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 .
Status of Claims
This is the first Office action on the merits. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and addressed below.
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:
“randomizer” provided in claim 3
The specification and drawings were used to define the generic placeholder specified above (item a):
Specification – “…Example 14 can include the method of example 12, further comprising: generating, using a randomizer, the first passcode… Example 19 can include a computing system comprising one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable media having stored thereon instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors to perform any of the steps of examples 12-19…”
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.
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.
Examiner note to help applicant overcome the art on record
Applicant may overcome the art on record by amending independent claims 1, 8, and 15 to include the limitations from dependent claims 3, 10, and 17 with the following further clarification included:
“… generating, using a randomizer, the first passcode based at least in part on determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range of the landing site; and
incorporating the first passcode into the first message,
wherein the first passcode is the same as the second passcode”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 1-2, 4, 6-9, 11, 13-16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham et al. US 20210349456 A1 (“Pham”) in view of Ganesh et al. US 20160068264 A1 (“Ganesh”).
For claim 1, Pham discloses a method performed by a pilotless aircraft computing system (See at least [0006] of Pham – “… this disclosure describes a UAV including an antenna and processing circuitry configured to receive, from a ground-based portable landing pad, a first data packet; transmit, in response to receiving the first data packet, a second data packet to the landing pad; receive, from the landing pad, a third data packet comprising a distance between the UAV and the landing pad; and cause the UAV to navigate toward the landing pad based on the distance and an orientation of the UAV relative to the landing pad…”), the method comprising:
transmitting a first message to a landing site computing system, the first message comprising a first passcode (See at least [0044] of Pham – “… UAV 10 is configured to transmit a second signal in the direction of landing pad 30 (406A). For example, UAV 10 may transmit a signal encoding a second data packet, including a “search” command along with the unique identifier or address of a particular portable landing pad 30 on which UAV 10 is seeking to land… UAV 10 may broadcast a search command directed to all landing pads 30 known to be in the area, in order to determine a most-proximal landing pad...”);
determining whether a second message comprising a second passcode is received from the landing site computing system in response to the first message, the second passcode corresponding to the first passcode (See at least [0045]-[0046] of Pham – “… Once landing pad 30 receives the search command that is addressed to it, landing pad 30 (e.g., a computing device 60 having a ranging engine) may generate a set of ranging data… landing pad 30 may determine, based on the first timestamp, the second timestamp, the third timestamp, and/or a fourth timestamp indicative of the time at which landing pad 30 detected the second signal, a time-of-flight (ToF) 408A of the second data packet… landing pad 30 may process the ranging data to convert the received ranging data to standard distance units … Landing pad 30 may output an indication of the distance units… Landing pad 30 may then transmit a third signal 410A encoding the ToF data back toward UAV 10... in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10…”);
determining a subset of maneuvers for landing condition from a set of maneuvers based at least in part on determining whether the second message comprising a second passcode is received from the landing site computing system (See at least [0046] of Pham – “… in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10… processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A)… processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value. For example, because a larger ToF value corresponds to a longer distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30, processing circuitry 26 may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values. Accordingly, as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero (or other predetermined threshold distance from landing pad 30), UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”); and
controlling the pilotless aircraft to perform the subset of maneuvers for the landing condition (See at least [0046] of Pham – “… in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10… Based on the determined ToF and the received signal strength indication (RSSI) (e.g., the direction or orientation of greatest signal strength), processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A). For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value (e.g., the determined distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30) approaches zero (e.g., within a predetermined threshold). In other examples, processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value. For example, because a larger ToF value corresponds to a longer distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30, processing circuitry 26 may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values. Accordingly, as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero (or other predetermined threshold distance from landing pad 30), UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”).
Pham fails to specifically disclose transmitting a first message to a landing site computing system based at least in part on determining that a pilotless aircraft is within a threshold range of a landing site.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches transmitting a first message to a landing site computing system based at least in part on determining that a pilotless aircraft is within a threshold range of a landing site (See at least [0029] – “… to facilitate drone security, the drone delivery service may require the purchaser to be present at the delivery zone when the drone arrives. The purchaser may use a smart device … When the drone is deployed and nears the landing zone, a wireless message may be sent to the smart device … The wireless message may be sent by the drone directly to the smart device … the message may provide a notification that the delivery drone is at… or is within range of the landing zone, and/or provide a detailed delivery time and other delivery information. The notification may prompt the purchaser to meet the drone at the landing zone....” and [0052]-[0053] of Ganesh – “… the drone 100 may hover at a hold-off distance 301a over the landing zone 310… When the drone 100 is in the hover position near the landing zone 310, the device 220 may receive a notification in a message exchange 303, from the drone 100… may indicate that the drone 100 is ready to land and deliver the package 109…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that features a drone sending a notification message to a user device to meet at a landing zone when the drone is within a range of a landing zone that includes delivery information.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of transmitting a first message to a landing site computing system based at least in part on determining that a pilotless aircraft is within a threshold range of a landing site as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide indication that the drone is ready to land and deliver a package and request a user to move to the landing zone as specified in at least [0053] of Ganesh.
For claim 2, Pham discloses wherein the first message is a first poll message, wherein the subset of maneuvers is a first subset of maneuvers, wherein the set of maneuvers comprises the first subset of maneuvers and a second subset of maneuvers (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… UAV 10 is configured to transmit a second signal in the direction of landing pad 30 (406A). For example, UAV 10 may transmit a signal encoding a second data packet, including a “search” command along with the unique identifier or address of a particular portable landing pad 30 on which UAV 10 is seeking to land… UAV 10 may broadcast a search command directed to all landing pads 30 known to be in the area, in order to determine a most-proximal landing pad… Based on the determined ToF and the received signal strength indication (RSSI) (e.g., the direction or orientation of greatest signal strength), processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A). For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value … approaches zero … processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value… may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values… as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero … UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”), and wherein the method further comprises:
receiving a third message requesting the pilotless aircraft to transmit a fourth message comprising a second poll message (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value … approaches zero…”);
transmitting the fourth message comprising a third passcode to the landing site computing system in response to the third message (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value … approaches zero…”).
Pham fails to specifically disclose determining that a fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system;
determining to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining that the fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system; and
determining to perform the second subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches determining that a fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base or other designated place with the package in block 529…”);
determining to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining that the fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt…”); and
determining to perform the second subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base or other designated place with the package in block 529…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that stops performing a delivery attempt and returns to a drone base or other designated place in the case that the drone does not receive a land instruction.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of determining that a fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base as specified in at least [0084] of Ganesh.
For claim 4, Pham discloses further comprising:
determining a radio parameter of a transceiver signal associated with the landing site computing system, wherein determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range is based at least in part on the radio parameter (See at least [0028] of Pham – “… In some examples in accordance with this disclosure, any or all of computing devices 60 may include a ranging engine ranging configured to determine, based on a time-of-flight (ToF) of a signal broadcast between two transceiver radios (e.g., between omnidirectional antenna 40 and directional antenna 50), an approximate distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30…”).
For claim 6, Pham discloses further comprising:
processing the second passcode; and determining that the second passcode corresponds to the first passcode before causing the pilotless aircraft to perform the subset of maneuvers (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… UAV 10 is configured to transmit a second signal in the direction of landing pad 30 (406A). For example, UAV 10 may transmit a signal encoding a second data packet, including a “search” command along with the unique identifier or address of a particular portable landing pad 30 on which UAV 10 is seeking to land… Once landing pad 30 receives the search command that is addressed to it, landing pad 30 (e.g., a computing device 60 having a ranging engine) may generate a set of ranging data… landing pad 30 may determine, based on the first timestamp, the second timestamp, the third timestamp, and/or a fourth timestamp indicative of the time at which landing pad 30 detected the second signal, a time-of-flight (ToF) 408A of the second data packet… landing pad 30 may process the ranging data to convert the received ranging data to standard distance units … Landing pad 30 may output an indication of the distance units… Landing pad 30 may then transmit a third signal 410A encoding the ToF data back toward UAV 10... in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10… Based on the determined ToF and the received signal strength indication (RSSI) (e.g., the direction or orientation of greatest signal strength), processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A). For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value (e.g., the determined distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30) approaches zero (e.g., within a predetermined threshold). In other examples, processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value. For example, because a larger ToF value corresponds to a longer distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30, processing circuitry 26 may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values. Accordingly, as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero (or other predetermined threshold distance from landing pad 30), UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”).
For claim 7, Pham fails to specifically disclose further comprising:
starting a timer based at least in part on transmitting the first message to the landing site computing system; and
determining an expiration of the timer, wherein determining whether a second message comprising a second passcode is received from the landing site computing system is based at least in part on expiration of the timer.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches further comprising:
starting a timer based at least in part on transmitting the first message to the landing site computing system (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base or other designated place with the package in block 529…”); and
determining an expiration of the timer, wherein determining whether a second message comprising a second passcode is received from the landing site computing system is based at least in part on expiration of the timer (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base or other designated place with the package in block 529…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that stops performing a delivery attempt and returns to a drone base or other designated place in the case that the drone does not receive a land instruction after a timeout period has expired.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of starting a timer based at least in part on transmitting the first message to the landing site computing system as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base after a timeout period has expired and no land instruction has been received by the drone as specified in at least [0084] of Ganesh.
For claim 8, Pham discloses a pilotless aircraft computing system (See at least [0006] of Pham – “… this disclosure describes a UAV including an antenna and processing circuitry configured to receive, from a ground-based portable landing pad, a first data packet; transmit, in response to receiving the first data packet, a second data packet to the landing pad; receive, from the landing pad, a third data packet comprising a distance between the UAV and the landing pad; and cause the UAV to navigate toward the landing pad based on the distance and an orientation of the UAV relative to the landing pad…”) comprising:
one or more processors (See at least [0013] of Pham – “… UAV 10 includes … at least a memory 24 and one or more processor(s) 26...”), and
a one or more computer-readable media having stored thereon instructions that, when executed, cause the one or more processors (See at least [0061] of Pham – “… In one or more examples, the functions described may be implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or any combination thereof… the functions may be stored on or transmitted over, as one or more instructions or code, a computer-readable medium and executed by a hardware-based processing unit…”) to:
transmit a first message to a landing site computing system, the first message comprising a first passcode (See at least [0044] of Pham – “… UAV 10 is configured to transmit a second signal in the direction of landing pad 30 (406A). For example, UAV 10 may transmit a signal encoding a second data packet, including a “search” command along with the unique identifier or address of a particular portable landing pad 30 on which UAV 10 is seeking to land… UAV 10 may broadcast a search command directed to all landing pads 30 known to be in the area, in order to determine a most-proximal landing pad...”);
determine whether a second message comprising a second passcode is received from the landing site computing system in response to the first message, the second passcode corresponding to the first passcode (See at least [0045]-[0046] of Pham – “… Once landing pad 30 receives the search command that is addressed to it, landing pad 30 (e.g., a computing device 60 having a ranging engine) may generate a set of ranging data… landing pad 30 may determine, based on the first timestamp, the second timestamp, the third timestamp, and/or a fourth timestamp indicative of the time at which landing pad 30 detected the second signal, a time-of-flight (ToF) 408A of the second data packet… landing pad 30 may process the ranging data to convert the received ranging data to standard distance units … Landing pad 30 may output an indication of the distance units… Landing pad 30 may then transmit a third signal 410A encoding the ToF data back toward UAV 10... in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10…”);
determine a subset of maneuvers for landing condition from a set of maneuvers based at least in part on determining whether the second message comprising a second passcode is received from the landing site computing system (See at least [0046] of Pham – “… in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10… processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A)… processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value. For example, because a larger ToF value corresponds to a longer distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30, processing circuitry 26 may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values. Accordingly, as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero (or other predetermined threshold distance from landing pad 30), UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”); and
control the pilotless aircraft to perform the subset of maneuvers for the landing condition (See at least [0046] of Pham – “… in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10… Based on the determined ToF and the received signal strength indication (RSSI) (e.g., the direction or orientation of greatest signal strength), processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A). For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value (e.g., the determined distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30) approaches zero (e.g., within a predetermined threshold). In other examples, processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value. For example, because a larger ToF value corresponds to a longer distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30, processing circuitry 26 may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values. Accordingly, as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero (or other predetermined threshold distance from landing pad 30), UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”).
Pham fails to specifically disclose transmit a first message to a landing site computing system based at least in part on determining that a pilotless aircraft is within a threshold range of a landing site.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches transmit a first message to a landing site computing system based at least in part on determining that a pilotless aircraft is within a threshold range of a landing site (See at least [0029] – “… to facilitate drone security, the drone delivery service may require the purchaser to be present at the delivery zone when the drone arrives. The purchaser may use a smart device … When the drone is deployed and nears the landing zone, a wireless message may be sent to the smart device … The wireless message may be sent by the drone directly to the smart device … the message may provide a notification that the delivery drone is at… or is within range of the landing zone, and/or provide a detailed delivery time and other delivery information. The notification may prompt the purchaser to meet the drone at the landing zone....” and [0052]-[0053] of Ganesh – “… the drone 100 may hover at a hold-off distance 301a over the landing zone 310… When the drone 100 is in the hover position near the landing zone 310, the device 220 may receive a notification in a message exchange 303, from the drone 100… may indicate that the drone 100 is ready to land and deliver the package 109…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that features a drone sending a notification message to a user device to meet at a landing zone when the drone is within a range of a landing zone that includes delivery information.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of transmitting a first message to a landing site computing system based at least in part on determining that a pilotless aircraft is within a threshold range of a landing site as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide indication that the drone is ready to land and deliver a package and request a user to move to the landing zone as specified in at least [0053] of Ganesh.
For claim 9, Pham discloses wherein the first message is a first poll message, wherein the subset of maneuvers is a first subset of maneuvers, wherein the set of maneuvers comprises the first subset of maneuvers and a second subset of maneuvers (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… UAV 10 is configured to transmit a second signal in the direction of landing pad 30 (406A). For example, UAV 10 may transmit a signal encoding a second data packet, including a “search” command along with the unique identifier or address of a particular portable landing pad 30 on which UAV 10 is seeking to land… UAV 10 may broadcast a search command directed to all landing pads 30 known to be in the area, in order to determine a most-proximal landing pad… Based on the determined ToF and the received signal strength indication (RSSI) (e.g., the direction or orientation of greatest signal strength), processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A). For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value … approaches zero … processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value… may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values… as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero … UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”), and wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
receive a third message requesting the pilotless aircraft to transmit a fourth message comprising a second poll message (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value … approaches zero…”);
transmit the fourth message comprising a third passcode to the landing site computing system in response to the third message (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value … approaches zero…”).
Pham fails to specifically disclose determine that a fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system;
determine to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining that the fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system; and
determine to perform the second subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches determine that a fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base or other designated place with the package in block 529…”);
determine to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining that the fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt…”); and
determine to perform the second subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base or other designated place with the package in block 529…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that stops performing a delivery attempt and returns to a drone base or other designated place in the case that the drone does not receive a land instruction.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of determining that a fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base as specified in at least [0084] of Ganesh.
For claim 11, Pham discloses wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
determine a radio parameter of a transceiver signal associated with the landing site computing system, wherein determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range is based at least in part on the radio parameter (See at least [0028] of Pham – “… In some examples in accordance with this disclosure, any or all of computing devices 60 may include a ranging engine ranging configured to determine, based on a time-of-flight (ToF) of a signal broadcast between two transceiver radios (e.g., between omnidirectional antenna 40 and directional antenna 50), an approximate distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30…”).
For claim 13, Pham discloses wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
processing the second passcode; and determining that the second passcode corresponds to the first passcode before causing the pilotless aircraft to perform the subset of maneuvers (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… UAV 10 is configured to transmit a second signal in the direction of landing pad 30 (406A). For example, UAV 10 may transmit a signal encoding a second data packet, including a “search” command along with the unique identifier or address of a particular portable landing pad 30 on which UAV 10 is seeking to land… Once landing pad 30 receives the search command that is addressed to it, landing pad 30 (e.g., a computing device 60 having a ranging engine) may generate a set of ranging data… landing pad 30 may determine, based on the first timestamp, the second timestamp, the third timestamp, and/or a fourth timestamp indicative of the time at which landing pad 30 detected the second signal, a time-of-flight (ToF) 408A of the second data packet… landing pad 30 may process the ranging data to convert the received ranging data to standard distance units … Landing pad 30 may output an indication of the distance units… Landing pad 30 may then transmit a third signal 410A encoding the ToF data back toward UAV 10... in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10… Based on the determined ToF and the received signal strength indication (RSSI) (e.g., the direction or orientation of greatest signal strength), processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A). For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value (e.g., the determined distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30) approaches zero (e.g., within a predetermined threshold). In other examples, processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value. For example, because a larger ToF value corresponds to a longer distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30, processing circuitry 26 may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values. Accordingly, as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero (or other predetermined threshold distance from landing pad 30), UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”).
For claim 14, Pham fails to specifically disclose wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
starting a timer based at least in part on transmitting the first message to the landing site computing system; and
determining an expiration of the timer, wherein determining whether a second message comprising a second passcode is received from the landing site computing system is based at least in part on expiration of the timer.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
starting a timer based at least in part on transmitting the first message to the landing site computing system (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base or other designated place with the package in block 529…”); and
determining an expiration of the timer, wherein determining whether a second message comprising a second passcode is received from the landing site computing system is based at least in part on expiration of the timer (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base or other designated place with the package in block 529…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that stops performing a delivery attempt and returns to a drone base or other designated place in the case that the drone does not receive a land instruction after a timeout period has expired.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of starting a timer based at least in part on transmitting the first message to the landing site computing system as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base after a timeout period has expired and no land instruction has been received by the drone as specified in at least [0084] of Ganesh.
For claim 15, Pham discloses one or more non-transitory, computer-readable storage media storing instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors of a pilotless aircraft computing system (See at least [0061] of Pham – “… In one or more examples, the functions described may be implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or any combination thereof… the functions may be stored on or transmitted over, as one or more instructions or code, a computer-readable medium and executed by a hardware-based processing unit… computer-readable media generally may correspond to (1) tangible computer-readable storage media which is non-transitory…”) to:
transmit a first message to a landing site computing system, the first message comprising a first passcode (See at least [0044] of Pham – “… UAV 10 is configured to transmit a second signal in the direction of landing pad 30 (406A). For example, UAV 10 may transmit a signal encoding a second data packet, including a “search” command along with the unique identifier or address of a particular portable landing pad 30 on which UAV 10 is seeking to land… UAV 10 may broadcast a search command directed to all landing pads 30 known to be in the area, in order to determine a most-proximal landing pad...”);
determine whether a second message comprising a second passcode is received from the landing site computing system in response to the first message, the second passcode corresponding to the first passcode (See at least [0045]-[0046] of Pham – “… Once landing pad 30 receives the search command that is addressed to it, landing pad 30 (e.g., a computing device 60 having a ranging engine) may generate a set of ranging data… landing pad 30 may determine, based on the first timestamp, the second timestamp, the third timestamp, and/or a fourth timestamp indicative of the time at which landing pad 30 detected the second signal, a time-of-flight (ToF) 408A of the second data packet… landing pad 30 may process the ranging data to convert the received ranging data to standard distance units … Landing pad 30 may output an indication of the distance units… Landing pad 30 may then transmit a third signal 410A encoding the ToF data back toward UAV 10... in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10…”);
determine a subset of maneuvers for landing condition from a set of maneuvers based at least in part on determining whether the second message comprising a second passcode is received from the landing site computing system (See at least [0046] of Pham – “… in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10… processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A)… processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value. For example, because a larger ToF value corresponds to a longer distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30, processing circuitry 26 may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values. Accordingly, as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero (or other predetermined threshold distance from landing pad 30), UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”); and
cause the pilotless aircraft to perform the subset of maneuvers for the landing condition (See at least [0046] of Pham – “… in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10… Based on the determined ToF and the received signal strength indication (RSSI) (e.g., the direction or orientation of greatest signal strength), processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A). For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value (e.g., the determined distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30) approaches zero (e.g., within a predetermined threshold). In other examples, processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value. For example, because a larger ToF value corresponds to a longer distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30, processing circuitry 26 may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values. Accordingly, as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero (or other predetermined threshold distance from landing pad 30), UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”).
Pham fails to specifically disclose transmit a first message to a landing site computing system based at least in part on determining that a pilotless aircraft is within a threshold range of a landing site.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches transmit a first message to a landing site computing system based at least in part on determining that a pilotless aircraft is within a threshold range of a landing site (See at least [0029] – “… to facilitate drone security, the drone delivery service may require the purchaser to be present at the delivery zone when the drone arrives. The purchaser may use a smart device … When the drone is deployed and nears the landing zone, a wireless message may be sent to the smart device … The wireless message may be sent by the drone directly to the smart device … the message may provide a notification that the delivery drone is at… or is within range of the landing zone, and/or provide a detailed delivery time and other delivery information. The notification may prompt the purchaser to meet the drone at the landing zone....” and [0052]-[0053] of Ganesh – “… the drone 100 may hover at a hold-off distance 301a over the landing zone 310… When the drone 100 is in the hover position near the landing zone 310, the device 220 may receive a notification in a message exchange 303, from the drone 100… may indicate that the drone 100 is ready to land and deliver the package 109…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that features a drone sending a notification message to a user device to meet at a landing zone when the drone is within a range of a landing zone that includes delivery information.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of transmitting a first message to a landing site computing system based at least in part on determining that a pilotless aircraft is within a threshold range of a landing site as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide indication that the drone is ready to land and deliver a package and request a user to move to the landing zone as specified in at least [0053] of Ganesh.
For claim 16, Pham discloses wherein the first message is a first poll message, wherein the subset of maneuvers is a first subset of maneuvers, wherein the set of maneuvers comprises the first subset of maneuvers and a second subset of maneuvers (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… UAV 10 is configured to transmit a second signal in the direction of landing pad 30 (406A). For example, UAV 10 may transmit a signal encoding a second data packet, including a “search” command along with the unique identifier or address of a particular portable landing pad 30 on which UAV 10 is seeking to land… UAV 10 may broadcast a search command directed to all landing pads 30 known to be in the area, in order to determine a most-proximal landing pad… Based on the determined ToF and the received signal strength indication (RSSI) (e.g., the direction or orientation of greatest signal strength), processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A). For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value … approaches zero … processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value… may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values… as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero … UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”), and wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
receive a third message requesting the pilotless aircraft to transmit a fourth message comprising a second poll message (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value … approaches zero…”);
transmit the fourth message comprising a third passcode to the landing site computing system in response to the third message (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value … approaches zero…”).
Pham fails to specifically disclose determine that a fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system;
determine to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining that the fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system; and
determine to perform the second subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches determine that a fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base or other designated place with the package in block 529…”);
determine to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining that the fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt…”); and
determine to perform the second subset of maneuvers based at least in part on determining to cease performing the first subset of maneuvers (See at least [0084] of Ganesh – “…When the processor of the drone determines that the LAND instruction has not been given … such as after a timeout period … the processor of the drone may abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base or other designated place with the package in block 529…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that stops performing a delivery attempt and returns to a drone base or other designated place in the case that the drone does not receive a land instruction.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of determining that a fifth message in response to the fourth message has not been received from the landing site computing system as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to abandon the delivery attempt and return to the drone base as specified in at least [0084] of Ganesh.
For claim 18, Pham discloses wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
determine a radio parameter of a transceiver signal associated with the landing site computing system, wherein determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range is based at least in part on the radio parameter (See at least [0028] of Pham – “… In some examples in accordance with this disclosure, any or all of computing devices 60 may include a ranging engine ranging configured to determine, based on a time-of-flight (ToF) of a signal broadcast between two transceiver radios (e.g., between omnidirectional antenna 40 and directional antenna 50), an approximate distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30…”).
For claim 20, Pham discloses wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
processing the second passcode; and determining that the second passcode corresponds to the first passcode before causing the pilotless aircraft to perform the subset of maneuvers (See at least [0044]-[0046] of Pham – “… UAV 10 is configured to transmit a second signal in the direction of landing pad 30 (406A). For example, UAV 10 may transmit a signal encoding a second data packet, including a “search” command along with the unique identifier or address of a particular portable landing pad 30 on which UAV 10 is seeking to land… Once landing pad 30 receives the search command that is addressed to it, landing pad 30 (e.g., a computing device 60 having a ranging engine) may generate a set of ranging data… landing pad 30 may determine, based on the first timestamp, the second timestamp, the third timestamp, and/or a fourth timestamp indicative of the time at which landing pad 30 detected the second signal, a time-of-flight (ToF) 408A of the second data packet… landing pad 30 may process the ranging data to convert the received ranging data to standard distance units … Landing pad 30 may output an indication of the distance units… Landing pad 30 may then transmit a third signal 410A encoding the ToF data back toward UAV 10... in response to receiving the third signal 410A, UAV 10 may be configured to determine an approximate altitude of UAV 10… Based on the determined ToF and the received signal strength indication (RSSI) (e.g., the direction or orientation of greatest signal strength), processing circuitry 26 may then cause UAV 10 to begin to automatically navigate toward landing pad 30 (412A). For example, UAV 10 may self-navigate in the direction of the greatest RSSI while continuously interacting with landing pad 30 to update the ToF until the determined ToF value (e.g., the determined distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30) approaches zero (e.g., within a predetermined threshold). In other examples, processing circuitry 26 may determine a speed for UAV 10 based on the determined ToF value. For example, because a larger ToF value corresponds to a longer distance between UAV 10 and landing pad 30, processing circuitry 26 may cause UAV 10 to travel at faster speeds when detecting relatively larger ToF values than when detecting smaller ToF values. Accordingly, as the continuously updated ToF calculation approaches zero (or other predetermined threshold distance from landing pad 30), UAV 10 may slow its travel speed to zero or nearly zero…”).
Claims 3, 10, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham in view of Ganesh, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Stapleton et al. US 20250015980 A1 (“Stapleton”).
For claim 3, Pham fails to specifically disclose further comprising:
generating the first passcode based at least in part on determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range of the landing site; and incorporating the first passcode into the first message.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches further comprising:
generating the first passcode based at least in part on determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range of the landing site; and incorporating the first passcode into the first message (See at least [0029] – “… to facilitate drone security, the drone delivery service may require the purchaser to be present at the delivery zone when the drone arrives. The purchaser may use a smart device … When the drone is deployed and nears the landing zone, a wireless message may be sent to the smart device … The wireless message may be sent by the drone directly to the smart device … the message may provide a notification that the delivery drone is at… or is within range of the landing zone, and/or provide a detailed delivery time and other delivery information. The notification may prompt the purchaser to meet the drone at the landing zone....”, [0043] – “The processor 120 may further conduct wireless communications such as with a device 170 through the radio module 130… the device 170 may represent a device such as a smart phone, tablet…”, and [0052]-[0053] of Ganesh – “… the drone 100 may hover at a hold-off distance 301a over the landing zone 310… When the drone 100 is in the hover position near the landing zone 310, the device 220 may receive a notification in a message exchange 303, from the drone 100… may indicate that the drone 100 is ready to land and deliver the package 109…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that features a drone generating and sending a notification message to a user device to meet at a landing zone when the drone is within a range of a landing zone that includes information that the drone is within range of the landing zone and other delivery information.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of generating the first passcode based at least in part on determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range of the landing site as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide indication that the drone is ready to land and deliver a package and request a user to move to the landing zone as specified in at least [0053] of Ganesh.
Furthermore, Pham also fails to specifically disclose generating, using a randomizer, the first passcode.
However, Stapleton, in the same field of endeavor teaches generating, using a randomizer, the first passcode (See at least the Abstract of Stapleton – “… Systems, apparatuses, methods, and computer program products are disclosed for facilitating extended range encrypted communication. An example method includes automatically navigating, via navigation circuitry of a first drone, to a first location of a first device. The example method also includes generating, by quantum random number generator circuitry of the first drone, a cryptographic key…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Stapleton teaches a system that facilitates encrypted communication between a drone and another device by generating cryptographic key using a random number generator of the drone.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of generating, using a randomizer, the first passcode as taught by Stapleton, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to facilitate secure communication between a drone and a device as specified in at least the Abstract of Stapleton.
For claim 10, Pham fails to specifically disclose wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
generate the first passcode based at least in part on determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range of the landing site; and incorporate the first passcode into the first message.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
generate the first passcode based at least in part on determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range of the landing site; and incorporate the first passcode into the first message (See at least [0029] – “… to facilitate drone security, the drone delivery service may require the purchaser to be present at the delivery zone when the drone arrives. The purchaser may use a smart device … When the drone is deployed and nears the landing zone, a wireless message may be sent to the smart device … The wireless message may be sent by the drone directly to the smart device … the message may provide a notification that the delivery drone is at… or is within range of the landing zone, and/or provide a detailed delivery time and other delivery information. The notification may prompt the purchaser to meet the drone at the landing zone....”, [0043] – “The processor 120 may further conduct wireless communications such as with a device 170 through the radio module 130… the device 170 may represent a device such as a smart phone, tablet…”, and [0052]-[0053] of Ganesh – “… the drone 100 may hover at a hold-off distance 301a over the landing zone 310… When the drone 100 is in the hover position near the landing zone 310, the device 220 may receive a notification in a message exchange 303, from the drone 100… may indicate that the drone 100 is ready to land and deliver the package 109…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that features a drone generating and sending a notification message to a user device to meet at a landing zone when the drone is within a range of a landing zone that includes information that the drone is within range of the landing zone and other delivery information.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of generating the first passcode based at least in part on determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range of the landing site as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide indication that the drone is ready to land and deliver a package and request a user to move to the landing zone as specified in at least [0053] of Ganesh.
Furthermore, Pham also fails to specifically disclose generate, using a randomizer, the first passcode.
However, Stapleton, in the same field of endeavor teaches generate, using a randomizer, the first passcode (See at least the Abstract of Stapleton – “… Systems, apparatuses, methods, and computer program products are disclosed for facilitating extended range encrypted communication. An example method includes automatically navigating, via navigation circuitry of a first drone, to a first location of a first device. The example method also includes generating, by quantum random number generator circuitry of the first drone, a cryptographic key…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Stapleton teaches a system that facilitates encrypted communication between a drone and another device by generating cryptographic key using a random number generator of the drone.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of generating, using a randomizer, the first passcode as taught by Stapleton, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to facilitate secure communication between a drone and a device as specified in at least the Abstract of Stapleton.
For claim 17, Pham fails to specifically disclose wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
generate the first passcode based at least in part on determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range of the landing site; and incorporate the first passcode into the first message.
However, Ganesh, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
generate the first passcode based at least in part on determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range of the landing site; and incorporate the first passcode into the first message (See at least [0029] – “… to facilitate drone security, the drone delivery service may require the purchaser to be present at the delivery zone when the drone arrives. The purchaser may use a smart device … When the drone is deployed and nears the landing zone, a wireless message may be sent to the smart device … The wireless message may be sent by the drone directly to the smart device … the message may provide a notification that the delivery drone is at… or is within range of the landing zone, and/or provide a detailed delivery time and other delivery information. The notification may prompt the purchaser to meet the drone at the landing zone....”, [0043] – “The processor 120 may further conduct wireless communications such as with a device 170 through the radio module 130… the device 170 may represent a device such as a smart phone, tablet…”, and [0052]-[0053] of Ganesh – “… the drone 100 may hover at a hold-off distance 301a over the landing zone 310… When the drone 100 is in the hover position near the landing zone 310, the device 220 may receive a notification in a message exchange 303, from the drone 100… may indicate that the drone 100 is ready to land and deliver the package 109…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Ganesh teaches a drone delivery system that features a drone generating and sending a notification message to a user device to meet at a landing zone when the drone is within a range of a landing zone that includes information that the drone is within range of the landing zone and other delivery information.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of generating the first passcode based at least in part on determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range of the landing site as taught by Ganesh, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide indication that the drone is ready to land and deliver a package and request a user to move to the landing zone as specified in at least [0053] of Ganesh.
Furthermore, Pham also fails to specifically disclose generate, using a randomizer, the first passcode.
However, Stapleton, in the same field of endeavor teaches generate, using a randomizer, the first passcode (See at least the Abstract of Stapleton – “… Systems, apparatuses, methods, and computer program products are disclosed for facilitating extended range encrypted communication. An example method includes automatically navigating, via navigation circuitry of a first drone, to a first location of a first device. The example method also includes generating, by quantum random number generator circuitry of the first drone, a cryptographic key…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Stapleton teaches a system that facilitates encrypted communication between a drone and another device by generating cryptographic key using a random number generator of the drone.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of generating, using a randomizer, the first passcode as taught by Stapleton, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to facilitate secure communication between a drone and a device as specified in at least the Abstract of Stapleton.
Claims 5, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham in view of Ganesh, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Banerjee et al. US 20180101173 A1 (“Banerjee”).
For claim 5, Pham fails to specifically disclose further comprising:
capturing an image of the landing site; and
determining an image parameter of the image, wherein determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range is based at least in part on the image parameter.
However, Banerjee, in the same field of endeavor teaches further comprising:
capturing an image of the landing site (See at least [0141] of Banerjee – “… The apparatus 102 may control 610 drone movement based on the computer vision tracking algorithm and/or the distance… depth estimation from drone camera images (indicating a distance between the drone camera and the landing pad, for example) may be utilized to land the drone…”); and
determining an image parameter of the image, wherein determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range is based at least in part on the image parameter (See at least [0141] of Banerjee – “… the apparatus 102 (e.g., processor 112) may cause the drone to accelerate, decelerate, or hold steady based on the location of the drone relative to the moving base (e.g., landing pad, landing pad slot, docking station, etc.) based on the computer vision tracking algorithm and/or the distance. In some configurations, depth estimation from drone camera images (indicating a distance between the drone camera and the landing pad, for example) may be utilized to land the drone…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Banerjee teaches a system for a drone that uses images to determine a distance to a landing to support landing operations.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of capturing an image of the landing site as taught by Banerjee, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to land the drone as specified in at least [0141] of Banerjee.
For claim 12, Pham fails to specifically disclose wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
capturing an image of the landing site; and
determining an image parameter of the image, wherein determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range is based at least in part on the image parameter.
However, Banerjee, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
capturing an image of the landing site (See at least [0141] of Banerjee – “… The apparatus 102 may control 610 drone movement based on the computer vision tracking algorithm and/or the distance… depth estimation from drone camera images (indicating a distance between the drone camera and the landing pad, for example) may be utilized to land the drone…”); and
determining an image parameter of the image, wherein determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range is based at least in part on the image parameter (See at least [0141] of Banerjee – “… the apparatus 102 (e.g., processor 112) may cause the drone to accelerate, decelerate, or hold steady based on the location of the drone relative to the moving base (e.g., landing pad, landing pad slot, docking station, etc.) based on the computer vision tracking algorithm and/or the distance. In some configurations, depth estimation from drone camera images (indicating a distance between the drone camera and the landing pad, for example) may be utilized to land the drone…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Banerjee teaches a system for a drone that uses images to determine a distance to a landing to support landing operations.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of capturing an image of the landing site as taught by Banerjee, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to land the drone as specified in at least [0141] of Banerjee.
For claim 19, Pham fails to specifically disclose wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
capturing an image of the landing site; and
determining an image parameter of the image, wherein determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range is based at least in part on the image parameter.
However, Banerjee, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the instructions that, when executed, further cause the one or more processors to:
capturing an image of the landing site (See at least [0141] of Banerjee – “… The apparatus 102 may control 610 drone movement based on the computer vision tracking algorithm and/or the distance… depth estimation from drone camera images (indicating a distance between the drone camera and the landing pad, for example) may be utilized to land the drone…”); and
determining an image parameter of the image, wherein determining that the pilotless aircraft is within the threshold range is based at least in part on the image parameter (See at least [0141] of Banerjee – “… the apparatus 102 (e.g., processor 112) may cause the drone to accelerate, decelerate, or hold steady based on the location of the drone relative to the moving base (e.g., landing pad, landing pad slot, docking station, etc.) based on the computer vision tracking algorithm and/or the distance. In some configurations, depth estimation from drone camera images (indicating a distance between the drone camera and the landing pad, for example) may be utilized to land the drone…”). Thus, Pham discloses a system for a UAV that sends an encoded signal to a landing pad and receives an encoded signal from the landing site, in response, in order to navigate the UAV towards the landing pad, while Banerjee teaches a system for a drone that uses images to determine a distance to a landing to support landing operations.
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 method, pilotless aircraft computing system, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media as disclosed in Pham to include the feature of capturing an image of the landing site as taught by Banerjee, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to land the drone as specified in at least [0141] of Banerjee.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J HERRERA whose telephone number is (571)270-5271. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST.
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, FADEY JABR can be reached at (571)272-1516. 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.
/M.J.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/NAEEM TASLIM ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights