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 § 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea.
Step 1:
Claim 1 is drawn to a apparatus.
Step 2A Prong 1:
Claim 1 recites “an apparatus guiding a flight route…; determine a cost between an arbitrary source node …; determine a departure node and arrival node …; determine the flight route of the second air mobility to minimize a sum of the cost…”; As such these recitations are directed to the mathematical concepts grouping within abstract ideas. Accordingly, these claims recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2:
The claims recite the additional elements “communication device, processors”. The additional elements appears to be merely data collection required to perform the abstract idea recited and as such is insignificant extra solution. Accordingly, this additional limitation does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Furthermore, the additional element do not improve the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field. The additional element does not implement the mathematical concept with a particular machine or effect a transformation.
Step 2B:
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The additional element considered individually or in ordered combination is well-understood, routine and conventional activities.
Therefore claim 1 is not patent eligible.
As per claims 2-20, similar analysis is done as in claim 1 and are not patent eligible for the same reasons above. It is noted that the dependent claims do not include additional limitations that are significantly more than the abstract idea, the dependent claims recite limitations that fall within the mathematical concepts as discussed with the independent claims.
Therefore, claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Villa et al., US Pg. Pub. No. (2019/0340934) referred to hereinafter as Villa.
As per claim 1, Villa teaches an apparatus for guiding a flight route of an air mobility, the apparatus comprising: a communication device configured to communicate with a first air mobility and a second air mobility (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, figs. 6, 8, 13-15); one or more processors configured to guide a flight route of the second air mobility based on flight environment information obtained by the first air mobility (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15); and a non-transitory storage device storing a program to be executed by the one or more processors, the program including instructions to: determine a cost between an arbitrary source node among a plurality of nodes set in an airspace and a neighboring node adjacent to the source node among the plurality of nodes based on the flight environment information provided from the first air mobility through the communication device (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133igs. 6, 8, 13-15); determine a departure node and an arrival node among the plurality of nodes based on flight information of the second air mobility scheduled to fly in the airspace for which the cost is calculated; and determine the flight route of the second air mobility to minimize a sum of the cost between transit nodes among the plurality of nodes connecting the departure node and the arrival node (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15).
As per claim 2, Villa teaches an apparatus of claim 1, wherein the program further includes instructions to: extract wind direction information and wind speed information between the source node and the neighboring node from the flight environment information (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15); calculate an expected flight time between the source node and the neighboring node by reflecting the wind direction information and the wind speed information; and determine the cost to be proportional to the expected flight time (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15).
As per claim 3, Villa teaches an apparatus of claim 2, wherein the program further includes instructions to: obtain a distance vector from the source node to the neighboring node; obtain a ground speed vector based on assuming a situation where the second air mobility flies from the source node to the neighboring node (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15); and calculate the cost to be proportional to a size of the distance vector and inversely proportional to a size of the ground speed vector (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15).
As per claim 4, Villa teaches an apparatus of claim 3, wherein the program further includes instructions to: obtain a weight that decreases with time from a reference timing at which the first air mobility obtains the flight environment information (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15); obtain a wind speed vector to which the weight is applied; and obtain the ground speed vector by adding the weighted wind speed vector and an estimated flight speed vector of the second air mobility (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15).
As per claim 5, Villa teaches an apparatus of claim 4, wherein the program further includes instructions to determine the weight to be zero after a threshold time elapses from the reference timing (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15).
As per claim 6, Villa teaches an apparatus of claim 4, wherein the program further includes instructions to update the cost based on the flight information of the second air mobility (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15).
As per claim 7, Villa teaches an apparatus of claim 6, wherein the program further includes instructions to: extract performance information of the second air mobility from the flight information; determine whether an airspeed of the second air mobility is able to be set such that the ground speed vector according to a flight of the second air mobility is in a same direction as the distance vector based on the performance information of the second air mobility (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15); and set the cost between the source node and the neighboring node to infinite based on a determination that the ground speed vector is unable to be adjusted in the same direction as the distance vector (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15).
As per claim 8, Villa teaches an apparatus of claim 6, wherein the program further includes instructions to: calculate a dilution of precision (DOP) for an area between the source node and the neighboring node; determine whether an auxiliary navigation device of the second air mobility is available in the flight information based on a determination that the DOP to which the weight is applied is greater than a threshold value (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15); and set the cost between the source node and the neighboring node to be infinite based on a determination that the auxiliary navigation device of the second air mobility is unavailable (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15).
As per claim 9, Villa teaches an apparatus of claim 6, wherein the program further includes instructions to reset the reference timing to zero after the cost is updated (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15).
As per claim 10, Villa teaches an apparatus of claim 1, wherein the program further includes instructions to: monitor whether the cost is updated after determining the flight route of the second air mobility; and reset the flight route based on a determination that the cost is updated (see at least abstract, summary, Para 37, 114, 116, 131, 133, 170, 172, 179, figs. 6, 8, 13-15).
As per claims 11-20, the limitations of claims 11-20 are similar to the limitations of claims 1-10, therefore they are rejected based on the same rationale.
Conclusion
Please refer to from 892 for cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSSA A SHAAWAT whose telephone number is (313)446-6592. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Erin Piateski can be reached at 571-270-7429. 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.
/MUSSA A SHAAWAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669