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 .
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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 4-19, 21-23 are pending.
Claims 2-3, 20, and 24 are canceled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 12/03/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of a certified copy of foreign application JP2022-073560, as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 1, 6, 8-10, 12, 16, 17, 19, and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities:
"a movement route of a mobile body" should read "[[a]] the movement route of [[a]] the mobile body" (claim 1, line 6-7 and claim 19, lines 7-8)
"destination of a mobile body" should read "destination of [[a]] the mobile body" (claim 1, lines 11-12)
"extracting, as a movement route" should read "extracting, as [[a]] the movement route" (claim 1, lines 14)
"wherein conditions" should read "wherein the conditions" (claim 5, line 2 and claim 6, line 3)
"at least ant one" should read "at least
"each time unit" should read "each timing" (claims 8, 9, and 10)
"when the mobile body does not include a specific sensor" should read "when the mobile body does not include [[a]] the specific sensor" (claim 9, line 4)
"when the mobile body does not include a camera" should read "when the mobile body does not include [[a]] the camera" (claim 10, line 3)
"where a camera is provided" should read "where [[a]] the camera is provided" (claim 10, line 5)
"updating a status of the spatial region" should read "updating [[a]] the status of the spatial region" (Claim 12)
"in each of the spatial region" should read "in each of the spatial regions" (claim 16, line 3-4)
"the plurality of continuous spatial regions" should read "the plurality of
"storing by a storage device" should read "storing by [[a]] the storage device" (claim 19, line 6)
Please remove the comma after the semicolon (claim 19, line 10)
"a computing device of the route generation device" should read "[[a]] the computing device of the route generation device" (claim 22, lines 5-6)
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-19, 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 19, and 21 each recite “changing a status of a spatial region extracted as a movement route…” after reciting “extracting, as a movement route, a plurality of spatial regions…” As written, it is unclear whether the spatial region recited in the status-changing step is a single one of the plurality of spatial regions as extracted in the extracting step or whether this implies that only one spatial region is extracted in the extracting step. The introduction of a single spatial region after introducing a plurality of spatial regions renders the claims indefinite.
Claim 11 recites "a movable time of the mobile body" after reciting "a moving time of the mobile body". It is unclear whether the movable time and the moving time are the same parameter or different parameters. As such, the claim has been rendered indefinite. If the two parameters are one and the same, Examiner suggests changing both instances to "movable time" or changing both instances to "moving time". Additionally, the second iteration of the parameters should recite "the" instead of "a" if these two iterations refer to the same parameter.
Dependent claims 4-18 and 22-23 are similarly rejected due to their dependency on indefinite claims.
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, 4-19, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed inventions are directed to a judicial exception without significantly more, as determined by the Subject Matter Eligibility Test
detailed below.
Step 1
Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test entails considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Independent claims 1, 19, and 21 are directed towards an apparatus, a method, and a system, respectively. Therefore, each of the independent claims 1, 19, and 21, and the corresponding dependent claims 4-18, 22-23 are directed to a statutory category of invention under step 1.
Step 2A, Prong 1
If the claim recites a statutory category of invention, the claim requires further analysis in Step
2A. Step 2A of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test is a two-prong inquiry. In Prong 1, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception.
Regarding Prong 1, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether they recite subject matter that falls within one of the following groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claim 1 recites abstract limitations, including those shown in bold below.
A route generation device comprising a computing device and a storage device, and configured to generate a movement route of a mobile body,
wherein the mobile body is a drone,
the route generation device comprising:
the storage device configured to store:
region data formed by a plurality of spatial regions configured to serve as a movement route of a mobile body, and
status data indicating a status used to determine whether movement is possible at each timing in each of the spatial regions; and
the computing device configured to execute:
receiving, through a receiving means, a departure point and a destination of a mobile body, and conditions of the mobile body including at least information for specifying a travel speed,
extracting, as a movement route, a plurality of spatial regions including a route from the departure point to the destination for the mobile body under the conditions,
changing a status of a spatial region extracted as a movement route of the mobile body in the status data in consideration of each timing according to a travel speed of the mobile body, and
transmitting, through a transmission means, information on a spatial region of the movement route and a spatial region in proximity in association with each of the timings to a control device of the mobile body.
These limitations, as drafted, describe a device that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind, or by a human using pen and paper, and therefore recites mental processes. For example, “extracting, as a movement route, a plurality of spatial regions including a route from the departure point to the destination for the mobile body under the conditions” may be interpreted as a mental decision of determining a route from one point to another, based either on historical knowledge of the area or the observation of the available airspace if the departure and destination are both in view. For example, “changing a status of a spatial region extracted as a movement route of the mobile body in the status data in consideration of each timing according to a travel speed of the mobile body” may be interpreted as a mental determination made according to observable data, such as recognizing that the regions to be occupied by one vehicle may not be available to another vehicle at the same time and mentally denoting those regions as having a different status. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Claims 19 and 21 recite abstract limitations analogous to those identified above with respect to claim 1, and therefore recite abstract ideas per the same analysis.
Claim 21 additionally recites “distinguishing a status of each of the spatial regions included in information regarding the spatial region for each type…” which may be interpreted as a mental process of interpreting the meaning of a received signal, such as a person reading words and interpreting the status therefrom.
Step 2A, Prong 2
If the claim recites a judicial exception in Step 2A, Prong 1, the claim requires further analysis in Step 2A, Prong 2. In Step 2A, Prong 2, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
Regarding Prong 2, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the claim, as a whole, integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. As noted in MPEP § 2106.04(d), 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 the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use do not integrate a judicial exception into a “practical application”.
Claim 1 recites additional elements including those underlined below.
A route generation device comprising a computing device and a storage device, and configured to generate a movement route of a mobile body,
wherein the mobile body is a drone,
the route generation device comprising:
the storage device configured to store:
region data formed by a plurality of spatial regions configured to serve as a movement route of a mobile body, and
status data indicating a status used to determine whether movement is possible at each timing in each of the spatial regions; and
the computing device configured to execute:
receiving, through a receiving means, a departure point and a destination of a mobile body, and conditions of the mobile body including at least information for specifying a travel speed,
extracting, as a movement route, a plurality of spatial regions including a route from the departure point to the destination for the mobile body under the conditions,
changing a status of a spatial region extracted as a movement route of the mobile body in the status data in consideration of each timing according to a travel speed of the mobile body, and
transmitting, through a transmission means, information on a spatial region of the movement route and a spatial region in proximity in association with each of the timings to a control device of the mobile body.
The recitation of receiving, through a receiving means, a departure point and a destination of a mobile body, and conditions of the mobile body including at least information for specifying a travel speed amounts to mere data receiving, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Furthermore, the recitation of transmitting, through a transmission means, information on a spatial region of the movement route and a spatial region in proximity in association with each of the timings to a control device of the mobile body amounts to sending or displaying information, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Additionally, the recitation of the storage device configured to store: region data formed by a plurality of spatial regions configured to serve as a movement route of a mobile body, and status data indicating a status used to determine whether movement is possible at each timing in each of the spatial regions amounts to storing and/or retrieving information from memory, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Accordingly, in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The recitation of the computing device amounts to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer.
Claim 21 additionally recites receiving information about the spatial region, which is similarly viewed as insignificant extra-solution receiving of data, and recites to cause a display device to display the status, which amounts to insignificant extra-solution displaying of information.
Step 2B
If the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application in step 2A Prong 2, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception, and requires further analysis under Step 2B to determine whether it provides an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself).
As discussed above, the additional elements of the computing device and the storage device configured to store: region data formed by a plurality of spatial regions configured to serve as a movement route of a mobile body, and status data indicating a status used to determine whether movement is possible at each timing in each of the spatial regions amount to mere instructions to apply the exception. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit).
As discussed above, receiving, through a receiving means, a departure point and a destination of a mobile body, and conditions of the mobile body including at least information for specifying a travel speed and receiving information about the spatial region amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity. MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well-understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here).
As discussed above, transmitting, through a transmission means, information on a spatial region of the movement route and a spatial region in proximity in association with each of the timings to a control device of the mobile body and to cause a display device to display the status amounts to insignificant extra-solution activity. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including in Trading Techs. Int’l v. IBG LLC, 921 F.3d 1084, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2019), and Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Co., 850 F.3d 1315, 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2017), for example, indicated that the mere displaying of data (i.e., displaying the changed status) is a well understood, routine, and conventional function.
Thus, even when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
Dependent claims 4-18 and 22-23 do not recite any further limitations that cause the claim(s) to be patent eligible. Rather, the various 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 (i.e., further characterizing the mental extraction steps). Therefore, dependent claims 4-18 and 22-23 are not patent eligible under the same rationale as provided for in the rejection of independent claims 1, 19, and 21.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 11, 12, 14, 15, 19, 21, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230394981 A1 BENEDEK; Aaron Sanjaya (hereinafter Benedek), in view of US 20230298472 A1 CHOI; Tae In et al. (hereinafter Choi).
Regarding Claim 1, Benedek discloses:
A route generation device comprising a computing device and a storage device, and configured to generate a movement route of a mobile body (see Benedek at least [0001] a flight management apparatus and [0109] a memory 11… a general computer and [0023] a request generation unit configured to determine own flight route),
wherein the mobile body is a drone (see Benedek at least [0110] Flying objects are any flyable devices, such as drones),
the route generation device comprising:
the storage device configured to store (see Benedek at least [0172] The memory 51 stores information):
region data formed by a plurality of spatial regions configured to serve as a movement route of a mobile body (see Benedek at least [0172] The memory 51 stores information of a plurality of space cells C which can be specified by coordinates or the like, reservation states of the space cells of the plurality of flying objects, flight routes of the respective flying objects generated by the route generation unit 53, and reservation states of the space cells), and
status data indicating a status used to determine whether movement is possible at each timing in each of the spatial regions (see Benedek at least [0138] the memory 31 may store the reservation state of the space cells of a plurality of flying objects as in the memory 11. The reservation state stored here may include not only the position information of the space cells C to be reserved but also information of the time zone in which the space cells C are reserved); and
the computing device configured to execute:
receiving, through a receiving means, a departure point and a destination of a mobile body, and conditions of the mobile body including at least information for specifying a travel speed (see Benedek at least [0139] The data acquisition unit 32 acquires data used for determining the flight route of the flying objects… The data to be acquired include the departure point and the destination of the flight route and [0140] the data acquisition unit 32 may periodically or intermittently acquire real-time data including the remaining battery level, current speed and the like from the flying object),
extracting, as a movement route, a plurality of spatial regions including a route from the departure point to the destination for the mobile body under the conditions (see Benedek at least [0189] the flight management apparatus 50 generates a new flight route to the destination with the specific space cell permitted to be reserved as a departure point for the flying object 60),
changing a status of a spatial region extracted as a movement route of the mobile body in the status data in consideration of each timing (see Benedek at least [0189] the flight management apparatus 50 updates the reservation state stored in the memory 51 for the specific space cell for which the reservation was permitted in step 37 for the flying object 60 and [0166] The flight management apparatus 30 may include information on a time zone in which the space cell is reserved in the reservation state of the space cell), and
transmitting, through a transmission means, information on a spatial region of the movement route and a spatial region in proximity in association with each of the timings to a control device of the mobile body (see Benedek at least [0160] when at least either a flight route of another flying object or the reservation state of the space cell C stored in the memory unit of the flight management apparatus is updated and the flight route of the flying object 40 becomes a near miss, the flight management apparatus transmits information indicating the fact to the flying object 40).
Benedek does not teach: changing a status of a spatial region according to a travel speed of the mobile body.
However, Choi teaches: changing a status of a spatial region according to a travel speed of the mobile body (see Choi at least [0073] the size of the space vector points located in the flightable area may vary depending on the wind speed, the wind direction, the size and speed of the unmanned vehicle, and the like).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drone spatial route planning device disclosed by Benedek to include the consideration of the drone speed in the spatial information of Choi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the inclusion of drone speed data affects the size of space vector points used in the display, creating a more intuitive environment display, as suggested by Choi (see Choi at least [0005] An object of the present invention, devised to solve the above problems, is to provide a method of displaying a corridor for an unmanned vehicle capable of intuitive recognition of a flight environment of the unmanned vehicle by 3-dimensionally displaying the corridor for the unmanned vehicle).
Regarding claim 4, Benedek and Choi disclose: The route generation device according to claim 1, wherein the status at least distinguishes between movability and non-movability (see Benedek at least [0113] The non-flyable area may be, for example, space cell(s) entirely or partially occupied by a building or classified as a “no-fly zone” or the like, or may further include a space cell (For example, adjacent space cells) in the vicinity of such a space cell).
Regarding claim 5, Benedek and Choi disclose: The route generation device according to claim 1,
wherein conditions of the mobile body include a moving purpose of the mobile body (see Benedek at least [0308] The communication unit 74 of the flight management apparatus 70 receives the emergency request concerning the emergency landing from the flying object 80), and
wherein the computing device extracts a spatial region corresponding to the moving purpose as the movement route (see Benedek at least [0310] the route generation unit 43 generates a new flight route of the flying object 80 for emergency landing by using the position data of the space cell(s) related to the emergency landable place).
Regarding claim 11, Benedek and Choi disclose: The route generation device according to claim 1,
wherein conditions of the mobile body include power information used to predict a moving time of the mobile body (See Benedek at least [0211] if it is calculated, based on information such as the remaining battery level and weather information, that the remaining battery level is less than a predetermined threshold during flight along the flight route, it may be determined that this candidate flight route is not flyable), and
wherein the computing device is configured to determine whether the mobile body can reach the destination from the departure point from a movable time of the mobile body predicted based on the power information, and transmit an alert signal when it is determined that the mobile body cannot reach the destination (see Benedek at least [0311] when the flight management apparatus 70 or the flying object 80 detects or receives that two or more flying objects are flying in the same cell, or that the remaining battery of the flying object is less than the predetermined value and needs an emergency landing, it may report the danger to the local authority having jurisdiction over the area).
Regarding claim 12, Benedek and Choi disclose: The route generation device according to claim 1, wherein the computing device is further configured to execute:
receiving environmental information of the spatial region through the receiving means (see Benedek at least [0322] the flight management apparatus may acquire weather information indicating that weather unsuitable for flight occurs in a predetermined area in a space),
determining conditions of passing of the spatial region using the environmental information (see Benedek at least [0322] The flight management apparatus may determine that weather unsuitable for flight occurs by determining from the weather information that precipitation per hour of a predetermined value or more, strong wind of a predetermined value or more, and pressure drop of a predetermined value or more occurs), and
updating the status of the spatial region of the status data according to the determined passing conditions (see Benedek at least [0323] When the weather unsuitable for flight occurs in a prescribed area, a flight management apparatus sets the space cells constituting the prescribed area as a non-flight area).
Regarding claim 14, Benedek and Choi disclose: The route generation device according to claim 1,
wherein conditions of the mobile body include whether the mobile body is a priority aircraft (see Benedek at least [0141] The priority, as described below, is a property of the flying object),
wherein, when the mobile body is a priority aircraft, the computing device extracts, in the extracting, a spatial region already set as a movement route of another mobile body in the status data as a movement route of the mobile body that is a priority aircraft (see Benedek at least [0148] When the priority of the flying object to be the flight route generation is “high”, the route generation unit 33 can set the derived flight route as the flight route of the flying object regardless of the flight route or the reservation state of other flying objects having the priority “low”), and
the computing device is further configured to execute changing a movement route currently set in the other mobile body other than a priority aircraft and updating the status data (see Benedek at least [0148] the flight route of the flying object having the priority “high” can be set in preference to the flight route of the flying objects having the priority “low” and [0149] the route generation unit 33 re-sets the flight route for the flying object of the priority “low” and its flight route becomes near miss with the set flight route. Further, regarding the flying object of the low priority, the route generation unit 33 cancels the reservation of the space cell which becomes a near miss position. In the case where the derived flight route is a near-miss with the flight route of the flying object having the already set priority “high”, the route generation unit 33 changes the derived flight route so as not to cause the near-miss).
Regarding claim 15, Benedek and Choi disclose: The route generation device according to claim 1, wherein the computing device is configured to extract, in the extracting, a spatial region serving as a movement route of the mobile body at a position separated by a predetermined distance from a spatial region serving as a movement route of another mobile body (see Benedek at least [0142] for safety reasons, it is preferable that the flight route of each flying object be set so as not to be close to the flight route of other flying objects… near misses are preferably prevented. Here, “near miss” may mean that two flying objects are closer than a predetermined distance).
Regarding claim 19, Benedek discloses: A route generation method to be executed by a route generation device that includes a computing device and a storage device, and generating a movement route of a mobile body (see Benedek at least [0001] a flight management apparatus… a flight management method and [0109] a memory 11… a general computer and [0023] a request generation unit configured to determine own flight route),
wherein the mobile body is a drone (see Benedek at least [0110] Flying objects are any flyable devices, such as drones),
the route generation method comprising:
storing by a storage device (see Benedek at least [0172] The memory 51 stores information):
spatial region data formed by spatial regions configured to serve as a movement route of a mobile body (see Benedek at least [0172] The memory 51 stores information of a plurality of space cells C which can be specified by coordinates or the like, reservation states of the space cells of the plurality of flying objects, flight routes of the respective flying objects generated by the route generation unit 53, and reservation states of the space cells), and
status data indicating a status used to determine whether movement is possible at each timing in each of the spatial regions (see Benedek at least [0138] the memory 31 may store the reservation state of the space cells of a plurality of flying objects as in the memory 11. The reservation state stored here may include not only the position information of the space cells C to be reserved but also information of the time zone in which the space cells C are reserved);
executed in the computing device, receiving, through a receiving means, a departure point and a destination of a mobile body, and conditions of the mobile body including at least information for specifying a travel speed (see Benedek at least [0139] The data acquisition unit 32 acquires data used for determining the flight route of the flying objects… The data to be acquired include the departure point and the destination of the flight route and [0140] the data acquisition unit 32 may periodically or intermittently acquire real-time data including the remaining battery level, current speed and the like from the flying object);
executed in the computing device, extracting, as a movement route, a plurality of spatial regions including a route from the departure point to the destination for the mobile body under the conditions (see Benedek at least [0189] the flight management apparatus 50 generates a new flight route to the destination with the specific space cell permitted to be reserved as a departure point for the flying object 60),
executed in the computing device, changing a status of a spatial region extracted as a movement route of the mobile body in the status data in consideration of each timing (see Benedek at least [0189] the flight management apparatus 50 updates the reservation state stored in the memory 51 for the specific space cell for which the reservation was permitted in step 37 for the flying object 60 and [0166] The flight management apparatus 30 may include information on a time zone in which the space cell is reserved in the reservation state of the space cell), and
executed in the computing device, transmitting, through a transmission means, information on a spatial region of the movement route and a spatial region in proximity in association with each of the timings to a control device of the mobile body (see Benedek at least [0160] when at least either a flight route of another flying object or the reservation state of the space cell C stored in the memory unit of the flight management apparatus is updated and the flight route of the flying object 40 becomes a near miss, the flight management apparatus transmits information indicating the fact to the flying object 40).
Benedek does not teach: changing a status of a spatial region according to a travel speed of the mobile body.
However, Choi teaches: changing a status of a spatial region according to a travel speed of the mobile body (see Choi at least [0073] the size of the space vector points located in the flightable area may vary depending on the wind speed, the wind direction, the size and speed of the unmanned vehicle, and the like).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drone spatial route planning method disclosed by Benedek to include the consideration of the drone speed in the spatial information of Choi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the inclusion of drone speed data affects the size of space vector points used in the display, creating a more intuitive environment display, as suggested by Choi (see Choi at least [0005] An object of the present invention, devised to solve the above problems, is to provide a method of displaying a corridor for an unmanned vehicle capable of intuitive recognition of a flight environment of the unmanned vehicle by 3-dimensionally displaying the corridor for the unmanned vehicle).
Regarding claim 21, Benedek discloses: A mobile body management system including a route generation device that generates a movement route of a mobile body and a control device used for control of movement of the mobile body (see Benedek at least [0001] a flight management apparatus… and [0109] a memory 11… a general computer and [0023] a request generation unit configured to determine own flight route),
wherein the mobile body is a drone (see Benedek at least [0110] Flying objects are any flyable devices, such as drones),
the mobile body management system comprising:
a storage device of the route generation device configured to store(see Benedek at least [0172] The memory 51 stores information):
spatial region data formed by a plurality of spatial regions configured to serve as a movement route of a mobile body (see Benedek at least [0172] The memory 51 stores information of a plurality of space cells C which can be specified by coordinates or the like, reservation states of the space cells of the plurality of flying objects, flight routes of the respective flying objects generated by the route generation unit 53, and reservation states of the space cells), and
status data indicating a status used to determine whether movement is possible at each timing in each of the spatial regions (see Benedek at least [0138] the memory 31 may store the reservation state of the space cells of a plurality of flying objects as in the memory 11. The reservation state stored here may include not only the position information of the space cells C to be reserved but also information of the time zone in which the space cells C are reserved);
a computing device of the route generation device configured to execute (see Benedek at least [0439] causing a computer to perform the above-described algorithms):
receiving, through a receiving means, a departure point and a destination of a mobile body, and conditions of the mobile body including at least information for specifying a travel speed (see Benedek at least [0139] The data acquisition unit 32 acquires data used for determining the flight route of the flying objects… The data to be acquired include the departure point and the destination of the flight route and [0140] the data acquisition unit 32 may periodically or intermittently acquire real-time data including the remaining battery level, current speed and the like from the flying object),
extracting, as a movement route, a plurality of spatial regions including a route from the departure point to the destination by a mobile body under the conditions (see Benedek at least [0189] the flight management apparatus 50 generates a new flight route to the destination with the specific space cell permitted to be reserved as a departure point for the flying object 60),
changing a status of a spatial region extracted as a movement route of the mobile body in the status data in consideration of each timing (see Benedek at least [0189] the flight management apparatus 50 updates the reservation state stored in the memory 51 for the specific space cell for which the reservation was permitted in step 37 for the flying object 60 and [0166] The flight management apparatus 30 may include information on a time zone in which the space cell is reserved in the reservation state of the space cell), and
transmitting, through a transmission means, information on a spatial region of the movement route and a spatial region in proximity in association with each of the timings to a control device of the mobile body (see Benedek at least [0160] when at least either a flight route of another flying object or the reservation state of the space cell C stored in the memory unit of the flight management apparatus is updated and the flight route of the flying object 40 becomes a near miss, the flight management apparatus transmits information indicating the fact to the flying object 40); and
a computing device of the control device configured to execute:
receiving information about the spatial region (see Benedek at least [0017] a flight control unit configured to move an airframe to the specific space cell when the specific space cell is not reserved by another flying object and the flying object receives permission information permitting movement to the specific space cell from the flight management apparatus).
Benedek does not teach: distinguishing a status of each of the spatial regions included in information regarding the spatial region for each type to cause a display device to display the status, and changing a status of a spatial region according to a travel speed of the mobile body.
However, Choi teaches: distinguishing a status of each of the spatial regions included in information regarding the spatial region for each type to cause a display device to display the status (see Benedek at least [0065] each of the space vector points may further include obstacle information and [0066] For example, the obstacle information may include information about whether an obstacle (e.g., a fixed obstacle, a temporary obstacle, etc.) exists at a place where the space vector points are located, and information (e.g., a building, a terrain, occupation of other unmanned vehicles, unexpected situations, whether or not to fly, etc.) about the types of the obstacle and [0068] information of the selected space vector point may be displayed in the form of text, graph, picture, etc. and [0069] As an example, in the case of information that changes according to the passage of time (e.g., weather information, obstacle information, occupancy information by the unmanned vehicle, etc.), the corresponding information may be displayed for each time period), and
changing a status of a spatial region according to a travel speed of the mobile body (see Choi at least [0073] the size of the space vector points located in the flightable area may vary depending on the wind speed, the wind direction, the size and speed of the unmanned vehicle, and the like).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drone spatial route planning system disclosed by Benedek to include the consideration of the drone speed in the spatial information of Choi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the inclusion of drone speed data affects the size of space vector points used in the display, creating a more intuitive environment display, as suggested by Choi (see Choi at least [0005] An object of the present invention, devised to solve the above problems, is to provide a method of displaying a corridor for an unmanned vehicle capable of intuitive recognition of a flight environment of the unmanned vehicle by 3-dimensionally displaying the corridor for the unmanned vehicle).
Regarding claim 22, Benedek and Choi disclose: The mobile body management system according to claim 21,
wherein the mobile body management system includes an information provision device that provides environmental information corresponding to a moving environment of the mobile body to the route generation device and the control device (see Benedek at least [0322] the flight management apparatus may acquire weather information indicating that weather unsuitable for flight occurs in a predetermined area in a space… the flight management apparatus may determine that weather unsuitable for flight occurs by determining from the weather information that precipitation per hour of a predetermined value or more, strong wind of a predetermined value or more, and pressure drop of a predetermined value or more occurs), and
wherein, when receiving the environmental information through the receiving means, a computing device of the route generation device updates the status data in accordance with the environmental information (see Benedek at least [0323] When the weather unsuitable for flight occurs in a prescribed area, a flight management apparatus sets the space cells constituting the prescribed area as a non-flight area).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benedek, in view of Choi, further in view of WO 2020136822 A1 KUSUMI, Jin et al. (hereinafter Kusumi).
Regarding claim 13, Benedek and Choi disclose: The route generation device according to claim 1.
Benedek and Choi do not teach: wherein conditions of the mobile body include an authority to move in a specific spatial region, and wherein the computing device is configured to extract, in the extracting, a spatial region serving as a movement route of the mobile body according to the authority to move.
However, Kusumi teaches: wherein conditions of the mobile body include an authority to move in a specific spatial region (see Kusumi at least [pg. 5, para. 8, beginning with “The authority level acquisition”] The authority level acquisition unit 112 adds the scores associated with the purpose of flight, the flight method, the skill of the driver of the unmanned aerial vehicle 300, or the airframe performance of the unmanned aerial vehicle 300 included in the flight application described later to the authority level), and
wherein the computing device is configured to extract, in the extracting, a spatial region serving as a movement route of the mobile body according to the authority to move (see Kusumi at least [pg. 5, para. 9, beginning with “The airspace level acquisition”] an airspace level indicating an allowable range of authority levels in the airspace and [pg. 7, para. 5, beginning with “As a specific example”] it is assumed that the flight application includes information that the route A or B is passed and the authority level is 120. Each rectangle arranged in a matrix in FIG. 6 represents an air space. The numerical value shown in each airspace is the airspace level of the airspace. In this case, the determination unit 122 compares the authority level with the airspace levels of all airspaces included in the route A and the route B…. the determination unit 122 determines that the unmanned aerial vehicle 300 can fly in the airspaces having the airspace levels of 50 and 100 in the airspaces overlapping the routes A and B, It is determined that the unmanned aerial vehicle 300 cannot fly in the airspace having the level of 200).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drone spatial route planning device disclosed by Benedek and Choi to include the authority-based drone route planning of Kusumi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because different factors affecting authority level may determine how well suited a particular vehicle may be for traveling in specific areas, as suggested by Kusumi (see Kusumi at least [pg. 12, para. 5, beginning with “By going through”] An appropriate flight path is set so that Further, when the unmanned aerial vehicle 300 has high airframe performance or the operator has abundant experience, the flight route is appropriately set even in a congested airspace, and the airspace is more efficient for each unmanned aerial vehicle 300).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benedek, in view of Choi, further in view of US 20160225269 A1 NIKOLAJEVIC; Konstanca et al. (hereinafter Nikolajevic).
Regarding claim 17, Benedek and Choi disclose: The route generation device according to claim 1.
Benedek and Choi do not teach: wherein a movement route formed by the plurality of spatial regions is formed by a smooth curve in which a curve in a vertical direction is represented by a vertical curve corresponding to a shape of an obstacle on a ground, and a curve in a horizontal direction is represented by a clothoid curve corresponding to a shape of a flyable region.
However, Nikolajevic teaches: wherein a movement route formed by the plurality of spatial regions is formed by a smooth curve in which a curve in a vertical direction is represented by a vertical curve corresponding to a shape of an obstacle on a ground, and a curve in a horizontal direction is represented by a clothoid curve corresponding to a shape of a flyable region (see Nikolajevic at least [0095] taking as a reference the current height of the flight, it is possible to consider that the helicopter 1 is safe providing it is at a minimum distance of 300 meters (m) from the ground, from the terrain in relief, or from stationary or moving obstacles and [0083] in a second segment 6 it can climb vertically and [0084] In a first variant of the invention, the segments 5, 6, and 7 of each path 3 can be calculated by primitives that are representative of the dynamic capabilities of the helicopter. These primitives are mathematical curves such as circular arcs, clothoid arcs, straight lines, helical arcs, helicoidal transitions, or indeed generalized Euler spirals, for example).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drone spatial route planning device disclosed by Benedek and Choi to include the flying vehicle route curvature decision of Nikolajevic. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the curves chosen allow for compliance with various environmental constraints such as a flight envelope, as suggested by Nikolajevic (see Nikolajevic at least [0084] The fallback paths are then calculated while complying with curvature, twist, and climb angle characteristics and as a function of their respective derivatives so as to avoid moving out from the flight envelope).
Claim(s) 18, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benedek, in view of Choi, further in view of US 20160189549 A1 Marcus; Benjamin Daniel (hereinafter Marcus).
Regarding claim 18, Benedek and Choi disclose: The route generation device according to claim 12.
Benedek and Choi does not teach: wherein the receiving means receives the environmental information at a predetermined frequency.
However, Marcus teaches: wherein the receiving means receives the environmental information at a predetermined frequency (see Marcus at least [0024] communications may also include… an IEEE 802.11-based radio frequency network and [0026] The second drone is configured to receive the information and selectively alter its approved flight plan if the weather or other received flight information indicates that the approved flight path is dangerous or otherwise disadvantageous).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drone spatial route planning device disclosed by Benedek and Choi to include the frequency-specific communication of weather data relevant to drones of Marcus. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because communicating weather data with drones is crucial in determining whether or not drone travel through a weather-affected area is safe, as suggested by Marcus (see Marcus at least [0064] The weather warning signals can indicate that the drone should stay out of a designated area. Thus, the drone is configured to compare weather warning signals to thresholds or rules that indicate when a weather warning signal indicates that operation of the drone is undesirable).
Regarding claim 23, Benedek and Choi disclose: The mobile body management system according to claim 22.
Benedek and Choi does not teach: wherein the information provision device provides the environmental information to the route generation device and the control device using a predetermined frequency band.
However, Marcus teaches: wherein the information provision device provides the environmental information to the route generation device and the control device using a predetermined frequency band (see Marcus at least [0024] communications may also include… an IEEE 802.11-based radio frequency network and [0026] The second drone is configured to receive the information and selectively alter its approved flight plan if the weather or other received flight information indicates that the approved flight path is dangerous or otherwise disadvantageous).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drone spatial route planning device disclosed by Benedek and Choi to include the frequency-specific communication of weather data relevant to drones of Marcus. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because communicating weather data with drones is crucial in determining whether or not drone travel through a weather-affected area is safe, as suggested by Marcus (see Marcus at least [0064] The weather warning signals can indicate that the drone should stay out of a designated area. Thus, the drone is configured to compare weather warning signals to thresholds or rules that indicate when a weather warning signal indicates that operation of the drone is undesirable).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 8, 9, and 10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, and if other objections and rejections to independent claims are resolved.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 6 includes the limitation “ … extracts, in the extracting step, a plurality of spatial regions serving as a movement route of the mobile body according to a downdraft specified from at least one of the type, the quantity of the propellers, or the weight, and changes, in the changing step, a status of a peripheral spatial region affected by a flight of the mobile body together with a spatial region of the movement route according to a specified downdraft,” which the examiner notes distinguishes itself over the prior art by reciting the adjustment of the width of the spatial region for a movement route for a drone depending on whether the drone is piloted manually or automatically. The prior art discloses generating a drone route specifying altitude and speed such that crops under the drone are not destroyed by the drone’s downdraft (see WO 2020085229 A1 WAKE CHIHIRO et al. at least [pg. 11, para. 5, beginning with “Information on departure”] The departure / arrival route determination unit 615 generates departure / arrival routes 41r-43r that cause the drone 100 to fly at an altitude and speed at which the downdraft generated during the flight of the drone 100 does not collapse the crops growing in the field 403). However, the prior art fails to disclose changing the movability status of not only the spatial region within which the drone travels but also peripheral spatial regions according to the drone’s downdraft calculated by the quantity of propellors, weight of drone, and/or type of drone. Thus, even in combination, the prior art would not yield the invention as claimed to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 8 includes the limitation “… wherein, when the mobile body is manually piloted, the computing device extracts, in the extracting step, a wider spatial region as a movement route for each time unit as compared with a case of automatic piloting” which the examiner notes distinguishes itself over the prior art by reciting the adjustment of the width of the spatial region for a movement route for a drone depending on whether the drone is piloted manually or automatically. The prior art discloses adjusting the width of a drone travel route based on predicted congestion in a flight area, priority levels of different drones, and weather information along the flight route (see Benedek at least [0284] the flight management apparatus may reduce the size of the space cells when managing a space in an area where many flying objects are assumed to be congested, and may increase the size of the space cells when managing a space in an area where few flying objects are assumed to be present and [0167] When the priority of the flying object for reserving the space cell is high, the flight management apparatus 30 makes the margin longer than in the case where the priority is low (For example, the former margin may be 2t and the latter margin may be t.). The flight management apparatus 30 may change the length of the margin based on weather information. For example, in the case where the weather information acquired by the data acquisition unit 32 is rainy, the flight management apparatus 30 may increase the margin as compared with the case where the weather is fine. Further, when the wind velocity is equal to or greater than a predetermined value, the margin may be made longer than when the wind velocity is less than the predetermined value. The margin may be set to increase continuously or stepwise as the wind velocity increases). However, the prior art fails to disclose adjusting the width of the drone traveling route based on the piloting method of the drone, specifically selecting a wider spatial region in the case of manual drone piloting. Thus, even in combination, the prior art would not yield the invention as claimed to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 9 includes the limitation “… wherein, when the mobile body does not include a specific sensor, in the extracting, the computing device extracts a wider spatial region as a movement route for each time unit as compared with a case where the specific sensor is provided.” Similar to claim 8, the prior art teaches the adjustment of the width of the drone’s travel route, but fails to recite a dependency of this adjustment on the specific sensors onboard the drone. Thus, even in combination, the prior art would not yield the invention as claimed to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 10 includes the limitation “… wherein, when the mobile body does not include a camera, in the extracting, the computing device extracts a wider spatial region as a movement route for each time unit as compared with a case where a camera is provided,” which is similar to, but narrower than, the limitation of claim 9 indicated to be allowable subject matter. As such, a similar analysis applies.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20200160732 A1 NAKADAI; Shinji et al. discloses a 3-dimensional area evaluation system for decentralized unmanned aircraft system route coordination
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLE ROSE KNUDSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1742. The examiner can normally be reached 1000-1700 ET M-F.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. 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.
/ELLE ROSE KNUDSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
7/25/26
Prosecution Insights