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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US11623738B1. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art;
To modify/remove some statements to make the claims broader,
To modify some statements to make the claim language perfection,
could make the claims broader, but does not make patentable distinct from the parent patent claims.
A claim comparison of the parent patent and instant application clearly shows that there is no new or improved elements other than some of the patentably indistinct variations.
See below table for claim elements comparison:
Instant App. No.: 18/745, 352
(Pub. No.: US20240414166A1)
Parent App. No.: 17/524,901
(Patent No.: US11623738B1)
(Currently Amended) A system comprising:
1. A system for the prioritization of flight controls in an electric aircraft, the system comprising:
a flight component configured at an electric aircraft;
a plurality of flight components coupled to the electric aircraft;
a sensor configured at the flight component; and
a sensor, which includes a three-dimensional scanner, coupled to each flight component of the plurality of flight components, wherein each sensor is configured to:
detect a failure event of a flight component of the plurality of flight components; and
generate a failure datum associated to the flight component of the plurality of flight components and
a computing device configured to perform operations comprising:
a computing device communicatively connected to the sensor, wherein the computing device is configured to:
receiving, from the sensor, an indication of a failure event associated with the flight component;
receive the failure datum associated to the flight component of the plurality of flight components from the sensor;
determining, based at least in part on the failure event, a prioritization of the flight component; and
determine a prioritization element as a function of the failure datum associated with the failure event of the flight component of the plurality of flight components wherein determining the prioritization element further includes ranking at least a flight element of yaw with at least two other flight elements, wherein the at least a flight element of yaw has a highest priority;
display the failure datum and the prioritization element on a display device to provide a graphical representation of the failure datum and the prioritization element; and
restricting, based at least in part on the prioritization of the flight component, control of a flight element by a pilot
restrict at least a flight element as a function of the prioritization element, wherein restricting at least a flight element includes mitigating a pilot's capability of maneuvering the at least a flight element.
8. (New) A method, comprising: & 15. A flight controller configured at an electric aircraft, the flight controller comprising:
a processor; and a memory communicatively connected to the processor, the memory comprising instructions executable by the processor, wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the processor to perform operations comprising:
11. A method for the prioritization of flight controls in an electric aircraft, the method comprising:
coupling a plurality of flight components to the electric aircraft;
coupling a sensor, which includes a three-dimensional scanner, to each flight component of the plurality of flight components;
detecting, at the sensor, a failure event of a flight component of the plurality of flight components;
generating, at the sensor, a failure datum associated to the flight component of the plurality of flight components; and
communicatively connecting a computing device to the sensor;
receiving, at a computing device configured at an electric aircraft, an indication of a failure event associated with a flight component of the electric aircraft;
receiving, at the computing device, the failure datum associated to the flight component of the plurality of flight components from the sensor;
determining, at the computing device, based at least in part on the failure event, a prioritization of the flight component; and
determining, at the computing device, a prioritization element as a function of the failure datum associated with the failure event of the flight component of the plurality of flight components, wherein determining the prioritization element further includes ranking at least a flight element of yaw with at least two other flight elements, wherein the at least a flight element of yaw has a highest priority;
displaying, at the computing device, the failure datum and the prioritization element on a display device to provide a graphical representation of the failure datum and the prioritization element; and
restricting, at the computing device, based at least in part on the prioritization of the flight component, control of a flight element by a pilot.
restricting, at the computing device, at least a flight element as a function of the prioritization element, wherein restricting at least a flight element includes mitigating a pilot's capability of maneuvering the at least a flight element.
The instant claims recitations are obvious variation of the parent patent claims recitation in which both claims are represented by common drawings and are comingled in scope as mapped out above.
Regarding dependent claims 2-7, 9-14 & 16-20; these claims are substantial duplicates of the parent patent claims 2-10 & 12-20.
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 (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.
Claims 1-10, 12-17 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over , Kashawlic et al., Pub. No.: US 20210041895 A1., in view of Hehn et al., Pub. No.: US 20180237148 A1., further in view of Bethke et al., Pub. No.: US 20170285631 A1.
Regarding claims 1, 8 & 15; Kashawlic et al. discloses a system & a method & (claim 15 only) a flight controller configured at an electric aircraft, the flight controller comprising: a processor; and a memory communicatively connected to the processor ([0049] “processor”, “memory”), the memory comprising instructions executable by the processor, wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the processor to perform operations comprising:
a flight component configured at an electric aircraft ([0052] “a power distribution bus of the aircraft 100 provides and/or otherwise delivers power to one or more components, such as the rotor 144, the motor 146, the sensor 148, and/or, more generally the rotor assemblies 102-124 of FIG. 1A based on the power distribution configuration 360”);
a sensor configured at the flight component ([0035] The controller 150 of FIG. 1A obtains measurements (e.g., sensor measurements) associated with the rotor assemblies 102-124 from the sensor 148.” & [0054] “FIG. 3, the vertical limit controller 210 includes the sensor interface 320 to collect and/or otherwise obtain measurements ... the sensor interface 320 obtains measurements associated with the rotor assemblies 102-124 of FIGS. 1A-1B. … the sensor interface 320 may obtain an electrical current and/or voltage measurement of the motor 146, a speed measurement of the rotor 144, etc., from the sensor 148 of FIG. 1A. … the sensor interface 320 may obtain a measurement from a sensor monitoring any other component and/or characteristic associated with the aircraft 100. For example, the sensor interface 320 may obtain a temperature associated with the power sources 152, 154 from the power source sensors 156, 158.”); and
a computing device configured to perform operations ([0034] “FIG. 1A, the aircraft 100 includes an example controller (e.g., a flight controller, a flight control computing device, etc.) 150 to control and/or otherwise facilitate operation (e.g., flight operation) of the aircraft 100.); comprising:
Kashawlic et al. is not explicit on “sensor that indicates of a failure event”. However, Hehn et al., US 20180237148 A1, teaches AN AERIAL VEHICLE and discloses,
receiving, from the sensor, an indication of a failure event associated with the flight component ([0131] “the aerial vehicle may further comprise one or more sensors, which may be structured and arranged to (a) provide data representative of a subsystem's component (e.g., an effector, a power source), or (b) provide data representative of the motion of one or more subsystems, or (c) provide data representative of the motion of the redundant aerial vehicle. A sensor may generate one or multiple sensor signals.” & [0132] Interoceptive sensors sense an internal quantity of a system. Examples include, a heat sensor sensing the temperature of a motor controller and a current sensor detecting the electric current in a wire. This type of sensor can be particularly useful to detect failures.”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use these above mentioned features disclosed by Hehn et al. with the system disclosed by Kashawlic et al. to provide an aerial vehicle that comprises at least two subsystems, each of which can be selectively used to fly the aerial vehicle independently of the other subsystem in order for improving or simplifying the design of existing aerial vehicles (see Abstract and para. [0001]).
Kashawlic et al. in view of Hehn et al. is not explicit on “determining, based at least in part on the failure event, a prioritization of the flight component”. However, Bethke et al., US 20170285631 A1, teaches UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE MODULAR COMMAND PRIORITY DETERMINATION AND FILTERING SYSTEM and discloses;
determining, based at least in part on the failure event, a prioritization of the flight component (( [0017] Among other features, this specification describes systems and methods for prioritizing control sources vying for command and control of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) implementing a flight plan. The UAV ensures that a single control source is in control of the UAV at any given time based on a prioritization of each control source. ... By actively determining which control source is to be in control of the UAV, the UAV can ensure that a resulting flight plan is implemented safely, and for example, if a problem with the flight plan is determined, a contingency handler can execute and handle the determined problem, before implementation of the flight plan is resumed. & [0020] “In some implementations, each control source can have a different priority, such that a highest priority control source can always be identified.”. & [0035] In some implementations, modular flight commands can include one or more of the following commands, with a non-exhaustive list including:...[0040] ATTITUDE_AIRSPEED: fly at a specified attitude (pitch, roll, heading) and airspeed. [0041] VELOCITY_NED: fly at a specified 3-dimensional velocity given in a fixed coordinate frame (e.g., Earth).” & [0075] “ the source determination system 200 can determine that a different modular flight command associated with the UAV 202 rotating about the roll axis (e.g., leaning to the left or right), or rotating about the yaw axis, can be safely implemented in parallel.” & [0082] “The source priority engine 310 utilizes the priority information to enable a requesting control source with a highest priority to assume control of the UAV 202.” & [0086] “The modular flight commands from the lower prioritized control source may also have a time limit to be performed.”. & [0100] “An additional example includes the UAV identifying a failure of a module, such as a camera, sensor, and so on.” & [0102] “That is, the first control source can select (e.g., based on ranking information of waypoints) the threshold number of waypoints and provide location information associated with each waypoint to the second control source for verification.” & [0114] The flight control module (also referred to as flight control engine) 722 handles flight control operations of the UAV. The module interacts with one or more controllers 740 that control operation of motors 742 and/or actuators 744. For example, the motors may be used for rotation of propellers, and the actuators may be used for flight surface control such as ailerons, rudders, flaps, landing gear, and parachute deployment. In one embodiment, the flight control module 722 also may perform the function of the source determination system. Alternatively, the application module 726 may perform the function of the source determination system.); and
restricting, based at least in part on the prioritization of the flight component, control of a flight element by a pilot ([0063] “the contingency handler can determine unsafe flight conditions, and assume control of the UAV 202 to provide correct maneuvers to restore the UAV 202 to safe flight conditions.” &[0088] “the engine 320 can restrict control sources from implementing modular flight commands that do not meet defined operational conditions (e.g., user-defined conditions)” & [0109] “a modular flight command that has the highest priority information to be in control of the UAV. ... The modular flight command can also be filtered based on determining that the UAV has entered a particular mode which restricts modular flight commands (e.g., types of commands), or restricts control sources, that can be implemented. & [0113] “the UAV primary processing system 700 may use various sensors to determine the vehicle's current geo-spatial location, attitude, altitude, velocity, direction, pitch, roll, yaw and/or airspeed and to pilot the vehicle along a specified route and/or to a specified location and/or to control the vehicle's attitude, velocity, altitude, and/or airspeed (optionally even when not navigating the vehicle along a specific path or to a specific location & [0114] “The module interacts with one or more controllers 740 that control operation of motors 742 and/or actuators 744. For example, the motors may be used for rotation of propellers, and the actuators may be used for flight surface control such as ailerons, rudders, flaps, landing gear, and parachute deployment. In one embodiment, the flight control module 722 also may perform the function of the source determination system.” & [0115] “The mission module 729 works in conjunction with the flight control module. For example, the mission module may send information concerning the flight plan to the flight control module, for example lat/long waypoints, altitude, flight velocity, so that the flight control module can autopilot the UAV. In one embodiment, the mission module 729 may perform as the first control source.”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use these above mentioned features disclosed by Bethke et al. with the system disclosed by Kashawlic et al. in order for prioritizing control sources vying for command and control of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) implementing a flight plan. The UAV ensures that a single control source is in control of the UAV at any given time based on a prioritization of each control source. By actively determining which control source is to be in control of the UAV, the UAV can ensure that a resulting flight plan is implemented safely, and for example, if a problem with the flight plan is determined, a contingency handler can execute and handle the determined problem, before implementation of the flight plan is resumed (see Abstract and para.[0017]).
Regarding claim 2, Kashawlic et al. discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the flight element comprises one or more of: a torque of the flight component, a thrust of the flight component, an airspeed velocity of the electric aircraft, a groundspeed velocity of the electric aircraft, an altitude of the electric aircraft, a direction of the electric aircraft, an orientation of the electric aircraft, a yaw of the electric aircraft, a roll of the electric aircraft, a heave of the electric aircraft, or a pitch of the electric aircraft ([0018]-[0020], [0032]-[0034] & [0041]-[0044] “VTOL aircraft may execute attitude control by adjusting a rotation speed and/or an orientation of one or more rotors to control an orientation of the VTOL aircraft with respect to an inertial frame of reference.”, “rotor thrust”, “the controller 150 controls a pitch, roll, and/or yaw of the aircraft 100 via differential rotor thrust” ,”vertical control to increase or decrease altitude”, “eliminate the roll error” & [0049] “FIG. 2, one or more of the elements, processes, and/or devices illustrated in FIG. 2 may be combined, divided, re-arranged, omitted, eliminated, and/or implemented in any other way”).
Regarding claims 3, 6-7, 12, 14 & 16-17, Kashawlic et al. discloses the system of claim 1 & the method of claim 8 & the flight controller of claim 15,
Kashawlic et al. is not explicit on “determining the prioritization of the flight component comprises ranking, based at least in part on the failure event” &“restricting/limiting control of the flight element/component by the pilot”. However, Bethke et al., US 20170285631 A1, teaches UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE MODULAR COMMAND PRIORITY DETERMINATION AND FILTERING SYSTEM and discloses;
(claim 3 & 17) wherein determining the prioritization of the flight component comprises ranking, based at least in part on the failure event, the flight component among a plurality of flight components configured at the electric aircraft ([0017] “The UAV ensures that a single control source is in control of the UAV at any given time based on a prioritization of each control source.” & [0020] “In some implementations, each control source can have a different priority, such that a highest priority control source can always be identified.”. & [0035] - [0041] & [0075] & [0082] “The source priority engine 310 utilizes the priority information to enable a requesting control source with a highest priority to assume control of the UAV 202.” & [0086] “while the UAV is acting upon modular flight commands of a certain priority, other commands from other control sources may be queued, and may be acted upon after the commands from the prioritized control source have been completed. The modular flight commands from the lower prioritized control source may also have a time limit to be performed.”. & [0100] “UAV identifying a failure of a module, such as a camera, sensor, and so on.” & [0102] “That is, the first control source can select (e.g., based on ranking information of waypoints)” & [0114] The flight control module (also referred to as flight control engine) 722 handles flight control operations of the UAV. The module interacts with one or more controllers 740 that control operation of motors 742 and/or actuators 744. For example, the motors may be used for rotation of propellers, and the actuators may be used for flight surface control such as ailerons, rudders, flaps, landing gear, and parachute deployment.).
(claim 6) wherein restricting control of the flight element comprises preventing control of the flight component by the pilot or limiting control of the flight component by the pilot.
(claims 7 & 12) wherein restricting control of the flight element comprises: receiving a pilot signal from a pilot control; and restricting control of the flight element further based at least in part on the pilot signal.
(claim 14) wherein restricting control of the flight element comprises restricting control of one or more of a plurality of flight components by the pilot, the plurality of flight components comprising the flight component.
(claim 16) wherein restricting control of the flight element comprises: receiving a pilot signal from a pilot control; and transmit, to the flight component, based at least in part on the pilot signal and the prioritization of the flight component, instructions to control one or more of a plurality of flight components, the plurality of flight components comprising the flight component.
([0063] “the contingency handler can determine unsafe flight conditions, and assume control of the UAV 202 to provide correct maneuvers to restore the UAV 202 to safe flight conditions.” &[0088] “the engine 320 can restrict control sources from implementing modular flight commands that do not meet defined operational conditions (e.g., user-defined conditions), and therefore control sources that are third-party generated applications can be reined in, and modular flight commands blocked that do not meet the conditions (e.g., altitude, location, speed, and so on). & [0109] “the system selects a control source that is providing a modular flight command that has the highest priority information to be in control of the UAV. After determining a modular flight command to be implemented, the system determines whether modular flight command can be performed. ... The modular flight command can also be filtered based on determining that the UAV has entered a particular mode which restricts modular flight commands (e.g., types of commands), or restricts control sources, that can be implemented. & [0113] Various sensors, devices, firmware and other systems may be interconnected to support multiple functions and operations of the UAV. For example, the UAV primary processing system 700 may use various sensors to determine the vehicle's current geo-spatial location, attitude, altitude, velocity, direction, pitch, roll, yaw and/or airspeed and to pilot the vehicle along a specified route and/or to a specified location and/or to control the vehicle's attitude, velocity, altitude, and/or airspeed (optionally even when not navigating the vehicle along a specific path or to a specific location & [0114] “The module interacts with one or more controllers 740 that control operation of motors 742 and/or actuators 744. For example, the motors may be used for rotation of propellers, and the actuators may be used for flight surface control such as ailerons, rudders, flaps, landing gear, and parachute deployment. In one embodiment, the flight control module 722 also may perform the function of the source determination system.” & [0115] “The mission module 729 works in conjunction with the flight control module. For example, the mission module may send information concerning the flight plan to the flight control module, for example lat/long waypoints, altitude, flight velocity, so that the flight control module can autopilot the UAV. In one embodiment, the mission module 729 may perform as the first control source.”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use these above mentioned features disclosed by Bethke et al. with the system disclosed by Kashawlic et al. in order for prioritizing control sources vying for command and control of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) implementing a flight plan. The UAV ensures that a single control source is in control of the UAV at any given time based on a prioritization of each control source. By actively determining which control source is to be in control of the UAV, the UAV can ensure that a resulting flight plan is implemented safely, and for example, if a problem with the flight plan is determined, a contingency handler can execute and handle the determined problem, before implementation of the flight plan is resumed (see Abstract and para.[0017]).
Regarding claims 4-5, Kashawlic et al. discloses the system of claim 1,
(claim 4) wherein determining the prioritization of the flight component is further based at least in part on the flight element,
(claim 5) wherein determining the prioritization of the flight component based at least in part on the flight element comprises determining the prioritization of the flight component further based at least in part on a ranking of the flight element among a plurality of flight elements,
([0019] During an emergency condition, a VTOL aircraft may need to prioritize attitude control over vertical control. For example, an electric VTOL aircraft may be operating on reduced power (e.g., one or more batteries are running low or in a reduced power state) and may not be able to provide a maximum power input (e.g., compared to when the one or more batteries are fully or substantially fully charged) to motors operatively coupled to the rotors to execute both maximum attitude control and maximum vertical control. In such examples, the electric VTOL aircraft may need to prioritize attitude control to ensure that the electric VTOL aircraft is in an orientation relative to a ground surface to facilitate landing on the ground surface using landing gear of the electric VTOL aircraft. Alternatively, by prioritizing vertical control over attitude control, the electric VTOL aircraft may not touch down using the landing gear causing damage to the electric VTOL aircraft. & [0034] In the illustrated example of FIG. 1A, the aircraft 100 includes an example controller (e.g., a flight controller, a flight control computing device, etc.) 150 to control and/or otherwise facilitate operation (e.g., flight operation) of the aircraft 100. The controller 150 controls a pitch, roll, and/or yaw of the aircraft 100 via differential rotor thrust (e.g., a differential rotor thrust flight control method, a flight control method based on differential rotor thrust vectors, etc.). In other examples, the controller 150 can control the pitch, roll, and/or yaw of the aircraft 100 via any other flight control method or schema.).
Regarding claims 9-10, Kashawlic et al. discloses the method of claim 8,
(claim 9) wherein the failure event comprises a failure of the flight component to produce output of at least a threshold output,
(claim 10) wherein the output is one or more of a voltage output, a current output, a power output, a torque output, or a thrust output.
([0077]-[0078] In the illustrated example of FIG. 5, the command generator 340 applies a second example control value 509 to a second example transfer function 510. The second control value 509 is based on an addition of the first control value 506 and a third example control value 511. The third control value 511 is an output of the first transfer function 508. For example, the second transfer function 510 can convert an input rotor speed (e.g., the second control value 509) to a fourth example control value 512. The fourth control value 512 can be an over-voltage limit value that, when applied to the motor 146 operatively coupled to the rotor 144 of FIG. 1A, invokes the motor 146 to generate a reduced rotor speed compared to the input rotor speed. Advantageously, the reduced rotor speed can enable the aircraft 100 of FIGS. 1A-1B to have available power for sufficient attitude control by reducing power allocated for vertical control. The fourth control value 512 can correspond to a threshold (e.g., a threshold voltage) above that the vertical command 230 may, in some examples, not exceed. For example, the vertical command 230 may correspond to a limited vertical control command to prioritize attitude control over vertical control.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over , Kashawlic et al., Pub. No.: US 20210041895 A1., in view of Hehn et al., Pub. No.: US 20180237148 A1., further in view of Bethke et al., Pub. No.: US 20170285631 A1, and further in view of Geiger et al., Pub. No.: US 20190337634 A1 .
Regarding claim 11, Kashawlic et al. discloses method of claim 8.
Kashawlic et al. is not explicit on “lack of detected motion of a control surface”. However, Geiger et al., US 20190337634 A1, teaches Controlling an Aircraft Based on Detecting Control Element Damage and discloses;
wherein the failure event comprises a lack of detected motion of a control surface ([0027] “Control actuators can be used to manipulate the control surfaces to cause the control surfaces to change orientation, position, angle, etc. Control effectors are force and/or moment generators. Damage or loss of these control elements can adversely impact stability and control of the aircraft.” & [0032] “the sensors 72 can be used for to detect structural fault/damage to control surfaces, effectors, or actuators. ... The FCC 75 can also receive inputs 74 as control commands to control the lift, propulsive thrust, yaw, pitch, and roll forces and moments of the various control elements of the aircraft 10.” & [0040] Control elements (e.g., surfaces, actuators, effectors, etc.) enable an aircraft to be controlled. For example, changes to a control surface affect the aircraft's operational capabilities. … If one or more of an aircraft's control elements become damaged, the aircraft's stability and ability to maneuver.” & [0041] The damage detection processing unit 310 detects damage to a control element of an aircraft. The damage to the control element can include damage to a control surface of an aircraft”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use these above mentioned features disclosed by Geiger et al. with the system disclosed by Kashawlic et al. in order to provide a system for controlling an aircraft based on detecting control element damage (see Abstract and para.[0001]-[0003]).
Regarding claim 13 & 20, Kashawlic et al. discloses the system of claim 1 & the method of claim 8 & the flight controller of claim 15 , wherein the flight component comprises one or more of: a battery, a motor, a propulsor, a pusher component, or a puller component ([0031] “FIG. 1A, each of the rotor assemblies 102-124 include two example propellers 142, an example rotor 144, an example motor 146, and an example sensor 148.” & [0034] “the aircraft 100 includes an example controller (e.g., a flight controller, a flight control computing device, etc.) 150 to control and/or otherwise facilitate operation (e.g., flight operation) of the aircraft 100.” & [0035] “the controller 150 may obtain a voltage being supplied to the motor 146.” & [0036] The aircraft 100 of FIG. 1A includes example power sources 152, 154 … . The power sources 152, 154 of FIG. 1A are batteries and each of the power sources 152, 154 may include one or more batteries” ).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over , Kashawlic et al., Pub. No.: US 20210041895 A1., in view of Hehn et al., Pub. No.: US 20180237148 A1., further in view of Bethke et al., Pub. No.: US 20170285631 A1, and further in view of List et al., Pub. No.: US 20210371123 A1 .
Regarding claims 18-19, Kashawlic et al. discloses the flight controller of claim 15.
Kashawlic et al. is not explicit on “lack of detected motion of a control surface”. However, List et al., US 20210371123 A1, teaches IN-FLIGHT STABILIZATION OF AN AIRCRAFT and discloses;
(claim 18) wherein: the operations further comprise: receiving a second indication of a second failure event associated with a second flight component of the electric aircraft; and determining, based at least in part on the second failure event, a second prioritization of the second flight component; and restricting control of the flight element is further based at least in part on the second prioritization of the second flight component,
(claim 19) wherein the operations further comprise, based at least in part on the prioritization of the flight component, control of a second flight element configures at the electric aircraft by the pilot, wherein the second flight element is distinct from the flight element ([0083]-[0095]: “receive the failure datum associated with first flight component 608 of plurality of flight components 604 from sensor 628”& [0084] “commanding second flight component 612 to perform the autorotation inducement action includes reconnecting power to a rotor opposite and diagonal the rotor associated with the failure datum, such that reconnecting power to the rotor will initiate the prioritization of heave over yaw.” & [0085] “reversible rotation is configured to prioritize flight controls such that heave is prioritized over yaw.” & [0086] “vehicle controller 624 is further configured to receive the failure datum associated with third flight component 616 of plurality of flight components 604. “automatic response 632 may be designed to prioritize fight controls in the order of pitch, roll, heave, and yaw, wherein rotation is the effect of prioritizing heave over yaw.” & [0091] “the sum of motor torques and thrust torques produced by first flight component 608, second flight component 612, third flight component 616, and fourth flight component 620 provide the aircraft with roll, pitch, and yaw control. Further, in the embodiment, the sum of thrusts generated by first flight component 608, second flight component 612, third flight component 616, and fourth flight component 620 provides the aircraft with heave, such as altitude control.”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use these above mentioned features disclosed by List et al. with the system disclosed by Kashawlic et al. to provide a system for in-flight stabilization including a plurality of flight components mechanically coupled to an aircraft, wherein the plurality of flight components includes a first flight component and a second flight component opposing the first flight component. A vehicle controller communicatively connected to the sensor and is configured to receive the failure datum (See Abstract & para.[0001]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Notice of References cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jalal C CODUROGLU whose telephone number is (408)918-7527. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 8-6 PT.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on 571-272-7298. 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.
/JALAL C CODUROGLU/Examiner, Art Unit 3665