Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 19/156,355

UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES (UAVs) AND CARRIER PLATFORMS THEREFOR

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Aug 13, 2025
Priority
Feb 22, 2023 — IL 300876 +1 more
Examiner
BONNETTE, RODNEY ANDREW
Art Unit
3647
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Elbit Systems C4I And Cyber Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 4m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allowance Rate
899 granted / 993 resolved
+38.5% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+6.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
1000
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
54.5%
+14.5% vs TC avg
§102
17.4%
-22.6% vs TC avg
§112
9.8%
-30.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 993 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “16” has been used to designate both landing legs (figure 1) and switch member (figures 2A & 2B). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “anchoring system”, (claims 1, 5-10, 21, & 23) “locking latch” “latch-catch”, (claim 10) “magnetic attaching assembly” (claim 11) “altimeter”, “compass”, “gyroscope”, (claim 15) & “GPS module” and “wireless communications module” (claim 16) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: there are apparent typos in the specification. On page 13, line 27, “landing lags” should be -- landing legs -- & on page 14, lines 13, 15, & 15; “switching member 30” should be – switching member 16 --; although reference # 16 was already used for the landing legs and therefore when the figures are corrected, the switching member may be a different reference number. In that case, the appropriate reference number should be used. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The term “substantially” in claim 13, line 2, is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For compact prosecution, the Examiner is interpreting “substantially perpendicular” in claim 13, line 2, as -- perpendicular --. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1, 2, 5-16, & 19-24 are allowed. However, 112 issues need to be resolved. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 1, The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed “whereby rotation of said at least one propeller blade activates said switching member into the unlocking position, to thereby unlock the anchoring system” in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 1. Regarding claims 21 & 23, The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed “whereby rotation of the at least one propeller blade activates the switching member into the unlocking position, to thereby unlock the anchoring system” in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claims 21 & 23. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references Mestler (US Patent No. 11,175,655 B1) & McGann et al. (US Patent No. 11,117,667 B1) each disclose a UAV carrier, a platform, a docking surface, a locking/unlocking mechanism, a UAV w/propeller blades, an anchoring system, an arresting location, a GPS module, and a wireless communications module. The reference Leslie et al. (Pub No. US 2021/0048832 A1) discloses an unmanned vehicle for carrying UAVs, a platform, a docking surface, a locking/unlocking mechanism, a UAV w/propeller blades, an anchoring system, an arresting location, UAV landing legs, a mechanical surface for reversibly interacting with the arresting location, a latch, and a wireless communications module. The reference Addonisio et al. (Pub No. US 2019/0176986 A1) discloses a UAV carrier, a platform, a docking surface, a locking/unlocking mechanism, a UAV w/propeller blades, an anchoring system, and an arresting location. The references Ananthanarayanan et al. (US Patent No. 10,099,561 B1) & Ananthanarayanan et al. (US Patent No. 9,421,869 B1) each disclose a UAV carrier, a platform, a docking surface, a locking/unlocking mechanism, a UAV w/propeller blades, an anchoring system, an arresting location, and UAV landing legs. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODNEY ANDREW BONNETTE whose telephone number is (571)270-7556. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30 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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 571-272-6909. 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. /RODNEY A BONNETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 13, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
May 01, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12628959
FURNITURE ITEM WITH CIRCUIT BOARD ASSEMBLY
2y 3m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12611035
EASY-TO-TRANSPORT CHAIR
2y 0m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12612154
MECHANICAL ARCHITECTURE FOR DISTRIBUTED FLAP ACTUATION SYSTEM
1y 2m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12612168
AIRCRAFT AIR INLET COMPRISING AT LEAST A MAIN DE-ICING SYSTEM AND AT LEAST ONE SECONDARY DE-ICING SYSTEM POSITIONED AT A SPLICE PLATE
1y 2m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12612152
WING FOR AN AIRCRAFT
1y 1m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+6.9%)
2y 1m (~1y 4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 993 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month