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 1-16 were previously pending. Claims 8-10 and 14-16 remain withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1, 3, and 11 have been amended. No claims have been cancelled or newly added. Thus, claims 1-16 remain pending, while claims 1-7 and 11-13 have been examined in this application.
Examiner's Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs/columns and line numbers or figures in the
references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the
specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific
limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is
respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the
references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as
the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is
reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the
language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicant's definition which is not specifically set forth in the disclosure.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2 and 11-12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1-2 and 11-12 recite “the antennas” but should instead recite --the antenna[[s]] ports--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the 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 1-6, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naderi (US 2023/0034179 A1, cited in the IDS received 3/12/2025) in view of Yeo (US 2020/0021138 A1) .
Regarding claim 1, Naderi discloses a wireless charging device for an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) (see at least Figs. 21-24, [0200] - a system 2100 for charging unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)), the wireless charging device comprising: a power transmission coil configured to transmit power to the UAV (see at least Figs. 21-24, [0200-0204] - induction-based coils for charging the UAV 2103); a plurality of antenna ports configured to output beamformed signals for guiding the UAV to land (see at least [0209-0211] - A secondary layer of localization can explore the use of Wi-Fi based beamforming using Wi-Fi adapters both in the backpack 2113 and the pad 2103); and a controller configured to: control the power transmission coil, the antennas, or a combination thereof; detect whether the UAV has moved to an area for wireless charging; generate a signal to guide a landing of the UAV for wireless charging; and output the generated signal, wherein the generated signal includes at least one of a beamformed frequency signal, a wavelength controlled signal, or a combination thereof (see at least [0209-0211] - A secondary layer of localization can explore the use of Wi-Fi based beamforming using Wi-Fi adapters both in the backpack 2113 and the pad 2103. Classical 802.11ac/ad Wi-Fi devices use beamforming to direct signals to specific receivers, and thus must perform a sector-sweep to lock the optimized direction… In certain embodiments, landing pads may generate a signal or include markings readable by a UAV to allow for the UAV to identify and locate the charging pad and to aid in positioning during landing. In some embodiments, the landing pad may be operable to take over the flight controls of a docking UAV to guide in to the proper landing location for charging. To accomplish this, the landing pad may include one or more of a processor operable to generate commands, a transmitter capable of sending control signals to the UAV and/or receiving information from the UAV (e.g., video signals or location information), and sensors for locating and tracking the UAV during approach (e.g., cameras). When landing, the voltage in fewer but larger coils are affected to different extents when a device is placed in proximity, which allows for more targeted charging.).
Naderi does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the power transmission coil is formed to surround each of the plurality of antenna ports and wherein the beamformed signals have directivity by changing amplitude and phase of a signal supplied to each antenna port in a state where the plurality of antenna ports are arranged at regular intervals.
Yeo, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following limitations: wherein the power transmission coil is formed to surround each of the plurality of antenna ports (see at least Fig. 24A, [0187] – coil 2401 located around a patch antenna array 2402) and wherein the beamformed signals have directivity by changing amplitude and phase of a signal supplied to each antenna port in a state where the plurality of antenna ports are arranged at regular intervals (see at least Figs. 2, 24A, [0067-0069, 0105, 0187] - at least one of amplitudes and phases of the RF waves generated by the patch antennas 111 to 126 may be adjusted by the second power transmission circuit 102 or a processor of the wireless power transmitter 100… so that the direction of the waves can be controlled… the patch antenna array includes antennas arranged at regular intervals as shown in Figs. 2 and 24A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have incorporated the teachings of Yeo into the invention of Naderi with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of efficiently transferring power by recognizing an accurate location of a power received located at longer distances (Yeo – [0004]).
Furthermore, if there is any doubt that the RF antennas of Naderi and Yeo include corresponding antenna ports, then it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the corresponding conventional antenna ports to provide the connection point between the RF circuitry and the corresponding antennas, since antenna ports are well known in the art and doing so would yield predictable results. The antenna ports are a necessary component to facilitate the electrical connection between the corresponding physical antennas and the RF circuitry.
Regarding claim 2, Naderi discloses wherein the controller is further configured to: generate a plurality of frequency signals or wavelength signals; perform beamforming on the generated frequency signals or wavelength signals; and output the plurality of beamformed signals using the plurality of antennas (see at least [0209-0211] - A secondary layer of localization can explore the use of Wi-Fi based beamforming using Wi-Fi adapters both in the backpack 2113 and the pad 2103.).
Regarding claim 3, Naderi discloses further comprising: a sensor configured to detect whether the UAV has completed the landing (see at least Figs. 21-24, [0201] - The pad 2101 may be foldable along a hinged portion 2105 to provide for easy portability with each half including multiple nested coils that are used both for the sensing of one or more receiver coils of the landed UAV 2103 and to provide charging energy to those receiver coils.).
Regarding claim 4, Naderi does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the controller is further configured to: stop output of the plurality of beamformed signals in response to detecting a landing completion of the UAV.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the ability to stop outputting the beamformed signals in response to detecting a landing completion into the invention of Naderi with a reasonable expectation of success. Naderi also already discloses detecting a landing completion and also discloses outputting the beamformed signals for the purpose of guiding landing of the UAV, therefore the beamformed signals are not necessary after landing is completed. For these reasons, incorporating this function into Naderi is considered obvious and doing so would yield predictable results. This would improve energy efficiency of the charging station by stopping the beamformed signals from being output when they are no longer needed because the UAV has already landed, preventing the unnecessary waste of energy.
Regarding claim 5, Naderi discloses wherein the controller is further configured to: start wireless charging for the UAV in response to detecting a landing completion of the UAV (see at least Figs. 21-24, [0201] - The pad 2101 may be foldable along a hinged portion 2105 to provide for easy portability with each half including multiple nested coils that are used both for the sensing of one or more receiver coils of the landed UAV 2103 and to provide charging energy to those receiver coils.).
Regarding claim 6, Naderi discloses wherein the UAV includes one or more batteries configured to be charged by power received from the power transmission coil, and wherein the one or more batteries provide power to the UAV (see at least [0204] - At the end of the charging foot 2109, a pad may be located comprising a receiver coil and circuitry to regulate energy received by the coil to a charging voltage level that can be provided to the battery of the UAV. Wiring 2111 may run internally or externally up the leg to the main body of the UAV 2103 or to wherever the battery is located to provide charging current. It will be appreciated that each landing leg of the UAV 2103 could be fitted with a charging foot 2109 which could decrease the charging time of the battery of the UAV as the power would be received by the UAV 2103 through each of the legs. ).
Regarding claim 11, all the limitations have been analyzed in view of claim 1, and it has been determined that claim 11 does not teach or define any new limitations beyond those previously recited in claim 1; therefore, claim 11 is also rejected over the same rationale as claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, all the limitations have been analyzed in view of claim 2, and it has been determined that claim 12 does not teach or define any new limitations beyond those previously recited in claim 2; therefore, claim 12 is also rejected over the same rationale as claim 2.
Regarding claim 13, all the limitations have been analyzed in view of claim 4, and it has been determined that claim 13 does not teach or define any new limitations beyond those previously recited in claim 4; therefore, claim 13 is also rejected over the same rationale as claim 4.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naderi in view of Yeo and Di Cosola (US 2022/0169401 A1, cited in the IDS received 3/12/2025).
Regarding claim 7, Naderi does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the UAV comprises an Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), an Urban Air Mobility (UAM), or a Regional Air Mobility (RAM).
Di Cosola, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following limitations: wherein the UAV comprises an Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), an Urban Air Mobility (UAM), or a Regional Air Mobility (RAM) (see at least [0123] – landing pad and charging station 101… Urban Air Mobility (UAM)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have incorporated the teachings of Di Cosola into the invention of Naderi with a reasonable expectation of success for the purpose of enabling wireless charging of various types of aerial vehicles, including UAMs, thereby enhancing the applicability of the wireless charging station. Furthermore, applying a known technique (wireless charging as taught by Naderi) to a specific type of aerial vehicle (UAMs) would have yielded predictable results.
Response to Arguments
In light of the amendments to the claims, the previous claim objections have been withdrawn. However new claim objections are presented above due to the new amendments to the claims.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-10 filed 5/25/2026, with respect to the prior art rejection(s) addressing the newly amended limitations of independent claims 1 and 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Yeo.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAITLIN MCCLEARY whose telephone number is (703)756-1674. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am - 7:00 pm.
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, Navid Z Mehdizadeh can be reached at (571) 272-7691. 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.
/CAITLIN R MCCLEARY/Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/NAVID Z. MEHDIZADEH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights