Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The current application relates a provisional application No. 63/469986 filed on May 31, 2023.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of the group I (claims 1-10) with traverse in the reply filed on 04/15/2026 is acknowledged. The applicant argues that although the independent claims (1, & 11) have subject matter are very closely related, similar limitations
Response to the Applicant’s argument:
The traversal is not found persuasive. Upon further consideration, claims 1-10 identified as Group I, and claims 11-19 identified as Group II. Group I Group II are independent because they are independent and disclosed different methods. Restriction between distinct inventions (MPEP 806.05-806.05(j)) are used when inventions are not connected in design, operation or effect or if one is patentable over the other.
In the instant case, the limitations Group I (claims 1-10) such as “identifying a plurality of wildfire risk point on a power grid …"; “calculating a route for an unmanned aerial vehicle …”; “controlling the UAV …”; “monitoring one or more sensors for an indication of a wildfire event …”; and “controlling the UAV to release a fire retardant ….” are not required by Group II (11-19). The Group II has different method such as “a vegetation module …retrieve vegetation data”; “a power equipment module …perform a spatiotemporal analysis of the power equipment data to generate power equipment risk data”; ”a wildfire module …generate wildfire risk data”; and “a power system …transform the vegetation risk data, the power equipment risk data and the wildfire risk data into power system risk data” which is not used in the Group I.
Examiner searches would double if working on the independent Group I & Group II.
Since Applicant elected Group I, claims 1-10 are prosecuted. Group II, claims 11-19 are considered as non-elected claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luca (20200130831) in view of Solomon (20230123483).
With regard to claim 1, Luca discloses a method for predictive fire control (a method for using UAV to delivery water or fire-retardants to a location selected by the fire-fighting personal, see the abstract), comprising:
The UAV includes radars, INS, GPS, and etc. with processor to recognizable points and extracted and then the appropriated software for the best match on the 3D map to identify a fire point T as shown in Fig.15 & [[024]-[0237]+);
calculating a route for an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to intersect with a maximum number of points as a function of a range of the UAV using the processor that is configured to transform UAV location data and the wildfire risk point data into flight plan data (a trajectory is calculated in real time by a navigation system 702, see [0240]-[0247])
controlling the UAV to traverse the route using a second processor; monitoring one or more sensors for an indication of a wildfire event using the second processor and the UAV (the UAV performs navigation required by the mission, see [0082]-[0083] & [0141]-[0150]+); and
controlling the UAV to release a fire retardant using the second processor (the aerodynamic flight controls the engine and the load release, see [0159]-[0160] & [0228]-[0235]+).
Luca does not clearly teach identifying a plurality of wildfire risk points on a power grid using a processor that is configured to receive power grid data and wildfire data and to transform the power grid data and the wildfire data into wildfire risk point data.
Solomon discloses a system as shown in Fig. 1 & Fig.2. The system includes a processor receives data information (grid data and wildfire data and to transform the power grid data and the wildfire data into wildfire risk point data) from sensor, GPS system, IMU for identifying a plurality of wildfire risk points on a power grid (see [0059]-[0060]+).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Luca by implement the system’s processor for identifying a plurality of wildfire risk points on a power grid using the received power grid data and wildfire data and to transform the power grid data and the wildfire data as taught by Solomon in order to detect wildfires more effectively.
With regard to claim 3, Solomon teaches that the method of claim 1, further comprising: detecting a fire retardant level at the UAV using sensors (using data detected by the sensors, to determine the wildfire growth factors, and risk zone levels for each of the wildfire location, see [0014]-[0016]+, and determines amount of fire-retardant drops, see [0119]+).
With regard to claim 4, Solomon teaches that the method of claim 1 further comprising: detecting a fire-retardant level at the UAV using a level sensor; and transmitting the fire-retardant level from the UAV to the processor (the information from sensors, GPS receiver stored in memory and processed by processor which determines risk level zones that extend from each of the small area, see [0060]-[0061]+).
With regard to claim 4, Solomon teaches that the method of claim 1 further comprising: detecting a fire retardant level at the UAV using a sensor; transmitting the fire retardant level from the UAV to the processor; and modifying the route as a function of the fire retardant level (The balloon (UAV)’s transmitter transmits information to the processor or user devices risk level zone where to evacuate, see [0058]-[0060]+).
With regard to claim 6, Solomon teaches that the method of claim 1 further comprising: detecting a fire-retardant level at the UAV using a sensor; transmitting the fire-retardant level from the UAV to the processor; and modifying the release of the fire retardant as a function of the fire-retardant level (see [0118]-[0120]+).
With regard to claim 7, Solomon teaches that the method of claim 1 further comprising: detecting updated wildfire data at the UAV using a sensor; and transmitting the updated wildfire data from the UAV to the processor (see [0058]-[0060]+).
With regard to claim 8, Solomon teaches that the method of claim 1 further comprising: detecting updated wildfire data at the UAV using a sensor; transmitting the updated wildfire data from the UAV to the processor; and modifying the release of the fire retardant as a function of the updated wildfire data (see [0118]-[0120]+). .
With regard to claim, Solomon teaches that the method of claim 1 further comprising: detecting updated wildfire data at the UAV using a sensor; transmitting the updated wildfire data from the UAV to the processor; and modifying the route as a function of the updated wildfire data (see [0014]-[0015]+).
With regard to claim 10, Solomon teaches that the method of claim 1 further comprising: detecting updated wildfire data at the UAV using a sensor; transmitting the updated wildfire data from the UAV to the processor; modifying the route as a function of the updated wildfire data; and modifying the release of the fire retardant as a function of the updated wildfire data and the modified route (see [0058]-[0061] & [0118]-[0119]+).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luca and Solomon as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jackson (20200179734).
With regard to claim 2, Luca and Solomon disclose the claimed subject matter but fails to teach controlling the UAV to release the fire retardant on the fire using the second processor comprises actuating one or more valves.
Jackson discloses a helicopter that carries a fire extinguish apparatus for use in fighting forest fires (see Fig. 1A, [0033]). The fire extinguishing apparatus comprises a valve, see [0034] for dropping retardant and/or water on the wildfire, see [0041]+ & [0054]-[0055]+).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Luca by implement the system’s processor for identifying a plurality of wildfire risk points on a power grid using the received power grid data and wildfire data and to transform the power grid data and the wildfire data as taught by Solomon and further including valves for dropping retardant as taught by Jackson. The combination of Luca, Solomon and Jackson is an adapted system for the UAV performing releasing the retardant on the wildfire consistency.
Prior Arts Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Brinkschulte (20250213900) discloses a method and device for suppressing wildfires. The system is designed as an autonomous flight drone carrying an extinguishing unit, a wildfire detection sensor 330, moves in a motorized manner along the calculated route to the target area of the fire sources, see the specification.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGA X NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-5217. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30AM - 2:30PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JELANI SMITH can be reached at 571-270-3969. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
NGA X. NGUYEN
Examiner
Art Unit 3662
/NGA X NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights