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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 or 103
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Sitrick et al. (US 11,629,934).
Re claim 1:
For the sake of clarity, individual limitations of Sitrick et al. will be followed in each instance by a discussion of the text in Sitrick et al. that meets the claim limitation.
Although Sitrick is the inventor of the instant application, there is no claim of priority to any earlier applications in the Application Data Sheet. Therefore, Sitrick et al. (US 11,629,934) is eligible as prior art.
An automated a human-transported weapon system comprising:
a barrel and munitions that can be aimed toward a targeting area to be propelled through the barrel;
Sitrick teaches (column 1, lines 40+)
“An automated weapon system [preferably a human transported weapon] is comprised of a barrel, a targeting subsystem, a computational subsystem, a positioning subsystem, and, a firing subsystem. The barrel is utilized for propelling a fired munitions as aimed towards an area of sighting.”
sensing logic for sensing which, of from one to up to a plurality of targets, are available targets that are within a firing range of the system,
Sitrick et al. teaches (column 5, lines 35+)
“The automated weapon system 200 is further comprised of sensing logic (sensors) 204, selection logic 255, aim computational logic 218, a positioning subsystem 214, trigger activation logic 212, and firing logic 213. The sensors 204 sense which of up to a plurality of targets are within firing range of the system. The selection logic 255 selects a selected target 220 from the targets in the targeting area sighting 230 that are within the firing range, responsive to the sensors and sensing logic 204. The aim computational logic 218 determines where to aim the human transported automated weapon 200 so that the munitions 202 will hit the selected target 220 if fired at a firing time. The positioning subsystem 214 adjusts the aim of the munitions 202 through the human transported weapon 200, to compensate as needed for where the selected target 220 is at the firing time, responsive to the computational logic 218. The trigger activation logic 212 initiates firing of the munitions 202 at the firing time. The firing logic (213) (trigger) 212 fires the munitions 202 responsive to the positioning subsystem 214 and trigger activation logic 212.”
wherein the sensing logic is further comprised of an external drone that is an additional linked appliance that can communicate with the human transported weapon;
See column 19, lines 54+:
“FIG. 19. illustrates a linked drone 1902 and handheld Automated Weapons System 100. Target information from the drone sensors 1904 is provided to the automated weapon system 100 through a communication link 1910. A communications interface 1910 communicates with the external subsystem linked (drone) 1902. Drone sensors provide a sensing subsystem 1904 that communicates to a targeting subsystem 340 (from FIG. 3.). The targeting subsystem 340 identifies a selected target 1920 in the area of sighting 1906 of the drone 1902. In one embodiment, the munitions selection logic chooses a selected munitions 320 from up to a plurality of types of munitions 1101 (from FIG. 11.), for use with the said type of the chosen selected target 1920. The computational subsystem 360 in the Automated Weapons System 300, responsive to the targeting subsystem 340 in the drone 1902, determines where the selected target 1920 is and where the aim of the barrel 1916 needs to be so that the selected munitions 320 will strike the target 1920 if fired at a firing time.
As illustrated in FIG. 19., an automated weapons system 100 is comprised of a human transported automated weapon system subsystem 100, an external drone subsystem 1902, and a targeting subsystem 340 (from FIG. 3.). The human transported automated weapon system 100 has munitions 320 for firing. The external drone subsystem 1902 comprises a drone 1902 with a sensing subsystem 1904 that communicates to a targeting subsystem 340 and provides communications 1910 between the external drone subsystem 1902 and the human transported automated weapons system subsystem 100. A targeting subsystem 340 selects a chosen target 1920 from available targets (in field of view/area of sighting 1906). The human transported automated weapon system 100 subsystem is comprised (reference to FIG. 3.) of a computational subsystem 360, positioning means 355, and a firing subsystem 380. The computational subsystem 360 is responsive to the targeting subsystem 340 for determining where the chosen target 350 is located, and then determining where to aim so that the munitions 320 will strike the chosen target 350. The positioning means 355 adjusts the aim 315 when firing the munitions 320, responsive to the computational subsystem 360. The firing subsystem 380 fires the munitions 320 at the chosen target 350, responsive to the positioning means 355.”
See especially figure 19, which shows this configuration.
selection logic, selecting a selected target from the available targets in the targeting area that are within the firing range, responsive to the sensing logic,
aim computational logic, determining where to aim the barrel of said human transported weapon, so that a fired said munitions will hit the selected target when fired at a firing time,
trigger activation logic initiating firing of the munitions at the firing time;
a positioning subsystem, adjusting the aim of the munitions through the barrel of the human transported weapon, to compensate as needed for where the selected target is at the firing time, responsive to the aim computational logic with data derived from the human transported weapon, and,
firing logic, firing the munitions responsive to the positioning subsystem, and the trigger activation logic.
Sitrick et al. teaches (column 5, lines 35+)
“The automated weapon system 200 is further comprised of sensing logic (sensors) 204, selection logic 255, aim computational logic 218, a positioning subsystem 214, trigger activation logic 212, and firing logic 213. The sensors 204 sense which of up to a plurality of targets are within firing range of the system. The selection logic 255 selects a selected target 220 from the targets in the targeting area sighting 230 that are within the firing range, responsive to the sensors and sensing logic 204. The aim computational logic 218 determines where to aim the human transported automated weapon 200 so that the munitions 202 will hit the selected target 220 if fired at a firing time. The positioning subsystem 214 adjusts the aim of the munitions 202 through the human transported weapon 200, to compensate as needed for where the selected target 220 is at the firing time, responsive to the computational logic 218. The trigger activation logic 212 initiates firing of the munitions 202 at the firing time. The firing logic (213) (trigger) 212 fires the munitions 202 responsive to the positioning subsystem 214 and trigger activation logic 212.”
Re claim 2:
Sitrick teaches (column 1, lines 55+):
“In one embodiment, the system is further comprised of an additional linked automated weapon having a separate barrel, separate munitions, a separate positioning subsystem, and a separate firing subsystem. The computational subsystem determines the positioning of the separate barrel to shoot the separate munitions to strike the chosen target. The additional linked automated weapon can be mounted on a stationary mount or mounted on a movable mount. In one embodiment, there is means for selecting at least one of the human transported weapon and the additional linked automated weapon, as selected and enabled to shoot the munitions at the firing time.”
Re claim 3:
Sitrick teaches most or all of these as parameters for selecting a target.
Re claim 4:
See column 3, lines 59+:
“A plethora of targeting sensors allows a wide spectrum of sensing beyond the visible spectrum, such as IR, SPI (Spacial Phased Imaging), UV (ULTRAVIOLET), X-Ray, Microwave, Thermal, 3D sensor, Visible light, Radar, Sonar, LIDAR, etc. [For further examples, see the catalog on “Image Sensors”, from Hamamaatsu, December, 2011).] Targeting sensors allow shooting at targets through fog, smoke, rain, and other vision obstructing conditions. This effectively provides an ‘all weather/all conditions’ targeting system.”
Re claim 5: See discussion re claim 2, above.
Re claim 6: Sitrick can hit multiple targets, and this would typically happen sequentially (i.e. at different times).
Re claim 7: See discussions above.
Re claims 8-11: See discussions above.
Re claim 12: See column 10, lines 62+:
“FIG. 7. illustrates an automated weapon system 700 utilizing a neural net system 701. The neural net system 701 can be utilized for target detection 702, target identification 777, selection 720, and/or tracking 714.
Sensor data 704 is evaluated by a computing means 740. In one embodiment, the computing means 740 includes neural net processing. Neural nets 700 can operate directly on the sensor data 704 producing outputs including, but not limited to, ‘target selection’, ‘target priority’, ‘target tracking data’, etc.
In another embodiment, neural nets 701 are used to increase speed [reduce the compute time] needed for identifying and selecting a target and to reduce power. In one embodiment, specific targets 702, (by type or by ID specifically) can be identified as potential threats or not. Targets that are not threats or identified as “friendly” are then removed from potential threats lists.”
Also, see figure 7.
Re claim 13:
See column 3, lines 59+:
“A plethora of targeting sensors allows a wide spectrum of sensing beyond the visible spectrum, such as IR, SPI (Spacial Phased Imaging), UV (ULTRAVIOLET), X-Ray, Microwave, Thermal, 3D sensor, Visible light, Radar, Sonar, LIDAR, etc. [For further examples, see the catalog on “Image Sensors”, from Hamamaatsu, December, 2011).] Targeting sensors allow shooting at targets through fog, smoke, rain, and other vision obstructing conditions. This effectively provides an ‘all weather/all conditions’ targeting system. The sensors can also be used to identify not only a target, but the type of target. One means of doing this utilizes neural net pattern recognition means to identify the type of target (person, animal, tank, etc.)”
Re claim 14:
See column 9, lines 12+:
“The method is further comprised of identifying targets within range of an area of sighting 330 of the weapon 300 as available targets, and determining a selected target 350 from the available targets, responsive to the computing subsystem 360. The selected target's 350 position at a firing time is then determined. The aim of the weapon is positioned so that the munitions 320 will strike the selected target 350 if fired at the firing time, responsive to the computing subsystem 400. Finally, a trigger signal 312 is provided to activate firing of the munitions 320 at the firing time.”
Re claims 15-23:
See discussions above. All of these elements are generally covered by Sitrick.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL A HESS whose telephone number is (571)272-2392. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, from 9 AM to 5 PM.
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, Michael G. Lee can be reached at (571)272-2398. 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.
/DANIEL A HESS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876