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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/08/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, & 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations “the controller to perform image processing to track image features of the target site; the image processing to determine apparent movement of the target site; the controller to compute a corresponding actuator signal so that the image features of the target site are maintained at an apparent location in the image” which is indefinite because a single claim which claims both an apparatus and method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Dependent claims 3 & 5 fail to cure the deficiency. Claim 10 is likewise rejected for its similar recitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, & 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant cited Ahn (KR 101873995 B1) in view of Foster et al. (WO 2017120571 A1), hereinafter Foster and Miralles (US 20100198514 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ahn discloses a steerable parachute system (parachute system shown in fig. 1) for use with a drone (Examiner notes the intent to use the steerable parachute system with a drone does not structurally differentiate the invention from the prior art, see MPEP §2111.02(II)) comprising:
a directional control module (automatic control unit 200; fig. 2) comprising:
an enclosure (housing of 200 shown in fig. 2) supporting:
a sensor (mushroom type GPS receiver 251; fig. 2) for capturing a signal associated with a target site (target point, The GPS-guided parafoil air transportation system is a system for delivering freight from the aircraft to the target point by autonomous flight by GPS navigation. ; [0032]);
a controller (automatic control device 252; fig. 2) connected to the sensor (251) for determining a direction of travel in response to the signal (Here, the mushroom type GPS receiver 251 receives GPS information for precise guidance of the cargo, and the automatic control device 252 controls the flight according to the automatic flight control algorithm. ; [0024]); and
an actuator (parachute control unit 220; fig. 2) responsively coupled to the controller (252);
an attachment component (attachment lines shown in fig. 1 extending from both the housing of 200 & from the storage unit 300) for securing a payload (storage unit 300; fig. 1) to the enclosure (housing of 200); and
the parachute (main parachute 120; fig. 1) connectable to the directional control module (200), the parachute (120) having a plurality of tension elements (plurality of parachute ropes 130 & control rods 141/142; fig. 1), at least one of the tension elements (142) being connected to the actuator (220) for steering the parachute (120, The parachute control units 220 and 230 include two pulleys 221 and 231, a motor reducer 222, a motor 223 and a motor brake 224 to control the movement of the parachute.
The two pulleys 221 and 231 include a line fixing pin 310 and are connected to the motors 223 and 233 and the control lines 141 and 142 are connected to the line fixing pin 310 , And wound around the pulleys 221 and 231. ; [0026]) during controlled descent towards a location relative to the target site (target point).
Anh does not appear to specifically disclose the sensor comprising a camera configured to capture visual features of the target site;
the controller configured to determine the direction of travel at least in part on the captured visual features.
the controller to perform image processing to track image features of the target site; the image processing to determine apparent movement of the target site; the controller to compute a corresponding actuator signal so that the image features of the target site are maintained at an apparent location in the image; and
an actuator responsively coupled to the controller based on the actuator signal.
However, Foster in the field of systems and methods for taking & processing images from unmanned aerial vehicles (title) teaches the sensor (sensors 140; fig. 17) comprising a camera (…sensors 140, such as visual sensors (e.g., cameras)… ; [00142]) configured to capture visual features of the target site (Examiner notes cameras are inherently configured to capture visual features of the target site being imaged);
the controller (navigation system 32; fig. 5) configured to determine the direction of travel at least in part on the captured visual features (The avionics system 30 and/or the navigation system 32 may estimate the current velocity, orientation and/or position of the UAV 12 based on data obtained from the sensors 140, such as visual sensors (e.g., cameras), IMU, GPS receiver and/or other sensors… ; [00143]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steerable parachute system disclosed by Anh with the camera & controller configured to determine the direction of travel at least in part on the captured visual features as taught by Foster with a reasonable expectation of success to provide the benefit of a redundant navigation system to guide the system in the event there are insufficient GPS signals for GPS navigation. Foster teaches such a redundant system as it teaches using “visual sensors (e.g., cameras), IMU, GPS receiver and/or other sensors” for navigation within the same system.
Miralles in the field of unmanned aerial vehicles (title) then teaches the controller (seeker processor 320; fig. 3) to perform image processing to track image features of the target site (The seeker processor 320 may include both image processing and target tracking processing, and target designation or re-designation input 321 that may be received from an uplink receiver 335 and/or as an output of a guidance processor 330. ; [0034]); the image processing to determine apparent movement of the target site (Accordingly, for some embodiments, the at least one sensor, such as a targeting sensor, of the UAV may comprise an imaging device and wherein the processing unit is configured to transition the UAV from a terminal homing mode to a separate mode, such as a target search mode based on one or more image change conditions, e.g., a change in quantity and/or magnitude of pixel states above a threshold or a change in the information content of an image or portion of an image--such as time-differenced discrete time Fourier transforms of images. ; [0011] Examiner notes that apparent movement of the target site would result in a change in the information content of the image); the controller (320) to compute a corresponding actuator signal (control surface actuation commands ; [0033]) so that the image features of the target site are maintained at an apparent location in the image (…the UAV processes output from various onboard flight sensors, e.g., gyros, accelerometers, GPS receiver outputs, and target data from the image sensor, or other front end target seeker/tracker sensor, via an onboard processor to generate control surface actuation commands and accordingly guide the UAV for both target search and terminal homing phases… ; [0033] Examiner notes a terminal homing phase inherently requires image features of a target site to be maintained at an apparent location in the image); and
an actuator (control surface actuator, not shown) responsively coupled to the controller (320) based on the actuator signal (control surface actuation commands).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the steerable parachute system disclosed by Ahn with the image processing & actuator signal taught by Miralles with a reasonable expectation of success to provide the benefit of enabling the steerable parachute to deliver a payload to a moving target.
Regarding claim 3, modified Ahn discloses the steerable parachute system of claim 1 wherein the payload (300) is a parcel (cargo within 300).
Regarding claim 5, modified Ahn discloses the steerable parachute system of claim 3 wherein the attachment component (attachment lines shown in fig. 1) comprises at least one linear tension member (linear attachment lines shown in fig. 1) for securing said parcel (cargo within 300).
Regarding claim 10, modified Ahn discloses a directional control module (200) comprising:
an enclosure (housing of 200) supporting:
a sensor (251) for capturing a signal associated with a target site (target point, The GPS-guided parafoil air transportation system is a system for delivering freight from the aircraft to the target point by autonomous flight by GPS navigation. ; [0032]);
a controller (252) connected to the sensor (251) for determining a direction of travel in response to the signal (Here, the mushroom type GPS receiver 251 receives GPS information for precise guidance of the cargo, and the automatic control device 252 controls the flight according to the automatic flight control algorithm. ; [0024]); and
an actuator (220) responsively coupled to said controller (252) and connectable to at least one tension element (220 connects to 142) of a parachute (120) for controlling descent towards a location (The parachute control units 220 and 230 include two pulleys 221 and 231, a motor reducer 222, a motor 223 and a motor brake 224 to control the movement of the parachute.
The two pulleys 221 and 231 include a line fixing pin 310 and are connected to the motors 223 and 233 and the control lines 141 and 142 are connected to the line fixing pin 310 , And wound around the pulleys 221 and 231. ; [0026]) relative to the target site (target point).
Anh does not appear to specifically disclose the sensor comprising a camera configured to capture visual features of the target site;
the controller configured to determine the direction of travel at least in part on the captured visual features
the controller configured to perform image processing to track image features of the target site; the image processing to determine apparent movement of the target site; the controller to compute a corresponding actuator signal so that the image features of the target site are maintained at an apparent location in the image; and
an actuator responsively coupled to said controller based on the actuator signal.
However, Foster teaches the sensor (sensors 140; fig. 17) comprising a camera (…sensors 140, such as visual sensors (e.g., cameras)… ; [00142]) configured to capture visual features of the target site (Examiner notes cameras are inherently configured to capture visual features of the target site being imaged);
the controller (navigation system 32; fig. 5) configured to determine the direction of travel at least in part on the captured visual features (The avionics system 30 and/or the navigation system 32 may estimate the current velocity, orientation and/or position of the UAV 12 based on data obtained from the sensors 140, such as visual sensors (e.g., cameras), IMU, GPS receiver and/or other sensors… ; [00143]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steerable parachute system disclosed by Anh with the camera & controller configured to determine the direction of travel at least in part on the captured visual features as taught by Foster with a reasonable expectation of success to provide the benefit of a redundant navigation system to guide the system in the event there are insufficient GPS signals for GPS navigation. Foster teaches such a redundant system as it teaches using “visual sensors (e.g., cameras), IMU, GPS receiver and/or other sensors” for navigation within the same system.
Miralles then teaches the controller (320) configured to perform image processing to track image features of the target site (The seeker processor 320 may include both image processing and target tracking processing, and target designation or re-designation input 321 that may be received from an uplink receiver 335 and/or as an output of a guidance processor 330. ; [0034]); the image processing to determine apparent movement of the target site (Accordingly, for some embodiments, the at least one sensor, such as a targeting sensor, of the UAV may comprise an imaging device and wherein the processing unit is configured to transition the UAV from a terminal homing mode to a separate mode, such as a target search mode based on one or more image change conditions, e.g., a change in quantity and/or magnitude of pixel states above a threshold or a change in the information content of an image or portion of an image--such as time-differenced discrete time Fourier transforms of images. ; [0011] Examiner notes that apparent movement of the target site would result in a change in the information content of the image); the controller (320) to compute a corresponding actuator signal (control surface actuation commands) so that the image features of the target site are maintained at an apparent location in the image (…the UAV processes output from various onboard flight sensors, e.g., gyros, accelerometers, GPS receiver outputs, and target data from the image sensor, or other front end target seeker/tracker sensor, via an onboard processor to generate control surface actuation commands and accordingly guide the UAV for both target search and terminal homing phases… ; [0033] Examiner notes a terminal homing phase inherently requires image features of a target site to be maintained at an apparent location in the image); and
an actuator (control surface actuator, not shown) responsively coupled to said controller (320) based on the actuator signal (control surface actuation commands).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the steerable parachute system disclosed by Ahn with the image processing & actuator signal taught by Miralles with a reasonable expectation of success to provide the benefit of enabling the steerable parachute to deliver a payload to a moving target.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant cited Ahn (KR 101873995 B1) in view of Foster (WO 2017120571 A1), and further in view of Pick (US 20160318615 A1).
Regarding claim 2, modified Ahn discloses the steerable parachute system of claim 1 but does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the payload is a drone.
However, Pick in the field of safety and recovery systems for unmanned aerial vehicles (abstract) teaches wherein the payload (payload of parachute 18; fig. 7) is the drone (aerial vehicle 12; fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the steerable parachute system disclosed by Ahn such that the payload is a drone as taught by Pick with a reasonable expectation of success to provide the benefit of safely landing the aerial vehicle in case of an in-flight emergency or failure (The deployment of the parachute out of the parachute holder during an emergency in flight condition can help slow the fall of the aerial vehicle toward the ground and help prevent any damage to the aerial vehicle or other equipment positioned on the vehicle as the aerial vehicle reaches the ground. Prevention of damage to the vehicle or other equipment can help save repair or replacement costs, which can be considerable. ; [0012]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 & 10 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. Newly amended claims 1 & 10 are now rejected as being unpatentable over Ahn in view of Foster and Miralles.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER ALBERT TARASCHI whose telephone number is (703)756-4727. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:30AM-6:30PM.
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 Huson can be reached on (571) 270-5301. 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.
/P.A.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642