults, or other accidental zeroization incidents may de-authenticate the remote device, and require the aircraft to return to within range of the ground-based CIK-initialized device in order to reinitiate)
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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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