DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
01. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
02. This action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 07/09/2025. Claims 1 – 20 are pending in the present application.
Applicant’s arguments and amendments are considered but are not persuasive.
This action is made final.
Information Disclosure Statement
03. The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 09/04/2025 has been considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file.
Response to Arguments
04. Applicant argues that not all claimed limitations are disclosed by the prior art references Donato and Ferreira. More specifically, it is argued that Donato does not teach “responsive to the selection of the airport, dynamically subdivide the at least one tile into a plurality of tiles”, as is recited in independent claims 1, 8, and 14. With respect to this claim limitation, Examiner generally agrees that Donato does not disclose the entirety of it. However, the 103 rejection has relied upon Ferreira to disclose this limitation.
Ferreira discloses a method of determining to make changes to terrain data based on an aircraft being near an airport runway. For example, paragraph [0001] of Ferreira explains that the technical field is for making adjustments to the “resolution and/or accuracy of the terrain elevation to be used when the aircraft is near an airport runway”. As a result of an aircraft being within proximity to the airport runway, terrain tiles can be adjusted. This makes two things evident. The first is that the changing of terrain data is performed dynamically, as it is done when the aircraft is in a certain range of the airport runway, meaning that the terrain data is changed/updated in real time as it would be needed. The second is that this is all done in response to a proximity of an airport. This means that some sort of “selection” of an airport is performed, as the determining of airport is what can be used to trigger the dynamic changing of terrain data (paragraphs [0024] and [0039]). Furthermore, it is not entirely clear if the Applicant’s claims are intended to take on a more specific meaning than what is currently listed in the claims, as the claims merely recite “a selection of an airport”. It may be that the Applicant is intending for this to mean something different or beyond what Ferreira teaches, but given the broadest reasonable interpretation, this claim limitation appears to be no more than any type of choosing, picking, or deciding of an airport in any type of way. Additionally, Applicant’s specification only mentions the “selection” twice, but does not give any specific definition to it. The teachings of Ferreira of choosing and using a particular airport based on an aircraft being within a certain location necessarily means that that airport is in some way “selected”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
05. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
06. 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 of this title, 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.
07. Claims 1 – 15 and 17 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donato et al. (US PGPub 2022/0390255), hereinafter “Donato”, in view of Ferreira et al. (US PGPub 2021/0217320), hereinafter “Ferreira”.
Consider claim 1, Donato discloses a computer apparatus comprising:
at least one processor in data communication with a plurality of databases and a memory storing processor executable code for configuring the at least one processor to (paragraphs [0246], [0264], a computer apparatus is used, which comprises various computing components, such as a processors and memories that perform functions):
receive terrain tile data from a terrain database in the plurality of databases (paragraphs [0042], [0065], terrain tiles are obtained, which can be either obtained from or stored in a database, such as a map server);
identify at least one tile within a predefined radius of … (paragraphs [0101], [0113], a tile is obtained, which can be from within a certain radius of a data point of interest);
subdivide the at least one tile into a plurality of tiles (paragraphs [0065], [0070], [0076], the system allows for dividing/partitioning one tile into multiple smaller tiles);
determine an elevation for each of the plurality of tiles (paragraphs [0069], [0070], [0095], the tiles for terrain can be associated with an elevation, such that elevation data for the tiles can come from multiple different sources);
update the terrain database with the plurality of tiles in place of the at least one tile (paragraphs [0046], [0070], the changes made to the terrain tiles are stored and saved in the map server).
However, Donato does not specifically disclose an airport.
In the same field of endeavor, Ferreira discloses an apparatus comprising:
receive a selection of an airport; of the selected airport (paragraphs [0031], [0034], a terrain database is utilized based on proximity to an airport, such that the actions performed by the system are done in response to a location within a threshold distance from the airport);
responsive to the selection of the airport, dynamically (paragraphs [0006], [0007], [0024], [0039], [0043], in response to an aircraft being within a proximity of an airport, terrain information is adjusted, such as tiles, wherein the adjustment can be to the resolution and accuracy of the tiles).
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 selecting of an airport in order to make changes to terrain information taught by Ferreira into the altering of terrain tiles taught by Donato for the purpose of allowing the terrain tiles to be changed near an airport, which would allow for navigation systems, such as those onboard an aircraft, to have access to updated and more accurate terrain information, which would improve navigation systems and make airplane flights go smoother.
Consider claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, Donato discloses an apparatus comprising:
the elevation for each of the plurality of tiles is determined from database in the plurality of databases (paragraph [0044], elevation data is obtained from datasets that are stored in a database, such as a map server).
Consider claim 3, and as applied to claim 2 above, Ferreira discloses an apparatus comprising:
receive onboard sensor data from the plurality of databases, the onboard sensor data corresponding to a location of each of the plurality of tiles (paragraphs [0024], [0031], the data that is obtained is done so by utilizing on-board computing devices, such that the data relates to the terrain and associated tiles);
verify the determined elevation for each of the plurality of tiles based on the onboard sensor data (paragraphs [0026] – [0028], [0105], the elevation data obtained is determined to have a certain level of associated accuracy).
Consider claim 4, and as applied to claim 1 above, Donato discloses an apparatus comprising:
identify a plurality of similar elevation tiles from the terrain database (paragraph [0066], a tiles obtained contain information about elevation, such that multiple tiles can be obtained);
consolidate the similar elevation tiles into a single tile (paragraph [0042], the tiles can undergo a simplification process, that allows for combining tiles that share vertices);
update the terrain database with the single tile (paragraph [0042], the tiles that have been combined are stored as such).
Consider claim 5, and as applied to claim 1 above, Ferreira discloses an apparatus comprising:
receive onboard sensor data from the plurality of databases, the onboard sensor data corresponding terrain and obstacle elevations (paragraphs [0024], [0031], data is obtained by using onboard computing devices, which can obtain terrain information);
identify a terrain elevation or obstacle elevation from a corresponding terrain database or obstacle database in the plurality of databases (paragraphs [0025], [0027], terrain elevation is obtained from a database);
verify the terrain elevation or obstacle elevation based on the onboard sensor data (paragraphs [0026] – [0028], [0105], the elevation data obtained is determined to have a certain level of associated accuracy).
Consider claim 6, and as applied to claim 5 above, Donato discloses an apparatus comprising:
determine an accuracy value of the terrain elevation or obstacle elevation (paragraphs [0026] – [0028], [0105], the elevation data obtained is determined to have a certain level of associated accuracy);
update the terrain database or obstacle database with the accuracy value (paragraphs [0026] – [0028], the elevation data that is obtained is stored in the database).
Consider claim 7, and as applied to claim 6 above, Donato discloses an apparatus comprising:
the accuracy value corresponds to a deviation among the onboard sensor data for the identified terrain elevation or obstacle elevation (paragraphs [0026] – [0028], [0033], the elevation data that is obtained is based on elevation data).
Claims 8 – 13 recite the same embodiments found in claims 1 – 7 except that a method is claimed instead of an apparatus. Since the same claim limitations are otherwise present, claims 8 – 13 are rejected under the same rational as supplied above with respect to claims 1 – 7.
Consider claim 14, Donato discloses a system comprising:
a plurality of databases including a terrain database, an obstacle database, and an onboard flight sensor database (paragraphs [0056], [0269], a system with various computing devices is utilized, which can include any number of components, including map servers, networks, storage devices, etc.
and at least one processor in data communication with the plurality of databases and a memory storing processor executable code for configuring the at least one processor to (paragraphs [0246], [0264], a computer apparatus is used, which comprises various computing components, such as a processors and memories that perform functions):
receive terrain elevation data from the terrain database (paragraphs [0042], [0065], terrain tiles are obtained, which can be either obtained from or stored in a database, which include elevation data).
receive obstacle elevation data from the obstacle database (paragraphs [0044], [0060], additional terrain data can be obtained, such as land cover data, that shows objects within the terrain, such as a forest, vegetation, coastlines, etc.);
identify at least one tile within a predefined radius (paragraphs [0101], [0113], a tile is obtained, which can be from within a certain radius of a data point of interest);
subdivide the at least one tile into a plurality of tiles (paragraphs [0065], [0070], [0076], the system allows for dividing/partitioning one tile into multiple smaller tiles);
determine an elevation for each of the plurality of tiles (paragraphs [0069], [0070], [0095], the tiles for terrain can be associated with an elevation, such that elevation data for the tiles can come from multiple different sources);
update the terrain database with the plurality of tiles in place of the at least one tile (paragraphs [0046], [0070], the changes made to the terrain tiles is stored and saved in the map server).
However, Donato does not specifically disclose an airport. Or using onboard sensor data for obstacles.
In the same field of endeavor, Ferreira discloses an apparatus comprising:
receive a selection of an airport; of the selected airport (paragraphs [0031], [0034], a terrain database is utilized based on proximity to an airport, such that the actions performed by the system are done in response to a location within a threshold distance from the airport);
responsive to the selection of the airport, dynamically (paragraphs [0006], [0007], [0024], [0039], [0043], in response to an aircraft being within a proximity of an airport, terrain information is adjusted, such as tiles, wherein the adjustment can be to the resolution and accuracy of the tiles);
receive onboard sensor data from the onboard flight sensor database, the onboard sensor data corresponding terrain and obstacle elevations (paragraphs [0024], [0031], data is obtained by using onboard computing devices, which can obtain terrain information);
verify the terrain elevation data and obstacle elevation data based on the onboard sensor data (paragraphs [0026] – [0028], [0105], the elevation data obtained is determined to have a certain level of associated accuracy).
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 selecting of an airport in order to make changes to terrain information taught by Ferreira into the altering of terrain tiles taught by Donato for the purpose of allowing the terrain tiles to be changed near an airport, which would allow for navigation systems, such as those onboard an aircraft, to have access to updated and more accurate terrain information, which would improve navigation systems and make airplane flights go smoother.
Consider claim 15, and as applied to claim 14 above, Ferreira discloses a system comprising:
determine an accuracy value of the terrain elevation data and obstacle elevation data (paragraphs [0026] – [0028], [0105], the elevation data obtained is determined to have a certain level of associated accuracy);
update the terrain database and obstacle database with the accuracy value (paragraphs [0026] – [0028], the elevation data that is obtained is stored in the database).
Consider claim 18, and as applied to claim 14 above, Ferreira discloses a system comprising:
the elevation for each of the plurality of tiles is determined from database in the plurality of databases (paragraph [0044], elevation data is obtained from datasets that are stored in a database, such as a map server).
Consider claim 19, and as applied to claim 18 above, Ferreira discloses a system comprising:
to verify the determined elevation for each of the plurality of tiles based on the onboard sensor data (paragraphs [0026] – [0028], [0105], the elevation data obtained is determined to have a certain level of associated accuracy).
Consider claim 20, and as applied to claim 17 above, Ferreira discloses a system comprising:
identify a plurality of similar elevation tiles from the terrain database (paragraph [0066], a tiles obtained contain information about elevation, such that multiple tiles can be obtained);
consolidate the similar elevation tiles into a single tile (paragraph [0042], the tiles can undergo a simplification process, that allows for combining tiles that share vertices);
update the terrain database with the single tile (paragraph [0042], the tiles that have been combined are stored as such).
08. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donato et al. (US PGPub 2022/0390255), hereinafter “Donato”, in view of Ferreira et al. (US PGPub 2021/0217320), hereinafter “Ferreira”, in further view of Guerrero del Pozo et al. (US PGPub 2025/0086964), hereinafter “Guerrero”.
Consider claim 16, and as applied to claim 14 above, Donato and Ferreira disclose the claimed invention except that a trained neural network is used.
In the same field of endeavor, Guerrero discloses a system comprising:
the at least one processor embodies a trained neural network (paragraphs [0049], [0084], a neural network is used for processing data, which is trained using training data).
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 trained neural network taught by Guerrero into the terrain management taught by Donato and Ferreira for the purpose of allowing more complex systems, such as a neural network type of machine-learning model, to be used that can make perform more advanced tasks and make predictions, which would help with navigation systems to allow for more reliable data to be used.
Conclusion
09. 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.
10. Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300 or mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Christopher Raab whose telephone number is (571) 270-1090. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 9:00am to 5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Ajay Bhatia can be reached on (571) 272-3906. 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) or 703-305-3028.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist/customer service whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
/CHRISTOPHER J RAAB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2156
October 16, 2025
Prosecution Insights