DETAILED ACTION
Contents
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 2
Election/Restrictions 2
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 2
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 5
Conclusion 8
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-8, in the reply filed on 5/19/26 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-10 are currently pending. Claims 9-10 are withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Michini et al (US 2018/0003161 A1). Regarding claim 1, Michini discloses an inspection system for a wind power generator, comprising: a drone configured to transmit image information obtained by capturing images of the wind power generator and surroundings of the wind power generator and sensor detection information for detecting the wind power generator and the surroundings of the wind power generator (see 0027, 0035, 0018, 0023, 0087-0089);
an inspection server configured to receive the image information and the sensor detection information from the drone (see 0022); and a mobile device configured to receive the image information and the sensor detection information (see 0074) and transmit at least one instruction to the drone to control operations of the drone (see 0020, 0036), wherein the inspection server is further configured to determine a location of the wind power generator (see 0019, 0072, 0078) and inspect a current state of the wind power generator, based on at least one of the image information and the sensor detection information (see 0022, 0035, 0003).
Regarding claim 2, Michini discloses a communication unit configured to transmit and receive data between the inspection server and the drone (see 0020-0022, 0088); an input/output unit configured to generate the at least one instruction, based on the image information and the sensor detection information (see 0074, 0095); and a storage unit storing a wind power generator inspection platform provided by the inspection server (see 0019, 0092) and storing information to be linked to the inspection server and the drone in a database (see 0022, 0081, 0089).
Regarding claim 5, Michini discloses an inspection method for a wind power generator, performed by an inspection system for a wind power generator, linked to a drone configured to inspect a state of the wind power generator and a mobile device configured to control operations of the drone (see 0005, 0017), the inspection method comprising: receiving image information and sensor detection information from the drone (see 0022, 0074); analyzing an image, based on the image information and the sensor detection information (see 0018, 0031, 0022); determining a location of the wind power generator, based on the image information, the sensor detection information, and a result of analyzing the image (see 0019, 0072, 0078); generating a first instruction for controlling the operations of the drone according to a result of determining the location of the wind power generator (see 0074, 0075, 0036); and transmitting the first instruction to the drone (see 0036, 0088).
Regarding claim 6-7, Michini discloses after the transmitting of the first instruction to the drone (see 005, 0017): generating a second instruction for inspecting a current state of the wind power generator when the drone approaches the wind power generator (see 0074, 0075, 0036); and transmitting the second instruction to the drone (see 0036, 0086);
controlling a flight operation of the drone to determine the location of the wind power generator (see 0019, 0036), and the second instruction is an instruction for controlling the flight operation of the drone to inspect the current state of the wind power generator (see 0027-0030, 0036, 0075).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimedinvention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3-4, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michini et al (US 2018/0003161 A1) in view of Karachalios et al (GB 2581403 A).
Regarding claim 3, Michini teaches all elements as mentioned above in claim 1. Michini does not teach expressly a communication module configured to receive the image information and the sensor detection information from the drone and transmit the received image information and the sensor detection information to the mobile device; an image processing module configured to load the image information, and analyze and process the image information, based on a deep learning algorithm; an inspection module configured to inspect a state of the wind power generator, based on the image information and the sensor detection information; a location determination module configured to determine the location of the wind power generator, based on the image information and the sensor detection information; an instruction generation module configured to generate an instruction for controlling the operations of the drone, based on the image information and the sensor detection information; and a control module configured to generate a control signal for controlling operations of the drone and the mobile device.
Karachalios, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a communication module configured to receive the image information and the sensor detection information from the drone and transmit the received image information and the sensor detection information to the mobile device (see pg. 9, 12-13); an image processing module configured to load the image information, and analyze and process the image information, based on a deep learning algorithm (see pg. 38-39); an inspection module configured to inspect a state of the wind power generator, based on the image information and the sensor detection information (see pg. 7, 13); a location determination module configured to determine the location of the wind power generator, based on the image information and the sensor detection information (see pg. 36-38); an instruction generation module configured to generate an instruction for controlling the operations of the drone, based on the image information and the sensor detection information (see pg. 15, 36); and a control module configured to generate a control signal for controlling operations of the drone and the mobile device (see pg. 5, 14).
It would have been obvious (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) or (at the time the invention was made) to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Michini to utilize the cited limitations as suggested by Karachalios. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enable better control and navigation systems for autonomous vehicles (see pg. 1). Furthermore, the prior art collectively includes each element claimed (though not all in the same reference), and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements in the manner explained above using known engineering design, interface and/or programming techniques, without changing a “fundamental” operating principle of Michini, while the teaching of Karachalios continues to perform the same function as originally taught prior to being combined, in order to produce the repeatable and predictable result. It is for at least the aforementioned reasons that the examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to the claim in question.
Regarding claim 4, Michini teaches generate a first instruction for controlling a flight operation of the drone to determine the location of the wind power generator and a second instruction for controlling the flight operation of the drone to inspect the current state of the wind power generator (see 0017, 0073, 0072, 0019, 0074, 0075, 0053).
Regarding claim 8, Michini teaches all elements as mentioned above in claim 5. Michini does not teach expressly analyzing the image information by using a deep learning algorithm; and performing image processing on analyzed image information by using a graphical interface.
Karachalios, in the same field of endeavor, teaches analyzing the image information by using a deep learning algorithm (see pg. 38-39, 26, 40); and performing image processing on analyzed image information by using a graphical interface (see pg. 46-47, 28, 16, 13).
It would have been obvious (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) or (at the time the invention was made) to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Michini to utilize the cited limitations as suggested by Karachalios. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enable better control and navigation systems for autonomous vehicles (see pg. 1). Furthermore, the prior art collectively includes each element claimed (though not all in the same reference), and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements in the manner explained above using known engineering design, interface and/or programming techniques, without changing a “fundamental” operating principle of Michini, while the teaching of Karachalios continues to perform the same function as originally taught prior to being combined, in order to produce the repeatable and predictable result. It is for at least the aforementioned reasons that the examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to the claim in question.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWARD PARK. The examiner’s contact information is as follows:
Telephone: (571)270-1576 | Fax: 571.270.2576 | Edward.Park@uspto.gov
For email communications, please notate MPEP 502.03, which outlines procedures pertaining to communications via the internet and authorization. A sample authorization form is cited within MPEP 502.03, section II.
The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6 CST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew Moyer, can be reached on (571) 272-9523. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/EDWARD PARK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2666
Prosecution Insights