DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
2. Claims 1-20 are pending in Instant Application.
Priority
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed 5/27/2024 has been received and considered by the examiner. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Examiner’s Note
5. Examiner has cited particular paragraphs/columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all of part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicant’s definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“terminal device” – in claims 1-3, 6, 10, 12-13, 15-16 and 20
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The following are the interpreted corresponding structures found within the specification for some of the above limitations:
“terminal device” – see Fig. 3, remote display
“control device” – processor, see Fig. 11
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis – Step 1
Claim 1 is directed to a method (i.e., a process).
Claim 15 is directed to a method (i.e., a process).
Claim 20 is directed to an aerial vehicle.
Therefore, claims 1, 15 and 20 are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claims 1, 15 and 20 include limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below - bolded) and will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection. The claim limitations that do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application are underlined.
Claim 1 recites,
A return method for an aerial vehicle, comprising:
during a flight process of the aerial vehicle, performing real-time planning of a return path from a current position to a return position; (A person of ordinary skill in the art can mentally plan a return path from a current position to a return position. Thus, this limitation is construed to be directed to the abstract idea of mental processes.)
and performing real-time transmission of the return path to a terminal device to display the return path on a display interface.
Claim 15 recites,
A return method applicable to a terminal device of an aerial vehicle, comprising:
receiving a return path from a current position of the aerial vehicle to a return position sent in real-time by the aerial vehicle, wherein the return path is planned in real-time by the aerial vehicle during a flight process; (A person of ordinary skill in the art can mentally plan a return path from a current position to a return position. Thus, this limitation is construed to be directed to the abstract idea of mental processes.)
and displaying the return path on a display interface of the terminal device.
Claim 20 recites,
An aerial vehicle, comprising: a body; a propulsion system located within the body to provide flight power to the aerial vehicle;
and a control device within the body, including: at least one storage medium storing at least one set of instructions for aerial vehicle return; and at least one processor in communication with the at least one storage medium, wherein during operation, the at least one processor executes the at least one set of instructions to cause the control device to at least: during a flight process of the aerial vehicle,
perform real-time planning of a return path from a current position to a return position, (A person of ordinary skill in the art can mentally plan a return path from a current position to a return position. Thus, this limitation is construed to be directed to the abstract idea of mental processes.)
and perform real-time transmission of the return path to a terminal device to display the return path on a display interface.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, the additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
Claim 1 recites,
A return method for an aerial vehicle, comprising:
during a flight process of the aerial vehicle, performing real-time planning of a return path from a current position to a return position;
and performing real-time transmission of the return path to a terminal device to display the return path on a display interface. (This is recited such that the Applicant is merely adding extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. Instantly this appears to be mere setting process based of the mental process. It does not showcase a controlling step or entitle that the vehicle is going to be moving to the selected location. (see MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)).)
Claim 15 recites,
A return method applicable to a terminal device of an aerial vehicle, comprising:
receiving a return path from a current position of the aerial vehicle to a return position sent in real-time by the aerial vehicle, (This is recited such that the Applicant is merely adding extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. (see MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)).)wherein the return path is planned in real-time by the aerial vehicle during a flight process;
and displaying the return path on a display interface of the terminal device. (This is recited such that the Applicant is merely adding extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. Instantly this appears to be mere setting process based of the mental process. It does not showcase a controlling step or entitle that the vehicle is going to be moving to the selected location. (see MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)).)
Claim 20 recites,
An aerial vehicle, comprising: a body; a propulsion system located within the body to provide flight power to the aerial vehicle; and a control device within the body, including: at least one storage medium storing at least one set of instructions for aerial vehicle return; and at least one processor in communication with the at least one storage medium, wherein during operation, the at least one processor executes the at least one set of instructions to cause the control device to at least: during a flight process of the aerial vehicle, (This is recited such that the Applicant is merely adding extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. (see MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)).)
perform real-time planning of a return path from a current position to a return position,
and perform real-time transmission of the return path to a terminal device to display the return path on a display interface. (This is recited such that the Applicant is merely adding extra-solution activity to the judicial exception. Instantly this appears to be mere setting process based of the mental process. It does not showcase a controlling step or entitle that the vehicle is going to be moving to the selected location. (see MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)).)
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05). Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
Regarding Step 2B of the Revised Guidance, representative independent claim 1, 10 and 15 do not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element discussed above, appears to be mere data gathering and transmitting of information which can be analyzed by an abstract mental process. And as discussed above, the additional limitations which are underlined above, the examiner submits that these limitations are insignificant extra-solution activities. Hence, the claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claim(s) 6 recite further limitations that cause claim’s 1, 15 and 20 to be patent eligible. The part of claim 6 in which showcases controlling a heading direction of the aerial vehicle, a left or right flight of the aerial vehicle, or a flight altitude of the aerial vehicle would overcome the 101 rejection. Other dependent claims further recite further recite extra-solution activity. Showcasing a controlling element for the aerial vehicle is utilizing the transmitted information and would overcome the 101 rejections for Claims 1, 15 and 20.
Claim(s) 1-20 are ineligible under 35 USC §101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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 non-obviousness.
10. Claims 1-2, 4, 6-8, 10, 14-15, 17-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (WO 2019006772) in view of Pasko (US 20150336668).
Regarding Claim 1, Yang discloses A return method for an aerial vehicle, comprising: during a flight process of the aerial vehicle, performing real-time planning of a return path from a current position to a return position; (Yang, see at least [0059] wherein a drone receives a return to home command, it retrieves the simulated flight trajectory and reverse-calculates the drone’s direction and path when returning home. Also see [0062] wherein map data of the current position is obtained, the flight trajectory of the drone from the starting position to the current flight position when the done is flying is calculated, and a flight direction/path of the drone when returning home is based on the flight trajectory. The drone is then guided to return home according to the flight directions/path.)
and performing real-time transmission of the return path to a terminal device to display the return path on a display interface. (Yang, see at least [0061] wherein the flight path can be displayed on the user’s remote terminal device.)
Yang does not explicitly disclose performing real-time transmission
However, Pasko discloses performing real-time transmission (Pasko, see at least [0063] wherein when the UAV is given fight path instructions, the UAV may travel a route and at altitudes specified by the flight path instructions, but if an obstacle is detected, may avoid the obstacles encountered in the flight path ** based on flight path instructions, if an obstacle is detected, the UAV is able to deviate and avoid the obstacles)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Pasko to include the capability of performing real-time transmission, wherein the flight data can be provided in real time, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle is given flight path instructions in real time. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
Regarding Claim 2, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 1, (see rejection above)
Yang further discloses wherein the terminal device is configured to display the return path on the display interface in response to an aerial vehicle return trigger instruction. (Yang, see at least [0061] wherein a recommended path can be displayed on the user’s remote terminal device in response to the user confirming or the display can be executed based on user preset commands that no notification is required)
Regarding Claim 4, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 1, (see rejection above)
Pasko further discloses wherein the aerial vehicle is equipped with a sensor for obstacle avoidance; (Pasko, see at least [0017] “UAV 220 may utilize one or more of the aforementioned sensors to sense (or detect) and avoid an obstacle in or near a flight path of UAV 220.”)
and the performing of the real-time planning of the return path from the current position to the return position includes: planning in real-time the return path from the current position to the return position based on detection data of the sensor when the sensor has a normal function to enable the aerial vehicle to avoid obstacles during a return process. (Pasko, see at least [0063] wherein when the UAV is given fight path instructions, the UAV may travel a route and at altitudes specified by the flight path instructions, but if an obstacle is detected, may avoid the obstacles encountered in the flight path)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Pasko to include the capability of performing real-time transmission based on detection data of a sensor, wherein the flight data can be provided in real time, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle is given flight path instructions in real time. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
Regarding Claim 6, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 4, further comprising: (see rejection above)
Pasko further discloses during the return process: the aerial vehicle refusing to respond to a first control command, sent by the terminal device, for controlling a heading direction of the aerial vehicle, a left or right flight of the aerial vehicle, or a flight altitude of the aerial vehicle; or the aerial vehicle responding to a second control command, sent by the terminal device, for controlling a flight speed of the aerial vehicle, and sending a first indication message to the terminal device to inform an increase in power consumption upon determining that a difference between a speed indicated by the second control command and a preset speed exceeds a speed difference threshold, wherein the preset speed indicates a flight speed corresponding to a maximum flight range of the aerial vehicle. (Pasko, see at least [0063] wherein when the UAV is given fight path instructions, the UAV may travel a route and at altitudes specified by the flight path instructions, but if an obstacle is detected, may avoid the obstacles encountered in the flight path)
Regarding Claim 7, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 4, wherein the planning in real-time the return path from the current position to the return position based on the detection data of the sensor includes: (see rejection above)
Yang further discloses determining a grid map and a road network map of an environment where the aerial vehicle is located based on the detection data of the sensor; and planning the return path of the aerial vehicle from the current position to the return point in real time based on the grid map and the road network map, wherein the grid map includes at least one grid, and each grid corresponds to a first parameter to characterize a security risk of passing through the grid, the road network map includes at least one edge, and each edge corresponds to a second parameter to characterize a security risk of passing through the edge. (Yang, see at least [0032] wherein the control unit that guides the drone to return home, determines whether the drone passes through sensitive flight areas based on map data. Also see [0039])
Regarding Claim 8, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 7, wherein the planning of the return path of the aerial vehicle from the current position to the return point in real time based on the grid map and the road network map includes: (see rejection above)
Yang further discloses performing, based on a searching method, a path search in the grid map and the road network map to obtain the return path; and optimizing, based on a sampling method, the return path in the road network map. (Yang, see at least [0032] wherein the control unit that guides the drone to return home, determines whether the drone passes through sensitive flight areas based on map data. Also see [0039])
Regarding Claim 10, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 1, (see rejection above)
Yang further discloses wherein the return path is planned in real-time at a first frequency and transmitted to the terminal device; the method further comprises: transmitting a real-time position of the aerial vehicle to the terminal device at a second frequency to display the real-time position on the display interface, wherein the second frequency is greater than or equal to the first frequency. (Yang, see at least [0094-0096] wherein the return to home device may be implemented by one or more application-specific technologies **in which each technology would utilize different frequencies.)
Regarding Claim 14, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 1, wherein the performing of the real-time planning of the return path from the current position to the return position includes at least one of: (rejection above)
Yang further discloses performing, after the aerial vehicle takes off, the real-time planning of the return path from the current position to the return position; performing, prior to triggering an aerial vehicle return, the real-time planning of the return path from the current position to the return position; or performing, upon determining that a distance between the aerial vehicle and the return position is greater than a distance threshold, the real-time planning of the return path from the current position to the return position. (Yang, see at least [0059] wherein a drone receives a return to home command, it retrieves the simulated flight trajectory and reverse-calculates the drone’s direction and path when returning home. Also see [0062] wherein map data of the current position is obtained, the flight trajectory of the drone from the starting position to the current flight position when the done is flying is calculated, and a flight direction/path of the drone when returning home is based on the flight trajectory. The drone is then guided to return home according to the flight directions/path. ** happening during a flight, meaning its happening in real time)
Regarding Claim 15, Yang discloses A return method applicable to a terminal device of an aerial vehicle, comprising: receiving a return path from a current position of the aerial vehicle to a return position sent in real-time by the aerial vehicle, wherein the return path is planned in real-time by the aerial vehicle during a flight process; (Yang, see at least [0059] wherein a drone receives a return to home command, it retrieves the simulated flight trajectory and reverse-calculates the drone’s direction and path when returning home. Also see [0062] wherein map data of the current position is obtained, the flight trajectory of the drone from the starting position to the current flight position when the done is flying is calculated, and a flight direction/path of the drone when returning home is based on the flight trajectory. The drone is then guided to return home according to the flight directions/path. ** happening during a flight, meaning its happening in real time)
and displaying the return path on a display interface of the terminal device. (Yang, see at least [0061] wherein the flight path can be displayed on the user’s remote terminal device)
Yang does not explicitly disclose planning in real-time
However, Pasko discloses performing real-time transmission (Pasko, see at least [0063] wherein when the UAV is given fight path instructions, the UAV may travel a route and at altitudes specified by the flight path instructions, but if an obstacle is detected, may avoid the obstacles encountered in the flight path ** based on flight path instructions, if an obstacle is detected, the UAV is able to deviate and avoid the obstacles)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Pasko to include the capability of performing real-time transmission, wherein the flight data can be provided in real time, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle is given flight path instructions in real time. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
Regarding Claim 17, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 14, (see rejection above)
Yang further discloses wherein the return path is planned in real time by the aerial vehicle at a first frequency, and the method further comprises: receiving a real-time position of the aerial vehicle transmitted by the aerial vehicle at a second frequency, wherein the second frequency is greater than or equal to the first frequency. (Yang, see at least [0094-0096] wherein the return to home device may be implemented by one or more application-specific technologies **in which each technology would utilize different frequencies.)
Regarding Claim 18, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 14, further comprising: (see rejection above)
Yang further discloses receiving a real-time position of the aerial vehicle; and performing at least one of the following: in response to a latest received real-time position of the aerial vehicle being on a latest received return path, displaying the return path between the latest received real-time position of the aerial vehicle and the latest received return path, or in response to a latest received real-time position of the aerial vehicle being deviated from a latest received return path, obtaining and display a line segment associating the latest received real-time position and the latest received return path, wherein the line segment includes a line connecting the latest received real-time position and the latest received return path or a historical flight trajectory. (Yang, see at least [0059] wherein a drone receives a return to home command, it retrieves the simulated flight trajectory and reverse-calculates the drone’s direction and path when returning home. Also see [0062] wherein map data of the current position is obtained, the flight trajectory of the drone from the starting position to the current flight position when the done is flying is calculated, and a flight direction/path of the drone when returning home is based on the flight trajectory. The drone is then guided to return home according to the flight directions/path. ** happening during a flight, meaning its happening in real time)
Regarding Claim 20, Yang discloses An aerial vehicle, comprising: a body; (Yang, see at least [0001] “The invention relates to a flight control system for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)”)
and a control device within the body, including: (Yang, see at least [0077-0082] wherein the control unit 24 guides the UAV to return home)
at least one storage medium storing at least one set of instructions for aerial vehicle return; and at least one processor in communication with the at least one storage medium, wherein during operation, the at least one processor executes the at least one set of instructions to cause the control device to at least: (Yang, see at least [0100] wherein a computer-readable storage medium is used to store instructions to cause a computer device to execute all the steps.)
during a flight process of the aerial vehicle, perform real-time planning of a return path from a current position to a return position, (Yang, see at least [0059] wherein a drone receives a return to home command, it retrieves the simulated flight trajectory and reverse-calculates the drone’s direction and path when returning home. Also see [0062] wherein map data of the current position is obtained, the flight trajectory of the drone from the starting position to the current flight position when the done is flying is calculated, and a flight direction/path of the drone when returning home is based on the flight trajectory. The drone is then guided to return home according to the flight directions/path.)
and perform real-time transmission of the return path to a terminal device to display the return path on a display interface. (Yang, see at least [0061] wherein the flight path can be displayed on the user’s remote terminal device.)
Yang does not explicitly disclose a propulsion system located within the body to provide flight power to the aerial vehicle;
performing real-time transmission
However, Pasko discloses a propulsion system located within the body to provide flight power to the aerial vehicle; (Pasko, see at least [0018] UAV 220 may include a variety of components, such as a power source (e.g., an internal combustion engine, an electric battery, a solar-powered battery, etc.); a component that generates aerodynamic lift force (e.g., a rotor, a propeller, a rocket engine, a jet engine, etc.); computational resources; sensors; etc.)
performing real-time transmission (Pasko, see at least [0063] wherein when the UAV is given fight path instructions, the UAV may travel a route and at altitudes specified by the flight path instructions, but if an obstacle is detected, may avoid the obstacles encountered in the flight path ** based on flight path instructions, if an obstacle is detected, the UAV is able to deviate and avoid the obstacles)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Pasko to include the capability of performing real-time transmission, wherein the flight data can be provided in real time, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle is given flight path instructions in real time. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
11. Claims 3, 5, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (WO 2019006772) in view of Pasko (US 20150336668) in further view of Tao (US 20190073918).
Regarding Claim 3, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 2, (see rejection above)
Yang does not explicitly disclose wherein a condition for triggering the aerial vehicle return includes at least one of: a user actively triggering a return, a remaining power of the aerial vehicle is lower than a low power threshold, or the aerial vehicle losing contact with the terminal device.
However, Tao discloses wherein a condition for triggering the aerial vehicle return includes at least one of: a user actively triggering a return, a remaining power of the aerial vehicle is lower than a low power threshold, or the aerial vehicle losing contact with the terminal device. (Tao, see at least [0144] wherein the user can activate an auto return routine to cause the UAV to engage in a sequence of predetermined actions to return autonomoustly to a predetermined point.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Tao to include the capability of utilizing a triggering condition that is activated by a user, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle is given flight path instructions in real time to a return location when a user is triggering an auto return. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
Regarding Claim 5, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 1, (see rejection above)
Yang does not explicitly disclose wherein the sensor includes a vision sensor; and the performing of the real-time planning of the return path from the current position to the return position includes: in response to a light brightness of an environment where the aerial vehicle is located meets a working condition of the vision sensor, performing the real-time planning of the return path from the current position to the return position.
However, Tao discloses wherein the sensor includes a vision sensor; and the performing of the real-time planning of the return path from the current position to the return position includes: in response to a light brightness of an environment where the aerial vehicle is located meets a working condition of the vision sensor, performing the real-time planning of the return path from the current position to the return position. (Tao, see at least [0153] wherein the navigation mode indicator can be used to indicate that the navigation is based on GPS, vision or both. The navigation may be performed based on sensing systems other than GPS and vision such as sensors. Altitudes, distances and more can be chosen based on being indoor /outdoor environments)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Tao to include the capability of utilizing vision sensors to further choose altitudes, distances and more for an aerial vehicle, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle is given flight path instructions. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
Regarding Claim 16, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 15, wherein the displaying of the return path on the display interface of the terminal device includes: (see rejection above)
Yang further discloses in response to an aerial vehicle return trigger instruction, displaying the return path on the display interface, (Yang, see at least [0061] wherein a recommended path can be displayed on the user’s remote terminal device in response to the user confirming or the display can be executed based on user preset commands that no notification is required)
Yang does not explicitly disclose wherein a condition for triggering the aerial vehicle return includes at least one of: a user actively triggering a return, a remaining power of the aerial vehicle is lower than a low power threshold, or the aerial vehicle losing contact with the terminal device.
However, Tao discloses wherein a condition for triggering the aerial vehicle return includes at least one of: a user actively triggering a return, a remaining power of the aerial vehicle is lower than a low power threshold, or the aerial vehicle losing contact with the terminal device. (Tao, see at least [0144] wherein the user can activate an auto return routine to cause the UAV to engage in a sequence of predetermined actions to return autonomously to a predetermined point.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Tao to include the capability of utilizing a triggering condition that is activated by a user, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle is given flight path instructions in real time to a return location when a user is triggering an auto return. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
12. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (WO 2019006772) in view of Pasko (US 20150336668) in further view of Zhang (WO 2018218516).
Regarding Claim 9, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 4, (see rejection above)
Yang further discloses wherein the performing of the real-time planning of the return path from the current position to the return position includes: planning the return path from the current position to the return position in real-time based on a distance between the current position and the return position or based on a historical flight trajectory of the aerial vehicle, when the sensor fails. (Yang, see at least [0059] wherein a drone receives a return to home command, it retrieves the simulated flight trajectory and reverse-calculates the drone’s direction and path when returning home. Also see [0062] wherein map data of the current position is obtained, the flight trajectory of the drone from the starting position to the current flight position when the done is flying is calculated, and a flight direction/path of the drone when returning home is based on the flight trajectory. The drone is then guided to return home according to the flight directions/path. ** happening during a flight, meaning its happening in real time)
Yang does not explicitly disclose when the sensor fails.
However, Zhang discloses when the sensor fails. (Zhang, see at least [0080-0085] wherein the UAV may initiate a process to reach the appropriate destination in response to a condition of a detection condition, such as sensor failure)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Zhang to include the capability utilizing sensor failures to initiate a process of a UAV to head toward a appropriate destination, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle is given flight path instructions during a sensor failure. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
13. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (WO 2019006772) in view of Pasko (US 20150336668) in further view of Xin (CN 116643582).
Regarding Claim 11, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 1, further comprising: (see rejection above)
Yang does not explicitly disclose during a return process, determining, when the aerial vehicle approaches the return position, a timing for initiating a diagonal descent of the aerial vehicle based on detection data of a sensor.
However, Xin discloses during a return process, determining, when the aerial vehicle approaches the return position, a timing for initiating a diagonal descent of the aerial vehicle based on detection data of a sensor. (Xin, see at least [0010] wherein a drone utilities sensor date to determine a target landing position and landing operation and the drone is controlled to perform segmented vertical landings at a set unit prelanding altitude that is timed.)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Zhang to include the capability of determining target landing positions and operations in which a drone is controlled to approach a return position, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle is able to land during the end of a return flight process. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
14. Claims 12-13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (WO 2019006772) in view of Pasko (US 20150336668) in further view of Pounds (US 10394240).
Regarding Claim 12, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 1, further comprising: (see rejection above)
Yang does not explicitly disclose sending a second indication message to the terminal device, when it is not possible to plan the return path from the current position to the return position, to at least informing that autonomous return is not executable, or suggesting manual return.
However, Pounds discloses sending a second indication message to the terminal device, when it is not possible to plan the return path from the current position to the return position, to at least informing that autonomous return is not executable, or suggesting manual return. (Pounds, see at least [0039] a remotely operated aerial vehicle operates autonomously with an operator (e.g., pilot) taking control under specified conditions (e.g., component failures, as requested by a control center, upon detecting failure of a primary guidance system, upon switching over to a secondary guidance system, etc.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Zhang to include the capability of determining failure among the guidance system of the aerial vehicle, and request by the control center that an operator take over, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle when a failure is detected, a operator is able to take over and complete a manual return. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
Regarding Claim 13, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 1, further comprising: (see rejection above)
Yang further discloses obtaining a flight control command sent by the terminal device; determining a predicted flight path of the aerial vehicle based on the flight control commands; performing real-time planning of the return path from points on the predicted flight path to the return position; (Yang, see at least [0059] wherein a drone receives a return to home command, it retrieves the simulated flight trajectory and reverse-calculates the drone’s direction and path when returning home. Also see [0062] wherein map data of the current position is obtained, the flight trajectory of the drone from the starting position to the current flight position when the done is flying is calculated, and a flight direction/path of the drone when returning home is based on the flight trajectory. The drone is then guided to return home according to the flight directions/path. ** happening during a flight, meaning its happening in real time)
Yang does not explicitly disclose and sending a second indication message to the terminal device, when it is not possible to plan the return path from the points on the predicted flight path to the return position, to inform that autonomous return is not executable and suggest manual return.
However, Pounds discloses and sending a second indication message to the terminal device, when it is not possible to plan the return path from the points on the predicted flight path to the return position, to inform that autonomous return is not executable and suggest manual return. (Pounds, see at least [0039] a remotely operated aerial vehicle operates autonomously with an operator (e.g., pilot) taking control under specified conditions (e.g., component failures, as requested by a control center, upon detecting failure of a primary guidance system, upon switching over to a secondary guidance system, etc.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Zhang to include the capability of determining failure among the guidance system of the aerial vehicle, and request by the control center that an operator take over, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle when a failure is detected, a operator is able to take over and complete a manual return. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
Regarding Claim 19, Yang in view of Pasko discloses The method according to claim 14, further comprising: (see rejection above)
Yang does not explicitly disclose receiving a second indication message sent by the aerial vehicle; and outputting a prompt message indicating that autonomous return is not executable and suggesting manual return, wherein the second indication message is sent by the aerial vehicle upon determining that the aerial vehicle is unable to plan the return path.
However, Pounds discloses receiving a second indication message sent by the aerial vehicle; and outputting a prompt message indicating that autonomous return is not executable and suggesting manual return, wherein the second indication message is sent by the aerial vehicle upon determining that the aerial vehicle is unable to plan the return path. (Pounds, see at least [0039] a remotely operated aerial vehicle operates autonomously with an operator (e.g., pilot) taking control under specified conditions (e.g., component failures, as requested by a control center, upon detecting failure of a primary guidance system, upon switching over to a secondary guidance system, etc.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in modified Yang with the teachings of Zhang to include the capability of determining failure among the guidance system of the aerial vehicle, and request by the control center that an operator take over, in which is utilized by the system of Yang to ensure that the aerial vehicle when a failure is detected, a operator is able to take over and complete a manual return. This would further improve the managing or controlling of an aerial vehicle.
Relevant Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20210020057 – A return flight control method includes obtaining return-flight-evaluation information in a return flight mode, controlling an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to return to an alternate landing area in response to that the return-flight-evaluation information satisfies a preset requirement, and controlling the UAV to return to a return point in response to that the return-flight-evaluation information does not satisfy the preset requirement.
US 20210223794 – Disclosed is a configuration to control automatic return of an aerial vehicle. The configuration stores a return location in a storage device of the aerial vehicle. The return location may correspond to a location where the aerial vehicle is to return. One or more sensors of the aerial vehicle are monitored during flight for detection of a predefined condition. When a predetermined condition is met a return path program may be loaded for execution to provide a return flight path for the aerial vehicle to automatically navigate to the return location.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NADA MAHYOOB ALQADERI whose telephone number is (571) 272-2052. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Friday, 8AM-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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on (571) 272-4896. 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.
/NADA MAHYOOB ALQADERI/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/RACHID BENDIDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664