Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/654,657

APPARATUSES, COMPUTER-IMPLEMENTED METHODS, AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCTS FOR VEHICLE LANDING GUIDANCE

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
May 03, 2024
Examiner
NGUYEN, NGA X
Art Unit
3662
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Honeywell International Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
609 granted / 784 resolved
+25.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
821
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.5%
-28.5% vs TC avg
§103
46.9%
+6.9% vs TC avg
§102
13.9%
-26.1% vs TC avg
§112
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 784 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . The current application relates to a Foreign Application Priority IN2024-11022275 filed on 03/22/2024. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1, cites “… precise landing guidance” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how and what manner the “precise landing guidance" is recognized by the computer and/or an apparatus. Claims 14 & 20 have same issue above. Claims 2-13 & 15-19 depend upon rejected claims. 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. Claim(s) 1, 14 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ehrmantraut (20220028289). With regard to claim 1, Ehrmantraut discloses a computer-implemented method, comprising: generating initial landing guidance for a vehicle respective to a landing site based on location data associated with the vehicle (an aircraft 30 includes a navigational computer 22 which generates a navigating landing based on received sensor data, see [0025]-[0027]+); rendering a graphical user interface (GUI) comprising the initial landing guidance on a display of a computing device associated with controlling the vehicle (an HMI 1040 coupled to a processor 1032 of the aircraft system 1030 that allows a user to interact directly with. The HMI capable of accepting commands or input from the user and transmitting the entered input to the processor 1032, see [0058]-[0059], wherein the HMI is interprets as the GUI); detecting an ultra-wideband (UWB) signal from at least one of a plurality of UWB beacons located proximate to the landing site via communication between at least one UWB transceiver of the vehicle and the plurality of UWB beacons located proximate to the landing site (The aircraft 12 receives infrared beacons signals, wherein the beacons are located around the landing site 32, see [0024]-[0025]+) ; in response to detecting the UWB signal, generating precise landing guidance for the vehicle respective to the landing site based at least in part on the UWB communication between the UWB transceiver of the vehicle and the plurality of UWB beacons located proximate to the landing site (the navigational computer 22 guiding the aircraft towards the landing site based on detecting the infrared beacons signals, see [0047]+); and updating the rendering of the GUI based at least in part on the precise landing guidance, wherein the precise landing guidance instructs navigation of the vehicle to the landing site (The navigational computer continuously updated the aircraft’s location based on received the infrared beacons, see [0025]+. While the aircraft receiver 20 is searching for the infrared beacons signals, the navigational computer 22 determines and provides the updated heading to a pilot or control system that redirects the aircraft 12 based on the updated heading on HMI, see [0035]-[0036]+, [0055] & [0059]+). Although Ehmantraut’s disclosure is not described as same world languages but Examiner interprets the aircraft including a computer system 1030 which providing landing guidance on HMI that is equivalent as the GUI. For this reason, Ehmantraut is obvious suggestively, if not anticipatory, of the claimed subject matter. With regard to claims 14 & 20, Ehrmantraut an apparatus comprising at least one processor and at least one non-transitory memory having computer-coded instructions stored thereon that, in execution with at least one processor, cause the apparatus to: generate initial landing guidance for a vehicle respective to a landing site based on location data associated with the vehicle (an aircraft 30 includes a navigational computer 22 which generates a navigating landing based on received sensor data, see [0025]-[0027]+); render a graphical user interface (GUI) comprising the initial landing guidance on a display of a computing device associated with controlling the vehicle (an HMI 1040 coupled to a processor 1032 of the aircraft system 1030 that allows a user to interact directly with. The HMI capable of accepting commands or input from the user and transmitting the entered input to the processor 1032, see [0058]-[0059], wherein the HMI is interprets as the GUI); detect a UWB signal from at least one of a plurality of UWB beacons located proximate to the landing site via communication between at least one UWB transceiver of the vehicle and the plurality of UWB beacons located proximate to the landing site (The aircraft 12 receives infrared beacons signals, wherein the beacons are located around the landing site 32, see [0024]-[0025]+) ; in response to detecting the UWB signal, generating precise landing guidance for the vehicle respective to the landing site based at least in part on the UWB communication between the UWB transceiver of the vehicle and the plurality of UWB beacons located proximate to the landing site (the navigational computer 22 guiding the aircraft towards the landing site based on detecting the infrared beacons signals, see [0047]+); and updating the rendering of the GUI based at least in part on the precise landing guidance, wherein the precise landing guidance instructs navigation of the vehicle to the landing site (The navigational computer continuously updated the aircraft’s location based on received the infrared beacons, see [0025]+. While the aircraft receiver 20 is searching for the infrared beacons signals, the navigational computer 22 determines and provides the updated heading to a pilot or control system that redirects the aircraft 12 based on the updated heading on HMI, see [0035]-[0036]+, [0055] & [0059]+). Although Ehmantraut’s disclosure is not described as same world languages but Examiner interprets the aircraft including a computer system 1030 which providing landing guidance on HMI that is equivalent as the GUI. For this reason, Ehmantraut is obvious suggestively, if not anticipatory, of the claimed subject matter. Claim(s) 2-13 & 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ehrmantraut (20220028289) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Goossen (20140018979). With regarding claim 2, Ehrmantraut discloses the claimed subject matter but fails to teach that the GUI comprising the initial landing guidance comprises a mapping of an area comprising a current location of the vehicle based at least in part on the location data. Goossen discloses a system for generating a graphical user interface including a 3D virtual containment space for flight of an UAV (see the abstract). The GUI presents the landing guidance comprising a map of an area including the aircraft current location, see [0065]-[0066]+. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Ehrmantraut by including a mapping area with the aircraft’s current location on the GUI for landing guidance as taught by Goossen for improving the aircraft’s operation. With regarding claim 3, Goossen teaches that the method of claim 2, wherein: a rendering of the precise landing guidance on the GUI comprises a three-dimensional mapping of a second area comprising an updated current location of the vehicle, the landing site, and a plurality of structures (see [0004]-[0006]+). With regard to claim 4, Ehrmantraut teaches that the method of claim 3, further comprising: generating the updated current location of the vehicle and the precise landing guidance based at least in part on: the UWB communication between the UWB transceiver of the vehicle and the plurality of UWB beacons; and additional location data associated with the vehicle (infrared beacons 24, and an inertial measurement unit 34, and infrared cameras, see [0025]-[0026]+). With regard to claim 5, Ehrmantraut teaches that the method of claim 4, further comprising: applying a first weight value to respective UWB data associated with the UWB communication between the UWB transceiver of the vehicle and the plurality of UWB beacons; and applying a second weight value to the additional location data associated with the vehicle, wherein the first weight value represents a greater impact value than the second weight value (the navigational computer 22 determines the landing site by comparing the site code indicated by the infrared site signal with a site code data store, see [0022]. The navigational computer 22 also determines a current location of the aircraft 12 based on the inertial measurements data collected, see [0025]. The computer uses either one of the collected types of information to aid the aircraft landing, therefore the weight value of the collected information depended on the situation the aircraft’s computer need for aiding the landing). With regarding claim 6, Goossen teaches that the method of claim 3, wherein: the rendering of the precise landing guidance on the GUI further comprises a trajectory through the second area, wherein: the trajectory directs to a respective surface of a subset of the plurality of structures that comprises the landing site and at least a subset of the plurality of UWB beacons located proximate to the landing site (see [0045]+). With regarding claim 7, Goossen teaches that the method of claim 6, wherein: updating the GUI based at least in part on the precise landing guidance comprises rendering the subset of the plurality of structures in a particular color to indicate at least one of i) a presence of the landing site, or ii) the subset of the plurality of UWB beacons located proximate to the landing site (see Fig.2, [0067]+). With regard to claim 8, Ehrmantraut teaches that the method of claim 1, wherein: the location data comprises satellite-based location data (GPS systems are commonly used in aircraft, see [0003]+). With regard to claims 9-10, Ehrmantraut teaches that the method of claim 1, wherein: the location data comprises compass data (the aircraft includes an inertial measurement unit 34 which enables to measure compass data, location data, see [0025]+). With regard to claims 11-13, Goossen teaches that the wireless interface used to communicate information about the detected obstruction to the air traffic control system. Wherein the information uncludes size, location, shape, type, images, movement characteristics, etc. which meets the scope of the claims of the vehicle’s “passenger count”, “type” and “weight”. With regard to claims 15-16, Goossen teaches that the apparatus of claim 14, wherein: the precise landing guidance comprises a landing speed and a landing angle (see [0064]+ & [0133]+) With regard to claims 17, Goossen teaches that the apparatus of claim 14, wherein: the initial landing guidance comprises a topographic map of an area comprising the landing site; and the precise landing guidance comprises a photogrammetry map of a subset of the area, wherein the subset of the area comprises the landing site (the 3D coverage map used to identify coverage gaps above the ground in the coverage area, see [0054]+). With regard to claims 18, Goossen teaches that the apparatus of claim 17, wherein: the photogrammetry map further comprises light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data associated with the subset of the area (the UAV equipped with radar to provide radar data, see [0125]+). With regard to claim 19, Ehrmantraut teaches that the apparatus of claim 14, wherein the instructions, in execution with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to: generate the precise landing guidance further based at least in part on the location data, wherein: the location data comprises at least one of satellite-based location data, compass data, or inertial measurement data (the aircraft includes an inertial measurement unit 34 which enables to measure compass data, location data, see [0025]+). Prior Arts Cited The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Ortman (20220397915) discloses a system for service drone landing zone (see the abstract). Henderson (20170212528) discloses an apparatus of autonomously landing an aerial vehicle (see the abstract). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGA X NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-5217. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30AM - 2:30PM. 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, JELANI SMITH can be reached at 571-270-3969. 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. NGA X. NGUYEN Examiner Art Unit 3662 /NGA X NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 03, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600237
RECOMMENDED VEHICLE-RELATED FUNCTIONALITY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601610
METHOD, DATA PROCESSING APPARATUS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT FOR GENERATING MAP DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12594968
VEHICLE DRIVING SWITCHING DEVICE, VEHICLE DRIVING SYSTEM, AND VEHICLE DRIVING SWITCHING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597351
VEHICULAR AUTOMATIC BRAKING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591247
UNMANNED VEHICLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+6.5%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 784 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month