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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is the initial office action has been issued in response to patent application, 18/943123, filed on 11 November 2024 with a provisional date of 13 November 2023. Claims 1-20, as originally filed, are currently pending and have been considered below.
Title
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
information disclosure statement
The information disclosure statement filed 07/29/2025 complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 and the information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 115,456,486 A to SHENZHEN AUTEL INTELLIGENT AVIATION TECH CO LTD (hereinafter 'SHENZHEN') in view of CN 108,596,548 A to DAGUO INNOVATION INTELLIGENT TECH DONGGUAN CO LTD (hereinafter 'DAGUO').
Claims 1, 9, 16:
With respect to claims 1, 9, 16, SHENZHEN discloses an apparatus/method of operating a node (Abstract), comprising:
one or more computer-readable storage media; and
program instructions stored on the one or more computer-readable storage media
executable by a processing device to direct the processing device (page 27) to at least:
obtain, by the node, an operational plan relating to logistical operations of one or more devices (page 2 - task planning method for a cluster system. The fleet system includes several unmanned aerial vehicles and several airports for the unmanned aerial vehicles to take off and land. Wherein, the mission planning method includes: receiving at least one target task; assigning drones and airports to the target task, and generating several corresponding execution plans);
perform, by the node, a feasibility check for the operational plan based on logical rules to determine a feasibility of an implementation of the logistical operations via the one or more devices (page 2-3 - perform route feasibility check on each flight task in turn; the performing route feasibility check on the flight mission specifically includes: judging whether the flight mission satisfies the preset first flight restriction condition; During the flight restriction condition, it is determined that the flight task has not passed the route feasibility check; when the flight task satisfies the first flight restriction condition, it is judged whether the landing airport of the flight task is in an idle state; When the landing airport of the task is in an idle state, it is determined that the flight task passes the route feasibility check); and
in response to satisfying the feasibility check, publish, by the node, the plan (page 2-3 - When all the flight tasks pass the route feasibility check, it is determined that the execution plan is an available execution plan; among the available execution plans, a target execution plan is determined; target scheduling task is combined with the corresponding flight task to form an execution plan).
SHENZHEN does not disclose a node having access to a blockchain, and configured to: logical rules implemented by the blockchain; publish the plan to the blockchain.
However, DAGUO teaches a node having access to a blockchain (page 3 - logistics scheduling system is provided, based on a blockchain network and at least one node), and configured to:
logical rules implemented by the blockchain (page 3 - determine whether the logistics company corresponding to the current node has the capability to execute the logistics task to be scheduled: yes, generate transaction information No, return to the generation module; a cost judging module, configured to determine, by the logistics company corresponding to the current node in the transaction information, an expected cost required to execute the to-be-scheduled logistics task and an execution of the customer estimate in the transaction information Whether the difference between the expected costs required for the logistics task to be scheduled is less than 0: No, returning to the generating module; a consensus module, configured to send the transaction information to the current blockchain network to participate in the consensus); publish the plan to the blockchain (page 3, 15 - a scheduling module, configured to receive the returned consensus result information by the current node, and determine whether the transaction information passes the consensus: yes, send an instruction to execute the to-be-scheduled logistics task to the logistics company corresponding to the current node; Then return to the generation module. In a third aspect, a blockchain network is provided, and the logistics scheduling systems provided by the embodiments of the present invention are respectively disposed in each node of the blockchain network; transmitting, to the computer or electronic device of the logistics company corresponding to the current node, an instruction to execute the to-be-scheduled logistics task).
SHENZHEN and DAGUO are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of task planning/logistical task scheduling.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use DAGUO in SHENZHEN for combine the feasibility check taught by SHENZHEN with the blockchain based logistics management taught by DAGUO since doing so would improve the efficiency and utilization of resources.
Claims 2, 10, 17:
With respect to claims 2, 10, 17, SHENZHEN discloses obtain an identifier for the operational plan from the data store (page 11- Assign the drone and the airport to the target task, and generate several corresponding execution plans. Among them, the main difference between the execution plan and the target task is that the execution plan records the drones and airports used to execute the specific target task; target execution plan among the available execution plans).
DAGUO teaches the node has access to a distributed data store, and wherein to obtain the operational plan, the node is configured to: obtain the operational plan from the
distributed data store (page 3 - obtains a logistics task to be scheduled from the blockchain of the node).
SHENZHEN and DAGUO are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of task planning/logistical task scheduling.
The motivation for combining SHENZHEN and DAGUO is recited in claims 1, 9, 16.
Claims 3, 11, 18:
With respect to claims 3, 11, 18, SHENZHEN discloses update the operational plan resulting in an updated operational plan and associate the operational plan with the updated operational plan and the updated identifier in the data store (page 4, 9 - Based on the distribution and completion of control instructions, route information
such as completed routes or ongoing routes can be further fed back to the route database 224 of the resource management center to complete the update of route information (for example, delete routes that have already been executed; effectively exclude those unfeasible solutions, making the entire planning method more intelligent).
DAGUO teaches Blockchain (Abstract).
Neither SHENZHEN nor DAGUO discloses obtain an updated identifier for the updated operational plan from the distributed data store.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use DAGUO in SHENZHEN to modify the combination to modify the identifier and assign the modified identifier to the updated operation plan since doing so would uniquely identify the updated operational plan.
SHENZHEN and DAGUO are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of task planning/logistical task scheduling.
Claims 4, 12, 19:
With respect to claims 4, 12, 19, DAGUO teaches wherein the node is further configured to execute the plan based on the publishing of the plan to the blockchain, wherein the node is in communication with the one or more devices (page 3 - sends an instruction to execute the to-be-scheduled logistics task to the logistics company corresponding to the current node).
SHENZHEN and DAGUO are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of task planning/logistical task scheduling.
The motivation for combining SHENZHEN and DAGUO is recited in claims 1, 9, 16.
Claims 5, 13, 19:
With respect to claims 5, 13, 19, SHENZHEN discloses the one or more devices comprise one or more controllable assets (page 6 - "Fleet system" includes multiple drones).
Claims 6, 14, 20:
With respect to claims 6, 14, 20, SHENZHEN discloses wherein the operational plan comprises one or more of a timing of the logistical operations (page 8 - the target task can be set to be executed at a specific time in the future), one or more types of the logistical operations (page 10 - temporary route corresponding to each executing
UAV. The execution UAV refers to the UAV assigned by the execution plan currently in progress), and one or more targets of the logistical operations (page 10 the device information mainly includes the relevant information of the three devices of the UAV, the airport and the alternate landing point. In the data set of equipment information, each drone, each airport, and alternate landing point are used as an element; the status of the UAV is a series of data that describes and represents the current operation of the UAV, such as the attitude, position, height, real-time status, flight mission information and alarm information of the UAV).
Claims 7, 15, 20:
With respect to claims 7, 15, 20, SHENZHEN discloses features comprise one or more of timing rules, operation type rules, and location rules (page 10).
DAGUO teaches wherein the logical rules comprise smart contract features implemented by the blockchain and based on capabilities of the one or more devices with which to evaluate the feasibility of the implementation of the logistical operations (page 22- determine whether the logistics company corresponding to the current node has the capability to execute the logistics task to be scheduled: yes, generate transaction information No, return to the generation module).
SHENZHEN and DAGUO are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of task planning/logistical task scheduling.
The motivation for combining SHENZHEN and DAGUO is recited in claims 1, 9, 16.
Claims 8, 15, 20:
With respect to claims 8, 15, 20, SHENZHEN discloses the capabilities of the one or more devices correspond to achievable logistical operations determined by orbital properties, ephemeris, trajectories, or on-board components (page 16 - the flight capability of the execution UAV refers to the total distance that the UAV can fly under the current battery power or the maximum flight time that can be maintained under the execution of the target task).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, see PTO Form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Helai Salehi whose telephone number is 571-270-7468. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 9 am to 5 pm.
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, Jeff Pwu, can be reached on 571-272-6798. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HELAI SALEHI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2433
/JEFFREY C PWU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2433