DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This action is in response to the application filed 13 May 2025 which is a Continuation of application 18/198,932, now US Patent 12,296,939 filed 18 May 2023 which is a Continuation of application 17/477,052, now US Patent 11,685,500 filed 16 September 2021 which claims priority to PRO’s 63/079,158; 63/079,103; 63/079,171; 63/079,167; 63/079,177; 63/114,794; 63/122,210 filed 16 September 2020 for the first five, 17 November 2020 for the sixth and 7 December 2020 for the seventh. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 1 and all claims depending therefrom are 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 “long-duration” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “long-duration” 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 examination purposes, any aircraft considered for endurance based flight will satisfy the limitation of “long-duration”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 11-12 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lavan (US 2006/0261213).
- Regarding Claim 1. Lavan discloses an unmanned aerial system (UAS) (10, fig. 3-7; “endurance unmanned vehicle” [abstract]) comprising:
a lighter-than-air (LTA) airship (“lighter-than-air vehicle” [0030]; the examiner notes that although Lavan discloses that the vehicle cannot “necessarily” be considered LTA, Lavan continues on to state “the vehicle provides sufficient buoyant lift to offset most (if not all) of the vehicle weight” [0030] allowing for the vehicle to be considered an LTA airship) configured for autonomous long-duration flight (“30 days” [0030]);
a hybrid propulsion system (124; “propulsion system…transitions between daytime and nighttime operations…generated by either arrays and/or the fuel cell” [0029]), comprising:
at least one hydrogen fuel cell (140); and
at least one solar photovoltaic (PV) module (64/66) disposed upon an outer surface of the LTA airship (10, the PV module is illustrated on the outer surface);
an electrolyzer (132) configured to generate hydrogen gas from water using power from the at least one solar PV module (64/66; “separates water into hydrogen and oxygen” [0026]; “arrays…power an electrolyzer” [abstract]);
a hydrogen storage system (134) operatively connected to the at least one hydrogen fuel cell (140) and the electrolyzer (132, illustrated by fig. 7); and
an autonomous resource management system (104/106/126/150) configured to dynamically allocate power between the at least one hydrogen fuel cell (140), the at least one solar PV module (64/66), and the electrolyzer (132, the various controllers 104/106/126/150 function to allocate power as necessary “necessary hardware, software and memory” [0029]).
- Regarding Claim 2. Lavan discloses the UAS of claim 1, wherein the LTA airship further comprises a flexible envelope (134) configured to receive supplemental lifting gas generated by the electrolyzer (132, “stored in respective storage receptacles” [0026]).
- Regarding Claim 3. Lavan discloses the UAS of claim 1, wherein the at least one hydrogen fuel cell (140) is a proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell (PEM fuel cell fig. 7 and [0026]).
- Regarding Claim 5. Lavan discloses the UAS of claim 1, wherein the at least one solar PV module (64/66) and the electrolyzer (132) are integrated into a single device (70) configured for simultaneous solar power generation and water splitting (the power system is contained in the payload housing 70, fig. 7 illustrates the integral nature of the power network and devices allowing for it to be considered a “single device”).
- Regarding Claim 6. Lavan discloses the UAS of claim 1, wherein the hydrogen gas (134) generated by the electrolyzer (132) is configured to augment lifting gas for buoyancy control (inherently, the hydrogen storage must be considered in buoyancy control as it is a lighter-than-air gas).
- Regarding Claim 7. Lavan discloses the UAS of claim 1, further comprising a water storage tank (142) configured to collect fuel cell exhaust water and supply it to the electrolyzer (132, illustrated by dotted lines of fig. 7 connecting the fuel cell, water storage and electrolyzer).
- Regarding Claim 8. Lavan discloses the UAS of claim 1, wherein the UAS is configured to draw power from stored hydrogen in the hydrogen storage system (132) for nighttime flight (“stored for nighttime use” [0027]).
- Regarding Claim 11. Lavan discloses a method for operating an unmanned lighter-than-air aerial vehicle (10, [abstract]), comprising:
generating electrical power via at least one solar photovoltaic (PV) module (64/66) disposed upon the unmanned lighter-than-air aerial vehicle (10, array 66 illustrated as on the body of the vehicle in the figures);
utilizing at least a portion of the electrical power to divide water into hydrogen and oxygen via an onboard electrolyzer (132, “separates water into hydrogen and oxygen” [0026]; “arrays…power an electrolyzer” [abstract]);
storing the hydrogen in a pressurized tank (134, the storage must inherently be pressurized to store the hydrogen);
supplying stored hydrogen (132) to a fuel cell (140) for power generation (“transferred to the power distribution controller” [0026]); and
controlling power and resource flows among the at least one solar PV module (64/66), fuel cell (140), electrolyzer (132), and hydrogen storage (134) using an autonomous control system (the various controllers 104/106/126/150 function to allocate power as necessary “necessary hardware, software and memory” [0029]).
- Regarding Claim 12. Lavan discloses the method of claim 11, further comprising collecting water (142) produced by the fuel cell (140) and recycling it into the onboard electrolyzer (132, cycle illustrated by dotted lines of fig. 7).
- Regarding Claim 15. Lavan discloses the method of claim 11, further comprising:
utilizing generated hydrogen (134) as a supplemental lifting gas to adjust buoyancy of the unmanned lighter-than-air aerial vehicle (10, inherently, with hydrogen being a lighter-than-air gas, the volume of hydrogen must be accounted for to properly maintain altitude and therefore adjust buoyancy).
- Regarding Claim 16. Lavan discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the autonomous resource management system (104/106/126/150) is configured to maintain internal pressure in the fuel cell (140) for energy conversion (inherently required in PEM fuel cells).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 4, 9-10, 13-14 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lavan in view of Obviousness.
- Regarding Claim 4. Lavan discloses the UAS of claim 1, with the autonomous resource management system (104/106/126/150). Lavan does not disclose that the system comprises a machine learning algorithm configured to predict power demand based on mission stage data and environmental inputs.
However, the examiner contends that it would be obvious to of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to program a system, such as that disclosed by Lavan to comprise a machine learning algorithm configured to predict power demand based on mission stage data and environmental inputs as doing so is considered optimization of a system. In addition, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention; and it is obvious to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; and it is obvious to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143 A-D
- Regarding Claim 9. Lavan discloses the UAS of claim 1, with the autonomous resource management system (104/106/126/150). Lavan does not disclose the system utilizes at least one of solar, battery, and/or fuel cell power based on anticipated energy needs using a Markov chain or quadratic programming-based optimization algorithm.
However, the examiner contends that it would be obvious to of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to program a system, such as that disclosed by Lavan to comprise a machine learning algorithm configured to predict power demand based on mission stage data and environmental inputs as doing so is considered optimization of a system. In addition, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention; and it is obvious to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; and it is obvious to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143 A-D
- Regarding Claim 10. Lavan discloses the UAS of claim 1, with the autonomous resource management system (104/106/126/150). Lavan does not disclose the system is further configured to transition between energy sources based on predicted environmental conditions and mission phase requirements.
However, the examiner contends that it would be obvious to of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to program a system, such as that disclosed by Lavan to comprise a machine learning algorithm configured to predict power demand based on mission stage data and environmental inputs as doing so is considered optimization of a system. In addition, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention; and it is obvious to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; and it is obvious to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143 A-D
- Regarding Claim 13. Lavan discloses the method of claim 11, with the autonomous resource management system (104/106/126/150). Lavan does not disclose the system includes a nonlinear controller using control Lyapunov functions (CLFs) and control barrier functions (CBFs).
However, the examiner contends that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to program a system, such as that disclosed by Lavan to comprise a machine learning algorithm configured to predict power demand based on mission stage data and environmental inputs as doing so is considered optimization of a system. In addition, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in the respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention; and it is obvious to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; and it is obvious to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143 A-D
- Regarding Claim 14. Lavan discloses the method of claim 11, but does not disclose:
forecasting solar intensity based on time and location to schedule onboard electrolyzer operation.
However, the examiner contends that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to forecast solar intensity based on time and location to schedule onboard electrolyzer operation as a failure to do so would result in the system of Lavan being incapable of the disclosed endurance ability.
- Regarding Claim 17. Lavan discloses the method of claim 11, but does not disclose:
utilizing a machine learning model trained on previous mission data to predict power usage across different mission phases.
However, the examiner contends that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to utilize a machine learning model trained on previous mission data to predict power usage across different mission phases as a failure to do so would result in the system of Lavan being incapable of the disclosed endurance ability.
- Regarding Claim 18. Lavan discloses the method of claim 11, but does not disclose:
dynamically adjusting propulsion power based on wind conditions to conserve energy.
However, the examiner contends that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to dynamically adjust propulsion power based on wind conditions to conserve energy, as conservation of energy within the system allows the system to operate more efficiently lowering costs and allowing for realization of the endurance capability of the system of Lavan.
- Regarding Claim 19. Lavan discloses the method of claim 11. Lavan does not disclose a battery system configured to provide backup power and act as an energy buffer between the at least one solar PV module and the electrolyzer.
However, the examiner contends that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to modify Lavan to incorporate a battery system configured to provide backup power and act as an energy buffer between the at least one solar PV module and the electrolyzer, as doing so allows the system to operate more efficiently lowering costs and allowing for realization of the endurance capability of the system of Lavan.
- Regarding Claim 20. Lavan discloses the method of claim 11, but does not disclose:
periodically entering a loitering state when mission objectives are satisfied, to conserve energy while maintaining surveillance altitude.
However, the examiner contends that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to modify Lavan to periodically entering a loitering state when mission objectives are satisfied, to conserve energy while maintaining surveillance altitude, as doing so allows the system to operate more efficiently lowering costs and allowing for realization of the endurance capability of the system of Lavan.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon but considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYE W ABELL whose telephone number is (303) 297-4408. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 0700-1500 CST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Timothy Collins can be reached on 571-272-6886. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/TYE WILLIAM ABELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3644 8 January 2026