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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the Applicants’ filing on 12/02/2025. Claims 1-11 were previously pending, of which claims 7, 9, and 11 have been withdrawn in response to the restriction requirement, and no claims have been newly added. Accordingly, claims 1-6, 8, and 10 are currently pending and are being examined below.
Election/Restrictions of Species
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I in
the reply filed on 12/02/2025 is acknowledged.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy of the foreign priority application FR2302353 has been received.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/12/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-6, 8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The Examiner has identified method Claim 1 as the claim that represents the claimed invention for analysis. Claim 1 recites the limitations of (additional elements emphasized in bold and are considered to be parsed from the remaining abstract idea):
A method for generating a trajectory for an aircraft in flight to exit a meteorological alert situation, the method being implemented by an automatic trajectory generation system comprising electronic circuitry, the method comprising:
- obtaining one or more polygons of a meteorological alert situation representative of at least one respective meteorological obstacle to be overcome;
- defining two tangential circles with respect to a current flight direction (ADIR) of the aircraft, one tangential circle being centered to a right and the other tangential circle being centered to a left with respect to a current in-flight position (APOS) of the aircraft, a radius of each tangential circle being a minimum radius of a turn which the aircraft is configured to perform in view of an operational state of the aircraft;
- identifying, for each polygon of the meteorological alert situation, candidate external sides which are candidates for the aircraft to exit the meteorological alert situation;
- defining straight lines which are perpendicular to the candidate external sides and which are tangential to one or both of the tangential circles;
- determining, for each straight line, a candidate safety position, which is located on said straight line at a distance at least equal to a predetermined lateral margin outside any polygon representative of a meteorological obstacle of the meteorological alert situation;
- forming candidate trajectories, in order for the aircraft to exit the meteorological alert situation, between the current in-flight position (A_POS) of the aircraft and each candidate safety position following the straight line on which the candidate safety position in question is located and, previously, a circle portion until said circle is tangential to the straight line in question; and
- choosing between the candidate trajectories, selecting the most promising candidate trajectory in view of a heuristic where minimizing a time of exposure of the aircraft to any meteorological obstacle of the meteorological alert situation prevails.
which is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation(s) as a Mental process (concept performed in the human mind) but for the recitation of generic computer elements. For example, a person could obtain weather data marked containing storm geometry, determine the location of the aircraft, create two tangential circles on the map denoting the turn radius, and draw perpendicular lines out of the storm based on that turn radius, and then choose the fastest route out of the storm by selecting the shortest tangential line.
With respect to Step 2A, Prong II, this judicial exception is not practically integrated. The claim recites the additional elements of electronic circuitry. These elements are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
With respect to Step 2B, the aforementioned additional elements are all generic computer elements have been held to be not significantly more than the abstract idea by Alice. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above, the additional elements of using the processors to receive information, make decisions, and supply instructions amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept.
Claim 8 cites the same limitations as that in claim 1, with the exception of adding more generic computer components, and are therefore also rejected under 35 USC § 101.
Claims 2-3 and 10 further define characteristics of the system. However, these characteristics do not add limitations that would integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and are therefore also rejected under 35 USC § 101.
Claims 4-6 recite limitations that include merging polygons, obtaining other polygons, and filtering candidate trajectories which can also be performed in the human mind and do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Therefore, these claims are also rejected under 35 USC § 101.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6, 8, and 10 would be allowable if amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) and 35 U.S.C. § 101.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, teach the invention as a whole. While prior art of record had meteorological objects/obstacles marked by polygons and turn radii of the plane’s marked by circles with straight lines marking the fastest way out of an emergent situation, the prior art found at this time did not contain specific limitations including “defining straight lines which are perpendicular to the candidate external sides and which are tangential to one or both of the tangential circles;” stated in claims 1 and 8.
The following references are the most relevant prior art and are representative of the current state of the art:
Marty et al. (US 2009/0132103 A1) discloses a system using circular arcs to calculate a set of avoidance trajectories and correlate them with the environmental data in order to detect the engagement points requiring a corrective maneuver with respect to obstacles or weather denoted by polygons. It does not have straight lines tangential to the circular arc to determine the minimal exposure time.
Sellman et al. (US 2022/0204180 A1) discloses a method to assist aircraft pilots with rapid decision-making due to an emergency to get to airports potentially within reach, using confidence scores for successful landings for alternative simulated landing options; provided by using two tangential circles and straight lines to determine the closest airport at which to successfully land. It does not contain the lines being perpendicular to a polygon side to exit a meteorological obstacle.
Coulmeau et al. (US 2015/0332490 A1) discloses a method for assisting the navigation of an aircraft using meteorological data, creating geometrical approximations of the weather volumes by transforming surfaces into exploitable digital objects such as polygons and navigating through and around them. It does not contain two tangential circles with tangent lines perpendicular to the polygon sides to minimize exposure time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHELLEY MARIE OSTERHOUT whose telephone number is (703)756-1595. The examiner can normally be reached Mon to Fri 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, Navid Mehdizadeh can be reached on (571) 272-7691. 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.
/S.M.O./Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669