DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Applicant’s election without traverse of invention/group I in the reply filed on 12/22/2025 is acknowledged.
3. Claims 12-17, 19-21 and 23 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions/groups II-III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/22/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) filled on 02/06/2024 is being considered in the examination of this application.
Drawings
5. The drawings (FIGS. 1A-49) are objected to because the drawings are not proper black and white drawings, as required by 37 CFR 1.84 and MPEP §608, requiring solid and clear black lines for the purposes of reproduction.
6. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
a. Claim 2: the “plurality of active phased arrays” and the “three-dimensional phased array”;
b. Claim 3: the autonomous vehicle platform as defined in claim 1, comprising the “a plurality of receivers”;
c. Claim 7: the “deployable structure”;
d. Claim 8: the “deployable structure having the first antenna disposed thereon”;
e. Claim 9: the “magnetic and/or electromagnetic coupling”;
f. Claim 11: the “deployable structure having the plurality of receivers disposed thereon”;
g. Claim 22: the autonomous vehicle platform as defined in claim 1, comprising “in a deployment mesh system , the deployment mesh system comprising: a deployable mesh structure for forming a scaffold to attach autonomous vehicles thereto ;a plurality of autonomous vehicles for deploying, positioning and holding the mesh structure in the atmosphere or in space; and a power and data distribution interface integrated to the deployable mesh structure for transmitting power and data between the autonomous vehicles.”.
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
7. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
8. INDENTATION (claims 1-3, 7-8, 11 and 22)
where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75. Appropriate correction is required.
9. Claims 1, 11 and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities:
a. Claim 1, line 5: the term “rotor/propeller” should be rewritten as --rotor or propeller-- for the purpose of clarity.
b. Claim 11, line 1: a comma should be entered after the term “claim 3”.
c. Claim 22, line 2: the extra spacing before the comma should be removed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
10. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
11. Claims 3, 7, 11, 22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
12. Claim 3, lines 1-4, recites the limitation “further comprising: a plurality of receivers for receiving the electromagnetic radiation in one or more bands” which renders the claim uncertain, since the claimed subject matter is clearly drawn to other distinct embodiments shown in FIGS. 10C and 16 of the applicant’s disclosure. In the embodiments of the applicant’s disclosure that include the claimed subject matter of claim 1, there are no structural configurations that include the rejected subject matter of this claim. Further stated, claim 1 is a non-generic claim. Therefore, the claim is indefinite because the claimed subject matter is inconsistent with the applicant’s specification. See MPEP 2173.03.
13. Claim 22, lines 1-8, recites the limitation “in a deployment mesh system, the deployment mesh system comprising: a deployable mesh structure for forming a scaffold to attach autonomous vehicles thereto; a plurality of autonomous vehicles for deploying, positioning and holding the mesh structure in the atmosphere or in space; and a power and data distribution interface integrated to the deployable mesh structure for transmitting power and data between the autonomous vehicles” which renders the claim uncertain, since the claimed subject matter is clearly to another distinct embodiment that is unrelated to the claimed invention. The claimed platforms as disclosed does not include or involve a deployment mesh system. For further evidence, see claim 22 of the claims filed on 02/06/2024 which was clearly drawn to a separate claimed invention and a distinct embodiment of the applicant’s disclosure. Furthermore, it is unclear as to exactly what is intended by “in a deployment mesh system” as recited in the claim. Further clarification and appropriate correction is required. See MPEP 2173.03.
Claims not addressed are rejected based on their dependency from a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
14. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
15. Claim(s) 1 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Heppe (US 2013/0037650 A1), hereinafter “Heppe”.
16. Regarding Claim 1, Heppe discloses an autonomous vehicle platform for relaying electromagnetic radiation (Abstract and paras. [0057]-[0058], [0076], [0234] and [0274]; long endurance airship system 210/260 as seen in FIG. 2), comprising:
a hybrid propulsion system comprising:
at least one rotor/propeller (para. [0076]; airships 210/260 including respective propulsion systems 216/266 having a respective rotor/propeller as seen in FIG. 2); and
at least one inflatable balloon system (para. [0076]; airships 210/260 including respective propulsion systems 216/266 having a respective rotor/propeller as seen in FIG. 2),
a first antenna for transmitting electromagnetic radiation in one or more bands (para. [0274]; tether 296 adapted to serve or support one or several antennas for radio communications, furthermore antennas by definition transmit electromagnetic radiation in one or more bands); and
a docking interface configured for docking with at least one other autonomous vehicle (para. [0079]; mating subsystems 295/215 configured for docking airships 210/260 as seen in FIG. 2).
12. Regarding Claim 8, Heppe discloses the autonomous vehicle platform of claim 1, further comprising:
a deployable structure having the docking interface disposed thereon (para. [0079]; each of airships 210/60 having respective mating subsystems 215/295 thereon, furthermore airships are by definition deployable structures).
18. Regarding Claim 9, Heppe discloses the autonomous vehicle platform of claim 1, wherein the docking interface includes a magnetic and/or electromagnetic coupling (para. [0125]; coupling via electromagnetic capture systems).
19. Regarding Claim 10, Heppe discloses the autonomous vehicle platform of claim 1, wherein the autonomous vehicle platform is a mobile relay station configured to receive and transmit the electromagnetic radiation between any two of: a land-based system, an air-based system, a water-based system and a space-based system (para. [0274]; with consideration of the long endurance airship system 210/260 being equipped with antennas, and antennas by definition being configured to receive and transmit electromagnetic radiations, the long durance airship system is by definition a mobile relay system that is structurally capable of receiving and transmitting electromagnetic radiation between land-based, air-based and water-based systems).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
20. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
21. Claim(s) 2-3, 7, 11 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heppe (US 2013/0037650 A1), in view of Feria et al. (US 2018/0166779 A1), hereinafter “Feria”.
22. Regarding Claim 2, Heppe discloses the autonomous vehicle platform of claim 1.
Heppe is silent regarding wherein the first antenna comprises: a plurality of active phased arrays for digital beamforming of the one or more bands; or a three-dimensional phased array for digital beamforming of the one or more bands.
Feria discloses an autonomous vehicle platform (Feria Abstract and para. [0023]; UAV 102 as seen in FIG. 1) wherein the first antenna comprises:
a plurality of active phased arrays for digital beamforming of the one or more bands (paras. [0024], [0026] and [0035]; phased array antennas 106 for digital beamforming of the one or more bands); or
a three-dimensional phased array for digital beamforming of the one or more bands (para. [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Heppe as taught by Feria such that the first antenna comprises: a plurality of active phased arrays for digital beamforming of the one or more bands; or a three-dimensional phased array for digital beamforming of the one or more bands in order to facilitate reliable, high-performance airborne communications in flight.
23. Regarding Claim 3, Heppe discloses the autonomous vehicle platform of claim 1, further comprising: a receiver for receiving the electromagnetic radiation in one or more bands (para. [0207]).
Heppe is silent regarding a plurality of receivers.
Feria discloses an autonomous vehicle platform (Feria Abstract and para. [0023]; UAV 102 as seen in FIG. 1) comprising a plurality of receivers for receiving the electromagnetic radiation in one or more bands (para. [0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Heppe as taught by Feria such that the autonomous vehicle platform further a plurality of receivers for receiving the electromagnetic radiation in one or more bands in order to improve the platform’s ability to find, identify and track signal sources during flight.
24. Regarding Claim 7, modified Heppe discloses (see Heppe) the autonomous vehicle platform of claim 3, further comprising:
a deployable structure having the first antenna disposed thereon (para. [0274]; tether 296 adapted to serve or support one or several antennas for radio communications, accordingly with consideration of the arrangement between airships 210/260 and tether 296, the antennas must be at least one of the airships 210/260, furthermore airships are by definition deployable).
25. Regarding Claim 11, modified Heppe discloses (see Heppe) the autonomous vehicle platform of claim 3, further comprising:
a deployable structure (airships 210/260 are by definition deployable structures).
Modified Heppe is silent regarding the deployable structure specifically having the plurality of receivers disposed thereon.
Feria discloses a deployable structure (Feria Abstract and para. [0023]; UAV 102 as seen in FIG. 1) comprising the plurality of receivers disposed thereon (paras. [0023]-[0024]; vehicle 102 includes the receivers, further vehicle 102 defined as an aircraft, airship, a ballon, an aircraft which are all by definition deployable).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of modified Heppe as taught by Feria such that a deployable structure having the plurality of receivers disposed thereon in order to enhance the ability of the platform to maintain communication links, perform precision localization and support high-bandwidth data collection.
26. Regarding Claim 24, modified Heppe discloses the autonomous vehicle platform of claim 7, further comprising a tether for connecting the autonomous vehicle platform to a ground station to transmit power and data to the autonomous vehicle platform (para. [0079]; umbilical 296 connected to airships 210/260 as seen in FIG. 2, accordingly umbilical 296 is structurally capable for connecting the long endurance airship system to a ground station to transmit power and data to the long endurance airship system).
27. Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heppe (US 2013/0037650 A1), in view of Choi et al. (US 2019/0068953 A1), hereinafter “Choi”.
28. Regarding Claim 22, Heppe discloses the autonomous vehicle platform of claim 1.
Heppe is silent regarding a deployment mesh system.
Choi discloses an autonomous vehicle platform (Choi Abstract) comprising in a deployment mesh system (para. [0094]; deployment net 112 and wires 116/118/120 as seen in FIG. 2f), the deployment mesh system comprising:
a deployable mesh structure for forming a scaffold to attach autonomous vehicles thereto (para. [0094]; deployment net 112 attached to UAVs 102, net 112 is structurally cable of forming a scaffold as seen FIG. 2f);
a plurality of autonomous vehicles (102) for deploying, position and holding the mesh structure in the atmosphere or in space (FIG. 2f); and
a power and data distribution interface integrated to the deployable mesh structure for transmitting power and data between the autonomous vehicles (para. [0101]; conductive wires 118 integrated to deployment net 112 are structurally cable of transmitting power and data between UAVs 102).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Heppe as taught by Choi such that in a deployment mesh system , the deployment mesh system comprising: a deployable mesh structure for forming a scaffold to attach autonomous vehicles thereto; a plurality of autonomous vehicles for deploying, positioning and holding the mesh structure in the atmosphere or in space; and a power and data distribution interface integrated to the deployable mesh structure for transmitting power and data between the autonomous vehicles in order to enhance the usability and capability of the autonomous vehicle platform, by enabling the platform to accommodate, transfer data and power a plurality of autonomous vehicles during flight.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record on the PTO-892 not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this or any earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Arfan Sinaki, whose telephone number is 571-272-7185. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 10:00 am to 6:00 pm 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, Joshua J. Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. The fax number for the organization to which 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.
/ARFAN Y. SINAKI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642