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 .
Claim Status
This action is in response to the application filed on 04/23/2024. Claims 1-19 are pending and examined below.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) a first unmanned vehicle, providing an information pattern, wherein the information pattern indicates a control information; and a second unmanned vehicle, acquiring the control information by identifying the information pattern. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because data gathering steps required to use the correlation do not add a meaningful limitation to the method as they are insignificant extra-solution activity. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 7, 15, 16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20260037004 A1 (“Matus”).
Regarding claim 1, Matus teaches a first unmanned vehicle, providing an information pattern, wherein the information pattern indicates a control information; and a second unmanned vehicle, acquiring the control information by identifying the information pattern (see at least [0049]).
Regarding claim 7, Matus teaches the first unmanned vehicle comprises a first infrared transceiver, the second unmanned vehicle comprises a second infrared transceiver, wherein the first infrared transceiver receives a specific infrared signal sent by the second unmanned vehicle through the second infrared transceiver (see at least [0249])
Regarding claim 15, Matus teaches the information pattern comprises at least one of a QR code and a barcode (see at least [0095])
Regarding claim 16, Matus teaches the unmanned vehicles comprise at least one relay vehicle and at least one other vehicle, and only the at least one relay vehicle among the unmanned vehicles is allowed to communicate with a management server, the at least one other vehicle is not allowed to communicate with the management server, wherein the first unmanned vehicle serves as one of the at least one relay vehicle and acquires at least one of the information pattern and the control information from the management server (see at least [0087]).
Regarding claim 18, Matus teaches the control information controls the second unmanned vehicle to suspend a first task and start performing a second task (see at least [0153).
Regarding claim 19, Matus teaches the control information controls the second unmanned vehicle to suspend going to a specific working region (see at least [0153).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20260037004 A1 (“Matus”) in view of US 20250044802 A1 (“Hiller”).
Regarding claim 2, Matus is not explicit on the first unmanned vehicle comprises a display device, and the display device displays the information pattern, however,
Hiller discloses the first unmanned vehicle comprises a display device, and the display device displays the information pattern (see at least [0375]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Matus with the methods and systems for coordinating drones disclosed by Hiller because there is a further need for improved methods of energy harvesting, camouflaging, and shielding (Hiller, [0003]).
Regarding claim 3, Matus is not explicit on the display device comprises at least one of a screen and a light-emitting diode rotating display system, however,
Hiller discloses the display device comprises at least one of a screen and a light-emitting diode rotating display system (see at least [0375]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Matus with the methods and systems for coordinating drones disclosed by Hiller because there is a further need for improved methods of energy harvesting, camouflaging, and shielding (Hiller, [0003]).
Regarding claim 4, Matus is not explicit on the first unmanned vehicle comprises a propeller, and the light-emitting diode rotating display system is integrated with the propeller, however,
Hiller discloses the first unmanned vehicle comprises a propeller, and the light-emitting diode rotating display system is integrated with the propeller (see at least [0375]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Matus with the methods and systems for coordinating drones disclosed by Hiller because there is a further need for improved methods of energy harvesting, camouflaging, and shielding (Hiller, [0003]).
Regarding claim 5, Matus discloses the display device is installed on a first surface of the first unmanned vehicle, the second unmanned vehicle comprises a reader, the reader is installed on a second surface of the second unmanned vehicle and reads the information pattern (see at least [0174]).
Regarding claim 6, Matus discloses the first unmanned vehicle and the second unmanned vehicle respectively are a first drone and a second drone, and the first surface is one of a top surface and a bottom surface, the second surface is another one of the top surface and the bottom surface (see at least [0249]).
Claims 8-14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20260037004 A1 (“Matus”) in view of US 20240319748 A1 (“Audronis”).
Regarding claim 8, Matus is not explicit on the first unmanned vehicle and the second unmanned vehicle are distributed in a working range divided into a plurality of working layers, and the first unmanned vehicle determines a specific working layer where the second unmanned vehicle is located based on the specific infrared signal from the second infrared transceiver, wherein the specific working layer is one of the working layers, however,
Audronis discloses the first unmanned vehicle and the second unmanned vehicle are distributed in a working range divided into a plurality of working layers, and the first unmanned vehicle determines a specific working layer where the second unmanned vehicle is located based on the specific infrared signal from the second infrared transceiver, wherein the specific working layer is one of the working layers (see at least [0022]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Matus with the layer approach to managing airspace of large groups of drones disclosed by Audronis because Drones for information gathering over a large area are particularly useful in emergency and disaster situations. With little to no direct human supervision, they can obtain visual and other information at great speed and effectiveness to enhance planning and remediation by responders (Audronis, [0004])).
Regarding claim 9, Matus is not explicit on the specific infrared signal from the second infrared comprises a working layer indicator, wherein the working layer indicator indicates the specific working layer where the second unmanned vehicle is located, however,
Audronis discloses the specific infrared signal from the second infrared comprises a working layer indicator, wherein the working layer indicator indicates the specific working layer where the second unmanned vehicle is located (see at least [0024]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Matus with the layer approach to managing airspace of large groups of drones disclosed by Audronis because Drones for information gathering over a large area are particularly useful in emergency and disaster situations. With little to no direct human supervision, they can obtain visual and other information at great speed and effectiveness to enhance planning and remediation by responders (Audronis, [0004])).
Regarding claim 10, Matus discloses the first unmanned vehicle performs: acquiring a received power of the specific infrared signal received by the first infrared transceiver, and estimating a specific distance between the first unmanned vehicle and the second unmanned vehicle accordingly; determining the specific working layer where the second unmanned vehicle is located based on the specific distance (see at least [0018]).
Regarding claim 11, Matus is not explicit on the unmanned vehicles are distributed in a working range divided into a plurality of working layers, and the first unmanned vehicle performs: determining a number of unmanned vehicles corresponding to each of the working layers; and reporting the number of unmanned vehicles corresponding to each of the working layers to a management server, however,
Audronis discloses the unmanned vehicles are distributed in a working range divided into a plurality of working layers, and the first unmanned vehicle performs: determining a number of unmanned vehicles corresponding to each of the working layers; and reporting the number of unmanned vehicles corresponding to each of the working layers to a management server (see at least [0024]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Matus with the layer approach to managing airspace of large groups of drones disclosed by Audronis because Drones for information gathering over a large area are particularly useful in emergency and disaster situations. With little to no direct human supervision, they can obtain visual and other information at great speed and effectiveness to enhance planning and remediation by responders (Audronis, [0004])).
Regarding claim 12, Matus is not explicit on the first unmanned vehicle performs: receiving a wireless signal from each of the unmanned vehicles located at each of the working layers, and determining the number of unmanned vehicles corresponding to each of the working layers accordingly, however,
Audronis discloses the first unmanned vehicle performs: receiving a wireless signal from each of the unmanned vehicles located at each of the working layers, and determining the number of unmanned vehicles corresponding to each of the working layers accordingly (see at least [0024]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Matus with the layer approach to managing airspace of large groups of drones disclosed by Audronis because Drones for information gathering over a large area are particularly useful in emergency and disaster situations. With little to no direct human supervision, they can obtain visual and other information at great speed and effectiveness to enhance planning and remediation by responders (Audronis, [0004])).
Regarding claim 13, Matus is not explicit on the first unmanned vehicle performs: taking a plurality of images of each of the unmanned vehicles located at each of the working layers, and determining the number of unmanned vehicles corresponding to each of the working layers accordingly, however,
Audronis discloses the first unmanned vehicle performs: taking a plurality of images of each of the unmanned vehicles located at each of the working layers, and determining the number of unmanned vehicles corresponding to each of the working layers accordingly (see at least [0049]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Matus with the layer approach to managing airspace of large groups of drones disclosed by Audronis because Drones for information gathering over a large area are particularly useful in emergency and disaster situations. With little to no direct human supervision, they can obtain visual and other information at great speed and effectiveness to enhance planning and remediation by responders (Audronis, [0004])).
Regarding claim 14, Matus is not explicit on the unmanned vehicles are distributed in a working range divided into a plurality of working layers, and the first unmanned vehicle performs: receiving a wireless signal from each of the unmanned vehicles located at each of the working layer; and determining a number of unmanned vehicles corresponding to a sub-working range in the working range according to the number of received wireless signals, wherein the sub-working range comprises at least one of the working layers, however,
Audronis discloses the unmanned vehicles are distributed in a working range divided into a plurality of working layers, and the first unmanned vehicle performs: receiving a wireless signal from each of the unmanned vehicles located at each of the working layer; and determining a number of unmanned vehicles corresponding to a sub-working range in the working range according to the number of received wireless signals, wherein the sub-working range comprises at least one of the working layers (see at least [0024]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Matus with the layer approach to managing airspace of large groups of drones disclosed by Audronis because Drones for information gathering over a large area are particularly useful in emergency and disaster situations. With little to no direct human supervision, they can obtain visual and other information at great speed and effectiveness to enhance planning and remediation by responders (Audronis, [0004])).
Regarding claim 17, Matus is not explicit on the unmanned vehicles are distributed in a working range divided into a plurality of working layers, the second unmanned vehicle is located in a specific working layer among the working layers, and the control information controls the second unmanned vehicle to move from the specific working layer where the second unmanned vehicle is located to another specific working layer among the working layers, however,
Audronis discloses the unmanned vehicles are distributed in a working range divided into a plurality of working layers, the second unmanned vehicle is located in a specific working layer among the working layers, and the control information controls the second unmanned vehicle to move from the specific working layer where the second unmanned vehicle is located to another specific working layer among the working layers (see at least [0022]).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the system disclosed by Matus with the layer approach to managing airspace of large groups of drones disclosed by Audronis because Drones for information gathering over a large area are particularly useful in emergency and disaster situations. With little to no direct human supervision, they can obtain visual and other information at great speed and effectiveness to enhance planning and remediation by responders (Audronis, [0004])).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATHEW FRANKLIN GORDON whose telephone number is (408)918-7612. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 - 5:00 PST.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at (571) 272 - 7298. 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.
/MATHEW FRANKLIN GORDON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665