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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15, 16, 21 and 23-26 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berthelot et al. (Berthelot; US Pub No. 2023/0343112 A1) in view of Moy et al. (Moy; US Pub No. 2024/0061445 A1) and Harrivel et al. (Harrivel; US Pub No. 2018/0189681 A1).
As per claim 1, Berthelot teaches a device for collecting biometric and posture information for tracking a consciousness of a rotorcraft pilot, comprising:
an on-body wearable device worn on the rotorcraft pilot to collect physiological information (paragraphs [0019]-[0030]; paragraph [0071], lines 1-3);
a control system pressure signal detection device that detects pressure applied to… control a rotorcraft (paragraph [0026]);
a pilot consciousness and posture tracking and learning device that directly tracks… posture information of the pilot (paragraphs [0050]-[0051], [0143]), receives the physiological information from the on-body wearable device, and derives an anomaly related to a loss of consciousness of the pilot (paragraph [0172]); and
an integrated data processing and storage device that is responsible for a condition monitoring function related to the rotorcraft… information received from the pilot consciousness and posture tracking and learning device and the control system pressure signal detection device (paragraphs [0046], [0155]), and generate a warning signal when identifying an anomaly related to the loss of consciousness (paragraph [0018]).
Berthelot does not expressly teach device that detects pressure applied to a stick and a pedal used to control a rotorcraft… device that directly tracks pupil response… and the pilot and voice and flight data recording, to process and record information received.
Moy teaches device that detects pressure applied to a stick and a pedal used to control a rotorcraft (paragraph [0023]: pilot input may include a control stick and pedal, sensor 112 is connected to the pilot input devices and detects phenomenon pertaining to flight control, sensor 112 may be a pressure sensor).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement the pressure sensors as taught by Moy, since Moy states in paragraph [0023] that such a modification would result in detecting input datum from a pilot input.
Harrivel teaches device that directly tracks pupil response (paragraph [0039], line 10)… and the pilot and voice and flight data recording, to process and record information received (paragraph [0032]; paragraph [0039], lines 11-12).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement the pupil tracking, voice stress response and flight data recording as taught by Harrivel, since Harrivel states in paragraph [0032] that such a modification would result in identifying a vehicle status based on a scenario classifier identified using the recorded data.
As per claim 2, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel further teaches the device of claim 1, wherein the rotorcraft is a military rotorcraft (Berthelot, paragraph [0005]; paragraph [0010], line 13).
Claim(s) 3-12, 22 and 27-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jewell (US Pub No. 2020/0398834 A1).
As per claim 3, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel teaches the device of claim 1, wherein the on-body wearable device includes a physiological signal detection module (Berthelot, paragraphs [0017]-[0030]).
Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel does not expressly teach a Bluetooth transmission/reception module, and a power supply module.
Jewell teaches a Bluetooth transmission/reception module (paragraph [0055]), and a power supply module (paragraph [0049], lines 16-18).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement the power supply and Bluetooth communication as taught by Jewell, since Jewell states that such a modification would result in a portable, self-contained device for monitoring the vital signs of a wearer.
As per claim 4, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 3, wherein the physiological signal detection module includes a blood pressure detection sensor (Jewell, paragraph [0020]), a heart rate sensor (Berthelot, paragraph [0105]), an electrocardiogram sensor (Berthelot, paragraph [0020]), a body temperature sensor (Berthelot, paragraph [0029]), and an oxygen saturation sensor (Berthelot, paragraph [0021]), and is located on a body part including a wrist of the pilot (Berthelot, paragraph [0078], lines 10-11).
As per claim 5, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 3, wherein the Bluetooth transmission/reception module transmits (Jewell, paragraph [0063]) the collected physiological information from the physiological signal detection module to the pilot consciousness and posture tracking and learning device (Harrivel, paragraph [0027]).
As per claim 6, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 3, wherein the power supply module supplies power to the physiological signal detection module and the Bluetooth transmission/reception module (Jewell, Fig. 6A, paragraph [0049], lines 16-18), and is in a form of a built-in battery (Jewell, paragraph [0029]).
As per claim 7, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel teaches the device of claim 1, wherein the control system pressure signal detection device includes a pressure detection module (Berthelot, paragraph [0086])… and a power supply module (Berthelot, modules connected to aircraft power supply).
Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel does not expressly teach a data transmission/reception module.
Jewell teaches a data transmission/reception module (paragraph [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement the transmitter/receiver as taught by Jewell, since Jewell states in paragraph [0063] that such a modification would result in sharing data between two paired devices, a function that is well known in the art.
As per claim 8, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 7, wherein the pressure detection module includes a cyclic stick pressure detection sensor, a collective stick pressure detection sensor, and a pedal pressure detection sensor (Moy, paragraph [0023], lines 11-14 & 28-29).
As per claim 9, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 8, wherein the cyclic stick pressure detection sensor is located at a lower front center of a cockpit adjacent to the pilot, the collective stick pressure detection sensor is located in a lower left portion of the cockpit adjacent to the pilot, and the pedal pressure detection sensor is located in a lower front portion of the cockpit adjacent to the pilot (Moy, paragraph [0023], lines 11-14 & 28-29, paragraph [0034], lines 7-8; Berthelot, Fig. 2).
As per claim 10, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 7, wherein the data transmission/reception module transmits the information (Jewell, paragraph [0063]) collected by the pressure sensing module (Berthelot, paragraph [0026]) to the pilot consciousness and posture tracking and learning device (Berthelot, paragraphs [0050]-[0051], [0143]), and the integrated data processing and storage device (Berthelot, paragraphs [0046], [0155]).
As per claim 11, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 7, wherein the power supply module supplies power to the pressure detection module and the data transmission/reception module (Berthelot, modules connected to aircraft power supply).
As per claim 12, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel teaches the device method of claim 1, wherein the pilot consciousness and posture tracking and learning device includes a pupillary response and posture information detection module (Harrivel, paragraph [0039], lines 10 & 12)… a signal information processing and learning module (Berthelot, paragraphs [0014] & [0015])… and a power supply (Berthelot, modules connected to aircraft power supply).
Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel does not expressly teach a Bluetooth transmission/reception module… a data transmission/reception module.
Jewell teaches a Bluetooth transmission/reception module… a data transmission/reception module (paragraph [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement the transmitter/receiver as taught by Jewell, since Jewell states in paragraph [0063] that such a modification would result in sharing data between two paired devices, a function that is well known in the art.
As per claim 22, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 12, wherein the Bluetooth transmission/reception module receives the physiological information transmitted from the on-body wearable device worn on the pilot and transmits the received physiological information to the signal information processing and learning module (Jewell, paragraph [0055]; Berthelot, paragraphs [0019]-[0030]; paragraph [0071], lines 1-3).
As per claim 27, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 12, wherein the data transmission/reception module transmits the information (Jewell, paragraph [0055]) collected and analyzed in the signal information processing and learning module (Berthelot, paragraphs [0050]-[0051], [0143]) to the integrated data processing and storage device (Berthelot, paragraphs [0046] & [0055]).
As per claim 28, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 12, wherein the power supply module supplies power to the pupillary response and posture information detection module, the Bluetooth transmission/reception, the signal information processing and learning module, and the data transmission/reception module (Berthelot, modules connected to aircraft power supply).
As per claim 29, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel teaches the device of claim 1, wherein the integrated data processing and storage device includes a posture information processing and storage module (Berthelot, paragraph [0046] & [0155]), a biometric information processing and storage module (Berthelot, paragraphs [0017]-[0030]), a voice and flight record storage device (Harrivel, paragraph [0032]; paragraph [0039], lines 11-12)… and a power supply module (Berthelot, modules connected to aircraft power supply).
Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel does not expressly teach a data transmission/reception module.
Jewell teaches a data transmission/reception module (paragraph [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement the transmitter/receiver as taught by Jewell, since Jewell states in paragraph [0063] that such a modification would result in sharing data between two paired devices, a function that is well known in the art.
As per claim 30, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 29, wherein the posture information processing and storage module receives and stores data related to posture information of the rotorcraft and posture information of the pilot (Berthelot, paragraph [0046] & [0155]), and generates a warning signal when an anomaly occurs (Berthelot, paragraph [0018]).
As per claim 31, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 29, wherein the biometric information (Berthelot, paragraphs [0017]-[0030]) processing and storage module receives and stores data related to the physiological information of the pilot (Berthelot, paragraph [0046] & [0155]), and generates a warning signal when an anomaly related to the loss of consciousness of the pilot is identified (Berthelot, paragraph [0018]).
As per claim 32, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 29, wherein the voice and flight record storage device is a device that serves as a black box that stores pilot communication data and flight records (Harrivel, paragraph [0032]: black box).
As per claim 33, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 29, wherein the data transmission/reception module: receives information from the pilot consciousness and posture tracking and learning device, and the control system pressure signal detection device, and transmits the information to the posture information processing and storage module, the biometric information processing and storage module, and the voice and flight record storage device (see rejections of claims 29-32 above); and when an anomaly occurs, transmits the signal generated from the posture information processing and storage module or the biometric information processing and storage module to a device that the pilot recognizes (Berthelot, paragraph [0018]) using his/her visual and auditory senses, including a multifunction display device (Harrivel, paragraph [0045]).
As per claim 34, Berthelot in view of Moy and Harrivel, and further in view of Jewell, further teaches the device of claim 29, wherein the power supply module supplies power to the posture information processing and storage module, the voice and flight record storage device, and the data transmission reception module (Berthelot, modules connected to aircraft power supply).
Claim(s) 13 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, and Jewell as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Velez et al. (Velez; US Patent No. 4,852,988).
As per claim 13, Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, and Jewell teaches the device of claim 12, wherein the pupillary response and posture information detection module includes a camera for confirming a facial part and a posture (Harrivel, paragraph [0039], line 19: imaging device).
Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, and Jewell does not expressly teach and infrared light for confirming a pupillary reflex.
Velez teaches and infrared light for confirming a pupillary reflex (col. 4, line 58 – col. 5, line 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement the eye-movement system as taught by Velez, since Velez states in column 2, lines 46-68 that such a modification would result in monitoring a pilot’s eye position.
As per claim 17, Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel and Jewell, and further in view of Velez, further teaches the device of claim 13, wherein the infrared light for confirming a pupillary reflex is a device for confirming a pupillary reflex of the pilot, and induces a change in pupil size by radiating the infrared light having an infrared band wavelength that is less harmful to a human body toward the pupil (Velez, Abstract, col. 3, lines 32-42).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, Jewell and Velez as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Dewey et al. (Dewey; US Patent No. 10,762,786 B1).
As per claim 14, Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, Jewell and Velez teaches the device of claim 13.
Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, Jewell and Velez does not expressly teach wherein the camera for confirming a facial part and a posture collects a changing state of the facial part including a pupil, and the posture information including the head, shoulders, and arms of the pilot in real time, and provides the changing state and the posture information to the signal information processing and learning module.
Dewey teaches wherein the camera for confirming a facial part and a posture collects a changing state of the facial part including a pupil, and the posture information including the head, shoulders, and arms of the pilot in real time, and provides the changing state and the posture information to the signal information processing and learning module (col. 33, lines 14-30).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement the driver position/posture monitoring as taught by Dewey, since Dewey states in column 1, lines 19-23 that such a modification would result in identifying impaired vehicle operators.
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, Jewell and Velez as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Baugh et al. (Baugh; US Pub No. 2019/0146580 A1).
As per claim 18, Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, Jewell and Velez teaches the device of claim 17.
Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, Jewell and Velez does not expressly teach wherein the change in pupil size of the pilot is observed in such a way that the camera for confirming a facial part and a posture tracks the pupillary response, and during pre-flight inspection of mission equipment, after confirming an eyeball condition where no pupillary response occurs two or more times, a pupil diameter d before response is learned through the signal information processing and learning module.
Baugh teaches wherein the change in pupil size of the pilot is observed in such a way that the camera for confirming a facial part and a posture tracks the pupillary response (paragraph [0003], lines 14-15; paragraph [0051]), and during pre-flight inspection of mission equipment, after confirming an eyeball condition where no pupillary response occurs two or more times, a pupil diameter d before response is learned through the signal information processing and learning module (paragraphs [0033] & [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement the baseline pupil values as taught by Baugh, since Baugh states in paragraphs [0002] and [0003] that such a modification would result in monitoring eye movements from a pilot operating an aircraft.
As per claim 19, Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, Jewell and Velez, and further in view of Baugh, further teaches the device of claim 18, wherein after confirming the pupillary response by radiating the infrared light two or more times during pre-flight inspection of mission equipment or during a flight mission, pupillary diameter d’ after response determined as an arithmetic mean is learned through the signal information processing and learning module (Baugh, paragraph [0035]).
As per claim 20, Berthelot in view of Moy, Harrivel, Jewell, Velez and Baugh further teaches the device of claim 19, wherein after confirming whether the pupillary response occurs by periodically radiating the infrared light during flight, when d>d’ (Velez, Abstract; Baugh, paragraph [0035]), it is determined as a state of securing consciousness according to a normal pupillary response (Harrivel, paragraph [0019], lines 1-3 & 14), and a signal is transmitted (Berthelot, paragraph [0018]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shih (US Pub No. 2016/0260264 A1): similar inventive concept
Bychkov (US Pub No. 2014/0240132 A1): similar inventive concept
Bonefas et al. (US Pub No. 2008/0068186 A1): similar inventive concept
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAOMI J SMALL whose telephone number is (571)270-5184. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5PM.
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, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at 571-272-3114. 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.
/NAOMI J SMALL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685