DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 16 March 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This Office action is in response to the application received on 29 August 2024. Claims 1-10 are pending.
Priority
The claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d) is acknowledged. A certified copy of the priority application has been received.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS received on 29 August 2024 has been considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
As to claim 7, the claim is considered to be indefinite because it recites limitations that appear to contradict preceding claim 1, in that the step 1 recited by claim 1 requires the path to already be scheduled so that satellite availability can be determined, but claim 7 recites step 1 being performed when setting the scheduled path, which is understood to mean when the path is first being generated.
As to claim 9, the claim is considered to be indefinite because claim 1 recites "a scheduled path" but claim 9 recites "the set scheduled path." It is unclear whether the path of claim 9 is meant to be the same as the path of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea (specifically, a mental process) without significantly more. The claims recite a method of calculating an availability state of satellite positioning for a UAV, where the availability state is based on the elevation angles of signal obstructions in proximity to the UAV, the availability state may be calculated for one or more points of an actual route of the UAV or for points of candidate routes, and candidate routes may include altitude changes to improve the availability state. The claimed invention is considered to be a mental process type of abstract idea because the steps may be performed mentally by a human being observing the height of nearby buildings and other obstructions and estimating to what degree the obstructions block the sky. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, although the claims include performing the method on a UAV, the additional elements do not add any meaningful limitations beyond implementing the abstract idea on a computing device. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements recited by the claims perform only routine and conventional computer functions such as calculating and comparing data.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 12,298,409 B2 (Bennington et al.).
As to claim 1, Bennington discloses a method for setting a flight path, comprising:
a step 1 of calculating an availability state, in an unmanned aerial vehicle, of artificial satellites based on a positional relationship between the artificial satellites constituting a global navigation satellite system and the unmanned aerial vehicle at any of points in a scheduled path of the unmanned aerial vehicle flying autonomously (col 11 ln 5-8 - "The disclosed GNSS Forecast engine service (FES) 125 inputs a map and satellite orbits and outputs a forecast of line-of-sight, non-line-of-sight (LOS/NLOS) plus [Position Dilution of Precision] PDOP for each 1 m.sup.2.", col 34 ln 5-9 - "the user knows their route and wants to know with high-fidelity, whether the route is assured, for route planning. For aviation, the user additionally needs to learn the positioning error of a [Unmanned Aerial System] UAS flight path/volume for planning"); and
a step 2 of comparing the availability state calculated in the step 1 and a reference availability state required for flight control of the unmanned aerial vehicle (col 8 ln 57-60 - "The disclosed Forecast Assured Navigation (FAN) technology features an obscuration forecast and a multipath forecast, that enable determining in advance where and when GNSS is reliable", col 60 ln 30-32 - "GNSS performance bands show distinctions between ideal, excellent, ok, moderate, poor and bad environments").
As to claim 2, Bennington discloses the method for setting a flight path according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein
the step 1 comprises:
a step 1-1 of calculating an elevation angle .theta. at any of the points (Fig 4A, col 36 ln 65-col 37 ln 3 - "FIG. 4A illustrates a 2D map orbit with GNSS satellites, and an example error calculation for a 2D point. In a typical situation in an urban area, the reception of each satellite signal depends on the position of the receiver and the satellite with respect to each other. Satellites S2 444 and S3 446 are in line of sight (LOS) with 2D point 465"); and
a step 1-2 of calculating an availability number n of the artificial satellites capable of acquiring information required for calculating a position from the global navigation satellite system based on the elevation angle .theta. calculated in the step 1-1 (col 54 ln 9-11 - "In addition to [dilution of precision] DOP, other items which can be calculated and displayed include the number of visible LOS satellites and the number of not visible NLOS satellites", col 54 ln 46-48 - "FIG. 8A illustrates the effect of turning a geometric corner in an urban environment on the number of LOS satellites within a target area"), and
in the step 2, the calculated availability number n and a reference satellite availability number N required for flight control are compared (col 8 ln 57-63 - "The disclosed Forecast Assured Navigation (FAN) technology features an obscuration forecast and a multipath forecast, that enable determining in advance where and when GNSS is reliable. FAN is a cloud-based service which provides additional forecast information about the expected GNSS visibility for specific regions around the world, as requested by the end user", col 50 ln 30-34 - "The disclosed GNSS Forecast solution can be used to determine if the flight path or area in which a drone is going to be flown in the future will have the required DOP, resulting position accuracy, and compliance in operation").
As to claim 3, Bennington discloses the method for setting a flight path according to claim 2, and further discloses wherein
in the comparing in the step 2,
when the availability number n has not reached the reference satellite availability number N, a correction position is calculated for changing one or both of a position in a vertical direction and a position in a horizontal direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle (col 50 ln 18-24 - "to determine if safe navigation using GNSS is possible, a prediction of the signal strength can be used to determine the best flight path (including altitudes), take-off and landing areas, areas to hover or loiter, risk-ratio of the flight, if areas of poor GNSS can be traversed using mitigation techniques and for how long"), and
the step 1-1, the step 1-2, and the step 2 are executed for the correction position (col 36 ln 65-col 37 ln 3, col 50 ln 30-34, col 54 ln 9-11).
As to claim 4, Bennington discloses the method for setting a flight path according to claim 3, and further discloses wherein
the step 1-1, the step 1-2, and the step 2 are executed for the correction position (col 36 ln 65-col 37 ln 3, col 50 ln 30-34, col 54 ln 9-11), and
when the availability number n has reached the reference satellite availability number N, the correction position is incorporated into the scheduled path (col 50 ln 18-24).
As to claim 5, Bennington discloses the method for setting a flight path according to claim 2, and further discloses wherein
in the comparing in the step 2,
when the availability number n has reached the reference satellite availability number N, the scheduled path is adhered to (col 50 ln 30-34).
As to claim 6, Bennington discloses the method for setting a flight path according to claim 2, and further discloses wherein
in the step 1-1, a maximum elevation angle .theta.max is calculated at any of the points (Figs 4A-4B, col 38 ln 9-13 - "Each ray is analyzed to see if the ray would reach the satellite thus establishing Line of Sight (LOS), or whether the ray would be obstructed by obstructions 440a, b and thus has no Line of Sight (NLOS). The status of each ray is stored"), and
in the step (1-2), the availability number n is calculated based on the maximum elevation angle .theta.max (col 54 ln 9-11).
As to claim 7, Bennington discloses the method for setting a flight path according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein
the step 1 and the step 2 are executed when setting the scheduled path (col 34 ln 5-9).
As to claim 8, Bennington discloses the method for setting a flight path according to claim 7, and further discloses wherein
the step 1 and the step 2 are executed for a plurality of the points separated by a predetermined interval in the scheduled path or for a plurality of waypoints in the scheduled path (Figs 9A-9G, col 10 ln 15-27 - "Map processing pipeline 215 completes the initial map processing and outputs 3D map data in FBX 3D data interchange format (FilmBox), along with at least one metadata file that describes the map data. The FBX is a 3D model mesh suitable for loading into a GPU and the metadata file contains geographic information about the FBX such as [...] a list of valid observable points (VOPs). [...] Processing to 1 Km.sup.2 utilizes VOPs in a grid of cuboids at 1 m intervals, in one implementation. When creating VOPs, the building footprints are typically masked to not include VOPs inside of buildings", col 34 ln 5-9, col 58 ln 64-col 55 ln 3 - "The customer can then drop pins to define a route that meets their requirements for GNSS performance. In the example illustrated in FIG. 9A through FIG. 9F, a user enters a route to check what the GNSS performance for the route is, and to adjust the route, if needed, using the GNSS Forecast data displayed as a heat map").
As to claim 9, Bennington discloses the method for setting a flight path according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein
the step 1 and the step 2 are executed when the unmanaged aerial vehicle is flying autonomously according to the set scheduled path (col 34 ln 5-9, col 50 ln 14-17 - "In one aviation use case, a drone flying needs to know the expected GNSS signals on its route of travel, or area of operation, for safe navigation. This is especially important for Beyond Line of Sight of the pilot (BLOS)", col 50 ln 30-34).
As to claim 10, Bennington discloses the method for setting a flight path according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein
in the step 1, a positioning accuracy degradation coefficient d at any of the points is calculated (col 17 ln 56-59 - "Forecast engine service (FES) 358 can compute line of sight (LOS), azimuth and elevation and position dilution of precision (PDOP). LOS will be recorded for every satellite at every VOP"), and
in the step 2, the calculated positioning accuracy degradation coefficient d and a reference positioning accuracy degradation coefficient D required for flight control are compared (col 34 ln 5-9, col 34 ln 9-16 - "Once the route is identified, the customer can download the complete route or can stream the route, for the identified time period. DOP and #sat (LOS, NLOS, NA) can be utilized to determine whether the route is good, for a navigation system, planning, and for [Unmanned Service Supplier] USS. If the route is deemed to be not 'good enough', the forecast engine can return to the approach described earlier for scenario one").
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on Form 892 (Notice of References Cited) and not relied upon is considered pertinent because it relates to methods of altering the flight of an aircraft in the presence of obstacles.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Todd Melton whose telephone number is (571)270-3871. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays, 9:30am - 6:00pm (Eastern time). 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 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.
/TODD MELTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669