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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks directed towards double patenting rejection are acknowledged, the rejection is maintained as the claims (submitted on 04/15/2026) are not patentably distinct from US Patent 12159541.
Applicant's arguments filed 08/04/2026, with respect to 112(b) rejected presented to claims 4, 5, 14 and 15 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant stated:
The Examiner states that claim 1 requires the plurality of approach vectors to “not intersect with each other at all times”, but concludes that claims 4 and 5 are unclear because they allegedly require an approach vector that does not intersect another approach vector to nevertheless intersect another approach vector. Applicant respectfully submits that this conclusion is based on a premise that is not recited in the claims
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claims are given broadest reasonable interpretation and BRI of “generating a plurality of hovering points for a ground site, each hovering point associated with a unique approach vector of a plurality of approach vectors, wherein the plurality of approach vectors do not intersect with each other” is:
A plurality of hovering points are generated, each hovering point has a unique approach vector and the approach vectors do not intersect with each other at all times.
There is no limitation in the claim 1 and 11 indicating that approach vectors do not intersect as long as an approach vector (or a point along the approach vector) is occupied by a UAV or assigned to a UAV. And
Therefore, it is unclear how an approach vector that does not intersect with another approach vector also intersects with another. Therefore, the rejection of claims 4, 5, 14 and 15 is maintained.
The following figure illustrates examiner’s interpretation of claim 1 (at time t0)
PNG
media_image1.png
512
707
media_image1.png
Greyscale
UAV 100 is assigned to hover at hovering point 410-1 and UAV 101 is assigned to hover at point 410-2. Hovering points 410-1 and 410-2 are tails of approach vectors and do not intersect with each other.
At time t1 UAV 100 and 101 are configured to land from their respective hovering points as illustrated in figure below.
PNG
media_image2.png
469
477
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 4 requires UAV 101 to hover at 410-1. As illustrated in figure below
PNG
media_image3.png
513
478
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As UAV 101 moves from hovering point 410-2 to 410-1, the head of flight vector leading UAV 101 to hovering point 410-1 intersects with tail of approach vector that lead UAV 100 to land. Therefore, the approach vectors intersect. However, claim 1 requires the approach vectors to not intersect. Therefore, rejection of claim 4, 5, 14 and 15 presented under 35 USC 112(b) is maintained.
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.
Claims 4, 5, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 USC 112(b) because:
Claims 1 and 11 recite “the plurality of approach vectors do not intersect with each other”. Examiner interprets the limitation as “any section approach vector of one UAV does not intersect with any section of approach vector of another UAV”.
Furthermore claims 1 and 11 recite “assigning a first UAV to a first hovering point”
Therefore, no other UAV can be assigned first hovering point. However, claims 4 and 14 recite “assigning the second UAV to the first hovering point”
It is unclear how approach vectors of UAVs do not intersect in independent claims and intersect in dependent claims.
Claims 5 and 15 depend on rejected claims 4 and 14 respectively, hence are also rejected.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-27 of U.S. Patent No. 12159541. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Claim of instant application 18928983
Claim is US Patent 12159541
1. A method for configuring unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to utilize a ground site, comprising:
generating a plurality of hovering points for a ground site, each hovering point associated with a unique approach vector of a plurality of approach vectors, wherein the plurality of approach vectors do not intersect with each other;
assigning a first UAV to a first hovering point in response to receiving a request to land at the ground site;
assigning a second UAV to a second hovering point in response to receiving a request to land at the ground site; and
configuring the first UAV and the second UAV to land at the ground site from a respective hovering point.
A method for deploying multiple unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) from a single landing site, comprising:generating a hovering perimeter for a landing site, the hovering perimeter including a plurality of hovering points and a plurality of approach vectors, each hovering point having spatial coordinates and being uniquely associated with one of the plurality of approach vectors, wherein the plurality of hovering points are along the hovering perimeter, wherein a flight path based on a first approach vector of the plurality of approach vectors does not overlap with cross a flight path based on a second approach vector of the plurality of approach vectors; and
configuring a first UAV of a plurality of UAVs to:
navigate to a first hovering point of the plurality of hovering points;
hover at the first hovering point; and
navigate from the first hovering point to the landing site when the first UAV is authorized to land at the landing site.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
assigning each of the plurality of hovering points to a hovering perimeter, the hovering perimeter defined by at least a height relative to the ground site.
1…generating a hovering perimeter for a site, the hovering perimeter including a plurality of hovering points and a plurality of approach vectors, each hovering point having spatial coordinates and being uniquely associated with one of the plurality of approach vectors, wherein the plurality of hovering points are along the hovering perimeter
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
assigning a first group of hovering points to a first hovering perimeter defined by at least a first height relative to the ground site; and
assigning a second group of hovering points to a second hovering perimeter defined by at least a second height relative to the ground site.
1…generating a hovering perimeter for a site, the hovering perimeter including a plurality of hovering points and a plurality of approach vectors, each hovering point having spatial coordinates and being uniquely associated with one of the plurality of approach vectors, wherein the plurality of hovering points are along the hovering perimeter
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
assigning the second UAV to the first hovering point, in response to determining that the first UAV landed at the ground site.
5. The method of claim 4, further comprising:
configuring the second UAV to land at the ground site from the first hovering point.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
assigning the first UAV a first homing beacon, wherein the first homing beacon is deployed on the ground site.
US Patent 12159541 does not claim “assigning the first UAV a first homing beacon, wherein the first homing beacon is deployed on the ground site”
Van Dyke (US 20170255896) teaches assigning the first UAV a first homing beacon, wherein the first homing beacon is deployed on the ground site ([0002], disclosing drones 130 can travel to specified locations to deliver or retrieve packages. In one example, the drop box 110 may emit a signal or “homing beacon” to be received by drones. The homing beacon may provide directions for the drone 130 and/or identify the location of the drop box 110. A homing beacon may include radio, acoustic, infrared, or any other emitted signal)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of claimed invention to modify 12159541 to claim assigning the first UAV a first homing beacon, wherein the first homing beacon is deployed on the ground site as taught by Van Dyke as well know method for UAV navigation.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the first homing beacon is any one of: a matrix bar code, a bar code, a visual cue, an infrared beacon, and any combination thereof.
Modification through Van Dyke is an infrared beacon
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
generating a hovering point having of the plurality of hovering points having at least a coordinate which is any one of: static, dynamic, or adaptive.
1…each hovering point having spatial coordinates and being uniquely associated with one of the plurality of approach vectors
9. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining a landing sequence of the first UAV and the second UAV, wherein the landing sequence includes assigning a priority to each UAV.
US Patent 12159541 does not claim determining a landing sequence of the first UAV and the second UAV, wherein the landing sequence includes assigning a priority to each UAV
Cantell (US 20180239350) teaches determining a landing sequence of the first UAV and the second UAV, wherein the landing sequence includes assigning a priority to each UAV ([0012-0014], disclosing determine a priority for landing at least one of the UAVs, each landing to be performed by one of a plurality of human pilots; and determine a queue of the at least one UAV, the queue being arranged in a landing order based on predetermined priority rules for landing)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of claimed invention to modify US Patent 12159541 to claim determining a landing sequence of the first UAV and the second UAV, wherein the landing sequence includes assigning a priority to each UAV as taught by Cantell to ensure ass UAVs land safely
Claim 10 recites limitations similar in scope to claim 1 hence is similarly rejected.
Claims 11-19 recite limitations similar in scope to claims 1-9 hence are similarly rejected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARSLAN AZHAR whose telephone number is (571)270-1703. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30 - 5:30.
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, Wade Miles can be reached at (571) 270-7777. 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.
/ARSLAN AZHAR/Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights