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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 7-10, 15-16 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhao et al. (CN 109407700 A, IDS).
As to claim 1, Zhao discloses an guiding apparatus for aircraft landing, wherein comprising: a light-emitting array (Fig. 1-2, QR code, para. 0011-0013), disposed in a target landing area of an aircraft, comprising at least one light-emitting unit (Fig. 1-2, QR code, para. 0011-0013) located at a target landing point and a plurality of light-emitting units arranged around the at least one light-emitting unit; a light-emitting control unit, electrically connected to the light-emitting array, and configured to control the light-emitting array to emit lights in accordance with preset light-emitting timing (Fig. 2-3, para. 0034-0035, 0040, 0084-0086).
As to claims 7 and 22, Zhao further discloses a method/computer readable medium for guiding aircraft landing, wherein comprising the step of: controlling the guiding apparatus for aircraft landing according to claim 1 to emit light in accordance with preset light-emitting timing (para. 0077-0086).
As to claims 8 and 15, Zhao further discloses an aircraft landing control method, wherein comprising the steps of: controlling the guiding apparatus for aircraft landing according to claim 1 to emit light in accordance with a preset light-emitting timing (para. 0034-0037); gathering light signals emitted by the light-emitting array on the aircraft, and controlling the aircraft to land to the target landing point by outputting corresponding flight control instructions in accordance with the gathered light signals (para. 0066-0067).
As to claims 9 and 16, Zhao further discloses wherein the step of outputting corresponding flight control instructions in accordance with the gathered light signals comprises: identifying the light-emitting timing and light-emitting positions of the light signals (para. 0066-0067); matching the light-emitting timing with the preset light-emitting timing to calculate the position of each light-emitting unit (para. 0066-0067); obtaining the real-time position, attitude and target landing point of the aircraft in accordance with the positions of the light-emitting units (para. 0082-0086).
As to claim 10, Zhao further discloses wherein the step of identifying the light-emitting timing and light-emitting positions of the light signals comprises: obtaining the movement trajectory of bright spots, the movement trajectory comprises the positions of the bright spots in each frame; determining the light-emitting timing and light-emitting positions of each light-emitting unit in accordance with the movement trajectory of the bright spots (para. 0073-0082).
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.
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.
Claims 2-6 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao in view of Koh et al. (US 2022/0033105 A1).
As to claim 2, Zhao does not explicitly disclose the plurality of light-emitting units are arranged in N circles centered on the target landing point, where N is an integer greater than or equal to 1. However, Koh teaches the plurality of light-emitting units are arranged in N circles centered on the target landing point, where N is an integer greater than or equal to 1 (Fig. 1). Therefore, given the teaching of Koh, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have readily recognized the desirability and advantages of modifying the apparatus of Zhao, by employing the well-known or conventional features of arranged in N circles centered on the target landing point, to aid aircraft landing.
As to claim 3, the feature of the distance between the light-emitting units arranged in the M-th circle and the target landing point is preset multiples of the distance between the light-emitting units arranged in the M−1st circle and the target landing point, where M is an integer greater and 1<M≤N, is design choice.
As to claim 4, Koh further teaches wherein the circle is of regular or irregular shape (Fig. 1).
As to claims 5-6, the use of timing code to emit light for different light units is also design choice.
As to claims 11-14, comparing the position of two bright spots via a threshold distance in two consecutive frames to determine whether they are same bright spot is well known and obvious to do.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ce Li Li whose telephone number is (571)270-5564. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 10AM-7PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Peter D Nolan can be reached at 571-270-7016. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
CE LI . LI
Examiner
Art Unit 3661
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights