Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/535,405

FOCUSING METHOD, FOCUSING DEVICE, AND UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 11, 2023
Examiner
KHAN, USMAN A
Art Unit
2637
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Autel Robotics Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
646 granted / 866 resolved
+12.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
895
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.1%
-35.9% vs TC avg
§103
46.6%
+6.6% vs TC avg
§102
32.6%
-7.4% vs TC avg
§112
13.0%
-27.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 866 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . 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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/15/2023 has been considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Specification The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 1 line 10 applicant claims “event ,”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. 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 – 2 and 7 – 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LEE (US PgPub No. 20120307042). Regarding claim 1, LEE teaches a focusing method being applied to an unmanned aerial vehicle (figure 1 item 100), the unmanned aerial vehicle being provided with an aerial camera (figure 1 item 30), the method comprising: obtaining an far focus of the aerial camera, in response to the unmanned aerial vehicle is at a high altitude (paragraphs 0022 – 0023; obtain focus and adjusting focus based on flight paragraphs 0009 - 0011, 0020, and 0025); obtaining a preset focus interval according to the far focus, wherein a minimum value of the preset focus interval is less than the far focus, and a maximum value of the preset focus interval is greater than or equal to the far focus (paragraphs 0022 – 0024, focus range with minimum and maximum ratio to fall within the preset range); and in response to a current image site of the aerial camera is greater than the maximum value, or the current image site is less than the minimum value, obtaining a first sharpness statistical value from a last focusing event, and determining whether to perform focus according to the first sharpness statistical value (figure 2B item S212 “No” then proceeds to items S214 – S215; sharpness statistical value being focus threshold value). Regarding claim 2, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 1, LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, LEE teaches in response to the unmanned aerial vehicle is not at the high altitude, determining whether to perform focus according to the first sharpness statistical value (figure 2B items S210, “No at item S210 to go to S212 leading to item S214; sharpness statistical value being focus threshold value). Regarding claim 7, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 1, LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, LEE teaches wherein the method further comprises: in response to the current image site is less than or equal to the maximum value of the preset focus interval, and the current image site is greater than or equal to the minimum value of the preset focus interval, determining not to perform focus (figure 2B item S213; focus within range and stop). Regarding claim 8, LEE teaches a focusing device applied to an unmanned aerial vehicle (figure 1 item 100) on which an aerial camera is provided (figure 1 item 30), wherein the device comprises: a first acquisition unit configured to obtain a far focus of the aerial camera in response to the unmanned aerial vehicle is at a high altitude (paragraphs 0022 – 0023; obtain focus and adjusting focus based on flight paragraphs 0009 - 0011, 0020, and 0025); a second acquisition unit configured to obtain a preset focus interval according to the far focus, wherein a minimum value of the preset focus interval is less than the far focus, and a maximum value of the preset focus interval is greater than or equal to the far focus (paragraphs 0022 – 0024, focus range with minimum and maximum ratio to fall within the preset range); and a determination unit is configured to, in response to a current image site of the aerial camera is greater than the maximum value, or the current image site is less than the minimum value, obtain a first sharpness statistical value when a last focusing ends, and determine whether to perform focus according to the first sharpness statistical value (figure 2B item S212 “No” then proceeds to items S214 – S215; sharpness statistical value being focus threshold value). Regarding claim 9, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 8, LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, LEE teaches in response to the unmanned aerial vehicle is not at the high altitude, determine whether to perform focus according to the first sharpness statistical value (figure 2B items S210, “No at item S210 to go to S212 leading to item S214; sharpness statistical value being focus threshold value). 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: 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. 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. Claims 11 – 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (US PgPub No. 20190187725) in view of LEE (US PgPub No. 20120307042). Regarding claim 11, ZHANG teaches an unmanned aerial vehicle (figure 1; unmanned aerial vehicle 10) comprising: a fuselage (figure 1 item 11 body); an engine arm connected to the fuselage (figure 1 item 132 also paragraph 0065); a power device provided to the engine arm (figure 11 item 27 and 25), the power device being configured to provide flying power to the unmanned aerial vehicle (figure 11 item 25 and 27 also paragraphs 0065 and 0121; a gimbal connected to the fuselage (figure 1 item 15); an aerial camera being loaded on the unmanned aerial vehicle via the gimbal (figure 1 item 14); and at least one processor and a memory connected in communication with the at least one processor, wherein the memory stores an instruction executable by the at least one processor, the instruction being executed by the at least one processor to enable the at least one processor to execute a focusing method (figure 1 items 16 and 17 also figure 3). However, ZHANG fails to clearly teach obtaining an far focus of the aerial camera, in response to the unmanned aerial vehicle is at a high altitude; obtaining a preset focus interval according to the far focus, wherein a minimum value of the preset focus interval is less than the far focus, and a maximum value of the preset focus interval is greater than or equal to the far focus; and in response to a current image site of the aerial camera is greater than the maximum value, or the current image site is less than the minimum value, obtaining a first sharpness statistical value from a last focusing event, and determining whether to perform focus according to the first sharpness statistical value. LEE, on the other hand teaches obtaining an far focus of the aerial camera, in response to the unmanned aerial vehicle is at a high altitude; obtaining a preset focus interval according to the far focus, wherein a minimum value of the preset focus interval is less than the far focus, and a maximum value of the preset focus interval is greater than or equal to the far focus; and in response to a current image site of the aerial camera is greater than the maximum value, or the current image site is less than the minimum value, obtaining a first sharpness statistical value from a last focusing event, and determining whether to perform focus according to the first sharpness statistical value. More specifically, LEE teaches obtaining an far focus of the aerial camera, in response to the unmanned aerial vehicle is at a high altitude (paragraphs 0022 – 0023; obtain focus and adjusting focus based on flight paragraphs 0009 - 0011, 0020, and 0025); obtaining a preset focus interval according to the far focus, wherein a minimum value of the preset focus interval is less than the far focus, and a maximum value of the preset focus interval is greater than or equal to the far focus (paragraphs 0022 – 0024, focus range with minimum and maximum ratio to fall within the preset range); and in response to a current image site of the aerial camera is greater than the maximum value, or the current image site is less than the minimum value, obtaining a first sharpness statistical value from a last focusing event, and determining whether to perform focus according to the first sharpness statistical value (figure 2B item S212 “No” then proceeds to items S214 – S215; sharpness statistical value being focus threshold value). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to incorporate the teachings of LEE with the teachings of ZHANG because in at least paragraphs 0022 – 0024 LEE teaches a system with improved image capture via focus, thereby improving image capture in the system of ZHANG when combined. Regarding claim 12, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 11, ZHANG in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, ZHANG teaches a radar sensor mounted to the fuselage, and a vision sensor loaded on the unmanned aerial vehicle via the gimbal (figure 10 item 301 – 302); wherein the radar sensor is configured to detect a distance from the unmanned aerial vehicle to ground (figure 10 item 300 obstacle detection; e.g. ground); and the vision sensor is configured to detect a distance between the unmanned aerial vehicle and an obstacle in front of the unmanned aerial vehicle (figure 10 item 300 obstacle detection; e.g. ground; also paragraphs 0010, 0027). Regarding claim 13, as mentioned above in the discussion of claim 11, ZHANG in view of LEE teach all of the limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, LEE teaches wherein the focusing method further comprising: in response to the unmanned aerial vehicle is not at the high altitude, determining whether to perform focus according to the first sharpness statistical value (figure 2B items S210, “No at item S210 to go to S212 leading to item S214; sharpness statistical value being focus threshold value). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to incorporate the teachings of LEE with the teachings of ZHANG because in at least paragraphs 0022 – 0024 LEE teaches a system with improved image capture via focus, thereby improving image capture in the system of ZHANG when combined. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3 - 6, 10, and 14 - 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claim 3: “wherein the determining whether to perform focus according to the first sharpness statistical value comprises: acquiring a current sharpness statistical value corresponding to the current image site; calculating an absolute value of a difference value between the current sharpness statistical value and the first sharpness statistical value; and determining whether to perform focus based on the absolute value” in combination with the other limitations in the claim and the parent claim is not discussed or suggested in any of the prior art that was searched. Regarding claims 4 - 6, these claims are also objected to as being dependent from objected claim 3. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claim 10: “wherein the determine whether to perform focus according to the first sharpness statistical value comprises: obtain a current sharpness statistical value corresponding to the current image site; calculate an absolute value of a difference value between the current sharpness statistical value and the first sharpness statistical value; and determine whether to perform focus based on the absolute value” in combination with the other limitations in the claim and the parent claim is not discussed or suggested in any of the prior art that was searched. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter for claim 14: “wherein the focusing method further comprising, acquiring a current sharpness statistical value corresponding to the current image site; calculating an absolute value of a difference value between the current sharpness statistical value and the first sharpness statistical value; and determining whether to perform focus based on the absolute value” in combination with the other limitations in the claim and the parent claim is not discussed or suggested in any of the prior art that was searched. Regarding claims 15 - 18, these claims are also objected to as being dependent from objected claim 14. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. ZHENG (US patent No. 20170297445) teaches a AUV device with camera. ZHAO (US patent No. 20180194488) teaches a AUV device with camera. HAM (US patent No. 20180356840) teaches a AUV device with camera. HONJO (US patent No. 20200130862) teaches a AUV device with camera. ZHONG (US patent No. 20200137295) teaches a AUV device with camera. HONJO (US patent No. 20210075973) teaches a AUV device with camera. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Usman A Khan whose telephone number is (571)270-1131. The examiner can normally be reached on M - Th 5:30 AM - 2 PM, F 5:30 AM - Noon. 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, Sinh Tran can be reached on (571)272-7564. 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. Usman Khan /USMAN A KHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637 11/12/2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 11, 2023
Application Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604089
IMAGE CAPTURING APPARATUS HAVING AUDIO RECOGNITION, CONTROL METHOD THEREOF, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604073
DEVICE AND FILTER ARRAY USED IN SYSTEM FOR GENERATING SPECTRAL IMAGE, SYSTEM FOR GENERATING SPECTRAL IMAGE, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING FILTER ARRAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598376
CAMERA SYSTEM, COMMUNICATION METHOD, SIGNAL PROCESSING DEVICE, AND CAMERA FOR COMMUNICATING VIA DIFFERENT TYPES OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598384
IMAGING DEVICE WITH FILTER SWITCHING, METHOD FOR CONTROLLING THE SAME, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591169
Remotely controllable mobile video studio with integrated teleprompter, camera, lighting and microphone
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+12.5%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 866 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month