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
Claims 1 & 3-14 of U.S. Application No. 18/830082 filed on 03/26/2026 have been examined.
Office Action is in response to the Applicant's amendments and remarks filed03/26/2026. Claims 1, 3-4, 7, & 10-11 are presently amended, and Claim 2 is cancelled. Claims 1 & 3-14 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
In regards to the previous claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f): Applicant does not provide separate remarks in regards to the previous claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f). Accordingly, the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(f) claim interpretation is maintained.
In regards to the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b): the amendments to the claims overcome the previous 35 USC § 112(b) rejection. Therefore, the previous 35 USC § 112(b) rejection is withdrawn.
In regards to the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101: the amendments to the claims overcome the previous 35 USC § 101 rejection. Therefore, the previous 35 USC § 101 rejection is withdrawn.
In regards to the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102: Applicant's amendments overcome the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102. Therefore, the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 is withdrawn.
In regards to the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103: Applicant’s argues that the prior art does not disclose the limitations “wherein the plurality of aircraft systems comprise input systems configured to provide the object data, and wherein the input systems comprise: non-cooperative sensing systems comprising sensors on board the aircraft configured to detect objects not actively providing information about themselves; and external surveillance systems and services configured to detect data regarding objects on the aerodrome surface; and wherein the output system comprises one or more of: the non-cooperative sensing systems which, using the contextualised list of detected objects, are configured to support internal detection and/or tracking and resolving ambiguities in their detection algorithms; and the external surveillance systems and services which, using the contextualised list of detected objects, are configured to improve the external surveillance systems and services' situational awareness of connected clients, and/or improving the situational awareness of the connected clients, wherein the collision avoidance system is configured to, when the aircraft is within a specified range of the aerodrome surface, commence operation as the aircraft approaches the aerodrome surface, remain active during aerodrome surface operations, and cease operation after take-off.”. Applicant further argues on page. 11-12 of the Remarks, “In other words, the system architecture disclosed in Gu is a single system with sensors and not a system aggregating data from multiple aircraft systems. In terms of anticipation, Gu fails to explicitly disclose an aggregated list of detected objects as a data structure and that such list is formed from multiple aircraft systems, and the same cannot be inferred from sensor fusion, detecting objects, and calculating physical properties. Further, Gu fails to disclose labeling the aggregated list using contextual data from a contextualized list. Whereas claim 1 requires labeling objects with contextual information and forming a contextualized list of detected objects as a distinct output for collision avoidance, Gu uses contextual data internally in calculations to calculate physical properties, estimate motion, and assess safety criteria. In addition, Gu discloses local non-cooperative sensing and fails to disclose external surveillance systems and services and receiving object data from such external systems. Finally, Gu fails to disclose outputting a contextualized object list to other systems, feedback sensing systems to resolve ambiguities, or improving situational awareness of external connected clients. In other words, whereas the system recited in the amended claim 1 is distributive, the system recited in Gu is limited to locally sensed data processed within a single system.”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant is reminded claims must be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. Applicant is reminded claims are more broad whenever having an “and/or” term in the claims, and the Examiner can take either of the terms to apply to the claims, and Examiner uses the “or” statement in the claims to meet the metes and bounds of the claims.
Gu discloses a system and method for monitoring activities in an aviation environment. Further Gu is able to monitor the aviation environment throughout monitoring units throughout the airport, and also further includes vision sensor systems that includes cameras and LIDAR that are interpreted as the non-cooperative sensing systems, that are also placed on the aircraft to also detect objects/obstacles in the environment (see at least Gu, para. [0111-0112]). The other sensing systems are on other ground vehicles, ground personnel, to detect data regarding objects on the aerodrome surface (see at least Gu, para. [0111]). Further Gu discloses using the contextualized list of detect objects to improve awareness, and improvement in aviation safety, operation efficiency, capacity, operating cost efficiency, environment and security (see at least Gu, para. [0172]). Further Knight is incorporated to teach the idea of when the aircraft is both on the ground and moving below the threshold ground speed, the system is enabled and the method proceeds to block/task/step. At, the video imagers acquire video images of various regions around the aircraft that correspond to each of the video imagers to monitor (see at least Knight, para. [0047-0048]).
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:
“a data input module configured to obtain object data…”
“a data output module configured to output the contextualized list of detected objects…”
“external surveillance systems and services configured to detect data regarding objects on the aerodrome surface”
“the non-cooperative sensing systems which, using the contextualised list of detected objects, are configured to support internal detection”
“ the external surveillance systems and services which, using the contextualised list of detected objects, are configured to improve the external surveillance systems” in claims 1-10.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure for the above limitation described in the specification: (see at least Applicant Specification, para. [0062-0064]: The processing system 130 comprise the data input module 132, a processor 134 and a data output module 136. The processor 134 processes, at the data input module 132, the data and information collected by the input systems 110 and the support systems 120 to derive a contextualised list of objects detected and their features, including, but not limited to, threat levels for each object. This provides a unified situational awareness of the objects detected close to the ownship or along its path, particularly of objects which may present a danger to the ownship. The processor 134 is configured to carry out the various processes or methods described in the present disclosure….The output systems 140 comprise downstream consumers which receive output information from the data output module 136 of the processing system 130 in the form of the contextualised list of objects detected and their features, including, but not limited to, threat levels for each object. The downstream consumers include human-machine interfaces (HMIs) 142, ownship guidance systems 144, the non-cooperative sensing systems 112 and the external surveillance systems and services 116….The HMIs 142 comprise dedicated HMIs in the flight deck, and provide information to the pilot and/or flight crew. The HMIs communicate information via audio, visual and/or tactile means, e.g., via one or more of a screen, a dashboard, an audio alert and a vibrating seatback.).
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 § 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, & 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2025/0131836A1 (“Gu”), in view of US 2013/0110323A1 (“Knight”)..
As per claim 1 Gu discloses
A collision avoidance system for aggregating and processing data when an aircraft is on or approaching an aerodrome surface (see at least Gu, para. [0149]: In a further example of the system 2…the risks associated with ground operations (Bl to B16) in the aviation environment near and at the airport can be more particularly monitored including taxiing collision/near collision, foreign object damage/debris 55, objects falling from aircraft 56, jet blast/propeller/rotor wash 57, fire/fume/smoke 58, fuel leaks 59, damage to aircraft fuselage/wings/empennage 60…), the collision avoidance system comprising:
a data input module configured to obtain object data and contextual data from a plurality of aircraft systems (see at least Gu, para. [0150-0153]: Further the system 2 in step 304 is configured to use the fused information to detect and identify at least one object, such as the aircraft(s) 16, ground vehicles and crew 18, 20, and airport infrastructure such as the boarding gates and the like, to calculate the at least one objects' physical properties, and to predict the at least one objects' physical properties. For example, the aircrafts' position, travel direction, velocity, acceleration, altitude and attitude is monitored as well as the distance between aircraft of interest and object of interest, e.g. the ground vehicles and crew, boarding gates, gate boundaries and the like.), wherein:
the object data relates to objects detected around the aircraft (see at least Gu, para. [0150-0153]: Further the system 2 in step 304 is configured to use the fused information to detect and identify at least one object, such as the aircraft(s) 16, ground vehicles and crew 18, 20, and airport infrastructure such as the boarding gates and the like, to calculate the at least one objects' physical properties, and to predict the at least one objects' physical properties.); and
the contextual data relates to information about the aircraft's route and environment (see at least Gu, para. [0150-0153]: For example, the aircrafts' position, travel direction, velocity, acceleration, altitude and attitude is monitored as well as the distance between aircraft of interest and object of interest, e.g. the ground vehicles and crew, boarding gates, gate boundaries and the like.);
a processor configured to:
combine the object data into an aggregated list of detected objects (see at least Gu, para. [0137]: In the right column of Table 3, there are shown detection and tracking multiple objects data processing capability and brief safe operation criteria that are required for each occurrence group, including object types, classes, different physical (both current and predicted) properties of each monitored object, and the types of risks and accompanying safe operation criteria that is associated with each occurrence type.); and
label the aggregated list of detected objects using the contextual data to form a contextualised list of detected objects for use in determining collision avoidance (see at least Gu, para. [0137]: Table 4 provides additional details into the particular safe and unsafe operation criteria (left column) for each of the occurrence types and in the right hand column there is provided the examples of assessment criteria/method for each of the safety operation criteria.); and
a data output module configured to output the contextualised list of detected objects to a set of output systems (see at least Gu, para. [0108]: Once installed, the software application of the host service 4 provides an interface that enables the host service 4 to facilitate communication of information and/or alerts, including sensor information, raw or processed, to a predetermined user 16, 18, 20. & para. [0133] & para. [0171]: The system can provide real-time monitoring of aviation activities, detection of unsafe aviation activity and generation of alerts, which can be displayed on at least one standalone screen or can be integrated with existing systems located in at least a cockpit of said aircraft, air traffic control towers/centres, ground control locations and airport emergency response team locations. The display format may include 3-D map and panoramic view.).
wherein the plurality of aircraft systems comprises input systems configured to provide the object data (see at least Gu, para. [0150-0153]: Further the system 2 in step 304 is configured to use the fused information to detect and identify at least one object, such as the aircraft(s) 16, ground vehicles and crew 18, 20, and airport infrastructure such as the boarding gates and the like, to calculate the at least one objects' physical properties, and to predict the at least one objects' physical properties. For example, the aircrafts' position, travel direction, velocity, acceleration, altitude and attitude is monitored as well as the distance between aircraft of interest and object of interest, e.g. the ground vehicles and crew, boarding gates, gate boundaries and the like.), and wherein the input systems comprises ;
non-cooperative sensing systems comprising sensors on board the aircraft configured to detect objects not actively providing information about themselves (see at least Gu, para. [0111-0112]: Monitoring units 22 are mounted on aircraft 16 and/or in locations on ground service vehicles and/or ground support vehicles 18 and equipment, ground personnel 20. Monitoring units 22 are configured and arranged so as to provide real-time, continuous and extensive views of a maximum space or volume near and at the airport (e.g. runway 40, taxiway 42, apron 44, ramp areas 46, runway threshold 48) in a variety of visibility or meteorological/environmental conditions.…Most preferably, each monitoring unit 22 has one of each of the LiDAR sensor 26 and a camera-type sensor 28 thereby advantageously providing range information of one or more objects and surrounding environment by LiDAR sensor, allowing accurate motion and position measurement; and providing visual information of one or more objects and surrounding environment by both LiDAR and camera-types sensors but primarily by the camera-type sensor,);
external surveillance systems and services configured to detect data regarding objects on the aerodrome surface (see at least Gu, para. [0111]: Referring particularly to FIGS. 1, 2 and 4, there are provided about 10 or more monitoring units 22 which each include one of each of the least two sensors 26, 28, 30 and which are provided in multiple locations throughout the aviation environment near and at airport including runway, taxiway, apron, ramp areas, passenger boarding bridges, ground service vehicles, ground support vehicles, ground crew, airport building structures including gates. Monitoring units 22 are mounted on aircraft 16 and/or in locations on ground service vehicles and/or ground support vehicles 18 and equipment, ground personnel 20.); and
wherein the output system comprises one or more of:
the non-cooperative sensing systems which, using the contextualised list of detected objects, are configured to support internal detection and/or tracking and resolving ambiguities in their detection algorithms; and
the external surveillance systems and services which, using the contextualised list of detected objects, are configured to improve the external surveillance systems and services' situational awareness of connected clients, and/or improving the situational awareness of the connected clients (see at least Gu, para. [0172]: more of the following advantages including improvement in aviation safety, operation efficiency, capacity, operating cost efficiency, environment and security. Specifically, the advantages include the following: enhanced situation awareness of unsafe aviation activities to human operators and operating systems, e.g. Air Traffic Control officers, pilots, aircraft on board systems that control the aircraft and emergency response team: awareness of all objects and activities within the aviation operating environment near and at airport; prompt detection and awareness (within seconds) of deviation from and/or violation of safe aviation operation criteria; human operators and/or operating systems can immediately assess the detected and identified unsafe aviation activities, and implement appropriate corrective actions; prevention of aviation safety occurrences or reduction of severity/cost of aviation safety occurrences;).
However Gu does not explicitly disclose
wherein the collision avoidance system is configured to, when the aircraft is within a specified range of the aerodrome surface, commence operation as the aircraft approaches the aerodrome surface, remain active during aerodrome surface operations, and cease operation after take-off.
Knight teaches
wherein the collision avoidance system is configured to, when the aircraft is within a specified range of the aerodrome surface, commence operation as the aircraft approaches the aerodrome surface, remain active during aerodrome surface operations, and cease operation after take-off (see at least Knight, para. [0047-0048]: At block/task/step 315, the processor 220 determines whether the aircraft 100 is on the ground and moving below a threshold ground speed. When the processor 220 determines that the aircraft 100is either (1) not on the ground, or (2) is not moving or (3) is moving above a threshold ground speed, method 300 loops back to block/task/step 315. This way, when the aircraft is in the air (i.e., not on the ground), or alternatively is on the ground and not moving, the system is effectively disabled to prevent the cockpit display from being activated and displaying the video images in cases where it would not be useful…By contrast, when the processor 220 determines that the aircraft 100 is both on the ground and moving below the threshold ground speed, the system 200 is enabled and the method 300 proceeds to block/task/step 320. At 320, the video imagers acquire video images of various regions around the aircraft 100 that correspond to each of the video imagers. In some operational scenarios, the video imagers will already be enabled and is use for other purposes (e.g., to display views outside the aircraft to the crew or passengers).).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gu to incorporate the teaching of wherein the collision avoidance system is configured to, when the aircraft is within a specified range of the aerodrome surface, commence operation as the aircraft approaches the aerodrome surface, remain active during aerodrome surface operations, and cease operation after take-off of Knight, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide methods, systems and apparatus that can reduce the likelihood of and/or prevent collisions with the detected obstacles (see at least Knight, para. [0005]).
As per claim 3 Gu discloses
wherein the plurality of aircraft systems comprises support systems configured to provide the contextual data (see at least Gu, para. [0150-0153]: Further the system 2 in step 304 is configured to use the fused information to detect and identify at least one object, such as the aircraft(s) 16, ground vehicles and crew 18, 20, and airport infrastructure such as the boarding gates and the like, to calculate the at least one objects' physical properties, and to predict the at least one objects' physical properties. For example, the aircrafts' position, travel direction, velocity, acceleration, altitude and attitude is monitored as well as the distance between aircraft of interest and object of interest, e.g. the ground vehicles and crew, boarding gates, gate boundaries and the like.).
As per claim 4 Gu discloses
wherein the input systems further comprise: cooperative sensing systems comprising sensors configured to detect data transmitted by other vehicles relating to the position and velocity of the other vehicles (see at least Gu, para. [0111]: Referring particularly to FIGS. 1, 2 and 4, there are provided about 10 or more monitoring units 22 which each include one of each of the least two sensors 26, 28, 30 and which are provided in multiple locations throughout the aviation environment near and at airport including runway, taxiway, apron, ramp areas, passenger boarding bridges, ground service vehicles, ground support vehicles, ground crew, airport building structures including gates. Monitoring units 22 are mounted on aircraft 16 and/or in locations on ground service vehicles and/or ground support vehicles 18 and equipment, ground personnel 20.).
As per claim 5 Gu discloses
wherein the support systems comprise one or more of:
navigation systems configured to provide information about one or more of the aircraft's position, velocity, and heading (see at least Gu, para. [0150-0153]: Further the system 2 in step 304 is configured to use the fused information to detect and identify at least one object, such as the aircraft(s) 16, ground vehicles and crew 18, 20, and airport infrastructure such as the boarding gates and the like, to calculate the at least one objects' physical properties, and to predict the at least one objects' physical properties. For example, the aircrafts' position, travel direction, velocity, acceleration, altitude and attitude is monitored as well as the distance between aircraft of interest and object of interest, e.g. the ground vehicles and crew, boarding gates, gate boundaries and the like.);
taxi navigation and management systems configured to provide information about one or more of the aircraft's position, taxi route, and the trajectory of other vehicles;
databases configured to provide information about one or more of airport runways, airport taxiways, non-movement area layouts, and aerodrome structures (see at least Gu, para. [0140]: Additional information 54 can be received by the processing system 4 to assist and/or facilitate calculation of the objects' physical properties and estimation/prediction of their physical properties and/or safe operation criteria, including runway data, such as length, boundaries, entries and exits, surface characteristics such as material or friction coefficients, and/or surface conditions such as wet, ice/snow, metrological data such as wind, temperature and the like, and aircraft data, such air craft type and capabilities/characteristics, weight, flying phase and/or intended or reference position or motion.); and
the non-cooperative sensing systems.
As per claim 6 Gu discloses
wherein the processor is configured to aggregate data from multiple sensing systems using one or more of heuristic algorithms, machine learning models, and neural networks (see at least Gu, para. [0129]: In the example 'Stage 3' summarised in Table 2, the processing system 4 can first process the camera sensor information received from the camera images/video frames to detect and/or identify the objects. In particular, the artificial intelligence-based data processing system 4 employs machine- or deep-learning-based object detection and/or classification models, which are trained, validated, verified and optimised for detection and classification of objects involved in aviation activities in an aviation environment near and at airport. The object detection and/or classification models that can be utilised include You Only Look Once (YOLO) or Fully Convolutional One-Stage (FCOS) models although it is expected that other artificial intelligence-based models could equally be used instead for similar effect.).
As per claim 7 Gu discloses
wherein the output systems further comprise one or more of:
human-machine interfaces configured to provide information to the pilot and/or flight crew (see at least Gu, para. [0108]: Once installed, the software application of the host service 4 provides an interface that enables the host service 4 to facilitate communication of information and/or alerts, including sensor information, raw or processed, to a predetermined user 16, 18, 20. & para. [0133] & para. [0171]: The system can provide real-time monitoring of aviation activities, detection of unsafe aviation activity and generation of alerts, which can be displayed on at least one standalone screen or can be integrated with existing systems located in at least a cockpit of said aircraft, air traffic control towers/centres, ground control locations and airport emergency response team locations. The display format may include 3-D map and panoramic view.); and
ownship guidance systems comprising taxi guidance systems configured to provide automated control for movement of the aircraft on the aerodrome surface.
As per claim 11 Gu discloses
A method of aggregating and processing data when an aircraft is on or approaching an aerodrome surface (see at least Gu, para. [0149]: In a further example of the system 2…the risks associated with ground operations (Bl to B16) in the aviation environment near and at the airport can be more particularly monitored including taxiing collision/near collision, foreign object damage/debris 55, objects falling from aircraft 56, jet blast/propeller/rotor wash 57, fire/fume/smoke 58, fuel leaks 59, damage to aircraft fuselage/wings/empennage 60…), the method comprising:
obtaining, using a data input module, object data and contextual data from a plurality of aircraft systems (see at least Gu, para. [0150-0153]: Further the system 2 in step 304 is configured to use the fused information to detect and identify at least one object, such as the aircraft(s) 16, ground vehicles and crew 18, 20, and airport infrastructure such as the boarding gates and the like, to calculate the at least one objects' physical properties, and to predict the at least one objects' physical properties. For example, the aircrafts' position, travel direction, velocity, acceleration, altitude and attitude is monitored as well as the distance between aircraft of interest and object of interest, e.g. the ground vehicles and crew, boarding gates, gate boundaries and the like.), wherein;
the object data relates to objects detected around the aircraft (see at least Gu, para. [0150-0153]: Further the system 2 in step 304 is configured to use the fused information to detect and identify at least one object, such as the aircraft(s) 16, ground vehicles and crew 18, 20, and airport infrastructure such as the boarding gates and the like, to calculate the at least one objects' physical properties, and to predict the at least one objects' physical properties.); and
the contextual data relates to information about the aircraft's route and environment (see at least Gu, para. [0150-0153]: For example, the aircrafts' position, travel direction, velocity, acceleration, altitude and attitude is monitored as well as the distance between aircraft of interest and object of interest, e.g. the ground vehicles and crew, boarding gates, gate boundaries and the like.);
combining, at a processor, the object data into an aggregated list of detected objects (see at least Gu, para. [0137]: In the right column of Table 3, there are shown detection and tracking multiple objects data processing capability and brief safe operation criteria that are required for each occurrence group, including object types, classes, different physical (both current and predicted) properties of each monitored object, and the types of risks and accompanying safe operation criteria that is associated with each occurrence type.);
labelling, at the processor, the aggregated list of detected objects using the contextual data to form a contextualised list of detected objects for use in determining collision avoidance (see at least Gu, para. [0137]: Table 4 provides additional details into the particular safe and unsafe operation criteria (left column) for each of the occurrence types and in the right hand column there is provided the examples of assessment criteria/method for each of the safety operation criteria.); and
outputting, using a data output module, the contextualised list of detected objects to a set of output systems (see at least Gu, para. [0108]: Once installed, the software application of the host service 4 provides an interface that enables the host service 4 to facilitate communication of information and/or alerts, including sensor information, raw or processed, to a predetermined user 16, 18, 20. & para. [0133] & para. [0171]: The system can provide real-time monitoring of aviation activities, detection of unsafe aviation activity and generation of alerts, which can be displayed on at least one standalone screen or can be integrated with existing systems located in at least a cockpit of said aircraft, air traffic control towers/centres, ground control locations and airport emergency response team locations. The display format may include 3-D map and panoramic view.);
wherein the plurality of aircraft systems comprises input systems configured to provide the object data (see at least Gu, para. [0150-0153]: Further the system 2 in step 304 is configured to use the fused information to detect and identify at least one object, such as the aircraft(s) 16, ground vehicles and crew 18, 20, and airport infrastructure such as the boarding gates and the like, to calculate the at least one objects' physical properties, and to predict the at least one objects' physical properties. For example, the aircrafts' position, travel direction, velocity, acceleration, altitude and attitude is monitored as well as the distance between aircraft of interest and object of interest, e.g. the ground vehicles and crew, boarding gates, gate boundaries and the like.), and wherein the input systems comprises ;
non-cooperative sensing systems comprising sensors on board the aircraft configured to detect objects not actively providing information about themselves (see at least Gu, para. [0111-0112]: Referring particularly to FIGS. 1, 2 and 4, there are provided about 10 or more monitoring units 22 which each include one of each of the least two sensors 26, 28, 30 and which are provided in multiple locations throughout the aviation environment near and at airport including runway, taxiway, apron, ramp areas, passenger boarding bridges, ground service vehicles, ground support vehicles, ground crew, airport building structures including gates…Most preferably, each monitoring unit 22 has one of each of the LiDAR sensor 26 and a camera-type sensor 28 thereby advantageously providing range information of one or more objects and surrounding environment by LiDAR sensor, allowing accurate motion and position measurement; and providing visual information of one or more objects and surrounding environment by both LiDAR and camera-types sensors but primarily by the camera-type sensor,);
external surveillance systems and services configured to detect data regarding objects on the aerodrome surface (see at least Gu, para. [0111]: Referring particularly to FIGS. 1, 2 and 4, there are provided about 10 or more monitoring units 22 which each include one of each of the least two sensors 26, 28, 30 and which are provided in multiple locations throughout the aviation environment near and at airport including runway, taxiway, apron, ramp areas, passenger boarding bridges, ground service vehicles, ground support vehicles, ground crew, airport building structures including gates. Monitoring units 22 are mounted on aircraft 16 and/or in locations on ground service vehicles and/or ground support vehicles 18 and equipment, ground personnel 20.); and
wherein the output system comprises one or more of:
the non-cooperative sensing systems which, using the contextualised list of detected objects, are configured to support internal detection and/or tracking and resolving ambiguities in their detection algorithms; and
the external surveillance systems and services which, using the contextualised list of detected objects, are configured to improve the external surveillance systems and services' situational awareness of connected clients, and/or improving the situational awareness of the connected clients (see at least Gu, para. [0172]: more of the following advantages including improvement in aviation safety, operation efficiency, capacity, operating cost efficiency, environment and security. Specifically, the advantages include the following: enhanced situation awareness of unsafe aviation activities to human operators and operating systems, e.g. Air Traffic Control officers, pilots, aircraft on board systems that control the aircraft and emergency response team: awareness of all objects and activities within the aviation operating environment near and at airport; prompt detection and awareness (within seconds) of deviation from and/or violation of safe aviation operation criteria; human operators and/or operating systems can immediately assess the detected and identified unsafe aviation activities, and implement appropriate corrective actions; prevention of aviation safety occurrences or reduction of severity/cost of aviation safety occurrences;).
However Gu does not explicitly disclose
wherein the method is operational when the aircraft is within a specified range of the aerodrome surface and during aerodrome surface operations, and wherein the method ceases operation after aircraft take-off.
Knight teaches
wherein the method is operational when the aircraft is within a specified range of the aerodrome surface and during aerodrome surface operations, and wherein the method ceases operation after aircraft take-off (see at least Knight, para. [0047-0048]: At block/task/step 315, the processor 220 determines whether the aircraft 100 is on the ground and moving below a threshold ground speed. When the processor 220 determines that the aircraft 100is either (1) not on the ground, or (2) is not moving or (3) is moving above a threshold ground speed, method 300 loops back to block/task/step 315. This way, when the aircraft is in the air (i.e., not on the ground), or alternatively is on the ground and not moving, the system is effectively disabled to prevent the cockpit display from being activated and displaying the video images in cases where it would not be useful…By contrast, when the processor 220 determines that the aircraft 100 is both on the ground and moving below the threshold ground speed, the system 200 is enabled and the method 300 proceeds to block/task/step 320. At 320, the video imagers acquire video images of various regions around the aircraft 100 that correspond to each of the video imagers. In some operational scenarios, the video imagers will already be enabled and is use for other purposes (e.g., to display views outside the aircraft to the crew or passengers).).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gu to incorporate the teaching of wherein the method is operational when the aircraft is within a specified range of the aerodrome surface and during aerodrome surface operations, and wherein the method ceases operation after aircraft take-off of Knight, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide methods, systems and apparatus that can reduce the likelihood of and/or prevent collisions with the detected obstacles (see at least Knight, para. [0005]).
As per claim 12 Gu discloses
wherein the combining comprises aggregating data from the aircraft sensors, optionally wherein the combining comprises aggregating data from sensors external to the aircraft (see at least Gu, para. [0111]: Referring particularly to FIGS. 1, 2 and 4, there are provided about 10 or more monitoring units 22 which each include one of each of the least two sensors 26, 28, 30 and which are provided in multiple locations throughout the aviation environment near and at airport including runway, taxiway, apron, ramp areas, passenger boarding bridges, ground service vehicles, ground support vehicles, ground crew, airport building structures including gates. Monitoring units 22 are mounted on aircraft 16 and/or in locations on ground service vehicles and/or ground support vehicles 18 and equipment, ground personnel 20.).
Claim(s) 8-9, & 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gu, in view of Knight, in view of US 2015/0194060A1 (“Mannon”).
As per claim 8 Gu does not explicitly disclose
wherein the aggregated list of detected objects is provided with georeferenced information regarding the position, velocity, and heading of each object.
Mannon teaches
wherein the aggregated list of detected objects is provided with georeferenced information regarding the position, velocity, and heading of each object (see at least Mannon, para. [0035]: a ground obstacle collision alert indicative of a ground obstacle collision condition, which can include, for example, a condition in which there is a potential for a collision between the aircraft and an obstacle while the aircraft is on the ground, e.g., due to the distance between the aircraft and the obstacle, due to the velocity and direction of the aircraft relative to the obstacle, or any combination thereof. & para. [0095]: As discussed above, in some examples, processor 16 is configured to determine a location of a detected obstacle based on a radial coordinate system, which may be determined relative to one or more fixed points on aircraft 12, which can be, for example, on the two wings of aircraft 12. Thus, processor 16 can determine both the distance between aircraft 12 and a detected obstacle, as well as the angular direction of the detected obstacle relative to aircraft 12, and position graphical representation of detected obstacle 40 relative to graphical representation of aircraft 38 based on the determined distance and angular direction.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gu to incorporate the teaching of wherein the aggregated list of detected objects is provided with georeferenced information regarding the position, velocity, and heading of each object of Mannon,with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to help improve crew member awareness of obstacles (see at least Mannon, para. [0026]).
As per claim 9 Gu does not explicitly disclose
wherein the aircraft's environment is divided into proximity zones based on proximity to the aircraft, such that the collision avoidance system is configured to track any one object as the object moves through different proximity zones.
Mannon teaches
wherein the aircraft's environment is divided into proximity zones based on proximity to the aircraft, such that the collision avoidance system is configured to track any one object as the object moves through different proximity zones (see at least Mannon, para. [0064]: For example, processor 16 can characterize detected obstacles as one of primary targets, intermediate targets, and secondary targets, based on the proximity of the detected aircraft to aircraft 12. The characterization of a detected obstacle as one of these types of targets may indicate a threat level of the detected obstacle, e.g., as a function of the possibility aircraft 12 will collide with the detected obstacle. & para. [0067-0068]: Memory 24 (FIG. 1) of aircraft 12 or another memory can store the parameters (e.g., vertical heights and lateral distances) with which processor 16 determines a threat level of a detected obstacle, e.g., the parameters with which processor 16 characterizes a detected obstacle as a primary, an intermediate, or a secondary target. In some examples, a primary target is an object on the ground within direct Strike Zone of a structure of aircraft 12, Such as a wing, wingtip or nacelle. The direct Zone is a Zone in which the aircraft 12 will strike the obstacle if aircraft 12 continues on its current heading. In addition, in some examples, an intermediate target is an object on the ground located just outside the direct strike Zone of a structure of aircraft 12, such as up to 10 feet or up to 3 meters laterally relative to the aircraft wing, where the lateral direction is in a direction Substantially perpendicular to the heading of aircraft 12.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gu to incorporate the teaching of wherein the aircraft's environment is divided into proximity zones based on proximity to the aircraft, such that the collision avoidance system is configured to track any one object as the object moves through different proximity zones of Mannon,with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to help improve crew member awareness of obstacles (see at least Mannon, para. [0026]).
As per claim 13 Gu does not explicitly disclose
wherein the combining of the object data into an aggregated list of detected objects further comprises providing georeferenced information regarding the position, velocity, and heading of each object.
Mannon teaches
wherein the combining of the object data into an aggregated list of detected objects further comprises providing georeferenced information regarding the position, velocity, and heading of each object (see at least Mannon, para. [0035]: a ground obstacle collision alert indicative of a ground obstacle collision condition, which can include, for example, a condition in which there is a potential for a collision between the aircraft and an obstacle while the aircraft is on the ground, e.g., due to the distance between the aircraft and the obstacle, due to the velocity and direction of the aircraft relative to the obstacle, or any combination thereof. & para. [0095]: As discussed above, in some examples, processor 16 is configured to determine a location of a detected obstacle based on a radial coordinate system, which may be determined relative to one or more fixed points on aircraft 12, which can be, for example, on the two wings of aircraft 12. Thus, processor 16 can determine both the distance between aircraft 12 and a detected obstacle, as well as the angular direction of the detected obstacle relative to aircraft 12, and position graphical representation of detected obstacle 40 relative to graphical representation of aircraft 38 based on the determined distance and angular direction.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gu to incorporate the teaching of wherein the combining of the object data into an aggregated list of detected objects further comprises providing georeferenced information regarding the position, velocity, and heading of each object of Mannon,with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to help improve crew member awareness of obstacles (see at least Mannon, para. [0026]).
As per claim 14 Gu discloses
wherein the labelling comprises using the contextual data to determine the relevance of the detected objects to the aircraft, further comprising determining one or more of threat level information, alerts, and indications for the detected objects (see at least Gu, para. [0137]: In the right column of Table 3, there are shown detection and tracking multiple objects data processing capability and brief safe operation criteria that are required for each occurrence group, including object types, classes, different physical (both current and predicted) properties of each monitored object, and the types of risks and accompanying safe operation criteria that is associated with each occurrence type. Table 4 provides additional details into the particular safe and unsafe operation criteria (left column) for each of the occurrence types and in the right hand column there is provided the examples of assessment criteria/method for each of the safety operation criteria. & para. [0155-0157]: Alternatively, the system 2 is configured to determine that the comparison shows that risk of collision or near collision is medium or high, i.e. runway excursion may occur in the next 120 seconds, or in the next 20 seconds, and the system is further configured to transmit at least one alert to at least one user accordingly i.e. yellow alert or red alert.).
However Gu does not explicitly disclose
for each of the detected objects.
Mannon teaches
further comprising determining one or more of threat level information, alerts, and indications for each of the detected objects (see at least Mannon, para. [0064]: For example, processor 16 can characterize detected obstacles as one of primary targets, intermediate targets, and secondary targets, based on the proximity of the detected aircraft to aircraft 12. The characterization of a detected obstacle as one of these types of targets may indicate a threat level of the detected obstacle, e.g., as a function of the possibility aircraft 12 will collide with the detected obstacle. & para. [0067-0068]: Memory 24 (FIG. 1) of aircraft 12 or another memory can store the parameters (e.g., vertical heights and lateral distances) with which processor 16 determines a threat level of a detected obstacle, e.g., the parameters with which processor 16 characterizes a detected obstacle as a primary, an intermediate, or a secondary target. In some examples, a primary target is an object on the ground within direct Strike Zone of a structure of aircraft 12, Such as a wing, wingtip or nacelle. The direct Zone is a Zone in which the aircraft 12 will strike the obstacle if aircraft 12 continues on its current heading. In addition, in some examples, an intermediate target is an object on the ground located just outside the direct strike Zone of a structure of aircraft 12, such as up to 10 feet or up to 3 meters laterally relative to the aircraft wing, where the lateral direction is in a direction Substantially perpendicular to the heading of aircraft 12.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gu to incorporate the teaching of further comprising determining one or more of threat level information, alerts, and indications for each of the detected objects of Mannon,with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to help improve crew member awareness of obstacles (see at least Mannon, para. [0026]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gu, in view of Knight, in view of Mannon, in view of US 2025/0058700A1 (“Nagaraja”).
As per claim 10 Gu does not explicitly disclose
wherein the proximity zones comprise a short-range zone and a long-range zone, optionally wherein the short-range zone is represented using occupancy grid maps and the long-range zone provides information and predictions about object position and/or velocity using Kalman filters.
Nagaraja teaches
wherein the proximity zones comprise a short-range zone and a long-range zone, optionally wherein the short-range zone is represented using occupancy grid maps and the long-range zone provides information and predictions about object position and/or velocity using Kalman filters (see at least Nagaraja, para. [0018]: Example ego-machines may include, but are not limited to, vehicles (land, sea, space, and/or air), robots, robotic platforms, etc. para. [0094]: Cameras with a field of view that include portions of the environment in front of the vehicle 400(e.g., front-facing cameras) may be used for surround view, to help identify forward-facing paths and obstacles, as well aid in, with the help of one or more controllers 436 and/or control SoCs, providing information critical to generating an occupancy grid and/or determining the preferred vehicle paths. & para. [0095]: Although only one wide-view camera is illustrated in FIG. 4B, there may any number of wide-view cameras 470 on the vehicle 400. In addition, long-range camera(s) 498 (e.g., a long-view stereo camera pair) may be used for depth-based object detection, especially for objects for which a neural network has not yet been trained. The long-range camera(s) 498 may also be used for object detection and classification, as well as basic object tracking. & para. [0162]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Gu to incorporate the teaching of wherein the proximity zones comprise a short-range zone and a long-range zone, optionally wherein the short-range zone is represented using occupancy grid maps and the long-range zone provides information and predictions about object position and/or velocity using Kalman filters of Nagaraja,with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve accuracy of detecting illumination states and determining a scene-illumination state of a region at which a machine may be located or traveling. (see at least Nagaraja, para. [0021]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MOHAMED ABDO ALGEHAIM whose telephone number is (571)272-3628. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5PM EST.
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, Fadey Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
/MOHAMED ABDO ALGEHAIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights