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 Objections
Claims 2-20 are objected to for failing to use proper indentation. Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 19, and 20, recite “a cylindrical configuration” in the preamble. The specification fails to provide an adequate written description thereof. A person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would not have recognized that the inventor was in possession of the invention as claimed in view of the disclosure of the application as filed. The specification does not disclose nor show in the drawings “a cylindrical configuration”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 3 and 16 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 3 recites “…wherein at least one of the connecting element and the suspension mechanism comprises at least one of a gyroscopically stabilized arm and a magnetic field suspension…wherein at least one of the connecting element and the suspension element is implemented using any structure, material, or system capable of allowing relative movement between the one or more housing units and the body…” This is indefinite because it is unclear how a broader limitation (“implemented using any structure, material, or system…”) can follow a narrower limitation requiring the exact structure of a gyroscopically stabilized arm or magnetic field suspension. Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claim 16 recites “a movement associated with a transportation facilitated by a rolling motion performed by the body” in lines 5-6, despite previously introducing “a movement for the transportation system” in line 2. This is indefinite for two reasons. First, the limitation is generally unclear, the scope of “a movement associated with a transportation” is unclear. What makes a movement “associated” with a transportation? Secondly, it is unclear if this recitation in lines 5-6 intends to reference the previous recitation of or intends to introduce an additional “movement”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 8, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Belloso (US 20250108914 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Belloso discloses a transportation system (Fig. 15) comprising:
a body (fuselage of aircraft of Fig. 15) defining an interior space (interior space of fuselage, Fig. 15), wherein the body comprises at least one of a polyhedral configuration, a spherical configuration, or a cylindrical configuration (cylindrical shape of fuselage of aircraft, Fig. 15, examiner notes the fuselage shape is better depicted in Fig. 12);
a plurality of propulsion units mounted on the body (rotors 16, including 115 and 118, Fig. 15), wherein each of the plurality of propulsion units comprises a thrust-generating mechanism (blades of 115 and 118, Fig. 15), wherein the thrust-generating mechanism is disposed within the interior space of the body, on the body, or external to the body (Fig. 15),
wherein the thrust-generating mechanism is operatively coupled to a power source, wherein the power source is configured to drive the thrust-generating mechanism (para. [0006] and 150, Fig. 1), wherein the power source is one of:
a dedicated source associated with each of the plurality of propulsion units, or a shared source supplying the plurality of propulsion units (para. [0006], “…power source being…rechargeable batteries…”),
wherein the thrust-generating mechanism is configured to produce a propulsion force characterized by each of direction and magnitude (para. [0006], “…lift said aircraft into the air…”);
a control unit (200, Fig. 1 and para. [0036]) operatively coupled to each of the plurality of propulsion units, wherein the control unit is disposed within, disposed on, integrated into, or remote from the body (para. [0036], examiner notes the control system may be located anywhere to meet this limitation); and
one or more housing units disposed within the interior space of the body (cockpit of aircraft, Fig. 15, better depicted in Fig. 2, for example), wherein the one or more housing units is suspended within the body by at least one of a connecting element and a suspension mechanism (examiner notes the cockpit is suspended in the fuselage via at least one connecting element, such as cockpit walls, for example), wherein the one or more housing units is configured for accommodating at least one individual (para. [0006], “…pilot…”).
Regarding Claim 8, Belloso discloses the transportation system of claim 1, further comprising at least one gimbal mount (para. [0032], “…gimbal device…”),
wherein each of the at least one gimbal mount is configured to support one or more of the plurality of propulsion units (para. [0032], “rotors 118 are….attached to a gimbal device…”),
wherein a subset of the plurality of propulsion units is mounted on the body using the at least one gimbal mount (para. [0032], “rotors 118 are….attached to a gimbal device…”), and a remainder of the plurality of propulsion units is mounted on the body without the at least one gimbal mount (para. [0032], “…rotor 115 is ideally static…”); and
a communication module configured for receiving user command data from a user device associated with a user (para. [0036], examiner notes control system 10 is clearly capable of receiving data from the pilot’s user device),
wherein the user command data represents a user command in relation to the producing of the propulsion force (para. [0036]),
wherein the communication module is communicatively coupled with one or both of at least one of the plurality of propulsion units and the central flight controller module (para. [0036]),
wherein the producing of the propulsion force characterized by at least one each of the direction and the magnitude is further based on the user command data (para. [0036]).
Regarding Claim 13, Belloso discloses the transportation system of claim 8, wherein each of the at least one gimbal mount is further configured to permit relative movement of one or more of the plurality of propulsion units with respect to the body (para. [0032]), and is configured to be actively controlled via actuators (110, 120, Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 14, Belloso discloses the transportation system of claim 1, wherein the body comprises aerodynamic surfaces which are configured to improve the efficiency of at least one movement of the transportation system (Fig. 15, examiner notes the wings of the aircraft are aerodynamic surfaces which improve efficiency), wherein the body is further configured to rotate during the at least one movement (para. [0032], “…pitch and roll…”).
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.
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Belloso (US 20250108914 A1) as applied above, and further in view of Potvin et al. (US 20230168692 A1), hereafter Potvin.
Regarding Claim 15, Belloso discloses the transportation system of claim 14.
While Belloso appears to depict adjustable flaps and slats on the wings (Fig. 15, depicted flaps and slats of wings of aircraft), Belloso does not specifically teach an aerodynamic-adjustment system configured to adjust aerodynamic characteristics of the aerodynamic surfaces of the body during the at least one movement, including adjustment of angles of attack and/or shapes of aerodynamic profiles of the aerodynamic surfaces, wherein the adjustment is performed based on preprogrammed algorithms according to flight conditions and direction of the transportation system, and wherein the adjustment is performed in coordination with the rotation of the body, and wherein the adjustment facilitates cyclic variation of aerodynamic forces during rotation of the body to enhance flight efficiency.
Potvin teaches an aerodynamic-adjustment system configured to adjust aerodynamic characteristics of the aerodynamic surfaces of the body during the at least one movement (para. [0041], “controller 108”), including adjustment of angles of attack and/or shapes of aerodynamic profiles of the aerodynamic surfaces (para. [0041], “…flight component 140 may include an aerodynamic surface…an aileron, an edge slat…flaps…”),
wherein the adjustment is performed based on preprogrammed algorithms according to flight conditions and direction of the transportation system (para. [0037], “…controller 108 may use a machine-learning…trained on a plurality of parameters…such as…airspeed, altitude, orientation…”), and wherein the adjustment is performed in coordination with the rotation of the body (para. [0037]-[0039]), and wherein the adjustment facilitates cyclic variation of aerodynamic forces during rotation of the body to enhance flight efficiency (para. [0037]-[0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the aerodynamic surfaces of Belloso with an aerodynamic adjustment system as taught by Potvin, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to optimize control of the aircraft for softer touchdowns, for example (Potvin, para. [0039]).
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Belloso (US 20250108914 A1) as applied above, and further in view of Fisher et al. (WO 2016115574 A1), hereafter Fisher.
Regarding Claim 17, Belloso discloses the transportation system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the plurality of propulsion units is further configured to be detachably attached to the body (Fig. 15 and para. [0028], “…housing 35 may be detachably attached…to the aircraft…”).
Belloso is silent about wherein at least one of the plurality of propulsion units is swappable with other propulsion units during flight.
Fisher teaches wherein at least one of a similar plurality of propulsion units is swappable with other propulsion units during flight (Figs. 21A-B and Pg. 8, lines 14-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the plurality of propulsion units of Belloso to be swappable with other propulsion units during flight, as taught by Fisher, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to improve communications with remote bases (Fisher, Pg. 8, lines 14-20) or facilitate propulsion unit maintenance/charging.
Claim(s) 1 is alternatively rejected, and Claims 2-3, 5, 10-11, and 19 are rejected, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Asai (JP 2019217932 A) in view of Lasa Aguirrebengoa et al. (US 20250282500 A1), hereafter Lasa Aguirrebengoa.
Regarding Claim 1, Asai discloses a transportation system (10, Fig. 1) comprising:
a body defining an interior space (12, Fig. 1), wherein the body comprises at least one of a polyhedral configuration, a spherical configuration (12, Fig. 1 and Abstract “spherical shape”), or a cylindrical configuration;
a plurality of propulsion units mounted on the body (22, Fig. 4), wherein each of the plurality of propulsion units comprises a thrust-generating mechanism (22A, Fig. 4), wherein the thrust-generating mechanism is disposed within the interior space of the body (22 are located on 14, Figs. 1 and 4), on the body, or external to the body,
wherein the thrust-generating mechanism is operatively coupled to a power source, wherein the power source is configured to drive the thrust-generating mechanism (Pg. 2 of attached translation, “electric power is supplied from the battery to a drive mechanism for operating the propeller device 22”), wherein the power source is one of:
a dedicated source associated with each of the plurality of propulsion units, or a shared source supplying the plurality of propulsion units (Pg. 2 of attached translation, “battery”),
wherein the thrust-generating mechanism is configured to produce a propulsion force characterized by each of direction and magnitude (Pg. 2 of attached translation, “…22A generates a propulsive force”); and
one or more housing units disposed within the interior space of the body (14, Fig. 1), wherein the one or more housing units is suspended within the body by at least one of a connecting element and a suspension mechanism (18, Fig. 1), wherein the one or more housing units is configured for accommodating at least one individual (via seat 16, Fig. 1).
Asai does not specifically teach a control unit operatively coupled to each of the plurality of propulsion units, wherein the control unit is disposed within, disposed on, integrated into, or remote from the body.
Lasa Aguirrebengoa teaches a control unit operatively coupled to each of a similar plurality of propulsion units (302 and each 305, Fig. 6B), wherein the control unit is disposed within, disposed on, integrated into, or remote from a similar body (Fig. 6B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the transportation system of Asai with a control unit as taught by Lasa Aquirrebongoa, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide control redundancy to increase security and reliability of the system (Lasa Aguirrebengoa, para. [0075]).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 1,
wherein at least one of the connecting element and the suspension mechanism is configured to secure the one or more housing units to the body (Asai, 18 connects 14 to 12, Fig. 1), and further configured to dampen and/or stabilize and/or actively adjust movement of the one or more housing units during operation of the transportation system (Asai, Pg. 4 of attached translation, lines 18-21, “…load input to the inner frame 14 can be reduced by the elastic deformation of the spring 18…”) ,
wherein the one or more housing units comprises at least one of a seat or a compartment (Asai, seat 18, Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 2,
wherein the one or more housing units is suspended relative to the body by at least one of the connecting element and the suspension mechanism (Asai, 14 is suspended relative to 12 by 18, Fig. 1),
wherein at least one of the connecting element and the suspension mechanism is configured to permit and/or actively adjust relative movement and/or dampen and/or stabilize the one or more housing units relative to the body (Asai, Pg. 4 of attached translation, lines 18-21, “…load input to the inner frame 14 can be reduced by the elastic deformation of the spring 18…”),
wherein at least one of the connecting element and the suspension mechanism comprises at least one of a gyroscopically stabilized arm(s) and a magnetic field suspension (see 112(b) rejection above),
wherein at least one of the connecting element and the suspension mechanism is further configured to absorb impact forces resulting from external collisions or operational movements (Asai, Pg. 4 of attached translation, lines 18-21, “…load input to the inner frame 14 can be reduced by the elastic deformation of the spring 18…”),
wherein at least one of the connecting element and the suspension mechanism is implemented using any structure, material, or system capable of allowing relative movement between the one or more housing units and the body while dampening and/or stabilizing and/or actively adjusting forces therebetween (Asai, Pg. 4 of attached translation, lines 18-21, “…load input to the inner frame 14 can be reduced by the elastic deformation of the spring 18…”),
wherein at least one of the connecting element and the suspension mechanism is configured to adjust the position and/or orientation of the one or more housing units within the body in response to a control input from at least one of a pilot and an automated system (Asai teaches a steering device for pilot input, see Pg. 2 of attached translation, para. 8, Pg. 4 of attached translation, lines 18-21, “…load input to the inner frame 14 can be reduced by the elastic deformation of the spring 18…”, examiner further notes Asai’s spring 18 is clearly capable of adjusting the position of the housing unit 14 in response to pilot input, as an inherent function of a spring).
Regarding Claim 5, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 1,
Modified Asai is silent about wherein the plurality of propulsion units are divided into a plurality of propulsion unit groups,
wherein the control unit comprises a plurality of flight controller modules,
wherein each of the plurality of flight controller modules is exclusively assigned to and configured to independently control a corresponding propulsion unit group, such that failure of one of the plurality of flight controller modules does not impair operation of the other propulsion unit groups,
wherein each flight controller module is further configured to communicate with its assigned propulsion unit group via a wired or wireless communication link.
Lasa Aguirrebengoa teaches wherein a similar plurality of propulsion units are divided into a plurality of propulsion unit groups (304a-d, Fig. 6B), wherein a similar control unit (302 and each secondary controller 305 of 304a-d, Fig. 6B) comprises a plurality of flight controller modules (305, Fig. 6B), wherein each of the plurality of flight controller modules is exclusively assigned to and configured to independently control a corresponding propulsion unit group (each secondary controller 305 controls a corresponding propulsion group 304a-d, Fig. 6B), such that failure of one of the plurality of flight controller modules does not impair operation of the other propulsion unit groups (para. [0075], “any one of the plurality of controllers may take over the whole vehicle in case the controller currently in charge…fails”), wherein each flight controller module is further configured to communicate with its assigned propulsion unit group via a wired or wireless communication link (para. [0075]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure the plurality of propulsion units and control unit of modified Asai wherein the plurality of propulsion units are divided into a plurality of propulsion units groups, wherein the control unit comprises a plurality of flight controller modules exclusively assigned to and configured to independently control a corresponding propulsion unit group as taught by Lasa Aguirrebengoa, with the reasonable expectation of success, with the benefit of controller redundancy to increase the security and reliability of the transportation system (Lasa Aguirrebengoa, para. [0075]).
Regarding Claim 10, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 1,
wherein at least one of the one or more housing units comprises an exterior housing structure (Asai, 14, Fig. 1) and an interior housing structure (Asai, 24, Fig. 1),
wherein the interior housing structure is operatively coupled to the exterior housing structure (Asai, Pg. 2 of attached translation, para. 10, “…24 is fixed to the inner frame 14…”).
Regarding Claim 11, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 10,
wherein at least one of the one or more housing units is connected to the body based on a connection between the exterior housing structure and the body using at least one of the connecting element and the suspension mechanism (Asai, 14 is connected to 12 via 18, Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 19, Asai discloses a transportation system (10, Fig. 1) comprising:
a body defining an interior space (12, Fig. 1), wherein the body comprises at least one of a polyhedral configuration, a spherical configuration (12, Fig. 1 and Abstract “spherical shape”), or a cylindrical configuration;
a plurality of propulsion units mounted on the body (22, Fig. 4),
wherein each of the plurality of propulsion units comprises a thrust-generating mechanism (22A, Fig. 4),
wherein the thrust-generating mechanism is operatively coupled to a power source (Pg. 2 of attached translation, “electric power is supplied from the battery to a drive mechanism for operating the propeller device 22”),
wherein the power source is configured to drive the thrust-generating mechanism (Pg. 2 of attached translation, “electric power is supplied from the battery to a drive mechanism for operating the propeller device 22”),
wherein the power source is one of: a dedicated source associated with each of the plurality of propulsion units, or a shared source supplying the plurality of propulsion units (Pg. 2 of attached translation, “electric power is supplied from the battery to a drive mechanism for operating the propeller device 22”),
wherein the thrust-generating mechanism is disposed within the interior space of the body, on the body, or external to the body (22 are located on 14, Figs. 1 and 4),
wherein the thrust-generating mechanism is configured for generating a propulsion force characterized by each of direction and magnitude (Pg. 2 of attached translation, “…22A generates a propulsive force”); and
one or more housing units (14, Fig. 1) and/or one or more pilot attachments (16, Fig. 1) disposed within the interior space of the body (Fig. 1),
wherein the one or more pilot attachments is configured to be attached to one or more pilots (seat 16 is capable of this function, Fig. 1), wherein the one or more pilots comprises at least one individual (seat 16 is capable of this function, Fig. 1),
wherein the one or more housing units and/or the one or more pilot attachments is suspended within the body by at least one of a connecting element and a suspension mechanism (18, Fig. 1),
wherein the one or more housing units is configured for accommodating the at least one individual (seat 16 is in 14, Fig. 1),
wherein at least one of the connecting element and the suspension mechanism is configured to secure the one or more housing units and/or the one or more pilot attachments to the body (18 secures 14 to 12, Fig. 1), and further configured to dampen and/or stabilize and/or actively adjust movement of at least one of the one or more housing units and/or the one or more pilot attachments during operation of the transportation system (Asai, Pg. 4 of attached translation, lines 18-21, “…load input to the inner frame 14 can be reduced by the elastic deformation of the spring 18…”),
wherein each the one or more housing units comprises at least one of a seat or a compartment (compartment defined by 14, Fig. 1).
Asai does not specifically teach a control unit operatively coupled to each of the plurality of propulsion units, wherein the control unit is disposed within, disposed on, integrated into, or remote from the body.
Lasa Aguirrebengoa teaches a control unit operatively coupled to each of a similar plurality of propulsion units (302 and each 305, Fig. 6B), wherein the control unit is disposed within, disposed on, integrated into, or remote from a similar body (Fig. 6B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the transportation system of Asai with a control unit as taught by Lasa Aquirrebongoa, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide control redundancy to increase security and reliability of the system (Lasa Aguirrebengoa, para. [0075]).
Claim(s) 4, 12, and 16 are rejected, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Asai as applied above, in further view of Connor (AU 2013101136 A4).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 1,
wherein the body comprises a frame formed by a plurality of interconnected frame members (Asai, 12A, Fig. 2),
wherein an arrangement of the plurality of interconnected frame members defines the geometric configuration of the body (Asai, Fig. 2).
Modified Asai is silent about wherein the body comprises an inner layer and an outer layer,
wherein a space between the inner layer and the outer layer is pressurized with one or more fluids,
Connor teaches wherein a similar body comprises an inner layer (103, Fig. 3) and an outer layer (104, Fig. 4),
wherein a space between the inner layer and the outer layer is pressurized with one or more fluids (Pg.5, last para – Pg. 6, first para.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to comprise the body of modified Asai with an inner layer and an outer layer, wherein a space between the inner layer and outer layer is pressurized with one or more fluids, as taught by Connor, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would provide the benefit of additional cushioning on the exterior of the system, “wherein the structure remains bouncy or springy” (Connor, Pg. 5, first para.).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 11.
Modified Asai is silent about a gyro-stabilization unit operatively coupled between the interior housing structure and the exterior housing structure,
wherein the gyro-stabilization unit is configured to stabilize an orientation of the interior housing structure relative to rotation and/or movement of the exterior housing structure; and
an orientation-adjustment unit configured to adjust the orientation of the interior housing structure relative to the exterior housing structure by sending control commands to the gyro-stabilization unit.
Connor teaches a gyro-stabilization unit (500, Fig. 1) operatively coupled between the interior housing structure and the exterior housing structure (Connor’s unit 500 connects a similar seat base to a similar exterior housing structure, Fig. 1),
wherein the gyro-stabilization unit is configured to stabilize an orientation of the interior housing structure relative to rotation and/or movement of the exterior housing structure (Pg. 3, lines 1-11); and
an orientation-adjustment unit configured to adjust the orientation of the interior housing structure relative to the exterior housing structure by sending control commands to the gyro-stabilization unit (Pg. 5, last para.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the interior and exterior housing structures of modified Asai with a gyro-stabilization unit as taught by Connor, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide stability for the user and allow for motor driven movement on the ground (Connor, Pg. 5).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 1, wherein the producing of the propulsion force produces a movement for the transportation system, wherein the movement comprises an aerial movement (Asai, Pg. 4 of attached translation, para. 8, “…allows the vehicle 10 to fly…”).
Modified Asai is silent about a terrestrial movement associated with the transportation system, wherein the terrestrial movement comprises a rolling movement corresponding to a movement associated with a transportation facilitated by a rolling motion performed by the body.
Connor teaches a similar transportation system that produces a terrestrial movement comprising a rolling movement facilitated by a rolling motion performed by a similar body (Pg. 4, lines 14-18, “…cause the spherical housing to roll over level terrain…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the transportation system of modified Asai to produce a terrestrial movement comprising a rolling motion, as taught by Connor, in order to expand the capabilities of the transportation system by allowing for ground movement.
Claim(s) 6 is rejected, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Asai as applied above, in further view of Morrison (US 20220315223 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 5,
wherein the control unit further comprises a central flight controller module operatively coupled to the plurality of flight controller modules (Lasa Aguirrebengoa, main controller 302, Fig. 6B),
wherein the central flight controller module is configured to monitor an operational status of each flight controller module to assume control of a propulsion unit group upon detection of a failure of its assigned flight controller module (Lasa Aguirrebengoa, para. [0075]),
wherein the central flight controller module is further configured to dynamically redistribute control among multiple propulsion unit groups to maintain stability of the transportation system following the failure (Lasa Aguirrebengoa, para. [0075]),
wherein control signals are distributed from the central flight controller module to the plurality of flight controller modules and further to at least one of the plurality of propulsion units to perform aerial and/or terrestrial movement of the transportation system (Lasa Aguirrebengoa, para. [0075], and Fig. 6B).
Modified Asai fails to teach wherein the central flight controller module is configured to monitor a temperature of each flight controller module.
Morrison teaches using a flight controller to monitor a temperature of aircraft components (para. [0010]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the central flight controller module of modified Asai to monitor temperatures as taught by Morrison, with a reasonable expectation of success. While Morrison teaches monitoring the temperature of a motor (para. [0010], examiner notes the central flight controller of modified Asai would be similarly capable of monitoring a temperature of each flight controller module as taught by Morrison, in order to monitor the operational status of the flight controller modules and enhance safety of the system.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Asai as applied above, in further view of Potvin et al. (US 20230168692 A1), hereafter Potvin.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 1,
wherein the control unit disposed in the one or more housing units (302 and each 305, Fig. 6B).
Modified Asai is silent about wherein the control unit is configured to process user command data received from a user device, and one or more data received from each of flight sensors, on-board sensors, and ground sensors using one or more machine learning models,
wherein the control unit is configured to generate control command data for at least one of the plurality of propulsion units based on the processing of the user command data and the one or more data,
wherein the transportation system is propelled based on the control command data,
wherein the control unit is configured to wirelessly transmit the control commands to at least one of the plurality of propulsion units.
Potvin teaches a similar control unit is configured to process user command data (para. [0037]) received from a user device (para. [0037], “…user using an interface…”), and one or more data received from each of flight sensors (para. [0022], “…airspeed”), on-board sensors (para. [0022], “…temperature sensor…”), and ground sensors (para. [0022], “…input may be from…environmental characteristics…”, examiner notes that Potvin’s controller is clearly capable of processing date from a ground sensor) using one or more machine learning models (para. [0037], “…machine-learning model…”),
wherein the control unit is configured to generate control command data for at least one of the plurality of propulsion units based on the processing of the user command data and the one or more data (para. [0035]-[-0041]),
wherein the transportation system is propelled based on the control command data (para. [0035]-[0041]),
wherein the control unit is configured to wirelessly transmit the control commands to at least one of the plurality of propulsion units (para. [0041], “controller 108 may communicate with the flight component using wireless communication…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the control unit of modified Asai to be configured to process user command data using one or more machine learning models and generate control command data, wherein the control unit is configured to wirelessly transmit the control commands, as taught by Potvin, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to perform more efficient and safe flight by using a machine learning model to analyze input data and perform efficient flight control functions.
Claim(s) 9 is rejected, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Asai as applied above, in further view of Briod et al. (US 20200189712 A1), hereafter Briod.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Asai teaches the transportation system of claim 1,
wherein the body comprises a frame (Asai, 12, Fig. 2) formed by a plurality of interconnected frame members (Asai, 12A, Fig. 2),
wherein the plurality of interconnected frame members comprises a plurality of tubes (12A, Fig. 2).
While examiner notes that modified Asai’s frame members (Asai, 12A) are clearly connected, Asai does not specifically teach a plurality of connectors,
wherein the plurality of tubes are interconnected using the plurality of connectors.
Briod teaches a plurality of connectors (22, Fig. 6a),
wherein a plurality of similar tubes are interconnected using the plurality of connectors (Fig. 6a).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the plurality of tubes of modified Asai with the plurality of connectors are taught by Briod, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to securely connect the tubes with a reversible connection for ease of disassembly and maintenance (Briod, para. [0102]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The prior arts of record, individually or in combination, do not disclose or render obvious the combined limitations of claims 18 or 20. The closest prior arts of record are Asai (JP 2019217932 A) and Fisher (WO 2016115574 A1). Specifically, Asai discloses a spherical body with a plurality of propulsion units mounted on the body, while Fisher teaches propulsion units swappable in flight (Figs. 21A-21B).
However the prior art of record does not appear to teach the combined limitations of the Claims 18 or 20, specifically wherein the central flight computer is configured to detect charged spare propulsion units positioned at ground locations, wherein the central flight computer is configured to initiate a mid-air replacement if a flight time exceeds an available battery capacity, wherein the charged spare propulsion units launch to approach the transportation system from the ground locations to attach with the body, and depleted propulsion units detach from the body upon the approach of the charged spare propulsion units during the mid-air replacement, wherein the depleted propulsion units which are detached from the body, navigate to a landing zone. While Fisher teaches propulsion systems detachable/swappable in flight, Fisher’s mothership itself performs the charging of the propulsion systems, and it would not be obvious to combine or modify the prior arts of record to teach the invention as claimed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Fisher et al. (WO 2016115574 A1) teaches swappable propulsion units in flight.
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 ANNA LYNN GORDON whose telephone number is (571)270-5323. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-4:30pm.
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, JOSHUA HUSON can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
/ANNA L. GORDON/Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642