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 .
Pursuant to communications filed on 08/19/2024, this is a First Action Non-Final Rejection on the Merits wherein claims 1-20 are currently pending in the instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/19/2024 (x5), 04/02/2025, and 06/18/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
1. – a communication unit configured to …In claim 1.
2. – a flight controller configured to …In claim 1.
3. – a geofencing device being configured …In claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Taveira (US 2016/0225264 – from IDS).
Regarding claims 1, 12 and 20, Taveira discloses an aerial vehicle / the associated method / the associated non-transitory computer readable storage medium (e.g., methods, systems and devices for providing access to a restricted area for a drone 100 by a beacon device. Beacon signals including access information associated with access for the restricted area may be transmitted by the beacon device. Figs. 1D, 2C, 3A-3B), comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
698
474
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a communication unit (fig. 1D above: radio module 130) configured to receive a wireless signal from a geo-fencing device (fig. 1D: wireless communication device 170 – see [0056] disclosing wireless communication device 170 may be a beacon device that emits a navigation signal identifying or indicating the restricted area), the geo-fencing device being configured not for landing of the aerial vehicle (see [0056] disclosing the wireless communication device 170 may be associated with an area in which drone operations are prohibited or restricted, referred to generally as a “restricted area.” – e.g. – Not for landing – see also fig. 2C below and [0064] disclosing drone 100 may receive signals from wireless communication devices 254, 256 (e.g., 170) through respective wireless signals 254a, 256a as the drone 100 progresses toward the destination 210. The wireless communication devices 254, 256 may be beacons that are associated with one or more restricted areas 260a, 260b.); and
a flight controller (see fig. 1D: control unit 110 with processor 120) configured to generate one or more control signals that cause the aerial vehicle (drone 100) to operate in accordance with a set of flight regulations (e.g. interpreted as implemented restrictions – conditional access) generated based on the wireless signal, the set of flight regulations including rules for controlling at least one of the aerial vehicle (drone 100) (see [0064] disclosing drone 100 may receive signals from wireless communication devices 254, 256 (e.g., 170) through respective wireless signals 254a, 256a as the drone 100 progresses toward the destination 210. The wireless communication devices 254, 256 may be beacons that are associated with one or more restricted areas 260a, 260b. …….. The wireless signals 245a, 256a may indicate to the drone 100 that the respective areas are restricted. The wireless signals 245a, 256a may contain additional information, such boundary coordinate information for the respective restricted areas and/or information regarding conditional access. – see [0068] disclosing If the drone 100 receives information indicated that the drone 100 is within one of the restricted areas 310a, 310b, or 310c, the drone 100 may take immediate corrective action. For example, the drone 100 may change course to leave the restricted area or land immediately. Other non-exhaustive and non-limiting examples of corrective action for the drone 100 may include landing in or moving to a designated area, proceeding along a designated path to avoid the restricted area, returning to a designated location, preventing takeoff, reverting control of the drone 100 to a third party, restricting usage of the drone 100 while in the restricted area, waiting for a period of time, and so on.), a carrier carried by the aerial vehicle, or a payload (fig. 1C: Payload 109) of the aerial vehicle (drone 100) (see [0050] disclosing As illustrated in FIG. 1C, the drone 100 may further be equipped with a payload-securing unit 107. The payload-securing unit 107 may include an actuator motor that drives a gripping and release mechanism and related controls that are responsive to a control unit to grip and release the payload 109 in response to commands from the control unit.).
PNG
media_image2.png
624
432
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
506
586
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
328
570
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 2 and 13, Taveira discloses wherein the wireless signal is broadcasted by the geo-fencing device (beacon 170) continuously (see [0071] disclosing maintaining constant signal level of the beacon signals. – e.g., in order to maintain the constant level of the signal implies a “continuous broadcasting”).
Regarding claims 3 and 14, Taveira discloses wherein the wireless signal is received by the communication unit (radio module 130) while the aerial vehicle (drone 100) is in flight (see [0055] the radio module 130 may be configured to switch between a cellular connection and a WiFi connection depending on the location and altitude of the drone 100. For example, while in flight at an altitude designated for drone traffic, the radio module 130 may communicate with a cellular infrastructure in order to maintain communications with a server (e.g., 170). – see [0065] the radio module 130 may be configured to switch between a cellular connection and a WiFi connection depending on the location and altitude of the drone 100. For example, while in flight at an altitude designated for drone traffic, the radio module 130 may communicate with a cellular infrastructure in order to maintain communications with a server (e.g., 170).).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Taveira discloses wherein the set of flight regulations includes at least one of:
one or more first geo-fencing boundaries within which the aerial vehicle is permitted to fly (see figure 2C showing two restricted areas 260a and 260b – see fig. 3A showing restricted areas 310a, 310b, and 310c may be indicated with beacons that transmit signals that are received by the drone 100 when close to the restricted areas.); or
one or more second geo-fencing boundaries within which the aerial vehicle is not permitted to fly (see fig. 3B and [0069] showing a restricted area 320 may be defined with altitude restrictions that limit unauthorized drones from flying below minimum altitudes, such as altitude profiles 320a and 320b. The altitude restrictions may be indicated or defined in signals received from a server responsible for controlling drone flight paths in or over the restricted are 320. For example, altitude restrictions (e.g., a specific altitude or an altitude minimum) may be provided in information communicated to the drone 100 from a server associated with the restricted area 320.).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Taveira discloses wherein each of the one or more first geo-fencing boundaries and the one or more second geo-fencing boundaries corresponds to a different set of flight regulations (see fig. 3B and [0069] as in claim 4 and see [0072] the wireless beacon signals 217 may contain information that defines a permitted altitude or altitude profile 320b that the drone 100 should follow while transiting the restricted area 320. For example, the wireless beacon signals 217 may provide information to the drone 100a defining the restricted altitudes for the altitude profile 320b over the restricted area 320. The drone 100a may navigate based on the altitude information received in the beacon signals 217 so as to remain outside the restricted airspace over the restricted area 320.).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Taveira discloses wherein:
the set of flight regulations includes conditions under which the aerial vehicle is not permitted to operate the payload of the aerial vehicle (e.g., this feature is inherently taken into account based at least in figure 3A: each time the drone 100 is set to navigate particular path to deliver the payload 109, the current restricted areas 1, 2 n, limits the drone access); and
the payload of the aerial vehicle includes an image capture device (see fig. 1D: camera 140), and the set of flight regulations includes conditions under which the aerial vehicle is not permitted to capture images (see [0084] disclosing For example, some usage restrictions 355 may place limits on the permitted types of operations that may be performed by a drone, such as taking high-resolution or low resolution imagery, or prohibiting any type of data collection.).
Regarding claim 7, Taveira discloses wherein the aerial vehicle is configured to change communication modes in response to the aerial vehicle entering a predetermined geographic range of the geo-fencing device (see [0054] disclosing A bi-directional wireless communication link 132 may be established between transmit/receive antenna 131 of the radio module 130 and transmit/receive antenna 171 of the wireless communication device 170. For example, the wireless communication device 170 may be a beacon that controls access to a restricted area as described herein. In an example, the wireless communication device 170 may be a cellular network base station or cell tower. The radio module 130 may be configured to support multiple connections with different wireless communication devices 170 having different radio access technologies.).
Regarding claim 8, Taveira discloses wherein the set of flight regulations includes one or more restrictions on articles carried by the aerial vehicle (see [0163] disclosing e.g., time sensitive payload, payload weight, payload characteristic, etc.).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Taveira discloses wherein: the wireless signal is configured to uniquely identify the geo-fencing device from other geo-fencing devices; and the set of flight regulations is associated with the uniquely identified geo-fencing device (see [0065] disclosing the information in the wireless signals 245a, 256a may be used by the drone processor 120 to determine the locations of the access points or wireless communication devices 254, 256, such as by comparing the identifiers to a database of the locations of access points…..The drone 100 may determine the location of the wireless communication device 254 by obtaining identification (e.g., SSID) and possibly other information about the wireless communication device 254, and obtain the access point location by sending the obtained access point information to a server of a location information services provider.).
Regarding claims 10 and 19, Taveira discloses wherein: the wireless signal is configured to indicate a type of the geo-fencing device; and the set of flight regulations is generated based on the type of the geo-fencing device (see [0065] disclosing The drone 100 may determine the location of the wireless communication device 254 by obtaining identification (e.g., SSID) and possibly other information about the wireless communication device 254, and obtain the access point location by sending the obtained access point information to a server of a location information services provider….see [0038] different beacons may provide different restriction levels to their restricted areas. For example, a first beacon may provide a Restriction Level 6 and a second beacon may provide a Restriction Level 7 for respective restricted areas. The beacon restriction levels may change over time. For example, the first beacon may change the restriction level from a Restriction Level 6 during the daytime to a Restriction Level 4 at night. A beacon may be configured to allow a selected drone, such as a drone owned by the owner of the beacon/property, while restricting access to other drones owned/operated by others.).
Regarding claim 11, Taveira discloses wherein: a plurality of the geo-fencing devices has different priority levels; and the set of flight regulations is generated associated with the different priority levels (see [0065] disclosing The drone 100 may determine the location of the wireless communication device 254 by obtaining identification (e.g., SSID) and possibly other information about the wireless communication device 254, and obtain the access point location by sending the obtained access point information to a server of a location information services provider….see [0038] different beacons may provide different restriction levels to their restricted areas. For example, a first beacon may provide a Restriction Level 6 and a second beacon may provide a Restriction Level 7 for respective restricted areas. The beacon restriction levels may change over time. For example, the first beacon may change the restriction level from a Restriction Level 6 during the daytime to a Restriction Level 4 at night. A beacon may be configured to allow a selected drone, such as a drone owned by the owner of the beacon/property, while restricting access to other drones owned/operated by others.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jaime Figueroa whose telephone number is (571)270-7620. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9-5.
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, Wade Miles can be reached on 571-270-7777. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAIME FIGUEROA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656