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 .
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Per step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test (See MPEP 2106), claim 1 is directed to an electronic device which is a product and falls within a statutory category (See MPEP 2106.03).
Per step 2A, prong 1, claim 1 recites calculating initial position data of the unmanned aerial vehicle based on the positioning data;
receiving the sensor data through the unmanned aerial vehicle, and generating position data of the unmanned aerial vehicle by combining the initial position data of the unmanned aerial vehicle and lidar detection data of the unmanned aerial vehicle;
correcting the position data of the unmanned aerial vehicle by a segmented mobile-fixed collaborative odometer… performing data fusion on the sensor data, the initial position data of the unmanned aerial vehicle, the corrected position data of the unmanned aerial vehicle and the point cloud data to obtain fused data; and
establishing a high-precision map of the underground poor texture space based on the fused data, with each of the sensor nodes used as a feature point in a mapping process,
wherein the step of correcting the position data of the unmanned aerial vehicle by a segmented mobile-fixed collaborative odometer comprises: acquiring relative positions of the unmanned aerial vehicle and one of the sensor nodes:
Pu=Cs X R + T
wherein Pu represents a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle in a world coordinate system, Cs represents coordinates of the sensor node in the world coordinate system, R represents a rotation matrix between the unmanned aerial vehicle and the sensor node, and T represents a translation vector between the unmanned aerial vehicle and the sensor node; and
correcting the position data of the unmanned aerial vehicle through the segmented mobile-fixed collaborative odometer according to the relative positions of the unmanned aerial vehicle and the sensor node, and
the step of correcting the position data of the unmanned aerial vehicle through the segmented mobile-fixed collaborative odometer according to the relative positions of the unmanned aerial vehicle and the sensor node comprises:
correcting the position data of the unmanned aerial vehicle when a timer interval of the segmented mobile-fixed collaborative odometer is greater than a preset timer interval and a distance between one of the sensor nodes and the unmanned aerial vehicle is less than a preset distance.
The steps of the claims recite calculations and steps that are disclosed as mathematical relationships (See specification pages 7-11), and therefore the claims fall into the mathematical concepts grouping (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(1), subsection 1). Performing data fusion and establishing a high-precision map are also steps capable of being performed in the human mind and therefore fall into the mental processes grouping (See MPEP 2106.05((a)(1), subsection III).
The additional elements are one or more processors, a memory; and one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors, and the programs may be configured to execute the method for an underground poor texture space based on mobile-fixed collaborative deviation correction, acquiring sensor data of sensor nodes determined based on a structure of the underground poor texture space, wherein the sensor data comprises structural data of the structure of the underground poor texture space and position data of the sensor nodes; and acquiring positioning data of an unmanned aerial vehicle in the underground poor texture space.
Per step 2A, prong 2, The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application. The recitation of a processor, memory and programs stored on the memory amount to instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer (See MPEP 2106.05(f)). The acquiring steps in claim 1 are mere data gathering in conjunction with the abstract idea, which is insignificant extra solution activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). When considered in combination, the additional elements do not provide anything further than their individual functionality.
Per step 2B, claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception for the same reason. Further, the courts have recognized that gathering data is well-understood, routine and conventional (See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II).
Claim 2 depends from claim 1 and recites the additional element of arranging the sensor nodes based on the structure of the underground poor texture space by using a self-adaptive optimal arrangement strategy, and acquiring the sensor data. The arrangement of the sensors is recited at a high level of generality and is part of the data gathering that is recognized by the courts as well-understood, routine and conventional. Therefore, the claim limitations for arranging the sensors does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and is not significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 3-5 depend from claim 1 and recite further details of the abstract idea. Claims 3-5 do not recite any additional elements. Since there are no recited additional elements, claims 3-5 are not integrated into a practical application and does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim 6 depends from claim 1 and recites a further additional element that receiving the sensor data through the unmanned aerial vehicle comprises: establishing a communication channel between the unmanned aerial vehicle and the sensor nodes through Zigbee low-power wireless communication; and receiving the sensor data based on the communication channel. These claim elements describe further details of collecting data in conjunction with the abstract idea. Further, the courts have recognized that collecting data in various manners including receiving or transmitting data over a network is well-understood, routine and conventional (Se MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II). Therefore, claim 6 is not integrated into a practical application and is not significantly more than the abstract idea.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 20 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant identifies limitations in bold on pages 6 and 7 of the response including one or more processors, a memory, an unmanned aerial vehicle and a segmented mobile-fixed collaborative odometer, and traverses that the limitations are not abstract ideas and the claimed steps are not performed merely in the human mind. However, claims can recite a mental process even if they are claimed as being performed on a computer (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(1) subsection III. C.) As discussed above, the recitation of a computer and memory amounts to instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer. The lidar is only recited as a source of data and is not recited as a structural element. The claim does not recite any structure for the segmented mobile-fixed collaborative odometer and only recites its mathematical functions, which fall into the mathematical processes grouping.
Applicant states that sensor node and the unmanned aerial vehicle integrate the segmented mobile-fixed collaborative odometer correction (ass asserted to be mental steps) into a practical application. However, the sensor node only describes the source of collected data, and the acquiring step is insignificant extra solution activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). Similarly, the unmanned aerial vehicle is only recited as a source of collected data. The claim does not recite any structural elements or functions beyond providing data for the abstract idea.
Applicant refers to disclosed advantages of the invention in paragraphs 44 and 87 of the specification to support a conclusion that the invention recites elements, including the incorporation of the segmented mobile-fixed collaborative odometer, that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (pages 9 and 10 of Applicant’s response). However, the segmented mobile-fixed collaborative odometer is not recited as a structural element. It is only recited in conjunction with a correction step. The correction step recites limitations which are mathematical functions that fall into the mathematical processes grouping.
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 MANUEL L BARBEE whose telephone number is (571)272-2212. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5:30..
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Shelby A Turner can be reached at 571-272-6334. 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.
/MANUEL L BARBEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights