DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6-15, 17, & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shuff (Pub No. US 2023/0002082 A1) in view of Wake et al. (Pub No. US 2021/0254980 A1).
Regarding claim 1
Shuff teaches a drone station (See paragraphs 0004-0005 & figures 1-4, ref # 500) comprising: a platform support; (See figures 1-4, ref # 400/520) a landing platform (See figures 1-4, ref # 510) configured to charge (See figures 1-4, ref # 512) a drone (See figures 5, 6, & 12, ref # 600/650) that is positioned on the landing platform, (See figures 1-4, ref # 510) wherein the landing platform (See figures 1-4, ref # 510) is mounted on a top of the platform support; (See figures 1-4, ref # 400/520) a Real Time Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna (See paragraphs 0009 & 0028) mounted on the landing platform; (See paragraphs 0009, 0028, & figures 1-3, ref # 510) a house computer (See paragraph 0028 & figures 1-4, ref # 515) configured to control and monitor operations of the drone station (See figures 1-4, ref # 500) that include battery management and communications with the drone; (See paragraph 0028 & figures 5, 6, & 12, ref # 600/650) a dome enclosure (See figures 1-4, ref # 502 & 503) surrounding the landing platform (See figures 1-4, ref # 510) that is configured to open and close around the landing platform; (See paragraph 0055 & figures 1-4, ref # 510) and an internal battery, (See figures 1-4, ref # 516) wherein the internal battery supplies power to the landing platform; (See paragraphs 0010, 0024, 0055 & figures 1-4, ref # 510) one or more solar panels that are configured to supply power to the internal battery; (See paragraphs 0010, 0024 & figures 1-4, ref # 516) and a power management system configured to manage power supplied by the one or more solar panels to the internal battery and to the landing platform, wherein the drone station is configured to operate without connection to an external power grid. (See paragraph 0024)
Shuff is silent about a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna.
However, Wake teaches a drone station (See paragraph 0064 & figure 8, ref # 404) comprising: a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna; (See paragraph 0064) a house computer (See paragraph 0064) configured to control and monitor operations of the drone landing platform system that includes battery management and communications with the drone; (See paragraphs 0062-0065) and an internal battery. (See paragraphs 0067-0068 & figure 7, ref # 502)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna as taught by Wake in the drone station of Shuff, since a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna is a well-known type of Real Time Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna.
Regarding claim 2
Shuff teaches wherein the landing platform (See figures 1-4, ref # 510) contains conductive material for point-to-point charging (See paragraph 0028) of the drone (See figures 5, 6, & 12, ref # 600/650) that is positioned on the landing platform. (See figures 1-4, ref # 510)
Regarding claim 6
Shuff teaches further comprising an aerial drone. (See paragraph 0004 & figures 5, 6, & 12, ref # 600/650)
Regarding claim 7
Shuff teaches wherein the drone (See figures 5, 6, & 12, ref # 600/650) comprises an RT GPS antenna (See paragraphs 0009 & 0028) for communicating with the house computer. (See paragraphs 0009, 0028 & figures 1-4, ref # 515)
Shuff is silent about a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna on the landing platform and the house computer.
However, Wake teaches a drone station (See paragraph 0064 & figure 8, ref # 404) comprising: a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna; (See paragraph 0064)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna on the landing platform and the house computer as taught by Wake in the drone station of Shuff, since a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna is a well-known type of Real Time Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna.
Regarding claim 8
Shuff teaches further comprising an alternative power source that is configured to supply power to the internal battery. (See paragraphs 0010, 0024, 0028, 0055 & figures 1-4, ref # 516)
Regarding claim 9
Shuff teaches further comprising one or more LIDAR sensors (See paragraph 0028) integrated into the platform support. (See paragraph 0028 & figures 1-4, ref # 520/400)
Regarding claim 10
Shuff teaches wherein the house computer (See figures 1-4, ref # 515) is configured to deploy a web server graphic user interface (GUI) (See paragraph 0009) for interaction with the drone (See figures 5, 6, & 12, ref # 600/650) by a remote user. (See paragraphs 0009, 0014, & 0028)
Regarding claim 11
Shuff teaches wherein the house computer (See figures 1-4, ref # 515) is configured to communicate with the drone (See figures 5, 6, & 12, ref # 600/650) for flight control and mission planning. (See paragraphs 0005; preferably with FAA authorization, meaning a flight/mission plan)
Regarding claim 12
Shuff teaches wherein the dome enclosure (See figures 1-4, ref # 502 & 503) is configured to be opened and closed remotely via the web server GUI. (See paragraphs 0005, 0009, 0014, & 0028)
Regarding claim 13
Shuff teaches further comprising a router and modem that is configured to create a local area network having internet access. (See paragraphs 0009 & 0076)
Regarding claim 14
Shuff is silent about wherein the modem is a satellite modem.
However, Wake teaches wherein the modem is a satellite modem. (See paragraph 0069)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a modem is a satellite modem as taught by Wake in the drone station of Shuff, since a satellite modem is a well-known type of modem.
Regarding claim 15
Shuff teaches wherein the modem is configured to provide LAN/WAN connectivity. (See paragraphs 0009 & 0076)
Regarding claim 17
Shuff teaches wherein the house computer (See figures 1-4, ref # 515) is configured to communicate with the drone (See figures 5, 6, & 12, ref # 600/650) using the local area network. (See paragraphs 0009 & 0076)
Regarding claim 20
Shuff teaches further comprising a camera system. (See paragraphs 0009, 0056 & figure 14)
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shuff (Pub No. US 2023/0002082 A1) in view of Wake et al. (Pub No. US 2021/0254980 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Aubrey et al. (Pub No. US 2022/0244127 A1).
Regarding claim 3
Shuff teaches wherein the dome enclosure
A modified Shuff does not teach the dome enclosure comprises three pieces.
However, Aubrey teaches wherein the dome enclosure comprises three separate pieces (2 or more) in which together creates a closed covering for the landing platform. (See paragraph 0067; 2 or more)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a dome enclosure comprises three separate pieces in which together creates a closed covering for the landing platform as taught by Aubrey in the modified drone station of Shuff, since having 2 or more than 2 separate pieces are functionally equivalent.
Claim(s) 13-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shuff (Pub No. US 2023/0002082 A1) in view of Wake et al. (Pub No. US 2021/0254980 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Di Cosola (Pub No. US 2022/0169401 A1).
Regarding claim 13
Shuff teaches further comprising a router and modem that is configured to create a local area network having internet access. (See paragraphs 0009 & 0076)
Di Cosola also teaches further comprising a router (See paragraphs 0078, 0103, & figures 2d, ref # 55) and modem that is configured to create a local area network having internet access. (See paragraphs 0052, 0066, & 0078)
Regarding claim 14
Shuff is silent about wherein the modem is a satellite modem.
However, Di Cosola teaches wherein the modem is a satellite modem. (See paragraph 0052)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a modem is a satellite modem as taught by Di Cosola in the modified drone station of Shuff, since a satellite modem is a well-known type of modem.
Regarding claim 15
Shuff teaches wherein the modem is configured to provide LAN/WAN connectivity. (See paragraphs 0009 & 0076)
Di Cosola also teaches wherein the modem is configured to provide LAN/WAN connectivity. (See paragraphs 0052 & 0066)
Regarding claim 16
Shuff teaches wherein the modem comprises a 4G modem. (See paragraphs 0009 & 0076)
A modified Shuff is silent about wherein the modem comprises a 4G-LTE modem.
However, Di Cosola teaches wherein the modem comprises a 4G-LTE modem. (See paragraphs 0052, 0066, & 0104)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a modem comprises a 4G-LTE modem as taught by Di Cosola in the modified drone station of Shuff, since a 4G-LTE modem is a well-known type of modem.
Regarding claim 17
Shuff teaches wherein the house computer (See figures 1-4, ref # 515) is configured to communicate with the drone (See figures 5, 6, & 12, ref # 600/650) using the local area network. (See paragraphs 0009 & 0076)
Di Cosola also teaches wherein the house computer is configured to communicate with the drone using the local area network. (See paragraphs 0052 & 0066)
Regarding claim 18
A modified Shuff is silent about wherein the house computer is configured to execute a drone flight state machine to determine whether the drone is ready to fly.
However, Di Cosola teaches wherein the house computer is configured to execute a drone flight state machine to determine whether the drone is ready to fly. (See paragraphs 0134-0135)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a house computer is configured to execute a drone flight state machine to determine whether the drone is ready to fly as taught by Di Cosola in the modified drone station of Shuff, so as to confirm the charging of the drone. (See paragraphs 0134-0135)
Regarding claim 19
A modified Shuff is silent about wherein the house computer is configured to check weather data to determine whether the drone is ready to fly, a connection status of the drone, and/or whether the drone has already completed a flight within an operational time window.
However, Di Cosola teaches wherein the house computer is configured to check weather data (See paragraphs 0104 & 0134) to determine whether the drone is ready to fly, a connection status of the drone, and/or whether the drone has already completed a flight within an operational time window. (See paragraphs 0104 & 0134)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a house computer is configured to check weather data to determine whether the drone is ready to fly, a connection status of the drone, and/or whether the drone has already completed a flight within an operational time window as taught by Di Cosola in the modified drone station of Shuff, so as to determine the weather, operational time windows, and charge status of the drone. (See paragraphs 0104 & 0134)
Regarding claim 20
Shuff teaches further comprising a camera system. (See paragraphs 0009, 0056 & figure 14)
Di Cosola also teaches further comprising a camera system. (See paragraph 0134 & figure 2d, ref # 57)
Regarding claim 21
A modified Shuff is silent about wherein the camera system is configured to capture a 360 degree view around the landing platform.
However, Di Cosola teaches wherein the camera system (See paragraphs 0134, 0199 & figure 2d, ref # 57) is configured to capture a 360 degree view around the landing platform. (See paragraphs 0134, 0199 & figures 4a-5c; real-time views of the area in the vicinity of the station, while Di Cosola does not say 360, it would be obvious that the area in the vicinity of the station would be the area around the station, e.g. 360)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a camera system is configured to capture a 360 degree view around the landing platform as taught by Di Cosola in the modified drone station of Shuff, so as to determine the weather, operational time windows, and charge status of the drone. (See paragraphs 0104 & 0134)
Regarding claim 22
Shuff teaches wherein the house computer (See paragraph 0028 & figures 1-4, ref # 515) is configured to track weather conditions. (See paragraph 0005)
A modified Shuff is silent about wherein the house computer is configured to track weather conditions using the camera system.
However, Di Cosola teaches wherein the house computer is configured to track weather conditions using the camera system. (See paragraph 0134)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a house computer is configured to track weather conditions using the camera system as taught by Di Cosola in the modified drone station of Shuff, so as to determine the weather. (See paragraph 0134)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 30 & 31 are allowed.
Claims 5 & 23-29 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: .
Regarding claim 5
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed "wherein one or more legs of the platform support contain one or more sensors" in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 5.
Regarding claim 23
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed "further comprising an auxiliary landing pad containing conductive material for point-to-point charging of an unmanned ground vehicle that is positioned on the auxiliary landing pad, wherein the auxiliary landing pad is positioned below the landing platform between legs of the platform support" in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 23.
Regarding claim 28
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed "wherein the alternative power source comprises an underground battery storage device that is configured to supply power to the internal battery" in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 28.
Regarding claim 30
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed "a platform support comprising one or more legs, each leg configured to house a battery source electrically connected to the landing platform and configured to supply power to charge the drone, each leg further configured to receive and secure one or more solar panels; wherein the landing platform is configured to be detachably mounted to the platform support such that the landing platform is operable independently of the platform support when mounted to an alternative support structure" in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 30.
Regarding claim 31
The prior art does not disclose or suggest the claimed "wherein the landing platform is configured to be detachably mounted to the platform support such that the landing platform is operable independently of the platform support when mounted to an alternative support structure" in combination with the remaining claim elements as set forth in claim 31.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues on pages 3-4 of the remarks that the reference Shuff does not teach “a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna mounted on the landing platform” and that Wake does not cure this deficiency.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Shuff was not used to teach “a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna mounted on the landing platform”, Wake was used to teach this limitation. Wake explicitly teaches “a Real Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS) antenna mounted on the landing platform”, as cited in the previous and current Office Action. (See Wake, paragraph 0064)
The Applicant argues on pages 4-5 of the remarks that the reference Shuff does not teach a power management system wherein the drone station is configured to operate without connection to an external power grid.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Shuff explicitly teaches a power management system wherein the drone station is configured to operate without connection to an external power grid as pointed out in the above rejection. (See Shuff, paragraph 0024)
No further arguments were provided.
Therefore the 103 rejections are maintained adjusting the rejection according to the amendments.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODNEY ANDREW BONNETTE whose telephone number is (571)270-7556. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30 am - 5:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 571-272-6909. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RODNEY A BONNETTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647
Prosecution Insights