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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on August 29, 2024. Claims 1-25 are pending. Claims 1 and 10 are independent.
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 1-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
101 Analysis – Step 1
Claims 1 and 10 are directed to a system. Therefore, claims 1 and 10 are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong I
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claim 1 includes limitations that recite an abstract idea (emphasized below) and will be used as a representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection.
Claim 1 recites:
1. A system for fulfilling a request for a payload delivery, the system comprising:
a computer system configured to:
receive a delivery request specifying a destination location;
receive a local map of a geographic area including the destination location;
generate a flight path of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to the destination location based on the local map;
receive surveillance data along the flight path; and
update the local map based on the surveillance data.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitations constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers performance of the limitation in the human mind or organizing human activity. Specifically, the limitation of “receive a delivery request” encompasses gathering data. Furthermore, the limitation “generate a flight path” and “update the local map based on the surveillance data” encompasses analyzing the data and planning a route. Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2A, Prong II
Regarding Prong II of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract into a practical application. As noted in the 2019 PEG, it must be determined whether any additional elements in the claim beyond the abstract idea integrate the exception into a practical application in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception. The courts have indicated that additional elements merely using a computer to implement an abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, or generally linking use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application.”
In the present case, the additional limitations beyond the above-noted abstract idea are as follows (where the underlined portions are the “additional limitations” while the bolded portions continue to represent the “abstract idea”):
1. A system for fulfilling a request for a payload delivery, the system comprising:
a computer system configured to:
receive a delivery request specifying a destination location;
receive a local map of a geographic area including the destination location;
generate a flight path of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to the destination location based on the local map;
receive surveillance data along the flight path; and
update the local map based on the surveillance data.
For the following reasons, the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding the additional limitations of “a computer system” the examiner submits that these limitations are an attempt to generally link additional elements to a technological environment. In particular, the computer system is recited at a high level of generality and merely automates the steps, therefore acting as a generic computer to perform the abstract idea. The computer system is claimed generically and is operating in its ordinary capacity and does not use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. The additional limitation is no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a computer.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitations as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitations add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05). Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
101 Analysis – Step 2B
Regarding Step 2B of the Revised Guidance, representative independent claim 1 does not include additional elements (considered both individually and as an ordered combination) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons to those discussed above with respect to determining that the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Dependent claims 2-9 and 16-20 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claims to be patent eligible. Rather, the limitations of dependent claims are directed toward additional aspects of the judicial exception and/or well-understood, routine and conventional additional elements that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Therefore, dependent claims 1-9 and 16-20 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of independent claim 1.
Therefore, claims 1-9 and 16-20 are ineligible under 35 USC §101. Claims 10-15 and 21-25 are ineligible under 35 USC §101 for at least the same reasons of claims 1-9 and 16-20.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 8-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 9,244,147 to Soundararajan et al. (hereinafter “Soundararajan”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0100269 to Ekhaguere et al. (hereinafter Ekhaguere.
With respect to independent claims 1 and 10, Soundararajan discloses a computer system configured to: receive a delivery request specifying a destination location (see col. 2, lines 56-57: a package delivery system identifies a package for delivery to a user.);and
receive a local map of a geographic area including the destination location (see col. 6, lines 6-11: the aerial delivery device computing system 121 may have a mapping system stored in the data storage unit 123 that works alone or in conjunction with onboard GPS technology to assist the aerial delivery device computing system 121 with navigation).
Soundararajan does not explicitly teach generate a flight path of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) to the destination location based on the local map.
Ekhaguere discloses In order to improve UAV navigation, a UAV may be configured with data representing at least one flight corridor and at least one flight path. A first flight plan may be calculated to avoid the flight corridor and the flight path by navigating around, over or under the locations of these items. If UAV 100 is programmed with a flight path of a manned aircraft or another UAV, UAV 100 should adjust its UAV flight plan avoid this flight path. The UAV flight plan may later be adjusted (or a new flight plan may be calculated) to avoid an obstacle. This adjustment or recalculation also preferably uses multi-modal logic. (See paragraphs [0008], [0021] and [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the mapping program for UAVs to follow a route to a destination address of Soundararajan with the flight corridors, paths, terrain maps of Ekhaguere in order to provide a system with a flight path to a delivery destination based on stored map and corridor data for a safer and more reliable drone delivery.
Soundararajan does not explicitly teach receive surveillance data along the flight path.
Ekhaguere discloses the UAV may receive transmissions from a friendly UAV or manned vehicle that indicate the location and/or vector of an obstacle. UAV 100 may communicate with other friendly UAVs, friendly manned aircraft, or ground control stations within its theater of operation in order to gather more information about its surroundings. For example, UAV 100 may receive information from a friendly UAV, manned aircraft, or ground control station about a previously unknown flight corridor, flight plan, flight path, obstacle, or another type of situational information, and UAV 100 may adjust its UAV flight plan accordingly. (See paragraphs [0009] and [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the mapping program for UAVs to follow a route to a destination address of Soundararajan with the flight path and position reports of Ekhaguere in order to provide route generation of a flight path such that a UAV can receive updates along its route in order to provide a safer and more reliable drone delivery.
Soundararajan does not explicitly teach update the local map based on the surveillance data.
Ekhaguere discloses that in order to improve UAV navigation, a UAV may be configured with data representing at least one flight corridor and at least one flight path. A first flight plan may be calculated to avoid the flight corridor and the flight path by navigating around, over or under the locations of these items. During the course of the UAV's operation of the first flight plan, the UAV may detect, for example via a camera, an obstacle within the UAV's flight plan or in the vicinity of the UAV's flight plan. Consequently, a second flight plan may be calculated to avoid the obstacle as well as flight corridors and flight paths. FIG. 1 depicts an example UAV 100. UAV 100 may be used for reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition (RSTA) missions. Generally speaking, UAV 100 may be programmed with a UAV flight plan that instructs UAV 100 to fly between a number of waypoints in a particular order, while avoiding certain geographical coordinates, locations, or obstacles. If UAV 100 is flying according to its UAV flight plan and UAV 100 encounters a known or previously unknown obstacle, UAV 100 should adjust its UAV flight plan to avoid the obstacle. The UAV flight plan may later be adjusted (or a new flight plan may be calculated) to avoid an obstacle. This adjustment or recalculation also preferably uses multi-modal logic. Based on the first UAV flight plan and input from one or more of its sensors, UAV 100 may calculate a second UAV flight plan to avoid obstacle 240. Alternatively, UAV 100 may dynamically adjust or recalculate its UAV flight plan to avoid airport 230, flight corridor 245, flight path 235 and obstacle 240. (see paragraph [0008], [0018], [0021], [0023] and [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the mapping program for UAVs to follow a route to a destination address of Soundararajan that receive reports that generate overlays and update the UAV flight plan to avoid new obstacles and paths of Ekhaguere in order to update the navigation map used by the delivery UAV, then recompute the route from the updated local map in order enhance safety and reliability of drone delivery.
With respect to dependent claims 2 and 11, Soundararajan does not explicitly teach wherein the surveillance data is obtained by the UAV during a mission flight.
Ekhaguere discloses the UAV flies according to the first UAV flight plan. At step 530, based on the first UAV flight plan and input from a camera, a second UAV flight plan is calculated. The input from the camera may be, for example, navigational signals in visible light frequencies, navigational signals in infrared light frequencies, or other indications of a moving or stationary obstacle. (See paragraph [0047]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the mapping program for UAVs to follow a route to a destination address of Soundararajan with the acoustic input to detect nearby unknown aircraft and respond by calculating a new flight plan of Ekhaguere in order to adjust flight behavior for improved UAV navigation.
With respect to dependent claim 3, Soundararajan does not explicitly teach the UAV, wherein the UAV comprises a camera system configured to capture images during the mission flight.
Ekhaguere discloses UAV 100 may include one or more active or passive sensors, such as a video camera or an acoustic sensor. In alternative embodiments, different types of sensors may be used in addition to the video camera and/or the acoustic sensor, such as motion sensors, heat sensors, wind sensors, RADAR, LADAR, electro-optical (EO), non-visible-light sensors (e.g. infrared (IR) sensors), and/or EO/IR sensors. (See paragraph [0019]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the mapping program for UAVs to follow a route to a destination address of Soundararajan with a UAV navigation and collision avoidance using onboard sensors and flight plan updates of Ekhaguere in order to enhance the safety and reliability of package delivery.
With respect to dependent claim 4, Soundararajan discloses wherein the UAV comprises the computer system (see Figure 1, reference numeral 121, col. 5, lines 26-31: the aerial delivery device 120 employs an aerial delivery device computing system that comprises hardware and software.).
With respect to dependent claim 5, Soundararajan does not explicitly disclose wherein the surveillance data is received from a remote device or system.
Ekhaguere discloses the UAV may receive transmissions from a friendly UAV or manned vehicle that indicate the location and/or vector of an obstacle. The UAV may respond by calculating a new flight plan to avoid the obstacle. UAV 100 may communicate with other friendly UAVs, friendly manned aircraft, or ground control stations within its theater of operation in order to gather more information about its surroundings. (see paragraphs [0009] and [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the mapping program for UAVs to follow a route to a destination address of Soundararajan with a UAV that transmits location and/or vector of an obstacle of Ekhaguere in order to adjust the flight plan accordingly in order to improve flight safety.
With respect to dependent claim 6, Soundararajan does not explicitly disclose wherein the remote device or system comprises a server, a UAV distribution center, the UAV or another UAV, or a third party source.
Ekhaguere the UAV may receive transmissions from a friendly UAV or manned vehicle that indicate the location and/or vector of an obstacle. (see paragraph [0009]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the mapping program for UAVs to follow a route to a destination address of Soundararajan with a UAV that transmits location and/or vector of an obstacle and receives information from another UAV, manned aircraft or ground control station of Ekhaguere in order to effectively assign missions to the delivery devices and adjust the flight plan accordingly in order to improve flight safety.
With respect to dependent claim 8, Soundararajan discloses a flight to a delivery location based on the local map (see col. 10, lines 1-4 and lines 6-11: The aerial delivery device 120 transports the package to the address associated with the delivery destination. The aerial delivery device 120 may proceed to the address associated with the user 101. The aerial delivery device computing system 121 may navigate via a mapping program to proceed to the address by following a route provided by the mapping program to reach the destination address of the user 101.).
Soundararajan does not explicitly teach the computer system is configured to generate a flight path.
Ekhaguere discloses in order to improve UAV navigation, a UAV may be configured with data representing at least one flight corridor and at least one flight path. A first flight plan may be calculated to avoid the flight corridor and the flight path by navigating around, over or under the locations of these items. (See paragraph [0008]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the mapping program for UAVs to follow a route to a destination address of Soundararajan with a UAV flight plan, flight corridor, flight path, terrain map and other navigational information that updates a plan in view of conditions of Ekhaguere in order to safely and efficiently rout a delivery UAV through shared airspace.
With respect to dependent claim 9, Soundararajan discloses wherein the computer system is configured to determine a condition at the delivery location, the condition relevant to payload delivery (see col. 2, lines 51-55 and col. 3, lines 24-27: The delivery receptacle receives responses from the aerial delivery device and directs the IR beacons in the direction of the aerial delivery device. After receiving the package, the delivery receptacle transports the package to a secure location. The delivery receptacle recognizes the delivery of the package and transmits the package to a secure location, such as a base that secures the package.).
With respect to dependent claim 11, Soundararajan discloses wherein the map is updated based on data captured from the UAV or another UAV during a mission flight (see paragraphs [0010] and [0036]: the UAV may utilize multiple input modes (e.g., manual, optical, acoustic, thermal, and/or electronic means) to make flight plan calculations and adjustments. When, during, or after UAV 100 determines that it needs to change course for any reason, UAV 100 may transmit an alert to the ground control station indicating the course change. As part of this course change, UAV 100 may use its sensors, for example a video camera, to acquire new images of the nearby terrain. Thus, any of the maneuvers conducted by UAV 100 at point A, B, C, D, E, and/or F may be accompanied by communication between UAV 100 and a ground control station, as well as UAV 100 acquiring new images of nearby terrain.).
With respect to dependent claim 12, Soundararajan does not explicitly teach wherein the map is updated dynamically during the mission flight.
Ekhaguere discloses that in order to improve UAV navigation, a UAV may be configured with data representing at least one flight corridor and at least one flight path. A first flight plan may be calculated to avoid the flight corridor and the flight path by navigating around, over or under the locations of these items. During the course of the UAV's operation of the first flight plan, the UAV may detect, for example via a camera, an obstacle within the UAV's flight plan or in the vicinity of the UAV's flight plan. Consequently, a second flight plan may be calculated to avoid the obstacle as well as flight corridors and flight paths. FIG. 1 depicts an example UAV 100. UAV 100 may be used for reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition (RSTA) missions. Generally speaking, UAV 100 may be programmed with a UAV flight plan that instructs UAV 100 to fly between a number of waypoints in a particular order, while avoiding certain geographical coordinates, locations, or obstacles. If UAV 100 is flying according to its UAV flight plan and UAV 100 encounters a known or previously unknown obstacle, UAV 100 should adjust its UAV flight plan to avoid the obstacle. The UAV flight plan may later be adjusted (or a new flight plan may be calculated) to avoid an obstacle. This adjustment or recalculation also preferably uses multi-modal logic. Based on the first UAV flight plan and input from one or more of its sensors, UAV 100 may calculate a second UAV flight plan to avoid obstacle 240. Alternatively, UAV 100 may dynamically adjust or recalculate its UAV flight plan to avoid airport 230, flight corridor 245, flight path 235 and obstacle 240. (see paragraph [0008], [0018], [0021], [0023] and [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the mapping program for UAVs to follow a route to a destination address of Soundararajan that receive reports that generate overlays and update the UAV flight plan to avoid new obstacles and paths of Ekhaguere in order to update the navigation map used by the delivery UAV, then recompute the route from the updated local map in order enhance safety and reliability of drone delivery.
With respect to dependent claim 13, Soundararajan does not explicitly teach wherein the management system is configured to navigate the UAV to the destination location along the flight path.
Ekhaguere discloses In order to improve UAV navigation, a UAV may be configured with data representing at least one flight corridor and at least one flight path. A first flight plan may be calculated to avoid the flight corridor and the flight path by navigating around, over or under the locations of these items. If UAV 100 is programmed with a flight path of a manned aircraft or another UAV, UAV 100 should adjust its UAV flight plan avoid this flight path. The UAV flight plan may later be adjusted (or a new flight plan may be calculated) to avoid an obstacle. This adjustment or recalculation also preferably uses multi-modal logic. (See paragraphs [0008], [0021] and [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to combine the mapping program for UAVs to follow a route to a destination address of Soundararajan with the flight corridors, paths, terrain maps of Ekhaguere in order to provide a system with a flight path to a delivery destination based on stored map and corridor data for a safer and more reliable drone delivery.
With respect to dependent claim 14, Soundararajan discloses wherein the management system is configured to determine a delivery location based on a condition at the destination location (see col. 2, lines 51-55 and col. 3, lines 24-27: The delivery receptacle receives responses from the aerial delivery device and directs the IR beacons in the direction of the aerial delivery device. After receiving the package, the delivery receptacle transports the package to a secure location. The delivery receptacle recognizes the delivery of the package and transmits the package to a secure location, such as a base that secures the package.).
With respect to dependent claim 15, Soundararajan discloses wherein the map comprises at least one of a skymap or a terrain map (see paragraph [0020]: the memory is preferably configured to contain static and/or dynamic data, including the UAV's flight plan, flight corridors, flight paths, terrain maps, and other navigational information.).
With respect to dependent claim 16, Soundararajan discloses the delivery request specifies a destination site for a payload delivery by the UAV; and the computer system is further configured to identify a delivery location based on an identification of an object (see col. 2, lines 47-51, lines 56-57 and lines 61-64: A package delivery system identifies a package for delivery to a user. The package delivery system identifies a destination for the package, such as the residence of the user to whom the package is addressed. The package is associated with an aerial delivery device for delivery. A delivery receptacle emits infrared (“IR”) beacons from one or more IR beacon transmitters. An aerial delivery device, such as a drone, detects the IR beacons and uses the beacons to navigate to the delivery receptacle.).
With respect to dependent claim 17, Soundararajan discloses wherein the object is a designated structure at the delivery location (see col. 6, lines 12-13 and 15-16: The delivery receptacle 130 may be a box or other container or vessel that is capable of receiving a package. The delivery receptacle 130 may be equipped with a hatch, bay, door, or other opening that allows a package to be placed inside.).
With respect to dependent claim 18, Soundararajan discloses wherein the object emits a signal to identify the delivery location (see col. 1, line 61 - col. 2, line 2 and col. 2, lines 47-51: The delivery device transports the package to the delivery address and locates one or more first beacons being transmitted by a delivery receptacle at the delivery address. The delivery device navigates to the delivery receptacle based on the triangulated position and transmits a second beacon to the delivery receptacle. The second beacon allows the delivery receptacle to adjust a direction of the one or more first beacons. The delivery device deposits the package into the delivery receptacle. A delivery receptacle emits infrared (“IR”) beacons from one or more IR beacon transmitters. An aerial delivery device, such as a drone, detects the IR beacons and uses the beacons to navigate to the delivery receptacle.
With respect to dependent claim 19, Soundararajan discloses wherein the object is a beacon at the destination site (see col. 6, lines 62 – 65 and col. 7, line 6-8: The delivery receptacle 130 comprises an IR beacon transmitter 135. The IR beacon transmitter 135 may represent any beacon, signal or other transmission that is broadcast to the aerial delivery device 120. The delivery receptacle 130 may utilize a particular configuration of IR beacon transmitters 135 to allow the aerial delivery device 120 to triangulate a relative position.).
With respect to dependent claim 20, Soundararajan discloses wherein the computer system is configured to select, from a plurality of UAVs, the UAV to fulfill the delivery request based on a characteristic of the UAV matching a characteristic of the delivery request (see col. 8, lines 52-63: the package delivery system 140 associates the package with an aerial delivery device computing system 121. The package delivery system 140 may identify an aerial delivery device 120 that is associated with a delivery area in which the delivery address is located. For example, certain aerial delivery devices 120 may be assigned a delivery route that encompasses a particular geographic region. If the delivery address is located in that geographic region, then the package may be associated with that particular aerial delivery device 120. In an alternate embodiment, the package is associated with the aerial delivery device 120 that is next in a queue of aerial delivery devices 120.).
With respect to dependent claim 21, Soundararajan discloses receive a request for a payload delivery (see col. 2, lines 56-57: a package delivery system identifies a package for delivery to a user.); and
select the UAV to fulfill the delivery request based on a characteristic of the UAV matching a characteristic of the delivery request (see col. 8, lines 52-63: the package delivery system 140 associates the package with an aerial delivery device computing system 121. The package delivery system 140 may identify an aerial delivery device 120 that is associated with a delivery area in which the delivery address is located. For example, certain aerial delivery devices 120 may be assigned a delivery route that encompasses a particular geographic region. If the delivery address is located in that geographic region, then the package may be associated with that particular aerial delivery device 120. In an alternate embodiment, the package is associated with the aerial delivery device 120 that is next in a queue of aerial delivery devices 120.).
With respect to dependent claim 22, Soundararajan discloses wherein the UAV is selected based on a package in its payload matching a package specified for delivery in the delivery request (see col. 8, lines 52-63: the package delivery system 140 associates the package with an aerial delivery device computing system 121. The package delivery system 140 may identify an aerial delivery device 120 that is associated with a delivery area in which the delivery address is located. For example, certain aerial delivery devices 120 may be assigned a delivery route that encompasses a particular geographic region. If the delivery address is located in that geographic region, then the package may be associated with that particular aerial delivery device 120. In an alternate embodiment, the package is associated with the aerial delivery device 120 that is next in a queue of aerial delivery devices 120.).
With respect to dependent claim 23, Soundararajan discloses wherein the request specifies a destination site, and wherein the UAV is selected based on a charge level of the UAV and a distance to the destination site location (see col. 6, lines 62 – 65, col. 7, line 6-8 and col. 10, line 66 – col. 11, line 3: The delivery receptacle 130 comprises an IR beacon transmitter 135. The IR beacon transmitter 135 may represent any beacon, signal or other transmission that is broadcast to the aerial delivery device 120. The delivery receptacle 130 may utilize a particular configuration of IR beacon transmitters 135 to allow the aerial delivery device 120 to triangulate a relative position. The selection by the delivery receptacle 130 may be based on a configuration by the user 101 or another party, by an analysis of the environs of the delivery location, or any other suitable criteria.).
With respect to dependent claim 24, Soundararajan discloses wherein the UAV is selected based on a component configuration of the UAV required by the payload (see col. 10, line 66 – col. 11, line 3: The selection by the delivery receptacle 130 may be based on a configuration by the user 101 or another party, by an analysis of the environs of the delivery location, or any other suitable criteria.).
With respect to dependent claim 25, Soundararajan discloses wherein the delivery request specifies a destination site for delivery of the payload see col. 2, lines 56-57: a package delivery system identifies a package for delivery to a user.), and wherein the management system is configured to identify the delivery location based on a signal received from a beacon device at the destination site (see col. 6, lines 6-11: the aerial delivery device computing system 121 may have a mapping system stored in the data storage unit 123 that works alone or in conjunction with onboard GPS technology to assist the aerial delivery device computing system 121 with navigation).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soundararajan and Ekhaguere as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 8,798,840 to Fong et al. (hereinafter “Fong”).
With respect to dependent claim 7, Soundararajan and Ekhaguere does not explicitly teach wherein the computer system is configured to generate the local map from a global map by selecting information in the global map that pertains to flight corridors within geographic area.
Fong discloses parameter data is recorded in a plurality of local grids, i.e., sub-maps associated with the robot position and orientation when the data was collected. When an occupancy map or other global parameter map is required, the robot merges local grids into a comprehensive map indicating the parameter data in a global reference frame. At any point in time, the grids may be combined to generate a complete parameter map of the entire environment or a portion of the environment for purposes of path planning, for example. (see abstract, col. 2, lines 11-14 and col. 7, lines 46-49) .
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the UAV’s flight plan and data to calculate and update the UAV flight plans of Soundararajan and Ekhaguere, to include a mapping pattern that represents a large environment map and derive sub-maps corresponding to particular regions or task of Fong in order to efficiently plan missions in specific geographic areas in order to improve memory and computational efficiency in UAV navigation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEMETRA R SMITH-STEWART whose telephone number is (571)270-3965. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6pm.
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, Peter Nolan can be reached at 571-270-7016. 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.
/DEMETRA R SMITH-STEWART/Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661