DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to Applicant's Amendment and Remarks filed on 4/16/2026. This Action is made FINAL.
Claims 1-22 were canceled.
Claims 46 is withdrawn.
Claims 23-45, 47-50 are pending for examination.
Response to Arguments
(A) Applicant's arguments filed “C. Shavit does not disclose or suggest a copilot ground base station that includes a DCU” and “Applicant respectfully submits that the ground station in Shavit does not require or necessitate a DCU. Indeed, Shavit does not disclose any structure within the ground station that performs the claimed data conversion functions, and the Office Action identifies no factual basis or technical reasoning showing that such a unit must necessarily be present in order for Shavit's system to operate. To the contrary, Shavit's disclosure is fully consistent with other implementations that do not require a DCU at the ground station at all. For example, any necessary data conversion could instead be performed by equipment installed onboard the aircraft, with the already converted data then transmitted to the ground station for display to the remote pilot. Thus, because the ground station in Shavit does not require a DCU and it permits alternative implementations in which any necessary data conversion is performed elsewhere, the claimed DCU cannot be treated as an inherent feature of Shavit.” on 4/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As to point (A), the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner further notes Shavit disclosed in Para 114 “Any suitable processor's, display and input devices may be used to process, display e.g. on a computer screen or other computer output device, store, and accept information such as information used by or generated by any of the methods and apparatus shown and described herein; the above processor's, display and input devices including computer programs, in accordance with some or all of the embodiments of the present invention. Any or all functionalities of the invention shown and described herein, such as but not limited to operations within flowcharts, may be performed by any one or more of: at least one conventional personal computer processor, workstation or other programmable device or computer or electronic computing device or processor, either general-purpose or specifically constructed, used for processing; a computer display screen and/or printer and/or speaker for displaying; machine-readable memory such as optical disks, CDROMs, DVDs, BluRays, magnetic-optical discs or other discs; RAMS, ROMs, EPROMs, EEPROMs, magnetic or optical or other cards, for storing, and keyboard or mouse for accepting. Modules shown and described herein may include any one or combination or plurality of: a server, a data processor, a memory/computer storage, a communication interface, a computer program stored in memory/computer storage”, Para 115 “The term “process” as used above is intended to include any type of computation or manipulation or transformation of data represented as physical, e.g. electronic, phenomena which may occur or reside e.g. within registers and/or memories of at least one computer or processor. The term processor includes a single processing unit or a plurality of distributed or remote such units”, and Para 120 “it is appreciated that throughout the specification discussions, utilizing terms such as, “processing”, “computing”, “estimating”, “selecting”, “ranking”, “grading”, “calculating”, “determining”, “generating”, “reassessing”, classifying generating “producing”, “stereo-matching”, “registering”, “detecting”, “associating”, “superimposing”, “obtaining” or the like, refer to the action and/or processes of at least one computer/s or computing system/s, or processor/s or similar electronic computing device/s, that manipulate and/or transform data represented as physical, such as electronic, quantities within the computing system's registers and/or memories, into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computing system's memories, registers or other such information storage, transmission or display devices. The term “computer” should be broadly construed to cover any kind of electronic device with data processing capabilities, including, by way of non-limiting example, personal computers, servers, computing system, communication devices, processors (e.g. digital signal processor (DSP), microcontrollers, field programmable gate array (FPGA), application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), etc.) and other electronic computing devices”. The examiner noted that the reference disclosed manipulate and/or transform data into other data similarly represented within display devices via processor and further disclosed modules shown and described herein may include a data processor. Lastly, Para 369 of Shavit disclosed “It is appreciated that each component which includes logic e.g. components 13, 14, 15, 16, 23, 25, 57, 56, 58, 60-64, 66, 69, 68 and the systems of FIGS. 5 and 7 may be implemented by one or more processors” indicating the usage of processor which manipulate and/or transform data. The examiner further notes that in order for the display of Shavit to display the information related to aircraft the process of manipulate and/or transform data is required.
(B) Applicant's arguments filed “D. Shavit does not disclose or suggest an output display device that renders a display using outputs of a DCU” and “While Figure 6 of Shavit addresses different types of displays that can be provided by the ground station therein, nothing in FIG. 6 or its corresponding description even remotely suggests that such displays are generated using a local DCU, much less a DCU located at and coupled to the ground station. Shavit therefore does not disclose the claimed functional and structural relationship in which aircraft data is first converted by a DCU into outputs adapted for display, and the output display device then renders a plurality of aircraft displays using those DCU-generated outputs.” on 4/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As to point (B), the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner further notes Shavit disclosed in Para 120 “it is appreciated that throughout the specification discussions, utilizing terms such as, “processing”, “computing”, “estimating”, “selecting”, “ranking”, “grading”, “calculating”, “determining”, “generating”, “reassessing”, classifying generating “producing”, “stereo-matching”, “registering”, “detecting”, “associating”, “superimposing”, “obtaining” or the like, refer to the action and/or processes of at least one computer/s or computing system/s, or processor/s or similar electronic computing device/s, that manipulate and/or transform data represented as physical, such as electronic, quantities within the computing system's registers and/or memories, into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computing system's memories, registers or other such information storage, transmission or display devices. The term “computer” should be broadly construed to cover any kind of electronic device with data processing capabilities, including, by way of non-limiting example, personal computers, servers, computing system, communication devices, processors (e.g. digital signal processor (DSP), microcontrollers, field programmable gate array (FPGA), application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), etc.) and other electronic computing devices” which indicated data manipulate and/or transform into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within display devices.
(C) Applicant's arguments filed “E. Shavit does not disclose or suggest the claimed GBS communication management system or its claimed arrangement within the architecture of the copilot GBS” and “Applicant respectfully submits that Shavit does not disclose, and does not suggest, the specific arrangement recited in claims 23 and 39. Claim 23 does not merely specify a ground station that communicates with an aircraft, but rather explicitly clarifies how components of this GBS architecture are coupled to each other, in order to facilitate a specific processing pipeline that is applied to data received from an aircraft. More specifically, claim 23 recites a particular GBS architecture in which a GBS communication management system is coupled to at least one data link and is also coupled to at least one data converter unit (DCU), with the DCU receiving aircraft data from the CPRS and converting that data into outputs adapted for display. Claim 39 recites the same or similar arrangement in method form” on 4/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As to point (C), the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner further notes Fig. 3 and Para 369 of Shavit disclosed “It is appreciated that each component which includes logic e.g. components 13, 14, 15, 16, 23, 25, 57, 56, 58, 60-64, 66, 69, 68 and the systems of FIGS. 5 and 7 may be implemented by one or more processors” indicating the usage of processor which manipulate and/or transform data and the components are couple together to facility the transfer of data.
(D) Applicant's arguments filed “First, it is noted that nothing in the cited passage, or any other portion of Shavit, describes the aircraft therein as having any type of MCWS. While the cited passage broadly states that "monitoring module (620) may be similar or identical to a conventional onboard MMI except that the other-pilot inputs that the remote pilot gets are from the air," it does reference an MCWS installed on an aircraft and certainly does not describe a ground-based pilot remotely interacting with an aircraft-based MCWS. Additionally, Applicant respectfully submits that Shavit does not disclose or suggest a ground station that enables a ground-based pilot to remotely interact with a monitoring, checklist and warning system (MCWS) "simultaneously" while an onboard pilot operates the aircraft." This is because the ground-based pilot in Shavit replaces the onboard pilot entirely for certain phases of flight.” on 4/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As to point (D), the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner further notes Para 262 of Shavit disclosed “As shown in FIG. 6, particularly for single aircraft, monitoring module (620) may be similar or identical to a conventional onboard MMI except that the other-pilot inputs that the remote pilot gets are from the air, whereas the other-pilot inputs that the air pilot gets are from the ground. The ground MMI may comprise display and other controls that present aircraft MMI status to a remote pilot and let the remote pilot operate the controls. It includes some or all of the following: display units (621), (622), (623) that present PFD, NAV and systems status.—Touch screens (624) that enable pilot inputs; and (625)—other controls not via touch screens. Element 630 typically includes displays for management and support data, such as but not limited to some or all of: forward looking video from aircraft, AFM (aircraft flight manual); MEL (minimum equipment list), aircraft maintenance log. Element (640) comprises Keyboard and other controls to operate the working station of the remote pilot”. The combination of monitoring module (620) and Element 630 typically includes displays for management and support data including MEL (minimum equipment list), aircraft maintenance log would encompass monitoring, checklist and warning system. Furthermore, Para 317-318 of Shavit disclosed “FIGS. 11b and 11c correspond to dual pilot operation (where pilot in command is the air pilot and the remote pilot, respectively and the co-pilot is the remote pilot and the air pilot, respectively)” and “The table of FIG. 12 may be used to improve or automate team work of airborne and remote pilots e.g. when both are active (one as pilot in command, and the other for monitoring and support)” indicating simultaneously interaction with the aircraft.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/31/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species A: Claims 23-45 in the reply filed on 1/9/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “Each of the above species is interconnected and involves common inventive features - e.g., relating to a copilot ground base station (GBS). Additionally, there is a substantial overlap in the subject matter of the claims included in each alleged species. See MPEP 802.01 ("Two or more inventions are related (i.e., not independent) if they are disclosed as connected in at least one of design (e.g., structure or method of manufacture), operation (e.g., function or method of use), or effect.")”. This is not found persuasive because the different species included different control methods including “communicate with an onboard pilot located in a cockpit of the aircraft, and transmit commands for controlling one or more functionalities of the aircraft” vs a “ground-based pilot may utilize the one or more aircraft displays to remotely monitor operations of the aircraft and transmit commands for controlling one or more functionalities of the aircraft” which created examination burden as the examiner would be required to search for the different species with unique text search including different configuration with first configuration requiring communication with an onboard pilot located in a cockpit of the aircraft and second configuration requiring direct control of the one or more functionalities of the aircraft without communication with an onboard pilot.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim(s) 23-30, 32-33, 36-43, 45, 47-50 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shavit (US20180290729A1).
Regarding claim 23, Shavit teaches A copilot ground base station (GBS), comprising:
at least one GBS communication management system configured to manage bi- directional communications between the copilot GBS and a copilot replacement system (CPRS) installed on an aircraft (Shavit: Fig. 1 Element 31, Fig. 3 Element 65; Para 212 “Communication module (65) including SAT COM data & voice with the aircrafts (e.g. Rockwell Collins ICG NEXTLink ICS-220A) (66), and SAT antennas (67), cyber warfare module (69) to secure and check all communications and ground communications (68) e.g. for some or all of the following: aviation weather (e.g. from government sources such as ADDS), NOTAMs (Notices to Airmen from government sources), NAS (National Aviation Services) operators such as but not limited to some or all of: flight service, Automatic Terminal Information Service, or ATIS, Clearance, air ports tower, Departure. Arrival, ATC; NAS (National Aviation Services) data (e.g. aircraft track files); aircraft technical support, e.g. local maintenance, OEM (Original equipment manufacturer) support; back up ground station for redundancy; and customer service”);
at least one data converter unit (DCU) coupled to the at least one GBS communication management system, the at least one DCU configured to receive aircraft data from the CPRS installed on the aircraft and convert the aircraft data into one or more outputs that are adapted for display(Shavit: Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays”);
at least one output display device configured to render a plurality of aircraft displays, at least in part, using the one or more outputs generated by the at least one DCU(Shavit: Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays”); and
at least one data link coupled to the at least one GBS communication management system, the at least one data link configured to establish a connection that facilitates the bi-directional communications with the aircraft(Shavit: Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”); and
wherein the connection established between the copilot GBS and the aircraft enables a ground-based pilot to remotely monitor operations of the aircraft on the at least one output display device, communicate with an onboard pilot located in a cockpit of the aircraft, and transmit commands for controlling one or more functionalities of the aircraft(Shavit: Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”).
Regarding claim 24, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein the copilot GBS comprises a multi- function control and display unit (MCDU) that is configured to is configured to present feedback related to the aircraft's operations, receive inputs from the ground-based pilot, and transmit one or more commands over the at least one data link to control operation of the aircraft based on the inputs received from the ground-based pilot(Shavit: Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”).
Regarding claim 25, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 24, wherein: the MCDU includes a simulated MCDU interface that is included on one of the plurality of aircraft displays presented on the at least one output display device(Shavit: Para 226 “the remote pilot MMI may present all or most of onboard pilot MMI data and controls status”); the simulated MCDU interface is configured to emulate functionality of a separate MCDU installed in a cockpit of the aircraft(Shavit: Para 226 “the remote pilot MMI may present all or most of onboard pilot MMI data and controls status”); and the simulated MCDU interface is configured to present the feedback related to the aircraft's operations via the at least one output display device, and receive the inputs from the ground-based pilot based on the ground-based pilot's interactions with the simulated MCDU interface(Shavit:Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”).
Regarding claim 26, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 25, wherein the simulated MCDU interface presents flight planning, navigation, and performance computations corresponding to the aircraft's operations, and the one or more commands transmitted by the simulated MCDU interface over the at least one data link include one or more commands for adjusting settings of a flight management system (FMS) or a flight guidance computer (FGC) installed on the aircraft(Shavit: Para 226 “the remote pilot MMI may present all or most of onboard pilot MMI data and controls status”; Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”).
Regarding claim 27, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein the at least one GBS communication management system is configured to communicate with an onboard communication management system of the CPRS installed in the aircraft, and communications between the at least one GBS communication management system and the onboard communication management system enables a ground-based pilot to remotely monitor the operations of the aircraft on the at least one output display, and transmit the commands for controlling the one or more functionalities of the aircraft(Shavit: Para 226 “the remote pilot MMI may present all or most of onboard pilot MMI data and controls status”; Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”).
Regarding claim 28, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein the aircraft data received via the at least one data link from the CPRS installed on the aircraft comprises monitoring data generated by a cockpit monitoring system installed on the aircraft, and the at least one output display device is configured to render at least a portion of the monitoring data on one or more of the plurality of aircraft displays(Shavit: Para 273 “Transition (130) At (101) mode, if “blue button” used by pilot (if he fears he is about to become incapacitated or by passengers that recognize that the pilot is incapacitated) is activated or if system otherwise detects that pilot is not responsive, the system transfers to (108) mode. Automatic detection of pilot incapacity is known (United B744 for example) e.g. by monitoring pilot inputs, detecting lack of inputs for a certain time and detecting failure to respond to certain system alerts”; Para Para 226 “the remote pilot MMI may present all or most of onboard pilot MMI data and controls status”; Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”).
Regarding claim 29, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein the aircraft data received from the CPRS installed on the aircraft via the at least one data link comprises outputs generated by, or derived from, at least one data concentrator installed on the aircraft, and one or more of the plurality of aircraft displays are generated, at least in part, using the outputs(Shavit: Para 164 “all monitor and control data is on a data bus to facilitate easy sharing of that data between aircraft and ground station through the communication net”; Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”).
Regarding claim 30, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein the aircraft data received from the CPRS installed on the aircraft via the at least one data link comprises external vision data captured by at least one exterior vision system installed on or near an exterior of the aircraft, and the at least one output display device is configured to render at least a portion of the external vision data on one or more of the plurality of aircraft displays(Shavit: Para 263 “Remote pilot MMI 23 of FIG. 3 may for example be similar to conventional onboard MMI and may provide some or all of the following: 1. As shown in FIG. 6, particularly for single aircraft, monitoring module (620) may be similar or identical to a conventional onboard MMI except that the other-pilot inputs that the remote pilot gets are from the air, whereas the other-pilot inputs that the air pilot gets are from the ground. The ground MMI may comprise display and other controls that present aircraft MMI status to a remote pilot and let the remote pilot operate the controls. It includes some or all of the following: display units (621), (622), (623) that present PFD, NAV and systems status.—Touch screens (624) that enable pilot inputs; and (625)—other controls not via touch screens. Element 630 typically includes displays for management and support data, such as but not limited to some or all of: forward looking video from aircraft, AFM (aircraft flight manual); MEL (minimum equipment list), aircraft maintenance log. Element (640) comprises Keyboard and other controls to operate the working station of the remote pilot”; Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”).
Regarding claim 32, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein the connection established between the copilot GBS and the aircraft enables a ground-based pilot to remotely interact with a monitoring, checklist and warning system (MCWS) installed in the cockpit of the aircraft and to remotely perform checklist functions, instrument monitoring functions, and warning functions(Shavit: Para 262 “Referring to FIG. 6, Remote pilot MMI 23 of FIG. 3 may for example be similar to conventional onboard MMI and may provide some or all of the following: 1. As shown in FIG. 6, particularly for single aircraft, monitoring module (620) may be similar or identical to a conventional onboard MMI except that the other-pilot inputs that the remote pilot gets are from the air, whereas the other-pilot inputs that the air pilot gets are from the ground. The ground MMI may comprise display and other controls that present aircraft MMI status to a remote pilot and let the remote pilot operate the controls. It includes some or all of the following: display units (621), (622), (623) that present PFD, NAV and systems status.—Touch screens (624) that enable pilot inputs; and (625)—other controls not via touch screens. Element 630 typically includes displays for management and support data, such as but not limited to some or all of: forward looking video from aircraft, AFM (aircraft flight manual); MEL (minimum equipment list), aircraft maintenance log. Element (640) comprises Keyboard and other controls to operate the working station of the remote pilot”).
Regarding claim 33, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein transmitting the commands for controlling one or more functionalities of the aircraft includes at least two of:
transmitting, via the at least one data link, commands to remotely control or use one or more radio devices installed on the aircraft for communicating with one or more air-based entities or one or more ground-based entities;
transmitting, via the at least one data link, commands for remotely controlling operation of an autopilot system installed in the aircraft(Shavit: Fig. 13; Para 156 “Flight path may be maintained by an auto pilot and auto throttle that are controlled and/or monitored by the remote pilot.”);
transmitting, via the at least one data link, commands for remotely controlling operation of an autothrust system installed in the aircraft(Shavit: Fig. 13; Para 156 “Flight path may be maintained by an auto pilot and auto throttle that are controlled and/or monitored by the remote pilot.”);
transmitting, via the at least one data link, commands for remotely controlling operation of an autoland system installed in the aircraft;
transmitting, via the at least one data link, commands for remotely controlling navigation or maneuvers of the aircraft; and
transmitting, via the at least one data link, commands for remotely controlling a flight plan or flight path for the aircraft.
Regarding claim 36, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein the at least one DCU comprises an aircraft display symbol generator configured to generate visual representations of the aircraft data received over the at least one data link in a form of symbols for incorporation into one or more of the plurality of aircraft displays presented on the at least one output display device(Shavit: Para 164 “all monitor and control data is on a data bus to facilitate easy sharing of that data between aircraft and ground station through the communication net”; Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”).
Regarding claim 37, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, further comprising a data entry means that is configured to receive identification information for selecting the aircraft and establishing the connection with the aircraft(Shavit: Para 191 “Switching from on-board piloting to remote piloting typically comprises an on-board piloting activating request on the control unit 150 or 155 followed by a limited time window during which the remote pilot must respond via his control unit 150 or 155 that he accepts control”; i.e. on-board piloting activating request indicated identification information and the remote pilot accepts control indicating establishing the connection with the aircraft), wherein the data entry means is included on at least one of: the at least one DCU; or an aircraft display presented on the at least one output display device(Shavit: Fig. 6 Element 155; Para 309 “FIG. 9 is a simplified diagram of a pilot-in-command Mode Selector 155, e.g. a touch screen or push button/s. and may serve as an alternative to apparatus 150 of FIG. 8, in which case the apparatus 150 is either omitted (e.g. in FIG. 6) or implemented in parallel for redundancy (e.g. in the system of FIG. 5b )”).
Regarding claim 38, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein transmitting commands for controlling one or more functionalities of the aircraft include transmitting commands to manipulate at least one data transfer relay located in the aircraft, and the at least one data transfer relay enables the ground-based pilot to remotely manipulate actuation switches or indicators for at least two of: controlling landing gear, flaps, engines, autopilot functions, autothrottle functions, autonomous landing systems, lighting systems, communication systems, fuel selector systems, or electronic circuit breakers(Shavit: Fig. 13; Para 156 “Flight path may be maintained by an auto pilot and auto throttle that are controlled and/or monitored by the remote pilot.”).
As per claim 39, it recites A method for operating a copilot ground base station (GBS) having limitations similar to those of claim 23 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 40, it recites A method for operating a copilot ground base station (GBS) having limitations similar to those of claim 25 and 26 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 41, it recites A method for operating a copilot ground base station (GBS) having limitations similar to those of claim 28, 29 and 30 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 42, it recites A method for operating a copilot ground base station (GBS) having limitations similar to those of claim 32 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
As per claim 43, it recites A method for operating a copilot ground base station (GBS) having limitations similar to those of claim 33 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Regarding claim 45, Shavit teaches The method of claim 39, further comprising terminating the connection between the copilot GBS and the aircraft in response to an override command(Shavit: Para 273 “Transition (125) At (106) mode, onboard pilot (P) may take control by moving control switch 150 or 155 to position P. Piloting may be set to P typically without remote pilot (RP) needing to confirm”; i.e. onboard pilot (P) take control indicated terminating the connection).
In regards to claim 47, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein the aircraft data received by the at least one DCU includes raw data generated by the aircraft's aircraft sensors and/or avionics systems(Shavit: Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays”; Para 245 “Display information of aircraft status may be presented on any or all of displays (421-423, 431) and may be available on digital communication lines and transmitted through data link to the ground. Most state of the art transport aircraft have the option to transmit some status messages through data link e.g. via their ACARS system (preliminary capability in Boeing's B767; enhanced capability on Boeing's B777, B787 and Embraer E190)”; i.e. information of aircraft status (raw data generated by the aircraft's avionics systems) transmitted via data link to the ground(the aircraft data received by the at least one DCU)) and the at least one DCU installed at the copilot GBS translates the aircraft data externally to the aircraft into a format that is suitable for display on the at least one output display device located at the copilot GBS(Shavit: Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays”; Para 262 “Referring to FIG. 6, Remote pilot MMI 23 of FIG. 3 may for example be similar to conventional onboard MMI and may provide some or all of the following: 1. As shown in FIG. 6, particularly for single aircraft, monitoring module (620) may be similar or identical to a conventional onboard MMI except that the other-pilot inputs that the remote pilot gets are from the air, whereas the other-pilot inputs that the air pilot gets are from the ground. The ground MMI may comprise display and other controls that present aircraft MMI status to a remote pilot and let the remote pilot operate the controls. It includes some or all of the following: display units (621), (622), (623) that present PFD, NAV and systems status.—Touch screens (624) that enable pilot inputs; and (625)—other controls not via touch screens. Element 630 typically includes displays for management and support data, such as but not limited to some or all of: forward looking video from aircraft, AFM (aircraft flight manual); MEL (minimum equipment list), aircraft maintenance log. Element (640) comprises Keyboard and other controls to operate the working station of the remote pilot”).
In regards to claim 48, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 32, wherein the connection established between the copilot GBS and the aircraft enables the ground-based pilot to simultaneously interact with, and control, the MCWS installed in the cockpit of the aircraft while the onboard pilot operates the aircraft(Shavit: Para 262 “Referring to FIG. 6, Remote pilot MMI 23 of FIG. 3 may for example be similar to conventional onboard MMI and may provide some or all of the following: 1. As shown in FIG. 6, particularly for single aircraft, monitoring module (620) may be similar or identical to a conventional onboard MMI except that the other-pilot inputs that the remote pilot gets are from the air, whereas the other-pilot inputs that the air pilot gets are from the ground. The ground MMI may comprise display and other controls that present aircraft MMI status to a remote pilot and let the remote pilot operate the controls. It includes some or all of the following: display units (621), (622), (623) that present PFD, NAV and systems status.—Touch screens (624) that enable pilot inputs; and (625)—other controls not via touch screens. Element 630 typically includes displays for management and support data, such as but not limited to some or all of: forward looking video from aircraft, AFM (aircraft flight manual); MEL (minimum equipment list), aircraft maintenance log. Element (640) comprises Keyboard and other controls to operate the working station of the remote pilot”; Para 318 “FIG. 12 is a table showing distribution of responsibilities between airborne and remote pilots, according to certain embodiments of the invention. The table of FIG. 12 may be used to improve or automate team work of airborne and remote pilots e.g. when both are active (one as pilot in command, and the other for monitoring and support)”; Para 318 “when both pilots (the airborne and ground pilots, respectively P & RP) are active exclusively, the PIC has operational controls for some critical tasks e.g. as shown in the table of FIG. 12. Other tasks may typically be done by either or both pilots to enable the other pilot to assist the PIC in a high workload scenario”).
In regards to claim 49, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein the copilot GBS can switch between at least two operational modes including:
a limited control mode in which the ground-based pilot operates and controls one more aircraft systems while the onboard pilot simultaneously controls one or more separate aircraft systems(Shavit: Para 318 “FIG. 12 is a table showing distribution of responsibilities between airborne and remote pilots, according to certain embodiments of the invention. The table of FIG. 12 may be used to improve or automate team work of airborne and remote pilots e.g. when both are active (one as pilot in command, and the other for monitoring and support)”; Para 318 “when both pilots (the airborne and ground pilots, respectively P & RP) are active exclusively, the PIC has operational controls for some critical tasks e.g. as shown in the table of FIG. 12. Other tasks may typically be done by either or both pilots to enable the other pilot to assist the PIC in a high workload scenario”); and
a full control mode in which the ground-based pilot assumes full control over the aircraft(Shavit: Para 267-269 “(101) Onboard pilot piloting, (105) Remote pilot piloting, (110) Automatic pilot-in-command mode for rare emergency back up. Modes (101) and (105) each have two sub modes, in the illustrated example state chart: other (ground/onboard) pilot monitoring and assisting the onboard/remote pilot—(103) and (106) respectively; and without other pilot assisting (102) and (107)” Para 273 “Transition (128) At (106) mode, if onboard pilot (P) moves control switch 150 or 155 to rest mode, and if remote pilot (RP) acknowledges in (PARAMETER) seconds, the system may transfer to mode (107)”).
In regards to claim 50, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, wherein copilot GBS includes an architecture for routing inbound communications received from the aircraft and routing outbound communications for transmission to the aircraft (Shavit: Fig. 1 Element 31, Fig. 3 Element 65; Para 212 “Communication module (65) including SAT COM data & voice with the aircrafts (e.g. Rockwell Collins ICG NEXTLink ICS-220A) (66), and SAT antennas (67), cyber warfare module (69) to secure and check all communications and ground communications (68) e.g. for some or all of the following: aviation weather (e.g. from government sources such as ADDS), NOTAMs (Notices to Airmen from government sources), NAS (National Aviation Services) operators such as but not limited to some or all of: flight service, Automatic Terminal Information Service, or ATIS, Clearance, air ports tower, Departure. Arrival, ATC; NAS (National Aviation Services) data (e.g. aircraft track files); aircraft technical support, e.g. local maintenance, OEM (Original equipment manufacturer) support; back up ground station for redundancy; and customer service”; Para 369 “It is appreciated that each component which includes logic e.g. components 13, 14, 15, 16, 23, 25, 57, 56, 58, 60-64, 66, 69, 68 and the systems of FIGS. 5 and 7 may be implemented by one or more processors”)such that:
the inbound communications received over the at least one data link are routed to the at least one GBS communication management system, which distributes the inbound communications to downstream components of the copilot GBS and at least a portion of the inbound communications are routed to the at least one DCU, which in turn converts the aircraft data included in the inbound communication systems into a display-adapted format for rendering the plurality of aircraft displays(Shavit: Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”);
at least a portion of the outbound communications are generated in response to commands or inputs received via the plurality of aircraft displays, wherein the at least one DCU converts the commands or inputs into aircraft-compatible data, the aircraft- compatible data is routed to the at least one GBS communication management system, and the at least one GBS communication management system transmits the aircraft- compatible data to the aircraft over the at least one data link(Shavit: Para 238 “ATC-aircraft data link or voice communication that contain assigned flight plan updates. The point to point connectivity between ground station and aircraft may be used to perform some or all of the following: a) Send data from aircraft data buses to generate the data on the remote pilot's MMI displays. b) Enable the remote pilot's manipulations of his controls to be sent to the aircraft enabling control of aircraft systems and to be presented on the airborne pilot's MMI. c) Cross check of the communicated data from the multi channel types enables improving robustness, and provides immunity from unauthorized intruders d) Send voice and data communication between ATC and aircraft and enable the remote pilot to monitor or operate ATC-aircraft negotiations”).
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 31, 34, 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shavit (US20180290729A1) in view of McCusker (US9384586B1).
In regards to claim 31, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 30
Yet Shavit do not explicitly teach wherein the exterior vision data enables the copilot GBS to execute distance-measuring functions, which determine a distance from the aircraft to one or more objects captured in the external vision data
However, in the same field of endeavor, McCusker teaches wherein the exterior vision data enables the copilot GBS to execute distance-measuring functions, which determine a distance from the aircraft to one or more objects captured in the external vision data (McCusker: Col. 11 Lines 12-21 “Memory 402 may also include a radar image processing module 407 configured to generate 2-D images from the 3-D model. In particular, module 407 may receive data from module 406 including a 3-D model of highly reflective structures in an airport terminal area or runway environment that may serve as visual reference points during aircraft approach and landing procedures. Module 407 may generate one or more 2-D images of one or more of the structures in the 3-D model”; Col. 11 Lines 46-52 “Location analyzer module 408 may also compare the determined location of the aircraft to location information contained in radar returns data used by modules 406 and 407 to generate 3-D models and 2-D images of nearby airport terminal or runway environment structures (e.g., distance, altitude and azimuth data determined by radar system 304 shown in FIG. 3)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify The copilot GBS of Shavit with the feature of wherein the exterior vision data enables the copilot GBS to execute distance-measuring functions, which determine a distance from the aircraft to one or more objects captured in the external vision data disclosed by McCusker. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “minimize losses due to the inability of the pilot to land the plane and deliver cargo and/or passengers on time in low visibility conditions” (McCusker: Col. 1 Lines 40-42).
In regards to claim 34, Shavit teaches The copilot GBS of claim 23, and Shavit further teaches wherein the at least one output display device is configured to output a flight augmentation display based, at least in part, on external vision data captured by an external vision system installed on the aircraft(Shavit: Para 263 “Remote pilot MMI 23 of FIG. 3 may for example be similar to conventional onboard MMI and may provide some or all of the following: 1. As shown in FIG. 6, particularly for single aircraft, monitoring module (620) may be similar or identical to a conventional onboard MMI except that the other-pilot inputs that the remote pilot gets are from the air, whereas the other-pilot inputs that the air pilot gets are from the ground. The ground MMI may comprise display and other controls that present aircraft MMI status to a remote pilot and let the remote pilot operate the controls. It includes some or all of the following: display units (621), (622), (623) that present PFD, NAV and systems status.—Touch screens (624) that enable pilot inputs; and (625)—other controls not via touch screens. Element 630 typically includes displays for management and support data, such as but not limited to some or all of: forward looking video from aircraft, AFM (aircraft flight manual); MEL (minimum equipment list), aircraft maintenance log. Element (640) comprises Keyboard and other controls to operate the working station of the remote pilot”) while McCusker further teaches the flight augmentation display being configured to augment the external vision data from captured by the external vision system with overlays or objects that provide information for assisting the ground-based pilot with landing the aircraft (McCusker: Col. 2 Lines 6-17 “An EFVS typically uses either a passive or active sensing system to acquire data used to generate imagery of the airport terminal area and runway environment. A typical passive sensor, such as a forward looking infrared (FLIR) camera or visible light spectrum camera, receives electromagnetic energy from the environment and outputs data that may be used by the system to generate video images from the point of view of the camera. The camera is installed in an appropriate position, such as in the nose of an aircraft, so that the PF may be presented with an appropriately scaled and positioned video image on the HUD having nearly the same point of view as the PF when viewing the external surroundings of the aircraft through the HUD”; Col. 9 Lines 13-33 “Processing electronics 302 may generate EFVS imagery of aircraft surroundings, such as an airport terminal or runway environment, using data from radar system 304, communication devices 306, and aircraft sensors 308. For example, processing electronics 302 may generate a 2-D or 3-D representation of an airport terminal or runway environment in front of the aircraft from the viewing perspective of a PF and provide the representation to a display 312 (e.g., HUD 22 shown in FIG. 1). The rendition may also include various indicia regarding the current state of the aircraft. For example, the rendering on display 312 may include data regarding the aircraft's heading, course, altitude, or the like. The processing electronics may also generate a 2-D aircraft situation display image representative of the airport terminal or runway environment and provide the representation to a display 312 (e.g., HUD 22 shown in FIG. 1) for review by a PM. For example, the aircraft situation display image may include a 2-D electronic moving map display of the airport terminal or runway environment. The aircraft situation display image may further include an overlay including the 2-D radar image of structures in the airport terminal or runway environment.”). The Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of references Shavit and McCusker as in Claim 31 above.
As per claim 44, it recites A method for operating a copilot ground base station (GBS) having limitations similar to those of claim 34 and therefore is rejected on the same basis.
Claim 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shavit (US20180290729A1) in view of McCusker (US9384586B1) further in view of Iskrev (US20170308100A1).
In regards to claim 35, the combination of Shavit and McCusker teaches The copilot GBS of claim 34.
Yet the combination of Shavit and McCusker do not explicitly teach wherein: the flight augmentation display enables the ground-based pilot to identify a touchdown location for landing the aircraft; and
in response to identifying the touchdown location, a flight augmentation system is configured to generate simulated sensor information and guidance commands that instruct an autopilot function, a flight management system, or a flight guidance computer installed on the aircraft to generate flight information for landing the aircraft at or near the touchdown location identified by the ground-based pilot.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Iskrev teaches wherein: the flight augmentation display enables the ground-based pilot to identify a touchdown location for landing the aircraft(Iskrev: Para 12 “a method for the automated landing of an unmanned aerial vehicle includes controlling an unmanned aerial vehicle from a takeoff point to a point generally vertically above a landing area, capturing a photograph of the landing area from the unmanned aerial vehicle, transmitting the photograph to a first remote control device located near the landing area, prompting an observer to select a landing point on the photograph via the first remote control device, calculating a reference trajectory for a landing phase in dependence upon a location of the unmanned aerial vehicle in relation to the selected landing point, and controlling movement of the unmanned aerial vehicle to the landing point according to the calculated reference trajectory”); and
in response to identifying the touchdown location, a flight augmentation system is configured to generate simulated sensor information and guidance commands that instruct an autopilot function, a flight management system, or a flight guidance computer installed on the aircraft to generate flight information for landing the aircraft at or near the touchdown location identified by the ground-based pilot(Iskrev: Para 12 “a method for the automated landing of an unmanned aerial vehicle includes controlling an unmanned aerial vehicle from a takeoff point to a point generally vertically above a landing area, capturing a photograph of the landing area from the unmanned aerial vehicle, transmitting the photograph to a first remote control device located near the landing area, prompting an observer to select a landing point on the photograph via the first remote control device, calculating a reference trajectory for a landing phase in dependence upon a location of the unmanned aerial vehicle in relation to the selected landing point, and controlling movement of the unmanned aerial vehicle to the landing point according to the calculated reference trajectory”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify The copilot GBS of the combination of Shavit and McCusker with the feature of wherein: the flight augmentation display enables the ground-based pilot to identify a touchdown location for landing the aircraft; and in response to identifying the touchdown location, a flight augmentation system is configured to generate simulated sensor information and guidance commands that instruct an autopilot function, a flight management system, or a flight guidance computer installed on the aircraft to generate flight information for landing the aircraft at or near the touchdown location identified by the ground-based pilot disclosed by Iskrev. One would be motivated to do so for the benefit of “automated landing of an aircraft of UAV in a variety of landing scenarios” (Iskrev: Para 5).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Walker (US20030093187A1) disclosed the capacity to organize, record, report, relay and control data and equipment from a local protected control/router to create a large machine-messaging matrix. Sharing or replacing local and standard Human Machine Interfacing HMI with accountable automated human assist controls, robotics and/or remote control accomplishes this. Additionally, the networking of various wireless technologies can be interfaced via a unique routing and translation process powered by stable current supplies from the machines, vehicles and equipment they are attached too.
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 WENYUAN YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5455. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00AM-5:00PM EST.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. 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.
/W.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
5/11/26
Prosecution Insights