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 § 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 4 is 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 4 recites the limitation "connected between" in Line 2 which renders the claim indefinite. The phrase is in opposition with the conveyor clause of Claim 1 which states a conveyor provided on the tank. It is unclear how the conveyor can be both on the tank and have a suction mechanism between the tank and conveyor. Perhaps the suction mechanism provides the connection to the tank?
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 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Furukawa (US 11040773 B2). Furukawa discloses:
1. An unmanned aerial vehicle comprising:
a plurality of rotors (96);
a main body (88+90) supporting the plurality of rotors;
a tank (106) that accommodates agricultural materials; and
a conveyor (86) provided on the tank to transport the agricultural materials toward the tank; wherein the conveyor has elasticity and/or flexibility (same as the other hoses “agent line 44 is a hose that possesses appropriate flexibility and rigidity”; Col 5 Line 62).
3. The unmanned aerial vehicle according to Claim 1, wherein the tank is provided above or below (below, See Fig. 5) the main body.
4. The unmanned aerial vehicle according to Claim 1, further comprising a suction mechanism (104) connected between the conveyor and the tank to draw up the agricultural materials from the supply station to the tank through the conveyor.
5. The unmanned aerial vehicle according to Claim 1, wherein the conveyor includes a nozzle (118).
6. The unmanned aerial vehicle according to Claim 1, further comprising a housing (90) that houses the conveyor so that the conveyor is not visible from the outside (see rolled hose around 122 in Fig. 5).
7. The unmanned aerial vehicle according to Claim 1, further comprising a controller (98) configured or programmed to control operation of the plurality of rotors; wherein when the conveyor is transporting the agricultural materials toward the tank, the controller is configured or programmed to control the operation of the plurality of rotors so that the main body hovers (“levitating force”; Col 12 Line 1).
8. The unmanned aerial vehicle according to Claim 1, further comprising a controller (98) configured or programmed to control operation of the plurality of rotors; wherein:
the conveyor includes a nozzle (118); and
when supplying the agricultural materials to the tank, the controller is configured or programmed to control the operation of the plurality of rotors so that the nozzle is positioned (“properly position the station 12, the first drone 14A, and the second drone 14B”; Col 17 Line 22) at or adjacent to the agricultural materials to be supplied.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furukawa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li (CN 119503126 A).
Furukawa discloses the The unmanned aerial vehicle wherein the tank includes an upper portion and a lower portion (inherent) ; and the conveyor is connected to the upper portion (see Fig. 5, the tank is below the hose and hose reel), but is silent on the lower portion has a tapered shape. Li teaches a tank (2) with a tapered shape (See Fig. 4). At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the tank of Furukawa with a tapered shape in view of the teaching of Li. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide a more aerodynamic shape.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. CN 119174561 A discloses a very similar device with a nozzle (32) at the end of a hose (30) which is used for conveying water. The end product is paint, but the water portion could be considered an agricultural product.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN M O'HARA whose telephone number is (571)270-5224. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM eastern.
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.
/BRIAN M O'HARA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642