DETAILED ACTION
Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s argument/remarks filed on March 30, 2026, claims 1-2, 7, 18 and 19-20 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
Applicant's arguments with respect to amended claims have been fully considered but are moot in view of a new ground(s) of rejection. Applicant had amended claims 1, 19 and 20.
Claims 3-6 and 8-17 had been withdrawn from further consideration, as being drawn to a nonelected Species.
Response to Argument
Regarding applicant’s arguments with respect to the amendment of the claims, applicant is kindly invited to consider the Office Action below to view the new ground of rejection, cited prior arts section and motivation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention; this constitutes new matter. The invention fails to disclose “ … determine a target area that requires an environmental change … by comparing the moving route with geographical locations based on an estimated emotion of the-target user …” (claims 1 and 20) and “ … determining a target area that requires an environmental change … by comparing the moving route with geographical locations based on an estimated emotion of the-target user …” (claim 19) (added remarks), and (ii) their critical role with respect to the scope of the invention.
Applicant failed to provide specification support for the amended limitations and indicated that support “is found in the Specification as originally filed.” However, the specification is completely devoid of the feature " … by comparing the moving route with geographical locations ...” (added remark). The specification describes two types of comparisons not related to amended limitations – see Pub.: par. 78 and 111. Applicants may consider using terms clearly disclose within the specification.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “ … determine a target area that requires an environmental change … by comparing the moving route with geographical locations based on an estimated emotion of the-target user …” (added remarks) or other new matter cited on the claim limitations” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the amended claims 1, 19 and 20. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 18 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaughn (Pub. No.: US 2015/0092020 A1) in view of Lutke et al. (Pat. No.: US 8,511,606 B1) and Berman et al. (US 2013/0245396 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Vaughn discloses an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) apparatus comprising:
circuitry (e.g., processor(s) – par. 89) configured to:
determine a target area that requires an environmental change on a moving route from a current location of a target user to a destination by comparing the moving route with geographical locations (e.g., a UAV moving into position in relation to a user (par. 103) while waking on a route within a location area (610) to a particular destination (e.g., car, house or other point) (par. 24 and 82 and Figure 6), which requires the UAV to determine a target area where the user is located by comparing walking route with location area(s); wherein the UAV provides sound projection directly to a user (par. 31 and 39) or project image (par. 36 and 58) (limitation: “… that requires an environmental change … “);
control a moving object (e.g., a UAV – par. 45) at a base station located near the target area to move to the target user (e.g., the UAV configured to follow or move around a user (par. 45). Figure 2 shows UAV 210 in operation near a wireless tower 230 (par. 23) while providing sound projection directly to a user (par. 31 and 39)); and
control the moving object to perform the environmental change by tracking the target user (e.g., the UAV configured to provide sound projection directly to a user (par. 31 and 39) or project image (par. 36 and 58) while the UAV follows / moves around a user (par. 45) ).
However, Vaughn failed to specifically disclose a moving object disposed at a based station; wherein the base station is configured to house the moving object and facilitate deployment and return of the moving object (added remark).
However, Lutke et al. Unmanned aerial vehicle based station configured to housed /shelter unmanned aerial vehicle (col. 14, lines 57-61; col. 16, lines 31-34 and Figures 13-14) and allow the aerial vehicle to depart for a mission (e.g., col. 17, lines 25-29; col. 5, lines 54-59) and return for charging / refueling (col. 4, lines 46-49; col. 16, lines 29-31; col. 6, lines 49-55).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the tower taught by Vaughn such that the tower is configured to house /shelter an unmanned aerial vehicle and allow the aerial vehicle to depart for a mission and return for charging / refueling, in view of Lutke et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of reducing cost and / or time consuming of human operator for launching, retrieving and maintaining unmanned aerial vehicle during a mission (col. 4, lines 18-25) while enable aerial vehicle(s) to operate over large area (col. 19, lines 43-52).
However, Vaughn, as modified by Lutke et al. failed to disclose an estimated emotion of each of a plurality of users, the plurality of users including the target user.
However, Berman et al. teach a storage configured to collect mental state data for a plurality of people (par. 5. 14, 18, 21) based on GPS information / region(s) (par. 5. 14, 27) and output audio to a person based on the mental state of the person (par. 28); wherein the mental state data comprises disappointment, hesitation, calmness, stress and others emotion states (par. 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) as taught by the combination of Vaughn in view of Lutke et al., such that the UAV is configured to output audio to a person based on the mental state of the person and collected mental state data for a plurality of people across regions, in view of Berman et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of evaluating the mental states of a user for an effective human interaction (Berman et al.’s par. 3) while the UAV provides sound projection to the user as it follows / moves around the user (Vaughn’s par. 31, 39 and 45).
Regarding claim 2, Vaughn discloses an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), wherein the circuitry (e.g., processor(s) – par. 89) is configured to control the moving object to perform the environmental change by controlling the moving object to fly above the target user while tracking the target user (e.g., the UAV configured to provide sound projection directly to a user (par. 31, 39) while the UAV follows / moves around a user (par. 45) ).
Regarding claim 7, Vaughn discloses an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), wherein the circuitry is configured to determine the target area that requires the environmental change on the basis of a detection value of a sensor of the moving object (e.g., the UAV configured to follow / move around a user (par. 45) based on the UAV’s camera data for viewing and tracking the user (par. 27, 28, 71 and 87) and to provide sound projection directly to a user (par. 31, 39)).
Regarding claim 18, Vaughn discloses an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), wherein the environmental change includes outputting sound in a direction of the target user (e.g., the UAV configured to provide sound projection directly to a user (par. 31, 39)).
Regarding claim 19, Regarding claim 1, Vaughn discloses an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) method comprising:
determining a target area that requires an environmental change on a moving route from a current location of a target user to a destination by comparing the moving route with geographical locations (e.g., a UAV moving into position in relation to a user (par. 103) while waking on a route within in a location area (610) to a particular destination (e.g., car, house or other point) (par. 24 and 82 and Figure 6), which requires the UAV to determine a target area where the user is located by comparing walking route with location area(s); wherein the UAV provides sound projection directly to a user (par. 31 and 39) or project image (par. 36 and 58) (limitation: “… that requires an environmental change … “);
controlling a moving object (e.g., a UAV – par. 45) at a base station located near the target area to move to the target user (e.g., the UAV configured to follow or move around a user (par. 45). Figure 2 shows UAV 210 in operation near a wireless tower 230 (par. 23) while providing sound projection directly to a user (par. 31 and 39)); and
controlling the moving object to perform the environmental change by tracking the target user (e.g., the UAV configured to provide sound projection directly to a user (par. 31 and 39) or project image (par. 36 and 58) while the UAV follows / moves around a user (par. 45) ).
However, Vaughn failed to specifically disclose a moving object disposed at a based station; wherein the base station is configured to house the moving object and facilitate deployment and return of the moving object (added remark).
However, Lutke et al. Unmanned aerial vehicle based station configured to housed /shelter unmanned aerial vehicle (col. 14, lines 57-61; col. 16, lines 31-34 and Figures 13-14) and allow the aerial vehicle to depart for a mission (e.g., col. 17, lines 25-29; col. 5, lines 54-59) and return for charging / refueling (col. 4, lines 46-49; col. 16, lines 29-31; col. 6, lines 49-55).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the tower taught by Vaughn such that the tower is configured to house /shelter an unmanned aerial vehicle and allow the aerial vehicle to depart for a mission and return for charging / refueling, in view of Lutke et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of reducing cost and / or time consuming of human operator for launching, retrieving and maintaining unmanned aerial vehicle during a mission (col. 4, lines 18-25) while enable aerial vehicle(s) to operate over large area (col. 19, lines 43-52).
However, Vaughn, as modified by Lutke et al. failed to disclose an estimated emotion of each of a plurality of users, the plurality of users including the target user.
However, Berman et al. teach a storage configured to collect mental state data for a plurality of people (par. 5. 14, 18, 21) based on GPS information / region(s) (par. 5. 14, 27) and output audio to a person based on the mental state of the person (par. 28); wherein the mental state data comprises disappointment, hesitation, calmness, stress and others emotion states (par. 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) as taught by the combination of Vaughn in view of Lutke et al., such that the UAV is configured to output audio to a person based on the mental state of the person and collected mental state data for a plurality of people across regions, in view of Berman et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of evaluating the mental states of a user for an effective human interaction (Berman et al.’s par. 3) while the UAV provides sound projection to the user as it follows / moves around the user (Vaughn’s par. 31, 39 and 45).
Regarding claim 20, Vaughn discloses a non-transitory computer readable storge medium / random access memory (RAM) / dynamic storge device for storing information and instruction to be executed by a processor (par. 91 and 135), the instruction causing the processor to:
determine a target area that requires an environmental change on a moving route from a current location of a target user to a destination by comparing the moving route with geographical locations (e.g., a UAV moving into position in relation to a user (par. 103) while waking on a route within a location area (610) to a particular destination (e.g., car, house or other point) (par. 24 and 82 and Figure 6), which requires the UAV to determine a target area where the user is located by comparing walking route with location area(s); wherein the UAV provides sound projection directly to a user (par. 31 and 39) or project image (par. 36 and 58) (limitation: “… that requires an environmental change … “);
control a moving object (e.g., a UAV – par. 45) at a base station located near the target area to move to the target user (e.g., the UAV configured to follow or move around a user (par. 45). Figure 2 shows UAV 210 in operation near a wireless tower 230 (par. 23) while providing sound projection directly to a user (par. 31 and 39)); and
control the moving object to perform the environmental change by tracking the target user (e.g., the UAV configured to provide sound projection directly to a user (par. 31 and 39) or project image (par. 36 and 58) while the UAV follows / moves around a user (par. 45) ).
However, Vaughn failed to specifically disclose a moving object disposed at a based station; wherein the base station is configured to house the moving object and facilitate deployment and return of the moving object (added remark).
However, Lutke et al. Unmanned aerial vehicle based station configured to housed /shelter unmanned aerial vehicle (col. 14, lines 57-61; col. 16, lines 31-34 and Figures 13-14) and allow the aerial vehicle to depart for a mission (e.g., col. 17, lines 25-29; col. 5, lines 54-59) and return for charging / refueling (col. 4, lines 46-49; col. 16, lines 29-31; col. 6, lines 49-55).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the tower taught by Vaughn such that the tower is configured to house /shelter an unmanned aerial vehicle and allow the aerial vehicle to depart for a mission and return for charging / refueling, in view of Lutke et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of reducing cost and / or time consuming of human operator for launching, retrieving and maintaining unmanned aerial vehicle during a mission (col. 4, lines 18-25) while enable aerial vehicle(s) to operate over large area (col. 19, lines 43-52).
However, Vaughn, as modified by Lutke et al. failed to disclose an estimated emotion of each of a plurality of users, the plurality of users including the target user.
However, Berman et al. teach a storage configured to collect mental state data for a plurality of people (par. 5. 14, 18, 21) based on GPS information / region(s) (par. 5. 14, 27) and output audio to a person based on the mental state of the person (par. 28); wherein the mental state data comprises disappointment, hesitation, calmness, stress and others emotion states (par. 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) as taught by the combination of Vaughn in view of Lutke et al., such that the UAV is configured to output audio to a person based on the mental state of the person and collected mental state data for a plurality of people across regions, in view of Berman et al., with reasonable expectation of success, since doing so would have achieved the benefit of evaluating the mental states of a user for an effective human interaction (Berman et al.’s par. 3) while the UAV provides sound projection to the user as it follows / moves around the user (Vaughn’s par. 31, 39 and 45).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hsu (US 2009/0156887 A1) is directed to emotion database storing a plurality of emotional state information and play media information to an individual for releasing the emotion of the individual.
Vu et al. (US 2007/0192910 A1) is directed to a robot configured to detect an emergency condition when a person appears to be in danger, sick or other conditions and allow a remote user (e.g., caregiver) to command the robot to make a contact with the person.
Peeters et al. (US 8,983,682 B1) is directed to UAV configured to assist a person in need during an emergency response service.
Karabed (US 2017/0248970 A1) is directed to drones providing a current of air for cooling or ventilation – for instance, a mobile fan that follows its user.
This application is a continuation application of U.S. application no. 17/018,736 filed on September 11, 2020, now U.S. Patent 11,940,170 (“Parent Application’), which is a continuation application of U.S. application no. 15/515,653 filed on March 30, 2017, now U.S. Patent 10,788,235 (“Parent Application’). See MPEP §201.07. In accordance with MPEP §609.02 A. 2 and MPEP §2001.06(b) (last paragraph), the Examiner has reviewed and considered the prior art cited in the Parent Application. Also, in accordance with MPEP §2001.06(b) (last paragraph), all documents cited or considered ‘of record’ in the Parent Application are now considered cited or ‘of record’ in this application. Additionally, Applicant(s) are reminded that a listing of the information cited or ‘of record’ in the Parent Application need not be resubmitted in this application unless Applicant(s) desire the information to be printed on a patent issuing from this application. See MPEP §609.02 A. 2. Finally, Applicant(s) are reminded that the prosecution history of the Parent Application is relevant in this application.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jorge O. Peche whose telephone number is (571)270-1339. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM - 5:30 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, Khoi H. Tran can be reached at 571 272 6919. 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.
/J.O.P/ Examiner, Art Unit 3656 /KHOI H TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights