DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This action is in response to the application filed 27 May 2025 which is a Continuation of PCT/JP2022/048152 filed 27 December 2022. 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.
Claims 6 and 7 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.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “inclined portion movable the body away” which is unclear and results in the claim being indefinite. For examination purposes, any aerial vehicle with a system that moves the connector lines in and out will satisfy the limitation.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “a state in which the inclined portion is present and a state in which the inclined portion is present” which is unclear and results in the claim being indefinite, as the states are the same. For examination purposes, any aerial vehicle with lines that can be reeled/wound will satisfy the limitation.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tani Shinichi (JP 2021037932, translation provided, hereinafter Tani).
- Regarding Claim 1. Tani discloses an aerial vehicle (81, fig. 15a-c) configured to fly while carrying a load (11), the aerial vehicle (81) comprising:
a body (3) including a plurality of rotors (2); and
a load connector (16) configured to be connected to the body (3), support the load (11), and adjust a posture of the load (11, illustrated by fig. 15a-c).
- Regarding Claim 2. Tani discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the load connector (16) is supported by the body (3) via a plurality of supports (83); and
the load connector (16) is configured to adjust the posture of the load (11) by adjusting a length of at least one of the supports from the body (3) to the load connector (16, illustrated by fig. 15a-c, slack introduced by the tilting of the vehicle is taken up by movement of the load connectors, winding device 83 shortens/lengthens the load connector as required).
- Regarding Claim 3. Tani discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 1, further comprising:
a posture sensor configured to detect the posture of the load (11, “determined by the weight balance of the device mounting portion and the tension balance of the linear member” the weight balance sensing of the vehicle is equivalent to a posture sensor);
wherein the load connector (16) is configured to adjust the posture of the load (11) based on a detection result of the posture sensor (“changes automatically…to keep the posture of the device…horizontal”).
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 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tani in view of Ichihara (WO 2017/078044, translation provided).
- Regarding Claim 4. Tani discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the load connector stabilizes the posture of the load with use of airflow generated by the rotors.
However, Ichihara discloses a similar aerial vehicle (1, fig. 2 and 4) wherein the load connector (30) stabilizes the posture of the load with use of airflow generated by the rotors (“rotating blades generate downward wind….air resistance is generated and tension is applied to the main wire…prevents from swinging”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to incorporate the load stabilizers of Ichihara with the load connectors of Tani to allow for further stabilization of the platform from airflow generated by the rotors. Doing so would alleviate some of the required work of the winding members of Tani, allowing for greater part life and reduced maintenance cost.
- Regarding Claim 5. Tani as modified discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 4, wherein the load connector (16) includes an inclined portion (the lines are illustrated at an angle/incline) movable toward the body while extending toward a central portion of the load connector (16, inherently, movement of the lines moves the central portion of the load connector).
- Regarding Claim 6. Tani as modified discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 4, wherein the load connector (16) includes an inclined portion movable the body away while extending toward a central portion of the load connector (16, inherently, movement of the lines will move portions toward and away from the connector depending on the line moved).
- Regarding Claim 7. Tani as modified discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 5, wherein the load connector (16) includes at least a portion that is deformable, and is further configured to deform between a state in which the inclined portion is present and a state in which the inclined portion is present (the lines are windable and as such, deformable, further, the inclined portion is present at all times unless the aerial vehicle tilts to a position in which one sides line is completely reeled in, at which point, the inclined portion would not be present).
- Regarding Claim 8. Tani as modified discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 7, further comprising:
a posture sensor configured to detect the posture of the load (11, “determined by the weight balance of the device mounting portion and the tension balance of the linear member” the weight balance sensing of the vehicle is equivalent to a posture sensor);
wherein the inclined portion of the load connector (16) is deformable on a detection result of the posture sensor (the line will be reeled/deformed as required to maintain the posture of the load).
- Regarding Claim 9. Tani as modified discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 4, wherein the load connector (16) includes at least a portion overlapped with at least one of the rotors (2) in a plan view (fig. 15a-c illustrate the arrangement).
- Regarding Claim 12. Tani as modified discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 4, wherein the load connector (16) includes a plurality of structures (fig. 15a-c illustrates multiple load connectors).
Claims 10-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tani as modified in further view of Ishikawa et al. (US 2024/0343425).
- Regarding Claim 10. Tani as modified discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 9, wherein the load connector (16) is overlapped with the rotor (2) in plan view. Tani as modified does not disclose wherein the plurality of rotors include a main rotor and a sub rotor.
However, Ishikawa discloses a similar aerial vehicle which comprises a main rotor (14) and sub rotors (15). It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to modify Tani as modified to incorporate the main and sub rotors of Ishikawa to provide for greater stability in flight of the aerial vehicle as disclosed by Ishikawa resulting in less tilting of the load and as such, less work on the load connector systems therefore allowing for lowered maintenance costs of the system.
- Regarding Claim 11. Tani as modified discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 9, wherein the load connector is overlapped with the rotor (2) in plan view. Tani as modified does not disclose wherein the plurality of rotors include a main rotor and a sub rotor.
However, Ishikawa discloses a similar aerial vehicle which comprises a main rotor (14) and sub rotors (15). It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to modify Tani as modified to incorporate the main and sub rotors of Ishikawa to provide for greater stability in flight of the aerial vehicle as disclosed by Ishikawa resulting in less tilting of the load and as such, less work on the load connector systems therefore allowing for lowered maintenance costs of the system.
- Regarding Claim 13. Tani as modified discloses the aerial vehicle according to claim 4, wherein the load (11) is carried so as to have a center of gravity overlapped by the rotor in a plan view (illustrated by fig. 15a-c). Tani as modified does not disclose wherein the plurality of rotors (2) include a main rotor and a sub rotor.
However, Ishikawa discloses a similar aerial vehicle which comprises a main rotor (14) and sub rotors (15). It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as claimed to modify Tani as modified to incorporate the main and sub rotors of Ishikawa to provide for greater stability in flight of the aerial vehicle as disclosed by Ishikawa resulting in less tilting of the load and as such, less work on the load connector systems therefore allowing for lowered maintenance costs of the system.
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 19 April 2026
Prosecution Insights