DETAILED ACTION
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 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.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs/columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations with the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to the Applicant’s definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
Status of Application
The list of claims 3-9, 12-16 and 21-28 is pending in this application. In the claim set filed 04/16/2026:
Claim(s) 21 and 28 is/are the independent claim(s) observed in the application.
Claim(s) 3-7 and 12-14 has/have been amended.
Claim(s) 8, 9, 15 and 16 has/have been indicated as originally presented.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 10, 11 and 17-20 has/have been canceled.
Claim(s) 21-28 has/have been newly added.
Response to Arguments
With respect to Applicant’s remarks filed on 04/16/2026; the Applicant's “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered. The Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
With respect to the objection(s) of claim(s) 2, 11 and 17, the Applicant’s “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered and are found persuasive. Therefore the objection(s) of claim(s) 2, 11 and 17 has/have been withdrawn.
With respect to the interpretation(s) of claim(s) 1, 10 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f), the Applicant has canceled claim(s) 1, 10 and 17 rendering interpretation(s) of claim(s) 1, 10 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) as moot. Therefore the interpretation(s) of claim(s) 1, 10 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) has/have been withdrawn.
With respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 101, the Applicant’s “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered but are NOT found persuasive.
While the Applicant has canceled previously rejected independent claims 1, 10 and 17 and replaced these claims with newly added claims 21 and 28, the Examiner asserts that independent claims 21 and 28 do not overcome 35 U.S.C. § 101 in view of the Applicant’s arguments.
In particular, the Applicant argues that recitation of the following recited “physical, structural limitations” yield claims that are patent eligible: “an aircraft,” “a position sensor,” “a weather sensor,” and “a communication device.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As claimed, the invention simply recites generic computing components (“control unit including one or more processors”) that receive data from broadly recited position and weather sensors (Insignificant pre-solution activity) and communicate this data (Insignificant post-solution activity) using a generic “communication device.” Therefore, recitation of an aircraft comprising generic computing components to perform the above operations of receiving data from one source and transferring it to another source, amounts to no more than recitation of the word “apply it” in view of MPEP § 2106.05(f).
Furthermore, the final limitation reciting: “wherein the one or more other aircraft are configured to be operated according to one or more flight paths that are adapted based on the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft,” does not positively recite control of an aircraft using the gathered weather and position data in a meaningful way. In fact, the only recitation in the Applicant’s specification that pertains to the above recited “adapted” flight plans is the following from Applicant’s ¶: 0038: “(e) increases passenger comfort (such as allowing pilots to readily re-plan a flight path to avoid areas of inclement weather).” Therefore, the Applicant’s claimed invention does not positively recite a control step using the claimed method, rather the Applicant’s claimed invention recites displaying information at one aircraft gathered by another aircraft, wherein the pilot may view this information and consider it accordingly.
Therefore the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 2, 11, 12 and 17-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 101 has/have been withdrawn due to cancelation of claim(s) 1, 2, 11, 12 and 17-20; however, all of pending claim(s): 3-9, 12-16 and 21-28 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for at least the reasons stated above as indicated in the Final Office Action below.
With respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. § 103, the Applicant’s “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered and are found persuasive. Therefore the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. § 103 has/have been withdrawn.
Office Note: Due to applicant’s amendments, further claim rejections appear on the record as stated in the Final Office Action below.
Final Office Action
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a communication device configured to output an Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) message” in claims 21 and 28.
Claim limitations: “a communication device configured to output an Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) message” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use a generic placeholder(s) such as “device” respectively coupled with functional language: without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
In the specification, the applicant describes the structure of the “communication device” as follows: “Figure 1 illustrates a block diagram of a system 100, according to an example of the present disclosure. The system 100 includes a control unit 102 in communication with a plurality of aircraft 104 operating in an airspace 106. For example, the control unit 102 can be coupled to a communication device 108, such as one or more of an antenna, a transceiver, an internet connection, a cloud-based connection, and/or the like. The control unit 102 is in communication with the aircraft 104, such as via communication between the communication device 108 and a communication device 110 of the aircraft 104. For example, the control unit 102 is in communication with all of the aircraft within the airspace 106. The communication device 110 can be an antenna, a transceiver, an internet connection, a cloud-based connection, and/or the like;” in at least Fig. 1 and ¶: 0020, for example.
Therefore, the examiner has interpreted the “communication device” as including but not limited to devices that may perform wireless data transfer, for example.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 3-9, 12-16 and 21-28 is/are rejected under 35 USC 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim(s) 21 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) using a control unit including one or processors to perform the following: 1) receive position and weather data from one or more position and weather sensors via a communication device;” 2) determine that another aircraft is within the airspace; and 3) transfer the received position and weather data recited in above step 1 to the other aircraft within the airspace.
The limitations of: using a control unit including one or processors to perform the following: 1) receive position and weather data from one or more position and weather sensors via a communication device;” 2) determine that another aircraft is within the airspace; and 3) transfer the received position and weather data recited in above step 1 to the other aircraft within the airspace, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic hardware components (processors, position sensor, weather sensor and communication device). That is, other than reciting a control unit including one or processors, position sensor, weather sensor and communication device, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the control unit including one or processors, position sensor, weather sensor and communication device, language, in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually performing steps of receiving position information and weather information from an aircraft, associating this weather with the airspace the aircraft is located using the received position information and weather information, and transferring this information to another aircraft that the user determines is in the same airspace. Furthermore. step 1 above merely discloses retrieval of previously gathered data. As explained in MPEP § 2106.05(g) the step of mere data gathering is an example of pre-solution activity (Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity), and therefore, is not sufficient in making the claims patent eligible. Furthermore, step 3 above merely discloses output or previously gathered data. As explained in MPEP § 2106.05(g) the step of mere data output is an example of post-solution activity (Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity), and therefore, is not sufficient in making the claims patent eligible. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim(s) recite(s) an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim(s) only recite(s) the following additional elements – a control unit including one or processors to perform the following: 1) receive position and weather data from one or more position and weather sensors via a communication device;” 2) determine that another aircraft is within the airspace; and 3) transfer the received position and weather data recited in above step 1 to the other aircraft within the airspace. The “control unit” is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as generic processors performing generic computer functions of receiving data from a generic position/weather sensor and transferring this data, wherein the transferring is performed via wireless communication) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer components. Accordingly, the 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 claim(s) is/are directed to an abstract idea.
Examiner’s Note: In addition to the above, the Applicant’s recitation of “an aircraft comprising” the above generic computer components to perform the above operations of receiving data from one source and transferring it to another source, amounts to no more than recitation of the word “apply it” in view of MPEP § 2106.05(f).
The claim(s) do/does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a a control unit including one or processors to perform the following: 1) receive position and weather data from one or more position and weather sensors via a communication device;” 2) determine that another aircraft is within the airspace; and 3) transfer the received position and weather data recited in above step 1 to the other aircraft within the airspace, amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim(s) is/are not patent eligible.
Dependent claim(s) 3-9, 12-16 and 22-27 when analyzed as a whole, is/are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitation(s) fail(s) to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea. The additional element(s), if any, in the dependent claim(s) is/are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reasons as with claim(s) 21 and 28.
Examiner’s Note: In order to overcome this rejection, the Office suggests further defining the limitations of the independent claim(s), for example linking the claimed subject matter to a non-generic device and controlling a vehicle or an apparatus in a specific way based on the data analysis performed or further showing that the claimed subject matter is an improvement to a technical field. Limitations such as these suggested above would further bring the claimed subject matter out of the realm of abstract idea and into the realm of a statutory category.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claim(s) 3-8, 12-15, 21, 22, 24, 25, 27 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hochwarth et al. (United States Patent Publication 2019/0304314 A1) in view of Zheng et al. (United States Patent Publication 2024/0386802 A1), referenced as Hochwarth and Zheng, respectively, moving forward.
Examiner’s Note: With respect to the ordering of the below claim rejections, the rejections appear in the following order: claim 21 (first identified independent claim); claim(s) 3-8, 22, 24, 25 and 27 (claims which depend from claim 21, in the order presented); claim 28 (second found independent claim); and claim(s) 12-15 (claims which depend from claim 28, in the order presented).
With respect to claim 21, Hochwarth discloses:
“A system comprising: an aircraft including: a position sensor configured to output one or more position signals indicative of a real time position of the aircraft as tracked by a tracking sub-system”[Hochwarth; In at least the figures and passages cited, Hochwarth discloses a flight management system and method for updating the flight plan of an aircraft by collecting real-time weather data from a network of aircraft operating in a nearby region. Hochwarth further discloses that each aircraft is equipped with at least a GPS module (denoted 47 in Fig. 2), which has been interpreted as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "position sensor;" Fig. 1, 2; ¶: 0022-0027];
“weather sensors configured to detect real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft”[Hochwarth; In at least the figures and passages cited, Hochwarth discloses a flight management system and method for updating the flight plan of an aircraft by collecting real-time weather data from a network of aircraft operating in a nearby region. Hochwarth further discloses that the sensors (denoted 26 in Fig. 1) may provide real-time weather data for the aircraft; Fig. 1, 2; ¶: 0022-0027];
“and a control unit including one or more processors, the control unit in communication with the aircraft, the control unit configured to: receive the ACARS message including the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft, determine the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft from the ACARS message including the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft, and communicate the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft to one or more other aircraft at one or more other positions within the airspace”[Hochwarth; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Hochwarth further discloses an external weather server (such as the destination server denoted 66 in Fig. 3) that receives weather data from one or more aircrafts comprising position and weather information from one or more sensors on the respective aircrafts and subsequently transmits this information to other aircrafts with range of the weather server. Fig. 3 demonstrates an example in which aircraft 10 receives weather and position data from one or more other aircrafts, 62 and 63, by communicating information from the one or more other aircrafts, 62 and 63, to the aircraft 10 via the ground system and destination server, 66 and 68; Fig. 1-3; ¶: 0027-0037];
“wherein the one or more other aircraft are configured to be operated according to one or more flight paths that are adapted based on the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft”[Hochwarth; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Hochwarth further discloses that the system may use the received real-time weather and position information to optimize a route for the aircraft based on specific parameters such as fuel savings and a required time of arrival as impacted by the gathered information; Fig. 5; ¶: 0048-0053].
And while Hochwarth discloses wireless transmission of real-time weather and position conditions of an aircraft [Hochwarth; Fig. 3 demonstrates an example in which aircraft 10 receives weather and position data from one or more other aircrafts, 62 and 63, by communicating information from the one or more other aircrafts, 62 and 63, to the aircraft 10 via the ground system and destination server, 66 and 68; Fig. 1-3; ¶: 0027-0037],
Hochwarth does not specifically state: “a communication device configured to output an Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) message including the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft.”
Zheng, which is in the same field of invention of systems/methods for weather monitoring and reporting systems for aircrafts, teaches: “a communication device configured to output an Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) message including the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft” [Zheng; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Zheng teaches a system/method for relaying real-time weather information pertaining to a particular airspace(for example, airspace 120 denoted in Fig. 1) using the disclosed Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS); Fig. 1, 2; ¶: 0049-0051].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft following a similar trajectory as disclosed by Hochwarth to incorporate the teachings regarding fusing weather data from multiple sources via the Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) as taught by Zheng with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft that is more robust in its ability to automatically determine whether an aircraft should adjust the planned flight path while reducing the flight crew workload by receiving the data from the various sources and fusing the information into a cohesive whole picture of the planned flight [Zheng; ¶: 0024, 0025].
With respect to claim 3, Hochwarth discloses: “wherein the control unit is further configured to one or both of show the weather conditions on a display of the other aircraft, or broadcast the weather conditions through a speaker of the other aircraft”[Hochwarth; "The display output from the advisory module 36 can include at least one of an updated weather display signal (based at least in part on the real-time weather data 52 from the receiving module 32), the predicted trajectory as determined by the trajectory module 34, an advisory alert (e.g. a recommended flight plan, a severe weather alert, or a turbulence event), or a change to a flight time display e.g. a reduced flight time due to the presence of tail winds, in non-limiting examples. For example, it is contemplated that the display output can be provided to the display 21 within the cockpit 16 (FIG. 1), including via the flight control computer 22, such as for pilot review or approval;" Fig. 1; ¶: 0030].
With respect to claim 4, Hochwarth discloses: “wherein the aircraft comprises the control unit”[Hochwarth; See the disclosed flight control computer, denoted 22 in Fig. 2; See also: ¶: 0035-0037].
With respect to claim 5, Hochwarth discloses: “wherein the control unit is separate and distinct from the aircraft”[Hochwarth; See the disclosed destination server, denoted 66 in Fig. 3, which is indicated as part of a ground system, denoted 68 in Fig. 3, that is presented as separate from the respective aircrafts 10, 62 and 63. As disclosed, the destination server relays communication between respective on-board flight control computers, denoted 22 in Fig. 3 in each of the respective aircrafts 10, 62 and 63; See also: Fig. 3; ¶: 0032-0037].
With respect to claim 6, Hochwarth does not specifically state: “wherein the tracking sub-system is an automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) tracking sub-system.”
Zheng teaches: “wherein the tracking sub-system is an automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) tracking sub-system” [Zheng; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Zheng further teaches use of and ADS-B tracking system for tracking positions of respective aircrafts; Fig. 1, 2; ¶: 0049-0051].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft following a similar trajectory as disclosed by Hochwarth to incorporate the teachings regarding fusing weather data from multiple sources via the Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) as taught by Zheng with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft that is more robust in its ability to automatically determine whether an aircraft should adjust the planned flight path while reducing the flight crew workload by receiving the data from the various sources and fusing the information into a cohesive whole picture of the planned flight [Zheng; ¶: 0024, 0025].
With respect to claim 7, Hochwarth discloses: “wherein the position of the aircraft is within a grid of the airspace”[Hochwarth; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Hochwarth further discloses that the previously recited tracking system provides 4D position information comprising latitude, longitude, altitude and time, wherein the disclosed latitude and longitude have been interpreted as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "position of the aircraft is within a grid of the airspace;" ¶: 0047].
With respect to claim 8, Hochwarth discloses: “wherein the grid includes a latitude range and a longitude range for a portion of the airspace”[Hochwarth; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Hochwarth further discloses defining a nearby region of airspace within an adjustable range, for example collecting data from other aircrafts within "100 nautical miles of a current flight plan" (¶: 0038), which is a relative position measurement between a current latitude and longitude of an aircraft with respect to the current latitude and longitude of another aircraft. In view of the above, the Examiner has interpreted the disclosed 100 nautical mile range as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "latitude range and a longitude range for a portion of the airspace;" See also: ¶: 0023].
With respect to claim 22, Hochwarth does not specifically state: “wherein the control unit is configured to communicate the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft to one or more other aircraft at other positions within the airspace via one or more other ACARS messages.”
Zheng teaches: “wherein the control unit is configured to communicate the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft to one or more other aircraft at other positions within the airspace via one or more other ACARS messages” [Zheng; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Zheng teaches a system/method for relaying real-time weather information pertaining to a particular airspace (for example, airspace 120 denoted in Fig. 1) using the disclosed Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS); Fig. 1, 2; ¶: 0049-0051].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft following a similar trajectory as disclosed by Hochwarth to incorporate the teachings regarding fusing weather data from multiple sources via the Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) as taught by Zheng with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft that is more robust in its ability to automatically determine whether an aircraft should adjust the planned flight path while reducing the flight crew workload by receiving the data from the various sources and fusing the information into a cohesive whole picture of the planned flight [Zheng; ¶: 0024, 0025].
With respect to claim 24, Hochwarth discloses: “wherein the weather sensors comprise: a temperature sensor configured to detect an ambient temperature; a barometer configured to detect atmospheric air temperature; and a wind sensor configured to detect wind direction and magnitude”[Hochwarth; "The one or more sensors 26 can be capable of sensing and providing both environmental and aircraft data. For example, the one or more sensors 26 can be capable of sensing, among other environmental data, weather data including temperature, pressure, real winds aloft, relative humidity, icing, and turbulence data. The sensors 26 can also be capable of integrating such information with coordinates where the data was obtained as well as a time stamp of when such information was obtained. Further, the one or more sensors 26 can be capable of sensing, among other aircraft data, data from all substantial aircraft systems including the braking hydraulics, speeds and performance parameters including deceleration data, acceleration data, landing performance data, take-off performance data, derated thrust data, runway condition parameters, aircraft weight and/or class, attitude, altitude, latitude, longitude, fuel quantity, or outside temperature;" Fig. 1, ¶: 0019].
With respect to claim 25, Hochwarth discloses: “further comprising the tracking sub-system”[Hochwarth; See disclosed GPS, denoted 47 in Fig. 3, and accompanying ¶: ¶: 0022-0027].
With respect to claim 27, Hochwarth does not specifically state: “wherein the control unit is further configured to note differences between weather information received from different aircraft within a grid.”
Zheng teaches: “wherein the control unit is further configured to note differences between weather information received from different aircraft within a grid” [Zheng; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Zheng further teaches that the system performs weather information fusion, denoted 306 in Fig. 3, which notes conflicts between different sources of weather information such as other aircrafts, in order to subsequently determine a course of action to make an informed decision such as through data comparison or voting; Fig. 1-3; ¶: 0049-0051].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft following a similar trajectory as disclosed by Hochwarth to incorporate the teachings regarding fusing weather data from multiple sources via the Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) as taught by Zheng with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft that is more robust in its ability to automatically determine whether an aircraft should adjust the planned flight path while reducing the flight crew workload by receiving the data from the various sources and fusing the information into a cohesive whole picture of the planned flight [Zheng; ¶: 0024, 0025].
With respect to claim 28, Hochwarth discloses:
“A method for a system comprising an aircraft including: a position sensor configured to output one or more position signals indicative of a real time position of the aircraft as tracked by a tracking sub-system”[Hochwarth; In at least the figures and passages cited, Hochwarth discloses a flight management system and method for updating the flight plan of an aircraft by collecting real-time weather data from a network of aircraft operating in a nearby region. Hochwarth further discloses that each aircraft is equipped with at least a GPS module (denoted 47 in Fig. 2), which has been interpreted as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "position sensor;" Fig. 1, 2; ¶: 0022-0027];
“weather sensors configured to detect real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft”[Hochwarth; In at least the figures and passages cited, Hochwarth discloses a flight management system and method for updating the flight plan of an aircraft by collecting real-time weather data from a network of aircraft operating in a nearby region. Hochwarth further discloses that the sensors (denoted 26 in Fig. 1) may provide real-time weather data for the aircraft; Fig. 1, 2; ¶: 0022-0027];
“and a control unit including one or more processors, the control unit in communication with the aircraft, the control unit configured to: receive the ACARS message including the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft, determine the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft from the ACARS message including the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft, and communicate the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft to one or more other aircraft at one or more other positions within the airspace”[Hochwarth; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Hochwarth further discloses an external weather server (such as the destination server denoted 66 in Fig. 3) that receives weather data from one or more aircrafts comprising position and weather information from one or more sensors on the respective aircrafts and subsequently transmits this information to other aircrafts with range of the weather server. Fig. 3 demonstrates an example in which aircraft 10 receives weather and position data from one or more other aircrafts, 62 and 63, by communicating information from the one or more other aircrafts, 62 and 63, to the aircraft 10 via the ground system and destination server, 66 and 68; Fig. 1-3; ¶: 0027-0037];
“the method comprising: receiving, by the control unit, the ACARS message including the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft, determining, by the control unit, the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft from the ACARS message including the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft, and communicating, by the control unit, the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft to the one or more other aircraft at the one or more other positions within the airspace”[Hochwarth; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Hochwarth further discloses an external weather server (such as the destination server denoted 66 in Fig. 3) that receives weather data from one or more aircrafts comprising position and weather information from one or more sensors on the respective aircrafts and subsequently transmits this information to other aircrafts with range of the weather server. Fig. 3 demonstrates an example in which aircraft 10 receives weather and position data from one or more other aircrafts, 62 and 63, by communicating information from the one or more other aircrafts, 62 and 63, to the aircraft 10 via the ground system and destination server, 66 and 68; Fig. 1-3; ¶: 0027-0037];
“wherein the one or more other aircraft are configured to be operated according to one or more flight paths that are adapted based on the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft”[Hochwarth; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Hochwarth further discloses that the system may use the received real-time weather and position information to optimize a route for the aircraft based on specific parameters such as fuel savings and a required time of arrival as impacted by the gathered information; Fig. 5; ¶: 0048-0053].
And while Hochwarth discloses wireless transmission of real-time weather and position conditions of an aircraft [Hochwarth; Fig. 3 demonstrates an example in which aircraft 10 receives weather and position data from one or more other aircrafts, 62 and 63, by communicating information from the one or more other aircrafts, 62 and 63, to the aircraft 10 via the ground system and destination server, 66 and 68; Fig. 1-3; ¶: 0027-0037],
Hochwarth does not specifically state: “and a communication device configured to output an Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) message including the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft.”
Zheng teaches: “and a communication device configured to output an Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) message including the real time weather conditions at the real time position of the aircraft” [Zheng; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Zheng teaches a system/method for relaying real-time weather information pertaining to a particular airspace(for example, airspace 120 denoted in Fig. 1) using the disclosed Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS); Fig. 1, 2; ¶: 0049-0051].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft following a similar trajectory as disclosed by Hochwarth to incorporate the teachings regarding fusing weather data from multiple sources via the Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) as taught by Zheng with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft that is more robust in its ability to automatically determine whether an aircraft should adjust the planned flight path while reducing the flight crew workload by receiving the data from the various sources and fusing the information into a cohesive whole picture of the planned flight [Zheng; ¶: 0024, 0025].
With respect to claim 12, Hochwarth discloses: “further comprising one or both of showing the weather conditions on a display of the one or more other aircraft, or broadcasting the weather conditions through a speaker of the one or more other aircraft”[Hochwarth; "The display output from the advisory module 36 can include at least one of an updated weather display signal (based at least in part on the real-time weather data 52 from the receiving module 32), the predicted trajectory as determined by the trajectory module 34, an advisory alert (e.g. a recommended flight plan, a severe weather alert, or a turbulence event), or a change to a flight time display e.g. a reduced flight time due to the presence of tail winds, in non-limiting examples. For example, it is contemplated that the display output can be provided to the display 21 within the cockpit 16 (FIG. 1), including via the flight control computer 22, such as for pilot review or approval;" Fig. 1; ¶: 0030].
With respect to claim 13, Hochwarth does not specifically state: “wherein the tracking sub-system is an automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) tracking sub-system.”
Zheng teaches: “wherein the tracking sub-system is an automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) tracking sub-system” [Zheng; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Zheng further teaches use of and ADS-B tracking system for tracking positions of respective aircrafts; Fig. 1, 2; ¶: 0049-0051].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft following a similar trajectory as disclosed by Hochwarth to incorporate the teachings regarding fusing weather data from multiple sources via the Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) as taught by Zheng with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft that is more robust in its ability to automatically determine whether an aircraft should adjust the planned flight path while reducing the flight crew workload by receiving the data from the various sources and fusing the information into a cohesive whole picture of the planned flight [Zheng; ¶: 0024, 0025].
With respect to claim 14, Hochwarth discloses: “wherein the position of the aircraft is within a grid of the airspace”[Hochwarth; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Hochwarth further discloses that the previously recited tracking system provides 4D position information comprising latitude, longitude, altitude and time, wherein the disclosed latitude and longitude have been interpreted as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "position of the aircraft is within a grid of the airspace;" ¶: 0047].
With respect to claim 15, Hochwarth discloses: “wherein the grid includes a latitude range and a longitude range for a portion of the airspace”[Hochwarth; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Hochwarth further discloses defining a nearby region of airspace within an adjustable range, for example collecting data from other aircrafts within "100 nautical miles of a current flight plan" (¶: 0038), which is a relative position measurement between a current latitude and longitude of an aircraft with respect to the current latitude and longitude of another aircraft. In view of the above, the Examiner has interpreted the disclosed 100 nautical mile range as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "latitude range and a longitude range for a portion of the airspace;" See also: ¶: 0023].
Claim(s) 9 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hochwarth in view of Zheng and ELKABETZ et al. (United States Patent Publication 2019/0339416 A1), referenced as Elkabetz moving forward.
With respect to claim 9, Hochwarth does not specifically state: “wherein the latitude range is between 1 - 5 degrees latitude, and the longitude range is between 1 - 5 degrees longitude.”
Elkabetz, which is in the same field of invention of systems/methods for weather monitoring and reporting systems, teaches: “wherein the latitude range is between 1 - 5 degrees latitude, and the longitude range is between 1 - 5 degrees longitude” [Elkabetz; "In an embodiment, the pro forma satellite location grid divides the atmosphere into multiple roughly square cells, each comprising two degrees of latitude on one side and two degrees of longitude on a second side that is disposed normal to the first side. Other cell sizes and shapes may be used when desired;" Fig. 5; ¶: 0150].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft following a similar trajectory as disclosed by Hochwarth to incorporate the teachings regarding discretizing an airspace into grids defined by a latitude and longitude range (such as two degrees in the latitude and longitude directions) as taught by Elkabetz with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft that is more robust in its ability to select grid spacing to report weather for the selected grid spaces, wherein the spacing of the grid spaces is “selected such that as few pro forma locations as possible are defined while maintaining an acceptable level of error in the resulting geometry” [Elkabetz; ¶: 0150-0152].
With respect to claim 16, Hochwarth does not specifically state: “wherein the latitude range is between 1 - 5 degrees latitude, and the longitude range is between 1 - 5 degrees longitude.”
Elkabetz teaches: “wherein the latitude range is between 1 - 5 degrees latitude, and the longitude range is between 1 - 5 degrees longitude” [Elkabetz; "In an embodiment, the pro forma satellite location grid divides the atmosphere into multiple roughly square cells, each comprising two degrees of latitude on one side and two degrees of longitude on a second side that is disposed normal to the first side. Other cell sizes and shapes may be used when desired;" Fig. 5; ¶: 0150].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft following a similar trajectory as disclosed by Hochwarth to incorporate the teachings regarding discretizing an airspace into grids defined by a latitude and longitude range (such as two degrees in the latitude and longitude directions) as taught by Elkabetz with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft that is more robust in its ability to select grid spacing to report weather for the selected grid spaces, wherein the spacing of the grid spaces is “selected such that as few pro forma locations as possible are defined while maintaining an acceptable level of error in the resulting geometry” [Elkabetz; ¶: 0150-0152].
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hochwarth in view of Zheng and Duraisamy et al. (United States Patent Publication 2024/0161631 A1), referenced as Duraisamy moving forward.
With respect to claim 23, Hochwarth does not specifically state: “wherein the control unit is further configured to: determine the determine real time weather conditions at real time positions of all aircraft within the airspace from ACARS messages including the real time weather conditions at the real time positions of all of the aircraft within the airspace, and replace a master weather grid based on the real time weather conditions at the real time positions of all of the aircraft within the airspace.”
Duraisamy, which is in the same field of invention of systems/methods for weather monitoring and reporting systems for aircrafts, teaches: “wherein the control unit is further configured to: determine the determine real time weather conditions at real time positions of all aircraft within the airspace from ACARS messages including the real time weather conditions at the real time positions of all of the aircraft within the airspace, and replace a master weather grid based on the real time weather conditions at the real time positions of all of the aircraft within the airspace” [Duraisamy; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Duraisamy teaches a system/method for updating a weather coverage map (see example coverage maps denoted 500 in Fig. 5A-5C) using the real-time position and real-time weather of each of a plurality of respective aircrafts (see for example aircrafts 502a, 502b and 502c in Fig. 5A-5C) in order to update a graphic overlay (for example the radial grid presented in Fig. 4) with the real-time weather conditions (such as the weather system denoted 408b in Fig. 5C) accordingly. In view of at least the above, the Examiner has interpreted the disclosed real-time weather updates to a coverage map for a patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited replacements to "a master weather grid based on the real time weather conditions at the real time positions of all of the aircraft within the airspace;" Fig. 4, 5A-5C, 7; ¶: 0053-0059, 0083-0090].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft following a similar trajectory as disclosed by Hochwarth to incorporate the teachings regarding updating a weather coverage map pertaining to an airspace using weather measurements from a plurality of aircrafts traveling within the airspace as taught by Duraisamy with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft that is more robust in its ability to achieve an improved level of situational awareness for air traffic control (ATC) regarding the weather cells in front of the aircraft and/or regarding the weather radar overlay of the display [Duraisamy; ¶: 0005-0007, 0059].
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hochwarth in view of Zheng and Wang et al. (United States Patent Publication 2017/0092139 A1), referenced as Wang moving forward.
With respect to claim 26, Hochwarth does not specifically state: “wherein the control unit is further configured to update weather conditions within different grids in response to recent aircraft to enter the different grids.”
Wang, which is in the same field of invention of systems/methods for weather monitoring and reporting systems for aircrafts, teaches: “wherein the control unit is further configured to update weather conditions within different grids in response to recent aircraft to enter the different grids” [Wang; In at least the paragraphs and figures cited, Wang teaches a system for updating weather information pertaining to an area proximate to one of a plurality of ground stations, wherein, when an aircraft determines that it has entered within a threshold distance from a ground station, the aircraft will transmit sensed weather information to the ground station. In view of a least the above, the Examiner has interpreted the disclosed threshold distance from a particular ground station of a plurality of ground stations as patentably indistinct from the Applicant's broadly recited "different grids;" Fig. 2A, 2B; ¶: 0019-0023].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft following a similar trajectory as disclosed by Hochwarth to incorporate the teachings regarding updating weather information pertaining to a certain area by receiving weather information from an aircraft that enters an area (repeatable across a plurality of areas), with further consideration of a time constraint, as taught by Wang with a reasonable expectation of success. By combining these inventions, the outcome is a system/method for collecting real-time weather information in order to update the trajectory of another aircraft that is more robust in its ability to receive updated weather information efficiently by implementing a time constraint to determine when regenerating the data is appropriate thereby reducing the burden of the wireless networks utilized by aircraft [Wang; ¶: 0002].
Prior Art (Not relied upon)
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in the attached form 892.
McCusker et al. (United States Patent 11,156,461 B1) discloses: Systems and methods for providing decision support guidance are provided. A method includes receiving airport information that includes a location of each airport of a plurality of airports. The method further includes determining a flight range of an ownship based on a location of the ownship and an amount of fuel remaining in the ownship, and determining if any airport of the plurality of airports is within the flight range of the ownship. The method further includes, for each airport within the flight range: determining an amount of time the ownship can maintain a current flight course before the airport is no longer within the flight range; and providing display data. The display data indicates the amount of time the ownship can maintain the current flight course before the airport is no longer within the flight range.
Mishra (United States Patent 11,410,562 B1) discloses: Disclosed are systems and methods that collect travel related data, which includes, but is not limited to, characteristics of obstacles, environmental conditions (e.g., wind speed, rain, barometric pressure, humidity), crowds of people, magnetic interference, etc., and operational characteristics of the aerial vehicle that result from the environmental conditions. The travel related data is then used to determine and/or optimize flight plans for aerial vehicles between a source location and a destination location.
Bunch et al. (United States Patent Publication 2013/0234884 A1) discloses: Systems and methods of detecting type I ice crystals using an aircraft's onboard weather radar system are disclosed. An exemplary embodiment identifies radar returns having a return level signal strength less than a radar return sensitivity threshold level, determines if at least one of a weather condition and a flight condition concurrently exists with the identified radar returns having the return level signal strength less than the radar return sensitivity threshold level, and identifies a region of airspace potentially having type I ice crystals when the at least one of the weather condition and the flight condition concurrently exists with the identified radar returns having the return level signal strength less than the radar return sensitivity threshold level.
Schoonveld et al. (United States Patent Publication 2014/0058591 A1) discloses: A method of providing real-time flight data to an aircraft, which includes the flying of a first aircraft along a flight path and obtaining real-time flight data as the first aircraft is flown along the flight path. The method includes directly relaying at least a portion of the real-time flight data.
Kronfield et al. (United States Patent Publication 2017/0082745 A1) discloses: A weather radar control system includes a processor configured to acquire first weather data for a first area extending from an aircraft from a weather radar system onboard the aircraft. The first weather data includes a first location of a weather event in the first area. The processor is further configured to receive second weather data for a second area with respect to the aircraft via the communication system from an external location where the second weather data includes a second location of a weather event in the second area, and correlate the first weather data and the second weather data. The processor is further configured to generate display data for display based on the correlated weather data where the display data is for a display area at least partially defined by the first and second areas, and provide the display data to a display system onboard the aircraft.
Wang et al. (United States Patent Publication 2017/0092139 A1) discloses: Systems and methods for collecting weather information for selected airspace regions are provided. In one embodiment, a method for collecting weather information for selected airspace regions comprises: receiving aircraft position information for a plurality of aircraft; forming an aircraft weather group based on flight path attributes derived from the aircraft position information; selecting at least a first representative aircraft from the weather group; and receiving at a weather information ground station, weather data from one or more representative aircraft of the aircraft weather group, wherein only the one or more representative aircraft transmit weather information to the weather information ground station from the aircraft weather group.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAMI N BEDEWI whose telephone number is (571)272-5753. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday - 6:00 am - 5:00 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, Scott A. Browne can be reached on (571-270-0151). 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.
/R.N.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3666C
/SCOTT A BROWNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights