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 .
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, “a detection member mounted at the body and including a magnetic sensor…..obtain detection information collected by the detection member,” recited in claims 1 and 19; “the detection member further includes a magnetic member arranged at one of the first member and the second member…etc.,” recited in claim 4; “the detection member further includes an angle sensor arranged at the rotation connector and configured to detect an angle between the first member and the second member,” recited in claim 5; “the detection information includes at least one of a magnetic field strength detected by the magnetic sensor or an angle between the first member and the second member…etc.,” recited in claim 8; “a second detection, a second magnetic sensor, a pressure sensor,” recited in claims 10, 12-16, and 20, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claims 1 and 19, the phrase, “a detection member mounted at the body and including a magnetic sensor…..obtain detection information collected by the detection member,” is indefinite and vague. Which element constitutes “a detection member?” Is applicant referring to a detection member as a magnetic sensor (128)? It appears that it’s a magnetic attraction. In so far the claim is understood as any magnetic attraction meets the limitation(s) of the claim.
In claim 4, the phrase, “the detection member further includes a magnetic member arranged at one of the first member and the second member…etc.,” is indefinite and vague. Which element constitutes “the detection member further includes a magnetic member arranged at one of the first member and the second member?” According to applicant’s figures, there is only a magnetic attachment between a third connection arm 125 with a second attachment member 21. In so far the claim is understood as any magnetic member attached to the apparatus meets the limitation(s) of the claim.
In claim 5, the phrase, “the detection member further includes an angle sensor arranged at the rotation connector and configured to detect an angle between the first member and the second member,” is indefinite and vague. Which element constitutes “ the detection member further includes an angle sensor arranged at the rotation connector?”
In claim 7, the phrase, “and another end of the third connection arm 125 connected to the yaw motor 122,” is indefinite and vague. Applicant’s figure 1 clearly shows it’s connected to the pitch motor 124 rather the yaw motor 122.
In claim 8, the phrase, “the detection information includes at least one of a magnetic field strength detected by the magnetic sensor or an angle between the first member and the second member…etc.,” is indefinite and vague. Which element constitutes “the detection information includes at least one of a magnetic field strength detected by the magnetic sensor or an angle between the first member and the second member?”
In so far the claim is understood as any magnetic member or any angle sensor attached to the apparatus meets the limitation(s) of the claim.
In claims 10, 12-16, and 20 are indefinite and vague. Which element constitutes “a second detection, a second magnetic sensor, a pressure sensor?” Applicant’s figure clearly shows a second attachment 21, and nothing more. In so far the claims are understood as any second attachment to the payload meets the limitation(s) of the claims.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 108375992, in view of CN 213333593.
Regarding claims 1, 4, and 19, CN ‘992 discloses a method of using the apparatus as shown in figures 1-5. CN ‘992 shows an apparatus (see figures 1-5, a gimbal member 1, claim 18) comprising: a body 1 configured to carry a load and be in one of a plurality of different states including a folded state and an unfolded state (see paragraphs [0010], [0023], [0055]), a detection member (using 22) mounted at the body and including an angle sensor 22 (claims 5, 8) rather than a magnetic sensor, with a connection arm (arm of 13, claim 3), one or more processors (using 24), and one or more memories storing one or more computer programs (i.e., see figure 5), when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processor to: obtain detection information collected by the detection member, the detection information being related to the folded state or the unfolded state of the body; and control the apparatus to be in a standby mode or an operation mode (see paragraphs [0014]-[0015], claims 9 and 17) according to the detection information, see figures 1-5.
CN ‘593 discloses a payload 300 with a second attachment 21 to a first attachment 122 with a magnetic sensor (see figures 1-16, as same as applicant’s device, claims 10, 12-16, and 20) attached to a body to carry a load and able to fold and unfold the arm with a connection arm 123 .
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the sensor of CN ‘992 to include a magnetic sensor as suggested by CN ‘593, to show that there are many different sensors that can be used. Furthermore, since all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Regarding claim 2, as stated above, CN ‘992 discloses a first member (arm of 11), a second member (arm of 12), and a rotation connector 123 arranged between the first member and the second member and is configured to be folded and unfolded through the rotation connector, and one end of the rotation connector is rotatably connected to the first member, and another end of the rotation connector is rotatably connected to the second member, (see figure 1, as same as applicant’s claim).
Regarding claims 6-7, and 11, as stated above, CN ‘992 discloses a yaw motor 11, a pitch motor 13, a roll motor 12, with a third connection arm (arm of 13) with the pitch motor attached to the end of the third connection arm rather than the second connection arm, see figures 1-5.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to place the already known motor onto any particular arm, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG K KIM whose telephone number is 571-272-6947. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 9 P.M or Tuesday through Thursday from 10:30 A.M. to 7 P.M.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Robert Hodge, can be reached on (571) 272-2097. 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).
SK
7/11/26
/SANG K KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3654
Prosecution Insights