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
Introduction
This office action is in response to Applicant’s submission filed on 11/25/2024. As such, claims 1-20 have been examined.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2, there should be a “:” after “one or more of”
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 4, “displaying the response message the operator” should read “displaying the response message to the operator”.
in line 3, there should be a “:” after “one or more of”
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, there should be a “:” after “one or more of”
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, there should be a “:” after “one or more of”
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, there should be a “:” after “one or more of”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-2, 5-11, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites a method that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, claims limitations that cover performance of the limitations in the human mind with the assistance of physical aids (e.g., pen and paper), but for the recitation of generic or well-known or conventional computer components. That is, other than reciting “first control unit and second control unit,” nothing in these claim limitations precludes the steps from practically being performed in the mind. As a whole, claim 1 pertains to interpreting motion signal and associate it with a reference table, which is a mental process that a human can do. Individually, each of the limitations also pertains to a mental process, for example:
detecting one or more signals from an operator, wherein the one or more signals that are detected are one or more of motion signals or audio signals; (e.g., a human listening to voice or looking at hand signal.)
creating a coded datalink message by converting the one or more signals to one or more coded signals with a first control unit, wherein each of the one or more signals is associated with a corresponding coded signal based on a reference table; (e.g., the human coding message by writing what each motion or audio signal means in a piece of paper, making a reference table, such as handshaking = turbulence (take over control), pointing down on the nose = nose diving (adjust steering) ) [first control unit are generic computers automating process that human can carry out]
communicating the coded datalink message with a second control unit; (e.g., the human writing down the coded message and give it to another human or feed it into a computer, the human could also just read the code out loud to another person) [second control unit are generic computers automating process that human can carry out]
decoding the coded datalink message by converting the one or more coded signals to the one or more signals with the second control unit based on the reference table; (e.g., the human playing the role of a decoder, pulling out a piece of paper with the reference table to look up what each code means.)
and executing the datalink message with the second control unit. (e.g., the human or another human carries out the task or action associated with the code/message.)
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims only recites generic computing components. Such generic computing components are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of receiving, determining, or outputting information) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these 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 is directed to an abstract idea.
Claim 1 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 limitations of using generic computer components amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. Claim 1 is not patent eligible.
The examiner further notes that the use of claimed generic computer components (“first control unit and second control unit,”) invokes such generic computer components “merely as a tool to perform an existing process”. MPEP 2106.05(f). MPEP 2106.05(f) further explains:
Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
Claim 1 recites generic computer components (“first control unit and second control unit,”), with respect to performing tasks. MPEP 2106.05(d) and (f) further provides examples of court decisions where the courts found generic computing components to be mere instructions to apply a judicial exception, and further explains “increased speed” (e.g., using a computer to increase the speed of an otherwise mental process) does not provide an inventive concept. For example:
A commonplace business method or mathematical algorithm being applied on a general purpose computer, Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. V. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 223, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1983 (2014); Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 64, 175 USPQ 673, 674 (1972); Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
A process for monitoring audit log data that is executed on a general-purpose computer where the increased speed in the process comes solely from the capabilities of the general-purpose computer, FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Sys., 839 F.3d 1089, 1095, 120 USPQ2d 1293, 1296 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (emphasis added).
Performing repetitive calculations. Bancorp Services v. Sun Life, 687 F.3d 1266, 1278, 103 USPQ2d 1425, 1433 (Fed. Cir. 2012) ("The computer required by some of Bancorp’s claims is employed only for its most basic function, the performance of repetitive calculations, and as such does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of those claims.")
Claim 11 recites system claim that corresponds to the system of claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same grounds as claim 1 above. While claim 11 further recites “sensors”, these are merely generic computer components recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Therefore, none of these limitations (a) integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or (b) amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, because in either case the additional limitations merely utilize generic computer components that amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer function. Claim 11 is not patent eligible.
Claim 20 recites non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claim that corresponds to the system of claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same grounds as claim 1 above. While claim 19 further recites “computer-readable storage medium comprising executable instructions”, these are merely generic computer components recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Therefore, none of these limitations (a) integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or (b) amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, because in either case the additional limitations merely utilize generic computer components that amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer function. Claim 20 is not patent eligible.
Claims 2-10, and 12-19, depend from independent claims 1, and 11, do not remedy any of the deficiencies of claims 1, and 11, and therefore are rejected on the same grounds as claim 1, 11 from above.
Claim 2 further recites: wherein the first control unit is disposed onboard an aircraft and the second control unit is disposed onboard the aircraft. (e.g., the human can work with another person on an airplane to carry out the steps of the claim.)
Claim 3, further recites: wherein the first control unit is disposed off-board an aircraft and the second control unit is disposed onboard the aircraft. (e.g., one of the human (air traffic controller is communicating with another person who is on the aircraft, like a copilot or flight attendant.)
Claim 4, further recites: wherein communicating the coded datalink message includes relaying the coded datalink message via one or more of an onboard relaying system or an off-board relaying system. (e.g., the human can communicate with another human using radio communication.) [radio communication could be transmitted on a generic computer]
Claim 5, further recites: wherein executing the datalink message includes changing at least some data stored within a memory of the second control unit. (e.g., the human or another human can update data on a log book) [this process could also just describe using a generic computer to update data, an automating process that a human can carry out.]
Claim 6, further recites: further comprising displaying at least some of the data that is changed via a display device responsive to changing at least some of the data stored within the memory of the second control unit. (e.g., the human writing out new data or status on a piece of paper and showing another human.) [A display device is another generic computing component that automates process that a human can carry out]
Claim 7, further recites: further comprising: creating an audio file associated with the at least some of the data that is changed with the second control unit; (e.g., the human or another human read the instruction from the notebook and record it using a recorder or just reading it out loud.)
and playing the audio file to the operator via an audio system. (e.g., the human playing back an audio recording or hearing the audio instruction from another person.)
Claim 8, further recites: further comprising controlling a display setting of a display device based at least in part on the one or more signals that are detected. (e.g., the human or another human adjust the display to make it brighter or dimmer.) [display is a generic computer component that automates a process that a human can carry out]
Claim 9, further comprising: receiving a response message from the second control unit responsive to the execution of the datalink message by the second control unit; (e.g., the human communicates to another human that the action has been done.)
and one or more of displaying the response message the operator via a display device or audibly playing an audio file of the response message to the operator via an audio system. (e.g., the human reads out or writing out a message.) [display is a generic computer component that automates a process that a human can carry out]
Claim 10, further comprising detecting the one or more signals from the operator of an aircraft and creating the coded datalink message while the aircraft is one or more of on ground or in flight. (e.g., the human performing the task, reading signal and coding on the airplane while the airplane is in the air or on the ground.)
Claim 12 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 2 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 13 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 3 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 14 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 4 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 15 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 5 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 16 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 6 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 17 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 8 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 18 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 9 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 19 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 10 and is rejected under similar rationale.
In sum, claims 2-10, and 12-19 depend from claim 1, and 11, and further recite mental processes as explained above. None of the additional limitations recited in claims 2-10, and 12-19 amount to anything more than the same or a similar abstract idea as recited in claims 1, and 11 respectively. Nor do any limitations in claims 2-10, and 12-19: (a) integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea or (b) amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional limitations of using generic computer components amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Claims 2-10, and 12-19 are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-8, 11-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saptharishi (US 20210233411), in view of Shintani (US 20250225950).
Regarding Claim 1, Saptharishi discloses: 1. A method, comprising: detecting one or more signals from an operator, wherein the one or more signals that are detected are one or more of motion signals or audio signals; ([0018] FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an aircraft system 100 with a speech recognition system 140, in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. The illustrated embodiment of the aircraft system 100 includes, without limitation: at least one processing system 102; an appropriate amount of data storage 104; a displays system 106; a user interface 108; control surface actuation modules 110; other subsystem control modules 112; a speech input/output (I/O) interface 116;)
creating a coded datalink message by converting the one or more signals to one or more coded signals with a first control unit, wherein each of the one or more signals is associated with a corresponding coded signal based on a ([0018] FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an aircraft system 100 with a speech recognition system 140, in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. The illustrated embodiment of the aircraft system 100 includes, without limitation: at least one processing system 102; an appropriate amount of data storage 104; a displays system 106; a user interface 108; control surface actuation modules 110; other subsystem control modules 112; a speech input/output (I/O) interface 116; a flight management system (FMS) 132, a navigation system 134, a speech recognition system 140 and a communication module 120. These elements of the aircraft system 100 may be coupled together by a suitable interconnection architecture 130 that accommodates data communication, the transmission of control or command signals, and/or the delivery of operating power within the aircraft system 100. [0023] In an exemplary embodiment, the communication module 120 is suitably configured to support data communication between the host aircraft and one or more remote systems. For example, the communication module 120 may be designed and configured to enable the host aircraft to communicate with an air traffic control (ATC) system 150, automatic terminal information service (ATIS), other ground and air communications, etc. In this regard, the communication module 120 may include or support a datalink subsystem that can be used to provide ATC data to the host aircraft and/or to send information from the host aircraft to the ATC system 150, preferably in compliance with known standards and specifications.)
communicating the coded datalink message with a second control unit; ([0018] FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an aircraft system 100 with a speech recognition system 140, in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. The illustrated embodiment of the aircraft system 100 includes, without limitation: at least one processing system 102; an appropriate amount of data storage 104; a displays system 106; a user interface 108; control surface actuation modules 110; other subsystem control modules 112; a speech input/output (I/O) interface 116; a flight management system (FMS) 132, a navigation system 134, a speech recognition system 140 and a communication module 120. These elements of the aircraft system 100 may be coupled together by a suitable interconnection architecture 130 that accommodates data communication, the transmission of control or command signals, and/or the delivery of operating power within the aircraft system 100.)
decoding the coded datalink message by converting the one or more coded signals to the one or more signals with the second control unit based on the ([0018] FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an aircraft system 100 with a speech recognition system 140, in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. The illustrated embodiment of the aircraft system 100 includes, without limitation: at least one processing system 102; an appropriate amount of data storage 104; a displays system 106; a user interface 108; control surface actuation modules 110; other subsystem control modules 112; a speech input/output (I/O) interface 116; a flight management system (FMS) 132, a navigation system 134, a speech recognition system 140 and a communication module 120. These elements of the aircraft system 100 may be coupled together by a suitable interconnection architecture 130 that accommodates data communication, the transmission of control or command signals, and/or the delivery of operating power within the aircraft system 100.)
and executing the datalink message with the second control unit. ([0018] FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram of an aircraft system 100 with a speech recognition system 140, in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. The illustrated embodiment of the aircraft system 100 includes, without limitation: at least one processing system 102; an appropriate amount of data storage 104; a displays system 106; a user interface 108; control surface actuation modules 110; other subsystem control modules 112; a speech input/output (I/O) interface 116; a flight management system (FMS) 132, a navigation system 134, a speech recognition system 140 and a communication module 120. These elements of the aircraft system 100 may be coupled together by a suitable interconnection architecture 130 that accommodates data communication, the transmission of control or command signals, and/or the delivery of operating power within the aircraft system 100.)
Saphtarishi does not appear to explicitly disclose a reference table for decoding.
Shintani in the related art discloses: encoding and decoding the coded datalink message by converting the one or more coded signals to the one or more signals with the second control unit based on the reference table; ([0052] In an example, the received control commands in the user input may be include instructions for the requested change in the values of the functional parameters such as, a display parameter, an audio parameter or a media parameter. The instructions corresponding to the control commands may be encoded in the received user input. The processor 208A may decode the instructions corresponding to the control commands in the received user input based on a look-up table of the control commands that may be stored on the memory 206A and/or the database 112. The changes in the values of the functional parameters of the control commands may be in a predefined range.)
Saphtarishi and Shintani are considered analogous art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Saphtarishi to combine the teaching of Shintani to incorporate the above mentioned features, because it is desirable use a lookup table to decode user inputs into actionable commands (Shintani, [0052]).
Regarding Claim 2, Saphtarishi and Shintani teaches all the element of claim 1,
Saphtarishi further discloses: wherein the first control unit is disposed onboard an aircraft and the second control unit is disposed onboard the aircraft. (FIG. 2 is a functional block diagram of a speech recognition system 140, in accordance with an exemplary embodiment. The illustrated embodiment of the speech recognition system 140 includes, without limitation: an ATCT speech engine module 202; a named entity identification module 204; a command and control update module 206; a flight context module 208; and a command and control speech engine module 210. A processing system (e.g., processing system 102, FIG. 1) of the aircraft system 100 may implement the various modules of speech recognition system 140. As used herein, the term module refers to any hardware, software, firmware, electronic control component, processing logic, and/or processor device, individually or in any combination, including without limitation: application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), an electronic circuit, a processor (shared, dedicated, or group) and memory that executes one or more software or firmware programs, a combinational logic circuit, and/or other suitable components that provide the described functionality. Generally, modules of speech recognition system are stored in data storage 104 and executed by processing system 102.) Also see para 0018, and 0026.
Regarding Claim 3, Saphtarishi and Shintani teaches all the element of claim 1,
Saphtarishi further discloses: wherein the first control unit is disposed off-board an aircraft and the second control unit is disposed onboard the aircraft. ([0019] The processing system 102 may be implemented or realized with one or more general purpose processors, content addressable memory, digital signal processors, application specific integrated circuits, field programmable gate arrays, any suitable programmable logic devices, discrete gate or transistor logic, discrete hardware components, or any combination designed to perform the functions described here. A processor device may be realized as a microprocessor, a controller, a microcontroller, or a state machine. Moreover, a processor device may be implemented as a combination of computing devices (e.g., a combination of a digital signal processor and a microprocessor, a plurality of microprocessors, one or more microprocessors in conjunction with a digital signal processor core, or any other such configuration). As described in more detail below, the processing system 102 may implement a speech recognition algorithm and, when operating in that context, may be considered a speech recognition system 140. In accordance with various embodiments, processing system 102 is configured to execute speech recognition system 140 so as to identify additional words that should be added or removed from command and control speech engine based on flight context data, to copy model parameters corresponding to those additional words from an air traffic control transcription (ATCT) speech engine, and to dynamically update model parameters of a command and control speech engine based on the copied model parameters. In addition, the processing system 102 may generate commands, which may be communicated through interconnection architecture 130 to various other system components. Such commands may cause the various system components to alter their operations, provide information to the processing system 102, or perform other actions, non-limiting examples of which will be provided below.)
Regarding Claim 4, Saphtarishi and Shintani teaches all the element of claim 1,
Saphtarishi further discloses: wherein communicating the coded datalink message includes ([0018] embodiment of the aircraft system 100 includes, without limitation: at least one processing system 102; an appropriate amount of data storage 104; a displays system 106; a user interface 108; control surface actuation modules 110; other subsystem control modules 112; a speech input/output (I/O) interface 116; a flight management system (FMS) 132, a navigation system 134, a speech recognition system 140 and a communication module 120.)
relaying the coded datalink message via one or more of an onboard relaying system ([0018] embodiment of the aircraft system 100 includes, without limitation: at least one processing system 102; an appropriate amount of data storage 104; a displays system 106; a user interface 108; control surface actuation modules 110; other subsystem control modules 112; a speech input/output (I/O) interface 116; a flight management system (FMS) 132, a navigation system 134, a speech recognition system 140 and a communication module 120. These elements of the aircraft system 100 may be coupled together by a suitable interconnection architecture 130 that accommodates data communication, the transmission of control or command signals, and/or the delivery of operating power within the aircraft system 100.) [The processing system and interconnection architecture provide the onboard routing and relay of digital commands between the avionics subsystems.]
or an off-board relaying system. ([0018] embodiment of the aircraft system 100 includes, without limitation: at least one processing system 102; an appropriate amount of data storage 104; a displays system 106; a user interface 108; control surface actuation modules 110; other subsystem control modules 112; a speech input/output (I/O) interface 116; a flight management system (FMS) 132, a navigation system 134, a speech recognition system 140 and a communication module 120. These elements of the aircraft system 100 may be coupled together by a suitable interconnection architecture 130 that accommodates data communication, the transmission of control or command signals, and/or the delivery of operating power within the aircraft system 100. These elements of the aircraft system 100 may be coupled together by a suitable interconnection architecture 130 that accommodates data communication, the transmission of control or command signals, and/or the delivery of operating power within the aircraft system 100.) [communication module serves as the required off-board transceiver/relay to send coded datalink messages to external ground stations or satellites.]
Regarding Claim 5, Saphtarishi and Shintani teaches all the element of claim 1,
Shintani further discloses: wherein executing the datalink message includes changing at least some data stored within a memory of the second control unit. ([0052] In an example, the received control commands in the user input may be include instructions for the requested change in the values of the functional parameters such as, a display parameter, an audio parameter or a media parameter. The instructions corresponding to the control commands may be encoded in the received user input. The processor 208A may decode the instructions corresponding to the control commands in the received user input based on a look-up table of the control commands that may be stored on the memory 206A and/or the database 112. The changes in the values of the functional parameters of the control commands may be in a predefined range.) [requesting change in the values of the functional parameter reads on requesting data change, encoding user input and then decoding the command using look-up table reads on communicating the message, and the processor decodes these commands using a look-up table or control commands stored in a memory, updating operational setting based on the look-up table means the system changing or implementing the data within the control loop.]
The rationale for the combination would be similar to the one provided earlier.
Regarding Claim 6, Saphtarishi and Shintani teaches all the element of claim 5,
Shintani further discloses: further comprising displaying at least some of the data that is changed via a display device responsive to changing at least some of the data stored within the memory of the second control unit. ([0020] The second electronic device 104 may render the requested changes in the value of the one or more functional parameters. Furthermore, the second electronic device 104 may display the effects of the rendered value of the one or more functional parameters on the screen.)
Saphtarishi also disclose display system, see para 0021-0022 and 0025 for details.
The rationale for the combination would be similar to the one provided earlier.
Regarding Claim 7, Saphtarishi and Shintani teaches all the element of claim 5,
Shintani further discloses: further comprising: creating an audio file associated with the at least some of the data that is changed with the second control unit; and playing the audio file to the operator via an audio system. ([0051] In an embodiment, the control commands may correspond to the audio parameters of the second electronic device 104. Herein, the first electronic device 102 may be a remote controller and the second electronic device 104 may be an audio output device, such as, a loudspeaker device or a media playback device with a capability to playback both audio and video associated with media content. In an example, the instructions in the control commands may indicate that the volume level and the parametric equalizer (EQ) of the second electronic device 104 may be required to be changed concurrently. As already discussed, such control command may be received from the user 106 via the first electronic device 102, as a user input.)
The rationale for the combination would be similar to the one provided earlier.
Regarding Claim 8, Saphtarishi and Shintani teaches all the element of claim 1,
Shintani further discloses: further comprising controlling a display setting of a display device based at least in part on the one or more signals that are detected. ([0020] The second electronic device 104 may render the requested changes in the value of the one or more functional parameters. Furthermore, the second electronic device 104 may display the effects of the rendered value of the one or more functional parameters on the screen.)
Saphtarishi also disclose display system, see para 0021-0022 and 0025 for details.
The rationale for the combination would be similar to the one provided earlier.
Regarding Claim 11, Saphtharishi discloses: 11. A hands-free communication system, comprising: one or more sensors configured to detect one or more signals from an operator, ([0025] Speech I/O interface 116 is suitably configured to couple headset 160 with the system 100, which enables system 100 to communicate with a system user (e.g., a pilot) through speech. For example, when the system user produces an utterance that is captured as an analog signal by a microphone 162, speech I/O interface 116 digitizes the analog speech signal and provides the digital command audio data 222 (see FIG. 2) to speech recognition system 140 for analysis by a speech recognition algorithm.)
As for the rest of the claim, they recite similar elements as claim 1, therefore the rationale applied in rejection of claim 1 is equally applicable.
Claims 12-17 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 2-6, and 8 respectively, and are rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding Claim 20, Saphtharishi discloses: 20. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising executable instructions that, in response to execution, cause one or more control units comprising one or more processors to perform the operations comprising: ([0020] The data storage 104 may be realized as RAM memory, flash memory, EPROM memory, EEPROM memory, registers, a hard disk, a removable disk, a CD-ROM, or any other form of storage medium known in the art. In this regard, the data storage 104 can be coupled to the processing system 102 such that the processing system 102 can read information from, and write information to, the data storage 104.)
As for the rest of the claim, they recite similar elements as claim 6, therefore the rationale applied in rejection of claim 6 is equally applicable.
Claims 9-10 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saptharishi (US 20210233411), in view of Shintani (US 20250225950), and further in view of Peram (US 20260112275).
Regarding Claim 9, Saphtarishi and Shintani teaches all the element of claim 1,
Shintani further discloses: and one or more of displaying the response message the operator via a display device ([0020] The second electronic device 104 may render the requested changes in the value of the one or more functional parameters. Furthermore, the second electronic device 104 may display the effects of the rendered value of the one or more functional parameters on the screen.) or audibly playing an audio file of the response message to the operator via an audio system. ([0051] In an embodiment, the control commands may correspond to the audio parameters of the second electronic device 104. Herein, the first electronic device 102 may be a remote controller and the second electronic device 104 may be an audio output device, such as, a loudspeaker device or a media playback device with a capability to playback both audio and video associated with media content. In an example, the instructions in the control commands may indicate that the volume level and the parametric equalizer (EQ) of the second electronic device 104 may be required to be changed concurrently. As already discussed, such control command may be received from the user 106 via the first electronic device 102, as a user input.)
Saphtarishi also disclose display system, see para 0021-0022 and 0025 for details.
Saphtarishi and Shintani do not appear to explicitly disclose feedback response from the second control unit responsive to the execution of the datalink message by the second control unit.
Peram in the related art discloses: receiving a response message from the second control unit responsive to the execution of the datalink message by the second control unit; ([0036] In various implementations, one or both the communications systems 110 and 140 may include additional communications not directly relied upon herein, such as bidirectional pilot-to-ATC (air traffic control) communications via a datalink, and any other suitable radio communication system that supports communications between the aircraft 102, the remote system 106, and various external source(s). The communications described herein also may apply to the feedback display device where suitable.)
and one or more of displaying the response message the operator via a display device ([0036] In various implementations, one or both the communications systems 110 and 140 may include additional communications not directly relied upon herein, such as bidirectional pilot-to-ATC (air traffic control) communications via a datalink, and any other suitable radio communication system that supports communications between the aircraft 102, the remote system 106, and various external source(s). The communications described herein also may apply to the feedback display device where suitable.)
Saphtarishi, Shintani, and Peram are considered analogous art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Saphtarishi and Shintani to combine the teaching of Peram to incorporate the above mentioned features, because bidirectional pilot to ATC communication via datalink enables for efficient communication between the pilot and the air traffic controllers without using up the voice frequencies (Peram, [0036]).
Regarding Claim 10, Saphtarishi and Shintani teaches all the element of claim 1,
Saphtarishi and Shintani do not appear to explicitly disclose detecting the one or more signals from the operator of an aircraft and creating the coded datalink message while the aircraft is one or more of on ground or in flight.
Peram discloses: further comprising: detecting the one or more signals from the operator of an aircraft and creating the coded datalink message while the aircraft is one or more of on ground or in flight. ([0036] In various implementations, each of the communications systems 110 and 140 are configured to support instantaneous (i.e., real time or current) communications between various systems. The communications systems 110 and 140 may each incorporate one or more transmitters, receivers, and the supporting communications hardware and software required for components of the system 100 to communicate as described herein. The network 108 used for communication may be a wireless gateway such as a data link management wireless (DLM-W) system that provides communication among systems within a cockpit and on an aircraft as well as transmission between the aircraft and the ground, Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS), which uses VHF, HF, or satellite communication (SATCOM) (whether via Wi-Fi or other network), VHF Data Link (VDL), High-Frequency Data Link (HFDL), and air-to-ground (ATG) systems. Other networks may be used when the aircraft 102 is on the ground such as cellular networks and ground Wi-Fi Networks while an aircraft is at a gate, taxiing, or at a remote location on the ground from a specific maintenance base.)
The rationale for the combination would be similar to the one provided earlier.
Claims 18-19 recites limitations similar to the limitations of Claim 9-10 respectively, and are rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Sharma (US 10447334)- discloses management and system for comprehensive security lock down, using hands free communication, AB coding and decoding and command table. See Abstract, col. 10, lines 60- col. 11, lines 1-28 for additional details.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Philip H Lam whose telephone number is (571)272-1721. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM-2 PM Pacific time.
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, Bhavesh Mehta can be reached on 571-272-7453. 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.
/PHILIP H LAM/Examiner, Art Unit 2656
Prosecution Insights