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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant submitted amendments and remarks on January 26, 2026. Therein, Applicant submitted substantive arguments. Claims 1, 6-7, 15, 18, and 24 have been amended. Claims 25-28 were added. Claims 3, 8, 16, and 23 were cancelled.
The submitted claims are considered below.
Claim Objections
Claim 27 is objected to because of the following informalities: The preamble of the claim currently reads as follows: “The method of claim 15, The system of claim 1”. In its current form, the dependency of this claim is unclear. For the purposes of the prior art rejections below, Claim 27 has been interpreted as dependent on claim 15.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-15, 17-22, and 24-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ravindranath, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10564637) in view of Anand, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 12101735) and further in view of Byravan, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20190108758).
Regarding claim 1, Ravindranath, et al. teaches: A system comprising: a control unit configured to: provide a plurality of turnaround task lists, wherein each of the plurality of turnaround task lists differs from one another, (Col. 4, lines 1-5: "Any combination of different types of task completion components (114) may be used in the wireless e-signoff system (100) [control unit]. Each task completion component (114) is preferably located on or near a corresponding task system (112) [subsystem for specific task on list] associated with the task [different turnaround task lists which can differ from each other]." ; Col. 3, lines 43-47: "One or more tasks associated with each task system (112) [subsystem for specific task on list] may need to be completed before the vehicle (110) [aircraft] can be deemed ready for the respective departure, task, mission or the like [turnaround procedure before next flight].")
wherein an aircraft is configured to be operated during a turnaround at an airport (Col. 4, lines 18-22: "…a moving entity (such as a mobile stair case) which may have a task completion component (114) attached thereto to signify that the staircase has undocked from the vehicle (110), thereby implying that the passengers have completed boarding/de-boarding [aircraft operated during turnaround at airport].").
Ravindranath, et al. does not teach according to a selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists.
In a similar field of endeavor (turnaround flight equipment task selection monitoring system), Anand, et al. teaches: according to a selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists (Col. 6, lines 51-57: "the system (10) determines an equipment list that includes needed mobile ground equipment for an upcoming flight and/or a turnaround associated with the flight arriving/leaving from the gate (65). In some embodiments, the GEM application (75) accesses flight data, gate scheduling data, and passenger data to generate the equipment list [turnaround task lists generated based on equipment needed for flight]." ; Col. 6, lines 9-15: "an IoT device is associated with a ground equipment item, with the IoT device configured to provide GE data to the system (10). In some embodiments and referring back to FIG. 1, one or more IoT devices is/are coupled to a ground equipment item. Generally, the IoT device is selected based on the type of equipment to which it will be attached or coupled [selected turnaround equipment based on selected task list]").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ravindranath, et al. to include the teaching of Anand, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the process of selecting the best turnaround task list for a flight based on optimal available equipment (Anand, et al. Col. 2, lines 26-36).
The combination of Ravindranath, et al. and Anand, et al. does not teach and receive data from one or more flight information sources including a tracking subsystem configured to track the aircraft and other aircraft on ground and in an airspace.
In a similar field of endeavor (flight prediction), Byravan, et al. teaches: and receive data from one or more flight information sources including a tracking subsystem configured to track the aircraft and other aircraft on ground and in an airspace (Paragraph [0037]: "…the decision module (114) of the system (100) is configured to predict flight delay using a real time flight information, one or more operational scenarios, one or more operational levers, and the predicted time of taxi-in, taxi-out, and air time of the aircraft [using flight information sources in order to track aircraft]." ; Paragraph [0026]: "…there are a set of parameters, affecting the airlines journey, include an en-route time, an inbound gate time, a turnaround time and an outbound gate time [tracking aircraft on ground]." ; Paragraph [0027]: "…a determination module (112) of the system (100) is configured to predict taxi-in time, taxi-out time, and air time of the flight. It would be appreciated that the taxi-out time and taxi-in time of the flight depends on one or more factors such as runway configuration, downstream restrictions, and arrival queue [tracking aircraft on ground]." ; Paragraph [0031]: "The air time of the flight depends on one or more factors such as a congested airspace, weather, traffic control actions, and a type of the aircraft [tracking aircraft in airspace].").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Ravindranath, et al. and Anand, et al. to include the teaching of Byravan, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the prediction and mitigation of aircraft operational delays (Byravan, et al. Paragraph [0005] – [0006]).
Regarding claim 2, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of turnaround task lists differs from one another in relation to one or more tasks, times for the tasks, a sequence of tasks, parameter of the tasks, or a number of tasks (Ravindranath, et al. Col. 4, lines 25-31: "…a second task completion component (114) could be mounted on a fuel truck. Accordingly, only when both of the task completion components (114) (i.e., the one of the vehicle (110) and the one on the fuel truck) are used may the task be considered complete, thereby providing a double check that the task was complete [turnaround task differs by number of tasks].").").
Regarding claim 4, Regarding claim 4, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 1, wherein the control unit is further configured to automatically determine the plurality of turnaround task lists based on the data received from the one or more flight information sources (Anand, et al. Col. 12, lines 6-9: "…the created and submitted equipment report is submitted via the GEM application (75) to automatically create a work order relating to the repair of the equipment [automatically creates task list]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 17, lines 33-35: "Moreover, the GEM application (75) [control unit] automatically provides an update to the downstream applications in a compatible format [automatically determines task list]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 3, lines 30-34: "…the plurality of data sources (30) includes data sources that include data relating to upcoming flight plans of users or customers, flight schedules, flight numbers and origination location and departure destination for each flight number, passenger data, etc [flight information sources].").
Regarding claim 5, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 4, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 4, wherein the control unit is further configured to automatically match one of the plurality of turnaround task lists with a set of turnaround features (Anand, et al. Col. 12, lines 6-9: "…the created and submitted equipment report is submitted via the GEM application (75) to automatically create a work order relating to the repair of the equipment [automatically creates task list]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 17, lines 33-35: "Moreover, the GEM application (75) [control unit] automatically provides an update to the downstream applications in a compatible format [automatically determines turnaround task list]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 2, lines 29-32: "The system manages equipment to match available, working equipment with flights based on flight data requirements, predicted tum times, gate positions, required special needs equipment, and listings of working/failed equipment [automatically match turnaround task list with features].").
Regarding claim 6, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 1, wherein the control unit is further configured to automatically select the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists based on the data received from the one or more flight information sources (Anand, et al. Col. 12, lines 6-9: "…the created and submitted equipment report is submitted via the GEM application (75) to automatically create a work order relating to the repair of the equipment [automatically creates task list]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 17, lines 33-35: "Moreover, the GEM application (75) [control unit] automatically provides an update to the downstream applications in a compatible format [automatically determines task list]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 6, lines 14-15: "Generally, the IoT device is selected based on the type of equipment to which it will be attached or coupled [automatic selection - selected list linked to equipment]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 3, lines 30-34: "…the plurality of data sources (30) includes data sources that include data relating to upcoming flight plans of users or customers, flight schedules, flight numbers and origination location and departure destination for each flight number, passenger data, etc [flight information sources].").
Regarding claim 7, Regarding claim 7, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more flight information sources further comprise one or more of: a tracking sub-system configured to track the aircraft and other aircraft on ground and in an airspace; a weather sub-system; aviation data sources configured to provide information regarding aviation flight operations; aircraft data sources configured to provide information about various aircraft; airport data sources configured to provide information regarding one or more airports; flight schedule data sources configured to provide information regarding flight schedules; weight and balance data sources to provide information regarding passengers, baggage, and fuel; or assignment data sources configured to provide information regarding assigned resources (Ravindranath, et al. Col. 6, lines 60-61: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, the origin airport, the destination airport [information about one or more airports]").
Regarding claim 9, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 1, wherein the control unit is further configured to monitor, during the turnaround, tasks of the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists (Ravindranath, et al. Col. 9, lines 47-51: "When all of the tasks are not complete, the wireless e-signoff management system (120) continues to monitor for task completion, transmits requests for new tasks and may analyze task performance, as discussed in further detail below [system monitors task of selected turnaround task].").
Regarding claim 10, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 9, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 9, wherein the control unit is further configured to update the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists in response to a change in one or more aspects of the tasks during the turnaround (Ravindranath, et al. Col. 8, lines 35-42: "Task data from the task completion components (114) and, if received, user entered task data is then transmitted to the wireless e-signoff management system (120) [control unit]. [...] The processor (122) of the wireless e-signoff management system (120) analyzes the received task and user data and generates an updated task list based thereon [updated turnaround task list]. [...] The updated task list reflects the task which has been completed and any new tasks generated based upon the user entered task data [change in aspects during turnaround].").
Regarding claim 11, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 1, further comprising one or more user interfaces in communication with the control unit, wherein the one or more user interfaces comprise a display, (Ravindranath, et al. Col. 8, lines 47-54: "A user of the vehicle display (116) [display] may transmit a request to subscribe for turn-around updates to the wireless e-signoff management system (120) [user interface - communication with control unit]")
and wherein the control unit is further configured to show the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists on the display (Ravindranath, et al. Col. 9, lines 13-16: "Other data related to the tasks may also be generated by the wireless e-signoff management system (120) [control unit] for display on the coordination system (140) and the vehicle display (116) [showing turnaround task lists on display].").
Regarding claim 12, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 1, wherein the control unit is further configured to automatically operate one or more devices to automatically perform one or more tasks within the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists (Anand, et al. Col. 17, lines 33-35: Moreover, the GEM application (75) [control unit] automatically provides an update to the downstream applications in a compatible format [automatically operates one or more devices to perform task]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 6, lines 14-15: "Generally, the IoT device is selected based on the type of equipment to which it will be attached or coupled [automatic selection - selected list linked to equipment]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 17, lines 38-43: "…results in the continuous and automatic update of all of the airline flight schedules, gate schedules, and crew schedules, and the automatic and immediate capture or identification of problem gate turnarounds [automatically perform one or more tasks].").
Regarding claim 13, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 1, wherein one or more controls of the aircraft are configured to be automatically operated to perform one or more tasks within the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists (Anand, et al. Col. 17, lines 33-35: "Moreover, the GEM application (75) [control unit] automatically provides an update to the downstream applications in a compatible format [automatically operates one or more devices to perform task]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 6, lines 14-15: "Generally, the IoT device is selected based on the type of equipment to which it will be attached or coupled [automatic selection - selected list linked to equipment]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 13, lines 39-42: "In some embodiments, the GEM application (75) reduces flight delays and reduces passenger wait times for boarding and deplaning by enabling the appropriate equipment to be present at the relevant gate during turning of the aircraft [enables aircraft controls to be automatically performing turnaround task on list].").
Regarding claim 14, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, and in a further embodiment, teach: The system of claim 1, wherein the control unit is an artificial intelligence or machine learning system (Anand, et al. Col. 14, lines 44-48: "…system (10) [control system] employs, works with, includes, or otherwise is associated with machine learning, artificial intelligence, neural networks [AI/machine learning system], and the like to predict the flow and need of the ground equipment.").
Regarding claim 15, Ravindranath, et al. teaches: A method comprising: providing, by a control unit, a plurality of turnaround task lists, wherein each of the plurality of turnaround task lists differs from one another in relation to one or more tasks, times for the tasks, a sequence of tasks, parameters of the tasks, or a number of tasks; (Col. 4, lines 1-5: "Any combination of different types of task completion components (114) may be used in the wireless e-signoff system (100) [control unit]. Each task completion component (114) is preferably located on or near a corresponding task system (112) [subsystem for specific task on list] associated with the task [different turnaround task lists which can differ from each other]." ; Step (270), Col. 3, lines 43-47: "The processor (122) of the wireless e-signoff management system may then generate one or more actions in response to the analysis and/or in response to receiving notice that a task has been completed. (Step (270)). The action may include, for example, generating one or more new task assignments [example - different tasks related to turnaround procedure before next flight].")
wherein an aircraft is operated during a turnaround at an airport (Col. 4, lines 18-22: "…a moving entity (such as a mobile stair case) which may have a task completion component (114) attached thereto to signify that the staircase has undocked from the vehicle (110), thereby implying that the passengers have completed boarding/de-boarding [aircraft operated during turnaround at airport].").
Ravindranath, et al. does not teach according to a selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists.
In a similar field of endeavor (turnaround flight equipment task selection monitoring system), Anand, et al. teaches: according to a selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists (Step (120), Col. 6, lines 51-57: "In one embodiment, and at the step (120), the system (10) determines an equipment list that includes needed mobile ground equipment for an upcoming flight and/or a turnaround associated with the flight arriving/leaving from the gate (65). In some embodiments, the GEM application (75) accesses flight data, gate scheduling data, and passenger data to generate the equipment list [turnaround task lists generated based on equipment needed for flight]." ; Step (110), Col. 6, lines 9-15: "In one embodiment and at the step (110), an IoT device is associated with a ground equipment item, with the IoT device configured to provide GE data to the system (10). In some embodiments and referring back to FIG. 1, one or more IoT devices is/are coupled to a ground equipment item. Generally, the IoT device is selected based on the type of equipment to which it will be attached or coupled [selected turnaround equipment based on selected task list]").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ravindranath, et al. to include the teaching of Anand, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the process of selecting the best turnaround task list for a flight based on optimal available equipment (Anand, et al. Col. 2, lines 26-36).
The combination of Ravindranath, et al. and Anand, et al. does not teach receiving, by the control unit, data from one or more flight information sources including a tracking sub-system configured to track the aircraft and other aircraft on ground and in an airspace.
In a similar field of endeavor (flight prediction), Byravan, et al. teaches: receiving, by the control unit, data from one or more flight information sources including a tracking sub-system configured to track the aircraft and other aircraft on ground and in an airspace (Paragraph [0037]: "…the decision module (114) of the system (100) is configured to predict flight delay using a real time flight information, one or more operational scenarios, one or more operational levers, and the predicted time of taxi-in, taxi-out, and air time of the aircraft [using flight information sources in order to track aircraft]." ; Paragraph [0026]: "…there are a set of parameters, affecting the airlines journey, include an en-route time, an inbound gate time, a turnaround time and an outbound gate time [tracking aircraft on ground]." ; Step (208), Paragraph [0042]: "In the preferred embodiment of the disclosure, at the next step (208), a taxi-in time, a taxi-out time, and airtime of the flight are predicted at a determination module (112) of the system (100). It would be appreciated that the taxi-out time and taxi-in time of the flight depends on one or more factors such as runway configuration, downstream restrictions, and arrival queue." ; Paragraph [0031]: "The air time of the flight depends on one or more factors such as a congested airspace, weather, traffic control actions, and a type of the aircraft [tracking aircraft in airspace].").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Ravindranath, et al. and Anand, et al. to include the teaching of Byravan, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the prediction and mitigation of aircraft operational delays (Byravan, et al. Paragraph [0005] – [0006]).
Regarding claim 17, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 15, and in a further embodiment, teach: The method of claim 15, further comprising automatically selecting, by the control unit, the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists based on the data received from the one or more flight information sources (Anand, et al. Col. 12, lines 6-9: "…the created and submitted equipment report is submitted via the GEM application (75) to automatically create a work order relating to the repair of the equipment [automatically creates task list]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 17, lines 33-35: "Moreover, the GEM application (75) [control unit] automatically provides an update to the downstream applications in a compatible format [automatically determines plurality of task lists]."; Anand, et al. Step (110), Col. 6, lines 9-15: "In one embodiment and at the step (110), an IoT device is associated with a ground equipment item [...] Generally, the IoT device is selected based on the type of equipment to which it will be attached or coupled [automatic selection - selected list linked to equipment]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 3, lines 30-34: "…the plurality of data sources (30) includes data sources that include data relating to upcoming flight plans of users or customers, flight schedules, flight numbers and origination location and departure destination for each flight number, passenger data, etc [flight information sources].").
Regarding claim 18, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 15, and in a further embodiment, teach: The method of claim 15, further comprising monitoring, by the control unit, during the turnaround, tasks of the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists (Ravindranath, et al. Step (265), Col. 9, lines 51-61: "In one embodiment, for example, the wireless e-signoff management system (120) may analyze task performance. (Step 265). [...] The analysis may include, for example, monitoring the amount of time each task takes, evaluating the performance of the personnel assigned to the PEDs (130), comparing against historical average based on weather, time of the day, skills of personnel involved, task-on-time metrics, or the like [monitoring selected turnaround tasks by control unit].").
Regarding claim 19, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 18, and in a further embodiment, teach: The method of claim 18, further comprising updating, by the control unit, the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists in response to a change in one or more aspects of the tasks during the turnaround (Ravindranath, et al. Steps (240) - (245), Col. 8, lines 35-42: "Task data from the task completion components (114) and, if received, user entered task data is then transmitted to the wireless e-signoff management system (120) [control unit]. (Step (240)). The processor (122) of the wireless e-signoff management system (120) analyzes the received task and user data and generates an updated task list based thereon [updated turnaround task list]. (Step (245)). The updated task list reflects the task which has been completed and any new tasks generated based upon the user entered task data [change in aspects during turnaround].").
Regarding claim 20, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 15, and in a further embodiment, teach: The method of claim 15, further comprising automatically operating one or more devices to automatically perform one or more tasks within the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists (Anand, et al. Method (100), Col. 17, lines 33-38: "Moreover, the GEM application (75) [control unit] automatically provides an update to the downstream applications in a compatible format [...] execution of one or more steps of the method (100) enables a manager (or other personnel) to avoid manually updating multiple downstream applications [automatically operates one or more devices to perform task]." ; Anand, et al. Step (110), Col. 6, lines 9-15: "In one embodiment and at the step (110), an IoT device is associated with a ground equipment item [...] Generally, the IoT device is selected based on the type of equipment to which it will be attached or coupled [automatic selection - selected list linked to equipment]." ; Anand, et al. Method (100), Col. 17, lines 38-43: "…execution of one or more steps of the method (100) results in the continuous and automatic update of all of the airline flight schedules, gate schedules, and crew schedules, and the automatic and immediate capture or identification of problem gate turnarounds [automatically perform one or more tasks].").
Regarding claim 21, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 18, and in a further embodiment, teach: The method of claim 15, further comprising automatically operating or more controls of the aircraft to perform one or more tasks within the selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists (Anand, et al. Method (100), Col. 17, lines 33-38: "Moreover, the GEM application (75) [control unit] automatically provides an update to the downstream applications in a compatible format [...] execution of one or more steps of the method (100) enables a manager (or other personnel) to avoid manually updating multiple downstream applications [automatically operates one or more devices to perform task]." ; Anand, et al. Step (110), Col. 6, lines 9-15: "In one embodiment and at the step (110), an IoT device is associated with a ground equipment item [...] Generally, the IoT device is selected based on the type of equipment to which it will be attached or coupled [automatic selection - selected list linked to equipment]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 13, lines 39-42: "…the GEM application (75) reduces flight delays and reduces passenger wait times for boarding and deplaning by enabling the appropriate equipment to be present at the relevant gate during turning of the aircraft [enables aircraft controls to be automatically performing turnaround task on list].").
Regarding claim 22, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 15, and in a further embodiment, teach: The method of claim 15, further comprising automatically matching one of the plurality of turnaround task lists to a set of turnaround features (Anand, et al. Col. 12, lines 6-9: "…the created and submitted equipment report is submitted via the GEM application (75) to automatically create a work order relating to the repair of the equipment [automatically creates task list]." ; Anand, et al. Method (100), Col. 17, lines 33-38: "Moreover, the GEM application (75) [control unit] automatically provides an update to the downstream applications in a compatible format [...] execution of one or more steps of the method (100) enables a manager (or other personnel) to avoid manually updating multiple downstream applications [automatically determines turnaround task list]." ; Anand, et al. Col. 2, lines 29-32: "The system manages equipment to match available, working equipment with flights based on flight data requirements, predicted tum times, gate positions, required special needs equipment, and listings of working/failed equipment [automatically match turnaround task list with features].").
Regarding claim 24, Ravindranath, et al. teaches: A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising executable instructions that, in response to execution, cause one or more control units comprising a processor, to perform operations comprising: (Col. 4, lines 58-59: "The wireless e-signoff management system (120) includes a processor (122) [processor] and a memory (124) [storage medium]." ; Col. 6, lines 64-67: "The processor (122) of the wireless e-signoff management system (120) may determine the tasks for the next flight of the vehicle (110) based upon the flight data [control unit to perform operations - executable instructions].")
providing a plurality of turnaround task lists, wherein each of the plurality of turnaround task lists differs from one another in relation to one or more tasks, times for the tasks, a sequence of tasks, parameters of the tasks, or a number of tasks (Col. 4, lines 1-5: "Any combination of different types of task completion components (114) may be used in the wireless e-signoff system (100) [control unit]. Each task completion component (114) is preferably located on or near a corresponding task system (112) [subsystem for specific task on list] associated with the task [different turnaround task lists which can differ from each other]." ; Col. 3, lines 43-47: "One or more tasks associated with each task system (112) [subsystem for specific task on list] may need to be completed before the vehicle (110) [aircraft] can be deemed ready for the respective departure, task, mission or the like [turnaround procedure before next flight].")
wherein an aircraft is configured to be operated during a turnaround at an airport (Col. 4, lines 18-22: "Another example is a moving entity (such as a mobile stair case) which may have a task completion component (114) attached thereto to signify that the staircase has undocked from the vehicle (110), thereby implying that the passengers have completed boarding/de-boarding [aircraft operated during turnaround at airport].").
Ravindranath, et al. does not teach according to a selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists.
In a similar field of endeavor (turnaround flight equipment task selection monitoring system), Anand, et al. teaches: according to a selected one of the plurality of turnaround task lists (Col. 6, lines 51-57: "the system (10) determines an equipment list that includes needed mobile ground equipment for an upcoming flight and/or a turnaround associated with the flight arriving/leaving from the gate (65). In some embodiments, the GEM application (75) accesses flight data, gate scheduling data, and passenger data to generate the equipment list [turnaround task lists generated based on equipment needed for flight]." ; Col. 6, lines 9-15: "an IoT device is associated with a ground equipment item, with the IoT device configured to provide GE data to the system (10). In some embodiments and referring back to FIG. 1, one or more IoT devices is/are coupled to a ground equipment item. Generally, the IoT device is selected based on the type of equipment to which it will be attached or coupled [selected turnaround equipment based on selected task list]").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ravindranath, et al. to include the teaching of Anand, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the process of selecting the best turnaround task list for a flight based on optimal available equipment (Anand, et al. Col. 2, lines 26-36).
The combination of Ravindranath, et al. and Anand, et al. does not teach and receive/receiving data from one or more flight information sources including a tracking subsystem configured to track the aircraft and other aircraft on ground and in an airspace.
In a similar field of endeavor (flight prediction), Byravan, et al. teaches: and receive/receiving data from one or more flight information sources including a tracking subsystem configured to track the aircraft and other aircraft on ground and in an airspace (Paragraph [0037]: "…the decision module (114) of the system (100) is configured to predict flight delay using a real time flight information, one or more operational scenarios, one or more operational levers, and the predicted time of taxi-in, taxi-out, and air time of the aircraft [using flight information sources in order to track aircraft]." ; Paragraph [0026]: "… there are a set of parameters, affecting the airlines journey, include an en-route time, an inbound gate time, a turnaround time and an outbound gate time [tracking aircraft on ground]." ; Paragraph [0027]: ": a determination module (112) of the system (100) is configured to predict taxi-in time, taxi-out time, and air time of the flight. It would be appreciated that the taxi-out time and taxi-in time of the flight depends on one or more factors such as runway configuration, downstream restrictions, and arrival queue [tracking aircraft on ground]." ; Paragraph [0031]: "The air time of the flight depends on one or more factors such as a congested airspace, weather, traffic control actions, and a type of the aircraft [tracking aircraft in airspace].").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Ravindranath, et al. and Anand, et al. to include the teaching of Byravan, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the prediction and mitigation of aircraft operational delays (Byravan, et al. Paragraph [0005] – [0006]).
Regarding claim 25, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 24, and in a further embodiment, Ravindranath, et al. teaches:
The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 24, wherein the one or more flight information sources further comprise: (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example")
a weather sub-system; (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, […] local weather [weather sub-system]")
aviation data sources configured to provide information regarding aviation flight operations; (Col. 6, lines 67 to Col. 7, lines 1-2: "…the distance to a destination airport [aviation flight operations]")
aircraft data sources configured to provide information about various aircraft; (Col. 6, lines 67 to Col. 7, lines 1-2: "…the type of aircraft [information about various aircraft]"
airport data sources configured to provide information regarding one or more airports; (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, the origin airport, the destination airport [information regarding one or more airports]"
weight and balance data sources to provide information regarding passengers, baggage, and fuel (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, […] expected passenger counts [passenger counts], […] fuel loaded quantity [fuel], […] cargo loads that accrue to determine the aircrafts weight [baggage]")
and assignment data sources configured to provide information regarding assigned resources (Col. 6, lines 52-55: "the wireless e-signoff management system (120) may determine the tasks itself based upon flight data associated with the next flight of the aircraft [assignment data sources - resources]").
Ravindranath, et al. does not teach flight schedule data sources configured to provide information regarding flight schedules.
In a similar field of endeavor (turnaround flight equipment task selection monitoring system), Anand, et al. teaches: flight schedule data sources configured to provide information regarding flight schedules (Col. 3, lines 30-32: "…the plurality of data sources [flight information source] includes data sources that include data relating to upcoming flight plans of users or customers, flight schedules [flight schedules]").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ravindranath, et al. to include the teaching of Anand, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the process of selecting the best turnaround task list for a flight based on optimal available equipment (Anand, et al. Col. 2, lines 26-36).
Regarding claim 26, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 1, and in a further embodiment, Ravindranath, et al. teaches: The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more flight information sources further comprise: (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, the origin airport, the destination airport, expected passenger counts, local weather, fuel loaded quantity, water loaded quantity, cargo loads that accrue to determine the aircrafts weight, and the like [examples].")
a weather sub-system; (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, […] local weather [weather sub-system]")
aviation data sources configured to provide information regarding aviation flight operations; (Col. 6, lines 67 to Col. 7, lines 1-2: "…the distance to a destination airport [aviation flight operations]")
aircraft data sources configured to provide information about various aircraft; (Col. 6, lines 67 to Col. 7, lines 1-2: "…the type of aircraft [information about various aircraft]"
airport data sources configured to provide information regarding one or more airports; (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, the origin airport, the destination airport [information regarding one or more airports]"
weight and balance data sources to provide information regarding passengers, baggage, and fuel (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, […] expected passenger counts [passenger counts], […] fuel loaded quantity [fuel], […] cargo loads that accrue to determine the aircrafts weight [baggage]")
and assignment data sources configured to provide information regarding assigned resources (Col. 6, lines 52-55: "the wireless e-signoff management system (120) may determine the tasks itself based upon flight data associated with the next flight of the aircraft [assignment data sources - resources]").
Ravindranath, et al. does not teach flight schedule data sources configured to provide information regarding flight schedules.
In a similar field of endeavor (turnaround flight equipment task selection monitoring system), Anand, et al. teaches: flight schedule data sources configured to provide information regarding flight schedules (Col. 3, lines 30-32: "…the plurality of data sources [flight information source] includes data sources that include data relating to upcoming flight plans of users or customers, flight schedules [flight schedules]").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ravindranath, et al. to include the teaching of Anand, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the process of selecting the best turnaround task list for a flight based on optimal available equipment (Anand, et al. Col. 2, lines 26-36).
Regarding claim 27, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 15, and in a further embodiment, teach: The method of claim 15, wherein the one or more flight information sources further comprise one or more of: a weather sub-system; aviation data sources configured to provide information regarding aviation flight operations; aircraft data sources configured to provide information about various aircraft; airport data sources configured to provide information regarding one or more airports; flight schedule data sources configured to provide information regarding flight schedules; weight and balance data sources to provide information regarding passengers, baggage, and fuel; or assignment data sources configured to provide information regarding assigned resources (Ravindranath, et al. Col. 6, lines 60-61: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, the origin airport, the destination airport [information about one or more airports]").
Regarding claim 28, Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. remain as applied to claim 15, and in a further embodiment, Ravindranath, et al. teaches: The method of claim 15, wherein the one or more flight information sources further comprise: a weather sub-system; (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, […] local weather [weather sub-system]")
aviation data sources configured to provide information regarding aviation flight operations; (Col. 6, lines 67 to Col. 7, lines 1-2: "…the distance to a destination airport [aviation flight operations]")
aircraft data sources configured to provide information about various aircraft; (Col. 6, lines 67 to Col. 7, lines 1-2: "…the type of aircraft [information about various aircraft]"
airport data sources configured to provide information regarding one or more airports; (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, the origin airport, the destination airport [information regarding one or more airports]"
weight and balance data sources to provide information regarding passengers, baggage, and fuel (Col. 6, lines 60-64: "The flight data [flight information source] may include, for example, […] expected passenger counts [passenger counts], […] fuel loaded quantity [fuel], […] cargo loads that accrue to determine the aircrafts weight [baggage]")
and assignment data sources configured to provide information regarding assigned resources (Col. 6, lines 52-55: "the wireless e-signoff management system (120) may determine the tasks itself based upon flight data associated with the next flight of the aircraft [assignment data sources - resources]").
Ravindranath, et al. does not teach flight schedule data sources configured to provide information regarding flight schedules.
In a similar field of endeavor (turnaround flight equipment task selection monitoring system), Anand, et al. teaches: flight schedule data sources configured to provide information regarding flight schedules (Col. 3, lines 30-32: "…the plurality of data sources [flight information source] includes data sources that include data relating to upcoming flight plans of users or customers, flight schedules [flight schedules]").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ravindranath, et al. to include the teaching of Anand, et al. based on a reasonable expectation of success and motivation to improve the process of selecting the best turnaround task list for a flight based on optimal available equipment (Anand, et al. Col. 2, lines 26-36).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 15, and 24 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant asserted that amended claims 1, 15, and 24 were patentable over Ravindranath, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10564637) in view of Anand, et al. (U.S. Patent No. 12101735) because the references did not meet the claim limitation “and receive data from one or more flight information sources including a tracking subsystem configured to track the aircraft and other aircraft on ground and in an airspace”. Please note that Byravan, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20190108758) was cited in order to teach these features.
In Byravan, et al., a decision module (114) within a system (100) can be used to conduct an operational review of a flight through the use of “…real time flight information, one or more operational scenarios, one or more operational levers, and the predicted time of taxi-in, taxi-out, and air time of the aircraft” (Paragraph [0037]). As a result, this process involves turnaround parameters which track the aircraft on the ground, such as “…an en-route time, an inbound gate time, a turnaround time and an outbound gate time” (Paragraph [0026]), and “…one or more factors such as runway configuration, downstream restrictions, and arrival queue (Paragraph [0027]). Additionally, the flight data source can track the aircraft in the air through the use of data stemming from “one or more factors such as a congested airspace, weather, traffic control actions, and a type of the aircraft” (Paragraph [0031]). Subsequently, it would have been obvious to combine Byravan, et al. with Ravindranath, et al. and Anand, et al. because Ravindranath, et al. teaches a control system unit which contains aircraft turnaround task lists (Col. 4, lines 1-5 and Col. 3, lines 43-47) and Anand, et al. teaches the selection of a task from the given aircraft turnaround task lists (Col. 6, lines 51-57 and Col. 6, lines 9-15).
Therefore, it can be concluded that since the combination of Ravindranath, et al., Anand, et al., and Byravan, et al. reads on the claim limitation “and receive data from one or more flight information sources including a tracking subsystem configured to track the aircraft and other aircraft on ground and in an airspace”, as stated in amended claims 1, 15, and 24, the arguments presented by the Applicant are not persuasive, and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Agrawal (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20180229856) teaches a computing system which monitors aircraft operational parameters during the turnaround process and which has the capability to analyze an operational parameter with respect to a threshold value and generate an alert based on the analysis.
Applicant is considered to have implicit knowledge of the entire disclosure once a reference has been cited. Therefore, any previously cited figures, columns and lines should not be considered to limit the references in any way. The entire reference must be taken as a whole; accordingly, the Examiner contends that the art supports the rejection of the claims and the rejection is maintained.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 TORRENCE S MARUNDA II whose telephone number is (571)272-5172. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:30.
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, ANGELA Y ORTIZ can be reached at 571-272-1206. 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.
/TORRENCE S MARUNDA II/ Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights