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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to applicant’s amendment filed, 06 January 2026, of application filed, with the above serial number, on 17 July 2023 in which claims 1-2, 13 have been amended. Claims 1-11, 13-21 are pending in the application.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11, 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morin (hereinafter “Morin”, 2010/0263524) in view of FUJIWARA S (hereinafter “Fujiwara”, JP2023106959) and Opperman et al (hereinafter “Opperman”, 12,449,241).
As per Claim 1, Morin discloses a system for providing fail-safe redundancy via single data bus, the system comprising:
a vehicle controller comprising a plurality of input devices, wherein the vehicle controller receives controller input from an operator (at least paragraph 44-45; Fig. 8; remote controlled robot vehicle, controller 45); and
a mobile device connected with the vehicle controller, wherein the mobile device wirelessly transmits commands to an unmanned vehicle (at least Fig. 5; par. 12 two independent communication links to remote controlled robot vehicle), the mobile device comprising:
one or more processors; and one or more non-transitory, computer-readable storage media storing instructions, which when executed by the one or more processors cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving, at the mobile device from the vehicle controller over the first channel, a vehicle maneuvering command for maneuvering the unmanned vehicle (at least paragraph 44; Fig. 8; remote controlled robot vehicle with joy stick);
transmitting, from the mobile device, the vehicle maneuvering command to the unmanned vehicle (at least paragraph 44; Fig. 8; remote controlled robot vehicle with joy stick);
receiving, at the mobile device from the vehicle controller, an indication that a user actuated an input device of the vehicle controller to initiate a privileged command (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; Fig. 5; eg. arm switch 41 and/or fire control switch);
receiving, using an input mechanism of the mobile device, the first privileged command (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; Fig. 5; eg. arm switch 41);
determining that the first privileged command corresponds to a first input in a sequence of inputs for executing a privileged operation (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; Fig. 5; operator control unit 40 must be activated in the proper sequence);
based on determining that the first privileged command corresponds to the first input in the sequence of inputs for executing the privileged operation, monitoring the second channel for a second privileged command from the vehicle controller (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; Fig. 5; eg. 45, 43, 44 input(s) after input 41 activates other input);
receiving, from the vehicle controller at the mobile device over the second channel of the connection, the second privileged command (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; Fig. 5; eg. 45, 43, 44 input(s));
determining whether the second privileged command corresponds to a second input in the sequence of inputs for executing the privileged operation (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; operator control unit 40 must be activated in the proper sequence); and
based on determining that the second privileged command corresponds to the second input in the sequence of inputs for executing the privileged operation, transmitting a request to the unmanned vehicle to perform the privileged operation (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; operator control unit 40 must be activated in the proper sequence else not activated).
Morin fails to disclose generating, responsive to receiving the indication that the user actuated the input device of the vehicle controller, a prompt for display at the mobile device, wherein interaction with the prompt triggers transmission of a first privileged command to the unmanned vehicle. However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Opperman. Opperman discloses, in an analogous art, a mobile device/ laptop working in conjunction with a controller having a touchscreen with interactive buttons allowing a warfighter to control a UAV with arming, locking, release etc and other controls (at least Fig. 13; col. 18:28-59; 28:8-52; 68:18-38). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Opperman’s touchscreen with Morin as Opperman teaches this allows the operator to have more interactive controls and more indicator colors to more readily ascertain the status of the UAV, resulting in safer outcomes and permitting lower skilled users the ability to rapidly gain proficiency with the UAV.
Morin and Opperman fail to explicitly disclose such the mobile device to vehicle controller connection over a physical universal serial bus connection having a first channel connected using a first interface and a second channel connected using a second interface.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Fujiwara. Fujiwara discloses a device receiving input to be controlled via a first USB HID interface and input being converted to another USB CDC interface (at least paragraph 26-30, 34). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Fujiwara’s USB interfaces with Morin’s two communication interfaces, as Fujiwara discloses (at least paragraph 4-8) that the system allows for multiple interface control with a technique to safely control a device to be controlled with a second/third USB control offering more security and safety for particular applications that would benefit, including Morin.
As per Claim 2, Morin discloses a method for providing fail-safe redundancy via single data bus, the method comprising:
receiving, at a mobile device, a vehicle maneuvering command from a vehicle controller over a first channel, wherein the mobile device is connected with the vehicle controller over the connection having the first channel and a second channel (at least paragraphs 43-45 and Fig. 5, 8; remote controlled robot vehicle with joy stick, using joy stick of operator control unit 40 to control speed and direction of robot vehicle with such maneuvering being sent over connection 60 between transceiver 46 and transceiver 72 via electronic connection from 45 to 46, from vehicle controller 45 of mobile unit 40);
transmitting, from the mobile device, the vehicle maneuvering command to a vehicle (at least paragraph 44; Fig. 8; remote controlled robot vehicle with joy stick sent over electronic connection 60 between transceiver 46 and transceiver 72 to vehicle 10);
receiving, using an input mechanism of the mobile device, a first privileged command (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; Fig. 5; eg. arm switch 41);
based on receiving the first privileged command, initiating a privileged mode of operation, wherein the privileged mode of operation enables privileged operations using the vehicle controller (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; Fig. 5; operator control unit 40 must be activated in the proper sequence);
receiving, at the mobile device, from the vehicle controller over the second channel, a second privileged command (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; Fig. 5; eg. 45, 43, 44 input(s));
determining whether the second privileged command corresponds to a second input in a sequence of inputs for executing a privileged operation (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; operator control unit 40 must be activated in the proper sequence); and
based on determining that the second privileged command corresponds to the second input in the sequence of inputs for executing the privileged operation, transmitting a request to the vehicle to perform the privileged operation (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; operator control unit 40 must be activated in the proper sequence else not activated).
Morin fails to explicitly disclose such the mobile device to vehicle controller connection of a physical connection having a first channel and a second channel.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Fujiwara. Fujiwara discloses a device receiving input to be controlled via a first USB HID interface and input being converted to another USB CDC interface (at least paragraph 26-30, 34). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Fujiwara’s USB interfaces with Morin’s two communication interfaces, as Fujiwara discloses (at least paragraph 4-8) that the system allows for multiple interface control with a technique to safely control a device to be controlled with a second/third USB control offering more security and safety for particular applications that would benefit, including Morin.
As per Claim 3. The method of claim 2, further comprising:
determining that the second privileged command has not been received within a predetermined threshold of time; and
based on determining that the second privileged command has not been received within the predetermined threshold of time:
stopping monitoring the second channel; and
generating for display, on the mobile device, a prompt to execute the first privileged command (at least paragraph 39-42, 46; periodically send a message and when not received activate safety actuator; arm 2 indicator lit or not lit if out no periodic message; see par. 39 “U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/543,427 incorporated herein by this reference” now USPN 7,905,177 to Deguire et al (hereinafter “Deguire”), col. 4:1-45 “actions must be carried out in sequence and the responses from the fire control unit 12 must happen in a predetermined amount of time (seconds, for example) in order for terminals 16A and 16B to be energized”; Opperman Fig. 13; col. 18:28-59; 28:8-52; 68:18-38; display prompts on touchscreen to execute commands).
As per Claim 4. The method of claim 2, further comprising:
determining that the second privileged command does not correspond to the second input in the sequence of inputs for executing the privileged operation; and
based on determining that the second privileged command does not correspond to the second input in the sequence of inputs for executing the privileged operation, stopping monitoring the second channel (at least paragraph 47; steps must be taken in the proper sequence. If they are not, controllers 70 and 45 are programmed to provide an error signal and firing circuit 62 is not activated).
As per Claim 5. The method of claim 2, further comprising:
determining that the sequence of inputs for executing the privileged operation has been broken; and
based on determining that the sequence of inputs for executing the privileged operation has been broken, prompting a user to execute the first privileged command again using the input mechanism associated with the mobile device (at least paragraph 47; steps must be taken in the proper sequence. If they are not, controllers 70 and 45 are programmed to provide an error signal and firing circuit 62 is not activated; Opperman Fig. 13; col. 18:28-59; 28:8-52; 68:18-38).
As per Claims 6, 17. Morin fails to explicitly disclose receiving the vehicle maneuvering command comprises receiving the vehicle maneuvering command over a universal serial bus human interface devices interface; and
receiving, the second privileged command comprises, receiving the second privileged command over a universal serial bus communications device class interface.
However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Fujiwara. Fujiwara discloses a device receiving input to be controlled via a first USB HID interface and input being converted to another USB CDC interface (at least paragraph 26-30, 34). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Fujiwara’s USB interfaces with Morin’s two communication interfaces, as Fujiwara discloses (at least paragraph 4-8) that the system allows for multiple interface control with a technique to safely control a device to be controlled with a second/third USB control offering more security and safety for particular applications that would benefit, including Morin.
As per Claim 7. The method of claim 2, further comprising:
based on receiving the second privileged command, determining, based on a privilege file, whether the mobile device is allowed to execute the privileged operation; and
based on determining that the mobile device is allowed to execute the privileged operation, generating an encrypted privileged operation by encrypting the privileged operation using an encryption function (at least paragraph 54, 51).
As per Claim 8. The method of claim 7, wherein transmitting the request to the vehicle to perform the privileged operation comprises transmitting the encrypted privileged operation (at least paragraph 54, 51).
As per Claim 9. The method of claim 2, wherein initiating the privileged mode of operation further comprises, based on receiving the first privileged command, monitoring the second channel for the second privileged command from the vehicle controller (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; Fig. 5; eg. 45, 43, 44 input(s) after input 41 activates other input).
As per Claim 10. The method of claim 2, wherein determining whether the second privileged command corresponds to the second input in the sequence of inputs for executing the privileged operation further comprises: determining whether the privileged mode of operation has been initiated; determining, based on the second privileged command received via the second channel, whether a plurality of inputs within the second privileged command match the privileged operation; and determining that the second privileged command corresponds to the second input in the sequence of inputs based on both determining (1) that the privileged mode of operation has been initiated and (2) that the plurality of inputs within the second privileged command match the privileged operation (at least paragraph 39; 45-49; operator control unit 40 must be activated in the proper sequence of inputs 41..45..43..44).
As per Claim 11. The method of claim 2, wherein determining that the second privileged command corresponds to the second input in the sequence of inputs for executing the privileged operation further comprises: receiving, from the vehicle controller over the second channel, a plurality of signals indicating that a combination of input devices has been actuated; receiving, from the vehicle controller over the second channel while the combination of the input devices is being actuated, an additional signal indicating that an additional input device has been actuated, wherein the additional signal indicates that both the combination of the input devices and the additional input device have been actuated; determining that the combination of the input devices being actuated corresponds to a first portion of the sequence of inputs and that the additional input device being actuated together with the combination of the input devices corresponds to a second portion of the sequence of inputs; and generating one or more instructions comprising the privileged operation (at least paragraph 33-38, 49-50; input switches activating when done in sequence; operator is also provided with operator module 50, FIG. 4 which includes kill switch 52. When kill switch 52 is activated, the weapon is also rendered safe).
Claims 13-16, 18-20 do not, in substance, add or define any additional limitations over claims 2-5, 7-9 and therefore are rejected for similar reasons, supra. Claims 13-16, 18-20 are corresponding non-transitory CRM claims to respective method claims 2-5, 7-9.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morin in view of Fujiwara and Opperman, further in view of Kim sang a et al (hereinafter “Kim”, KR20180005519).
Morin, Fujiwara, and Opperman fail to explicitly disclose wherein the mobile device slides into the vehicle controller to form the physical universal serial bus connection. However, the use and advantages for using such a system was well known to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention as evidenced by the teachings of Kim. Kim discloses, in an analogous art, a mobile device such as a phone, sliding into a controller via a physical electronic connection (at least Fig. 2a-2b). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the use of Kim’s controller and phone connection with Morin and Fujiwara and Opperman as Kim teaches a mobile robot being controlled by a controller with physical buttons to maneuver the robot, this gives the well known benefit of a mobile device, such as a phone for example, that is used to control a robot with a touchscreen the added advantage of being controlled with easier to use physical buttons and joysticks, easing a robot operators interface and ability to control a robot without looking at a screen to see where the buttons are.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11 and 13-21 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.
Applicant has not responded to the 103 Rejection of claim 21 in view of Kim.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is indicated in PTO form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY TODD whose telephone number is (303)297-4763. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5 MST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Nicholas Taylor can be reached on 571-272-3889. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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 571-272-1000.
/GREGORY TODD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights