DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claims 1, 27, 57, 59 thru 68, 71 thru 73 and 75 thru 81 have been examined. Claims 2 thru 26, 28 thru 56, 58, 69, 70, 74 and 82 have been cancelled.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: The reference character D (page 14 line 28) is not in the drawings. 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. 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
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Page 11 line 25 states, “UAV system 100 example illustrated in FIG. 1A”, but Figure 1A does not include the reference character 100. The examiner suggests amending to read, “UAV system 100 (illustrated in Figures 2 thru 6E) example in FIG. 1A”.
Appropriate correction is required.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 16 line 20, there should be a ‘comma’ after the word ‘namely’ instead of a ‘period’.
Appropriate correction is required.
The use of the term BLUETOOTH (page 2 line 9, page 4 line 2, page 4 line 15, page 6 line 1, page 7 line 9, page 7 line 15, page 7 line 24, page 7 line 29, page 8 line 8, page 12 line 11, page 21 line 32, page 22 line 34, page 24 line 14, page 24 line 21, page 24 line 27, page 25 line 7, page 25 line 13, and page 26 line 22) (18 times), which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
The use of the term ZIGBEE (page 7 line 9, page 7 line 15, page 7 line 24, page 7 line 29, page 8 line 8, page 12 line 11, page 24 line 21, page 24 line 27, page 25 line 7, page 25 line 13, and page 26 line 22) (11 times), which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
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 (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.
Claim(s) 1 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by So et al Patent Application Publication Number 2015/0120126 A1.
Regarding claim 1 So et al disclose the claimed unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) system, a multi-aircraft lifting system (Figure 1), and the aircraft may be drones P[0088], comprising:
the claimed plurality of drones capable of communicating with each other to conduct a coordinated maneuver of a payload coupled to the plurality of drones, “Wireless communication media between the aircraft 11,12, payload 14 and pilot station 16 may include, for example, radio, satellite, Bluetooth, and laser. As shown in dotted lines, the communication unit 511 is in communication with the swarm avionics units 502 and the payload avionics 507. Similarly, the payload avionics unit 502 is in communication with the swarm avionics units 502. The received sensory data is processed in real-time by a processor 510, which then sends the situational data to a computer display and interface 509 for the pilot 508 to view. The pilot 508 uses the current position and velocity of the swarm 18 and payload 14 to determine the flight path of the payload.” (P[0044] and Figure 5), and “the drones can either physically attach themselves to the target and control the target's position and orientation through coordinated pulling or pushing” (P[0088] and Figures 1 thru 4),
the claimed plurality of drones including a first drone, the swarm of aircraft includes a first aircraft 11 (Figure 1), configured to:
the claimed detect a change in a payload characteristic of the payload, “Attached to the payload 14 is a payload avionics unit 507 that gathers sensory data about the location and orientation of the payload 14, and transmits the data to the pilot station 16 and the aircraft 11, 12.” P[0043], and “to adjust their pose during the application of the propulsive effort in order to correct the trajectory” P[0070], the correcting of the trajectory equates to the claimed detect a change in a payload characteristic because there is a change that has caused a need to change directions;
the claimed send or receive a communication that concerns an adjustment to be made to a drone characteristic of the first drone in response to the change in the payload characteristic, “for an n aircraft swarm 18, the swarm waypoint controller 803 will generate n desired aircraft states 911, which are then transmitted to each of the n corresponding flight controllers 804 residing on each aircraft's processor 609” P[0057], “controlling a plurality of vehicles to affect positioning of a common payload. The system comprises of multiple vehicles having positioners to change the location of the common payload, where the group of vehicles form a swarm that is controlled by a driver or pilot station. Each vehicle is autonomously stabilized and guided through a swarm electronics unit, which further includes sensor, communication, and processing hardware. At the driver or pilot station, a system or a person remotely enters payload destinations, which is processed and communicated to each vehicle. The method for controlling a multi-vehicle system includes inputting the desired location of the payload and determining a series of intermediary payload waypoints. Next, these payload waypoints are used by the swarm waypoint controller to generate individual waypoints for each vehicle. A controller for each vehicle moves the vehicle to these individual waypoints.” (abstract); and
the claimed adjust the drone characteristic in accordance with the communication, “The computed flight control commands are sent to the aircraft's flight system 503, which is an electrical interface to the aircraft's actuators 504.” P[0038], and “The flight control system 806 is responsible for the flight and stability of an individual aircraft. The flight control system 806 calculates the required actuation signals necessary for the plant model 805 to track the reference control signal provided by the swarm control system 803. The flight control system 806 is also responsible for tracking the reference signal within a specified tracking error and overshoot, as specified later in more detail. Achieving these flight control system specifications allows the aircraft actuators 504 to position the aircraft body 11, 12 at a safe distance from each other and at the proper locations to support the payload 14, as was determined by the swarm waypoint controller 803.” P[0054].
Regarding claim 27 So et al disclose the claimed method performed by a drone lift team comprising a plurality of drones ,a method for a plurality of a multi-aircraft lifting system (Figure 1, abstract), and the aircraft may be drones P[0088], the method comprising:
the claimed determining a current orientation of a payload, “Attached to the payload 14 is a payload avionics unit 507 that gathers sensory data about the location and orientation of the payload 14” P[0043];
the claimed identifying a target orientation for the payload, “The processor uses the control algorithms to compute swarm waypoint commands for each aircraft within the swarm in order to move the payload to the desired waypoint.” P[0044], and “The payload waypoint controller 802 also generates a path along which the payload 14 will travel from its current state to the desired payload state as determined by the pilot 508. The payload's path is formed by generating appropriate waypoints between the initial and final states, and calculates a path from the payload's initial state to the first waypoint.” P[0048];
the claimed first drone of the plurality of drones communicating with a second drone of the plurality of drones regarding at least one maneuver to be performed to change the current orientation of the payload, “the pilot station 16 receives data about the payload 14 and individual aircraft 11, 12 within the swarm 18 through the pilot station's communication unit 511” P[0044], “The pilot's commands are sent to the processor 510, which holds payload waypoint control algorithms and swarm waypoint control algorithms within the memory 512. The processor uses the control algorithms to compute swarm waypoint commands for each aircraft within the swarm in order to move the payload to the desired waypoint.” P[0044], and “This path is sent to the swarm waypoint controller 803, which coordinates the individual aircraft within the swarm 18 to obtain the desired payload state at time t.” P[0048],
the claimed at least one maneuver including one of a first maneuver by the first drone or a second maneuver by the second drone, “The processor uses the control algorithms to compute swarm waypoint commands for each aircraft within the swarm in order to move the payload to the desired waypoint.” P[0044], and “The overall function of the multi-aircraft control system is to stabilize and guide each aircraft, while determining the flight path for each aircraft such that the payload 14 moves from its initial position to a final position as commanded by the pilot 508.” P[0045];
the claimed first drone executing the first maneuver, “guide each aircraft while the payload 14 moves along the desired path” P[0053]; and
the claimed second drone executing the second maneuver, “guide each aircraft while the payload 14 moves along the desired path” P[0053]; wherein
the claimed after the first and second maneuvers, a modified orientation of the payload is the target orientation, “the payload 14 moves from its initial position to a final position as commanded by the pilot 508” P[0045].
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) 57, 59 thru 68, 72, 73 and 76 thru 81 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over So et al Patent Application Publication Number 2015/0120126 A1 in view of Jassowski et al Patent Application Publication Number 2019/0047698 A1.
Regarding claim 57 So et al teach the claimed unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) system for manipulating a payload, a multi-aircraft lifting system (Figure 1), and the aircraft may be drones P[0088], the UAV system comprising:
the claimed first drone capable of being attached to the payload, aircraft (drone) 11 is attached to payload 14 (Figure 1);
the claimed second drone capable of being attached to the payload, aircraft (drone) 12 is attached to payload 14 (Figure 1), and the claimed configured to communicate with the first drone to conduct coordinated operation to manipulate the payload, “the pilot station 16 receives data about the payload 14 and individual aircraft 11, 12 within the swarm 18 through the pilot station's communication unit 511” P[0044], “The pilot's commands are sent to the processor 510, which holds payload waypoint control algorithms and swarm waypoint control algorithms within the memory 512. The processor uses the control algorithms to compute swarm waypoint commands for each aircraft within the swarm in order to move the payload to the desired waypoint.” P[0044], and “This path is sent to the swarm waypoint controller 803, which coordinates the individual aircraft within the swarm 18 to obtain the desired payload state at time t.” P[0048];
the claimed third drone capable of being attached to the payload, aircraft (drone) 13 is attached to payload 14 (Figure 1), and the claimed configured to communicate with the first and second drones, “the pilot station 16 receives data about the payload 14 and individual aircraft 11, 12 within the swarm 18 through the pilot station's communication unit 511” P[0044], “The pilot's commands are sent to the processor 510, which holds payload waypoint control algorithms and swarm waypoint control algorithms within the memory 512. The processor uses the control algorithms to compute swarm waypoint commands for each aircraft within the swarm in order to move the payload to the desired waypoint.” P[0044], and “This path is sent to the swarm waypoint controller 803, which coordinates the individual aircraft within the swarm 18 to obtain the desired payload state at time t.” P[0048].
So et al do not teach the claimed third drone is configured to determine that the third drone will replace the first drone during the coordinated operations to manipulate the payload, the claimed third drone attaches to the payload at a selected attachment point, the claimed first drone determines that the third drone is attached to the payload, and the claimed first drone detaches from the payload.
Jassowski et al teach,
the claimed third drone is configured to determine that the third drone will replace the first drone during the coordinated operations to manipulate the payload, “The spare drone 114 may attach to the support component 110.” (P[0030] and Figure 1), and “spare drone 114 may be added to the system 100 in response to a failure of one of the drones 102-108” P[0031],
the claimed third drone attaches to the payload at a selected attachment point, “the spare drone 114 is attached to the support component 110” P[0031],
the claimed first drone determines that the third drone is attached to the payload and the claimed first drone detaches from the payload, “Once the spare drone 114 is attached to the support component 110, the failed drone may be removed from the support component 110 (e.g., the drones 102-108 and 114 may shift to allow the failed drone to detach).” P[0031], and “IMUS 118 may communicate the orientation and provide feedback to a parent drone 102, or to child drones (e.g., 104-108). The IMU may communicate with a drone (e.g., 102-108) via wireless connection, such as Bluetooth, IEEE 802.11 (Wi-Fi), or a custom RF link.” P[0025].
The attaching and detaching of the drones of Jassowski et al would be used in So et al to replace aircraft/drones as needed (failures, power depletion). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 59 So et al teach the claimed selected attachment point differs from an attachment point used by the first drone, “Three aircraft 11, 12, 13 are attached to the payload 14 using various lengths of tethers, such that each aircraft has different elevation relative to each other.” P[0051], and aircraft/drone 11, 12, 13 are connected to the payload 14 at different locations (Figure 12).
Regarding claims 60 So et al do not teach the claimed determine that the third drone will replace the first drone based on a communication received from the first drone. Jassowski et al teach, “The IMU may communicate with one of the drones 102-108 at a given time as a parent drone (e.g., the IMU may select a parent drone with each communication or may select a drone as the parent drone until that drone is replaced in the system 100). In another example, the parent drone 102 may relay information to the IMU (e.g., a desired tilt angle for carrying a particular package).” P[0033], and “the spare drone 114 may be added to the system 100 in response to a low battery of one of the drones 102-108. When a drone has a low battery, the spare drone 114 may be sent to be added to the system 100. The low battery drone may detach from the support component 110 before the spare drone 114 is added if there is sufficient cargo carrying capacity redundancy among the remaining drones or after the spare drone 114 is added if not (or for the sake of redundancy). If the low battery drone was the parent drone 102, a new parent drone may be selected, either from the child drones 104-108 or the spare drone 114.” P[0032].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations when a drone has a low battery condition of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 61 So et al do not teach the claimed communication concerns a power level of the first drone. Jassowski et al teach, “the spare drone 114 may be added to the system 100 in response to a low battery of one of the drones 102-108. When a drone has a low battery, the spare drone 114 may be sent to be added to the system 100.” P[0032]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations when a drone has a low battery condition of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 62 So et al do not teach the claimed determine that the third drone will replace the first drone based on an observation of a characteristic of the first drone or the second drone or the payload. Jassowski et al teach, “the spare drone 114 may be added to the system 100 in response to a low battery of one of the drones 102-108. When a drone has a low battery, the spare drone 114 may be sent to be added to the system 100.” P[0032]. The claimed observation of a characteristic of the first drone equates to an indication of a low battery in one of the drones. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations when a drone has a low battery condition of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 63 So et al do not teach the claimed characteristic is one or altitude, attitude or orientation. Jassowski et al teach, “spare drone 114 may be added to the system 100 in response to a failure of one of the drones 102-108” P[0031], and “If the drone that fails cannot move, it may be deadweight and additional spare drones may be added to the system to compensate for the weight.” P[0031]. If a drone fails to the point where it cannot move (fly), it would be unable to maintain altitude, attitude or orientation. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that other failures of the drone could include faults that would cause inability to maintain altitude (low power output), attitude (gyro failure), or orientation (compass failure). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations when a drone has a failure condition of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 64 So et al teach the claimed third drone uses an on-board optical system to make the observation, “Each vehicle has a control system consisting of…vehicle sensors (e.g. radar, LIDAR, cameras, GPS, RFID scanners, etc.).” P[0080]. So et al do not explicitly teach the claimed optical system make the observation, but the vehicle sensors would be available to provide the information (failures) regarding the aircraft/drones. Jassowski et al teach, “drones in a networked drone system may include a camera, such as a camera on each drone in the networked drone system. The camera or cameras may be used to measure a distance between two drones in the networked drone system.” P[0023]. The distance between drones equates to the claimed observation (such as, of an orientation failure). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations when a drone has a failure condition and using cameras on the drones of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 65 So et al do not teach the claimed determine that the third drone will replace the first drone based on a communication received from the second drone. Jassowski et al teach, “the IMU may communicate with any of the drones in the networked drone system” P[0022], “The IMU may communicate with one of the drones 102-108 at a given time as a parent drone (e.g., the IMU may select a parent drone with each communication or may select a drone as the parent drone until that drone is replaced in the system 100). In another example, the parent drone 102 may relay information to the IMU (e.g., a desired tilt angle for carrying a particular package).” P[0033], and “the spare drone 114 may be added to the system 100 in response to a low battery of one of the drones 102-108. When a drone has a low battery, the spare drone 114 may be sent to be added to the system 100. The low battery drone may detach from the support component 110 before the spare drone 114 is added if there is sufficient cargo carrying capacity redundancy among the remaining drones or after the spare drone 114 is added if not (or for the sake of redundancy). If the low battery drone was the parent drone 102, a new parent drone may be selected, either from the child drones 104-108 or the spare drone 114.” P[0032].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations when a drone has a low battery condition of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 66 So et al do not explicitly teach the claimed communication received from the second drone includes an indication of an observation made by the second drone, but the pilot station 16 receives data about the payload 14 and individual aircraft 11, 12 within the swarm 18 P[0044]. Jassowski et al teach, “the spare drone 114 may be added to the system 100 in response to a low battery of one of the drones 102-108. When a drone has a low battery, the spare drone 114 may be sent to be added to the system 100.” P[0032]. The claimed observation second drone equates to an indication of a low battery in one of the drones. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations when a drone has a low battery condition of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 67 So et al teach the claimed observation made by the second drone comprises a detected change in a position of the second drone relative to the payload, “Within each aircraft 11, 12 there is a swarm avionics unit 502 that gathers sensory and flight data to determine flight control commands. The computed flight control commands are sent to the aircraft's flight system 503, which is an electrical interface to the aircraft's actuators 504.” P[0038], “The swarm waypoint controller 803 uses the previously generated payload path to determine the relative orientations and positions for all of the individual aircraft. Turning to FIG. 10, a positioning configuration for four aircraft, by way of example, is shown. The positions on each aircraft 11, 12, 41, 42, relative to the payload 14, is determined by two constants. The first constant is the height difference H between the payload 14 and the swarm plane 101, and second constant is the radius R between each aircraft 11, 12, 41, 42 to the center of the swarm plane 101.” (P[0049] and Figure 10), “the swarm waypoint controller 803 ensures that each aircraft 11, 12 maintains a relative position to each other and the payload 14” (P[0050] and Figure 11), and “Each drone is modeled as a vehicle with actuators, such as propeller, jet, or fin control, or combinations thereof, which can adjust the position and orientation of each drone. The drones can then physically attach themselves to a common payload and work together to move the common payload.” P[0085].
Regarding claim 68 So et al do not teach the claimed observations made by the second drone comprises a detected change of altitude, attitude or orientation of the first drone, the second drone or the payload. Jassowski et al teach, “spare drone 114 may be added to the system 100 in response to a failure of one of the drones 102-108” P[0031], and “If the drone that fails cannot move, it may be deadweight and additional spare drones may be added to the system to compensate for the weight.” P[0031]. If a drone fails to the point where it cannot move (fly), it would be unable to maintain altitude, attitude or orientation. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that other failures of the drone could include faults that would cause inability to maintain altitude (low power output), attitude (gyro failure), or orientation (compass failure), these are changes from the normal operation of the drone (claimed detected change). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations when a drone has a failure condition of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 72 So et al teach the claimed command center, “The pilot station 16 may be located in a ground base 17 for remote operation.” (P[0035] and Figure 1). So et al do not teach the claimed third drone determines that the third drone will replace the first drone based on a communication received from the command center, Jassowski et al teach, “The control system may be onboard support platform 905 or may be remotely located and communicate with system 900 wirelessly.” P[0047], the remotely located control system equates to the claimed command center. Jassowski et al further teach the claimed third drone determines that the third drone will replace the first drone based on a communication received from the command center, “When the parent drone 1404 leaves, the plurality of drones 1402, one of the at least one child drones 1406 may take over as the parent drone 1404. When a replacement drone 1408 is added to the plurality of drones 1402 and the parent drone 1404 leaves, the replacement drone 1408 or one of the at least one child drones 1406 may take over as a parent drone. The new parent drone may be controllable by the remote control device.” P[0054]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations based on remote control operations of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 73 So et al do not teach the claimed first drone determines that the third drone is attached to the payload based on a signal received from the second or third drone. Jassowski et al teach, “IMUS 118 may communicate the orientation and provide feedback to a parent drone 102, or to child drones (e.g., 104-108). The IMU may communicate with a drone (e.g., 102-108) via wireless connection, such as Bluetooth, IEEE 802.11 (Wi-Fi), or a custom RF link.” P[0025], “the IMU 1412 may transmit the support platform balance information to only the parent drone 1404, the parent drone 1404 to communicate the support platform balance information to remaining drones in the plurality of drones 1402 (e.g., the at least one child drone 1406)” P[0055], and “Once the spare drone 114 is attached to the support component 110, the failed drone may be removed from the support component 110 (e.g., the drones 102-108 and 114 may shift to allow the failed drone to detach).” P[0031]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations using network drone communication of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 76 So et al do not teach the claimed first drone determines that the third drone is attached to the payload by detecting a presence of the third drone. Jassowski et al teach, “drones in a networked drone system may include a camera, such as a camera on each drone in the networked drone system. The camera or cameras may be used to measure a distance between two drones in the networked drone system. For example, neighboring drones may use a camera to detect a distance between the drones and the drones may be controlled to maintain a predetermined distance (e.g., change the distance to the predetermined distance).” P[0023], and “Once the spare drone 114 is attached to the support component 110, the failed drone may be removed from the support component 110 (e.g., the drones 102-108 and 114 may shift to allow the failed drone to detach). After the failed drone detaches, the remaining drones, including the spare drone 114 may be rearranged for efficient control of the support component 110.” P[0031], the cameras determine the distances between the drones, and detects the claimed presence of any of the drones. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with detecting of drones that are the attaching and detaching from payload lift operations of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 77 So et al teach the claimed first drone uses an on-board optical, “Each vehicle has a control system consisting of…vehicle sensors (e.g. radar, LIDAR, cameras, GPS, RFID scanners, etc.).” P[0080]. So et al do not teach the claimed first drone detect the presence of the third drone using the on-board optical system. Jassowski et al teach, “drones in a networked drone system may include a camera, such as a camera on each drone in the networked drone system. The camera or cameras may be used to measure a distance between two drones in the networked drone system. For example, neighboring drones may use a camera to detect a distance between the drones and the drones may be controlled to maintain a predetermined distance (e.g., change the distance to the predetermined distance).” P[0023]. The claimed detecting the presence equates to the cameras detecting distance between the drones. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations including detecting distances between drones of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 78 So et al teach the claimed command center, “The pilot station 16 may be located in a ground base 17 for remote operation.” (P[0035] and Figure 1). So et al do not teach the claimed first drone determines that the third drone is attached based on a communication received from the command center, Jassowski et al teach, “The control system may be onboard support platform 905 or may be remotely located and communicate with system 900 wirelessly.” P[0047], the remotely located control system equates to the claimed command center. Jassowski et al further teach the claimed first drone determines that the third drone is attached based on a communication received from the command center, “When the parent drone 1404 leaves, the plurality of drones 1402, one of the at least one child drones 1406 may take over as the parent drone 1404. When a replacement drone 1408 is added to the plurality of drones 1402 and the parent drone 1404 leaves, the replacement drone 1408 or one of the at least one child drones 1406 may take over as a parent drone. The new parent drone may be controllable by the remote control device.” P[0054]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations based on remote control operations of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 79 So et al do not teach the claimed first drone navigates to a base after detaching from the payload. Jassowski et al teach, “The drone with the low battery may be configured to return to a recharging station after being removed from the networked drone system 1400.” P[0057]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations and return the drone to the station of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 80 So et al do not teach the claimed third drones uses first flight settings after attaching to the payload, and the claimed third drone uses second flight settings after the first drone has detached from the payload. Jassowski et al teach,
the claimed third drones uses first flight settings after attaching to the payload, “When a drone fails, spare drone 114 may be added to the system 100 and the remaining functional drones may be shifted for efficient control of support component 110. If the drone that fails cannot move, it may be deadweight and additional spare drones may be added to the system to compensate for the weight.” P[0031], and “When support component 110 is at a pitch angle relative to a horizontal, the drones (102, 104, 106 and 108) may adjust to compensate and force the support component 110 back to a horizontal pitch. For example, support component 110 is at a pitch angle in FIG. 1. Drone (e.g., child drone) 106 may move downward to decrease upward lift from the child drone 106 and the parent drone 102 may move upward to increase upward lift from the parent drone 102. These movements may force the support component 110 hack to a level pitch angle.” P[0026]; and
the claimed third drone uses second flight settings after the first drone has detached from the payload, “After the failed drone detaches, the remaining drones, including the spare drone 114 may be rearranged for efficient control of the support component 110.” P[0031].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations for efficient control of the payload of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Regarding claim 81 So et al do not teach the claimed first and second flight settings include different thrust levels or different thrust directions, but do teach that the vehicles adjust their pose during the application of the propulsive effort in order to correct the trajectory P[0070]. This adjustment would be provided for any time that the payload transport needs to be stabilized or corrected. Jassowski et al teach, “motion control for system 100 may be implemented by applying thrust vectors to each drone to change the roll or pith of the overall platform” P[0027], thrust vectors include both thrust levels and thrust directions, “When support component 110 is at a pitch angle relative to a horizontal, the drones (102, 104, 106 and 108) may adjust to compensate and force the support component 110 back to a horizontal pitch.” P[0026], and “The plurality of drones 1402 may compensate for changes in the yaw, the pitch, or the roll of the support platform 1410 using a control system, the control system to separately control each drone in the plurality of drones 1402.” P[0055]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al with the adjusting thrust vectors of drones for payload lift operations of Jassowski et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, extend range of the networked drone system (Jassowski et al P[0024]).
Claim(s) 71 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over So et al Patent Application Publication Number 2015/0120126 A1 and Jassowski et al Patent Application Publication Number 2019/0047698 A1 as applied to claims 57 and 65 above, and further in view of Trowbridge et al Patent Application Publication Number 2014/0231590 A1.
Regarding claim 71 So et al and Jassowski et al do not teach the claimed second drone sends the communication to the third drone after detecting a loss of communication with the first drone. The loss of communication can typically trigger different responses by the system, such as landing the drones, stopping motion (hover mode), or continue along the programmed path. Trowbridge et al teach, coordinated control of UAVs P[0072], and “The status of these communication channels is monitored by the local control module, and, when either communication channel is detected to be lost (e.g., an expected receipt confirmation from the GCS is not received to a transmission of a telemetry data by a UAV), the local control module may react to this loss of communication by entering a safe operating mode (e.g., land, return to home, hold position, or the like).” P[0066]. The loss of communication would cause the UAVs to land, return home, or hold position, in such a case, these actions would be communicated to each of the UAVs in the group. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the multi-aircraft lifting system of So et al and the attaching and detaching of drones from payload lift operations when a drone has a low battery condition of Jassowski et al with the landing, hovering or return operations when there is a loss of communication of Trowbridge et al in order to, with a reasonable expectation of success, ensure safe operations of the UAVs (Trowbridge et al P[0066]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 75 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The reasons for indicating allowable subject matter over the prior art of record is based on the combined limitations of claims 57 and 75. The closest prior art is the combination of So et al Patent Application Publication Number 2015/0120126 A1 and Jassowski et al Patent Application Publication Number 2019/0047698 A1.
So et al disclose a system and method for controlling a plurality of vehicles to affect positioning of a common payload. The system comprises of multiple vehicles having positioners to change the location of the common payload, where the group of vehicles form a swarm that is controlled by a driver or pilot station. Each vehicle is autonomously stabilized and guided through a swarm electronics unit, which further includes sensor, communication, and processing hardware. At the driver or pilot station, a system or a person remotely enters payload destinations, which is processed and communicated to each vehicle. The method for controlling a multi-vehicle system includes inputting the desired location of the payload and determining a series of intermediary payload waypoints. Next, these payload waypoints are used by the swarm waypoint controller to generate individual waypoints for each vehicle. A controller for each vehicle moves the vehicle to these individual waypoints.
Jassowski et al disclose methods, systems and apparatus for networked drone systems. In the networked drone system, a plurality of smaller drones are attached to a fixed platform to increase delivery payload, distance, reliability and safety. As a drone nears charge depletion, it is replaced in-flight with a new drone. The networked drone system need not be grounded to replace the depleted drone. Flight efficiency is increased by providing collapsible wings to the networked drone system.
In regards to claims 57 and 75, So et al and Jassowski et al taken individually, in combination, or in combination with other prior art fails to teach or render obvious an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) system for manipulating a payload, The UAV system including a first drone capable of being attached to the payload, a second drone capable of being attached to the payload and configured to communicate with the first drone to conduct a coordinated operation to manipulate the payload, and a third drone capable of being attached to the payload and configured to communicate with the first drone and the second drone. The third drone is configured to determine that the third drone will replace the first drone during the coordinated operation to manipulate the payload, and in response to determining that the third drone will replace the first drone during the coordinated operation to manipulate the payload, attach to the payload at a selected attachment point. The first drone is configured to determine that the third drone is attached to the payload, and in response to determining that the third drone is attached to the payload, detach from the payload. The first drone is further configured to determine that the third drone is attached to the payload based at least in part on a detected change in a proportion of a weight of the payload being supported by the first drone.
Related Art
The examiner points to Yuksel et al European Patent Number EP 3772460 B1 as related art, but not relied upon for any rejection. Yuksel et al is directed to multiple UAVs performing load motion operations (see Figures 1 thru 9).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DALE W HILGENDORF whose telephone number is (571)272-9635. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9-5:30.
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.
/DALE W HILGENDORF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3662