DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-7 are pending and examined below. This action is in response to the claims filed 5/8/26.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Remarks 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) filed on 5/8/26, regarding 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) interpretations are persuasive in view of amendments filed 5/8/26. 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) interpretations are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Remarks 35 USC § 102 and 35 USC § 103. filed on 5/8/26, regarding 35 USC § 102 and 35 USC § 103 rejections are persuasive in view of amendments filed 5/8/26.
However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of additional citations to the art of record below.
Applicant’s remarks asserts the state of signal transmission as disclosed in Zhang does not teach the topology information as disclosed, then states “the topology information indicates a communication connection relationship in which the moving body, the external apparatus, and the other communication apparatus are arranged.” It is unclear as to how the signal transmission state does not indicate communication connection relationship between the different devices. Signal transmission state including signal strength, change in transmission rate, or an abnormal state in a signal transmission does disclose a communication connection relationship. The ability to communicate wirelessly between the devices is explicitly a communication connection relationship between them.
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Remarks Double Patenting filed on 5/8/26, regarding Double Patenting rejections are persuasive in view of amendments filed 5/8/26. Double Patenting rejections are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US 2019/0265705).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Zhang discloses an autonomous movable object signal transmission based navigation system including a moving body/ movement control method, comprising: a processor and a memory, wherein the processor performs wireless communication with an external apparatus (¶131 – external device/terminal corresponding to the recited external apparatus);
acquires, based on the wireless communication with the external apparatus, topology information of a communication network including the external apparatus and another communication apparatus (¶81-88 and Fig. 6 – signal transmission operating status corresponding to the recited communication connection relationship of a communication network between the moving body and multiple external apparatuses where the signal transmission operating status includes connection relationship information between the external device/terminal and the moving body as well as relative positioning between them overlayed on a 2D elevation map corresponding to the recited topology information based on the wireless communication with the external apparatus); and
determines, based on the topology information, a first direction, in which the moving body moves, and causes the moving body to move in the first direction (¶87-88 and Fig. 6 – element 606 determining a first flight path corresponding to the recited determining a first direction to which the moving body moves based on the communication connection relationship corresponding to the recited topology information).
Regarding claim 5, Zhang further discloses wherein in a case where the topology information indicates that no communication apparatus wirelessly connected to the other communication apparatus is present, the processor determines that the first direction is a direction of the other communication apparatus (¶83-84 – after failing to transmit data to a control device for a period of time, corresponding to the recited first index value being equal to or less than the first threshold the UAV can backtrack to a point where wireless transmission strength was strong, a region where data transmission rate was above a threshold corresponding to the recited stopping forward progress at a location where an abnormal signal transmission condition was detected corresponding to the recited index value is equal to or less than the first threshold where the communication connection relationship corresponding to the recited topology information).
Regarding claim 7, Zhang further discloses wherein the topology information indicates a communication connection relationship in which the moving body, the external apparatus, and the other communication apparatus are arranged (¶81-88 - the signal transmission operating status includes connection relationship information between the external device/terminal and the moving body as well as relative positioning between the different devices overlayed on a 2D elevation map corresponding to the recited topology information based on the wireless communication with the external apparatus).
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 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2019/0265705), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Dietrich et al. (US 2005/0208952).
Regarding claim 2, Zhang further discloses wherein in a case where the topology information indicates that the other communication apparatus is present at an end of the communication network (¶87-88 and Fig. 6 – UAV searches among “safe” points for determining a first direction given that the “safe” points is classification for locations which are above a threshold data transmission rate corresponding to the recited communication is present where communication connection relationship corresponding to the recited topology information).
Zhang does not explicitly disclose identifying the direction of a second communication apparatus, however, Dietrich discloses a signal strength based position identification system including the processor determines that the first direction is a direction of the other communication apparatus (¶36-40 – wireless node location module utilizes signal strength data received from different wireless nodes to determines the locations of the infrastructure radio transceivers corresponding to the recited communication apparatuses which are mapped onto a coverage map indicating the relative directions of the communications apparatus)
The combination of the autonomous movable object signal transmission based navigation system of Zhang with the wireless node location identification and mapping of Dietrich fully discloses the elements as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have combined the autonomous movable object signal transmission based navigation system of Zhang with the wireless node location identification and mapping of Dietrich in order to improve signal based positioning detection for both communications infrastructure and mobile devices (Dietrich - ¶12-13).
Regarding claim 3, Zhang further discloses wherein the processor acquires an index value indicating a transmission path characteristic between the moving body and the other communication apparatus (¶84-88 and Fig. 6 – signal transmission operating status corresponding to the recited transmission path characteristic between the moving body and the other apparatus which is utilized to determine the classification of the location corresponding to the recited index value), and
determines, based on the index value, a second direction, in which the moving body moves, and causes the moving body to move in the second direction (¶87-88 and Fig. 6 – element 610 determining a second destination corresponding to the recited determining a second direction to which the moving body moves based on the location classifier corresponding to the recited index value).
Regarding claim 4, Zhang further discloses wherein in a case where the index value is higher than a threshold, the processor determines that the second direction is a direction away from the other communication apparatus (¶81-88 and Figs. 6-9 – starting point being the location of the remote controller corresponding to the recited external apparatus being closer to the UAV than the next point to the destination which is at a first direction farther away from the external apparatus which is selected based on the state of signal transmission at the first point being above a threshold value).
Zhang does not explicitly disclose identifying the direction of a second communication apparatus, however, Dietrich discloses a signal strength based position identification system including wireless node location module utilizes signal strength data received from different wireless nodes to determines the locations of the infrastructure radio transceivers corresponding to the recited communication apparatuses which are mapped onto a coverage map indicating the relative directions of the communications apparatus (¶36-40).
The combination of the autonomous movable object signal transmission based navigation system of Zhang with the wireless node location identification and mapping of Dietrich fully discloses the elements as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have combined the autonomous movable object signal transmission based navigation system of Zhang with the wireless node location identification and mapping of Dietrich in order to improve signal based positioning detection for both communications infrastructure and mobile devices (Dietrich - ¶12-13).
Additional References Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tamura (US 2006/0176842) discloses a network system including identifying topology information and expanding it based on connection of local topologies for detecting positioning of freely traveling nodes (¶77).
Ramanathan et al. (US 2024/0056359) discloses an automated scaling of networking topologies utilizing routing information base which includes information about the topology of the network immediately around it (¶33).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew J Reda whose telephone number is (408)918-7573. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7-4 ET.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at (571) 272-7298. 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.
/MATTHEW J. REDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights