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 .
Preliminary Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed on 08/20/2025 is being entered. Claims 1-15 are cancelled and claims 16-35 are new.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/19/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 25
a graphical user interface module executable
an authentication module configured to establish
a validation module configured to verify
Clam 26
a template module storing
Claim 27
a conversion module configured to generate
Claim 28
the graphical user interface module displays
Claim 30
a data storage module for storing
Claim 31
a synchronization module for uploading
Claim 32
the validation module compares
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. See Paragraphs 0049 and 0073 discusses that the modules are a processor that executes software programs.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
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.
Claims 16-17, 24-28, and 33-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klatt et al. (U.S. Publication 2021/0327296 A1) hereinafter Klatt in view of Glatfelter et al. (U.S. Publication 2017/0347233 A1) hereinafter Glatfelter.
Regarding claim 16, Klatt discloses a method for conducting fixed-base operator aviation services, comprising the steps of:
providing a portable electronic device having a graphical user interface [see Paragraph 0024 - discusses a portable device (phone, tablet) that has a display/touchscreen];
establishing aircraft identity via the graphical user interface [see Figure 6 below - depicts aircraft identity (make and model) that is selected on the display]
PNG
media_image1.png
486
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 6 of Klatt
defining an aviation service having a standard operating procedure to be carried out via the graphical user interface [see Paragraph 0037 - discusses that "the user interface 700 shows a view of an electronic document having a first portion 702 with a combination of illustrations and instructions for performing a set of tasks associated with an equipment maintenance procedure. In this example, the first portion 702 is original content, e.g., as published with the original maintenance manual for the equipment. ", and see Paragraph 0047 - The method begins at operation 902 when an enhanced electronic document is presented via a document viewing application executing on a head-worn computer having a head-mounted display. The original content of the electronic document has been enhanced to include an interactive workflow consisting of a set of checklist items];
prompting collection of objective or subjective data corresponding to the standard operating procedure [see Paragraph 0049 - discusses during a maintenance procedure, prompting a user to capture an image or photograph]; and
validating compliance with the standard operating procedure [see Paragraph 0049 - discusses that a task has determined to be completed when a user submits an image/video and a checkmark for the maintenance task is checked and determining whether data has been captured during a maintenance operation, if the data has not been captured then the maintenance specialist is prompted to capture data and then the task is updated to have been completed by the maintenance specialist].
Glatfelter discloses wherein an aircraft identity is verified using GPS coordinates from a portable electronic device [see Paragraphs 0048, and 0062-0063 – discusses that an aircraft electronic maintenance technical publication is determined when a GPS location of a mobile device is in proximity of the aircraft (structure)].
Glatfelter suggests that using GPS location of a mobile device allows for quickly and efficiently locating a particular aircrafts component for maintenance [see Paragraph 0003].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify
the portable electronic device as taught by Klatt to verify aircraft identity using GPS coordinates from a portable electronic device as taught by Glatfelter in order to quickly and efficiently locate a particular aircraft component to aid personnel in the maintenance of the aircraft [Glatfelter, see Paragraph 0003].
Regarding claim 17, Klatt and Glatfelter disclose the invention with respect to claim 16. Glatfelter further discloses the step of displaying an inspection dashboard showing real-time status of aircraft [see Figure 7 below - depicts an inspection dashboard showing the status of the maintenance of an aircraft].
PNG
media_image2.png
677
825
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 7 of Klatt
Regarding claim 24, Klatt and Glatfelter disclose the invention with respect to claim 16. Glatfelter further discloses wherein the objective or subjective data includes at least one of photographs, videos, or audio notations [see Paragraph 0049 - discusses an image/video is captured].
Regarding claim 25, Klatt discloses a system for conducting fixed-base operator aviation services, comprising:
a portable electronic device comprising a processor and memory [see Paragraph 0057 - discusses a processor and a memory of a machine (portable electronic device)];
a graphical user interface module executable by the processor [see Paragraph 0024 - discusses the portable electronic device (phone, tablet) has a display/touchscreen];
an authentication module configured to establish user identity [see Paragraph 0033 - discusses that a maintenance specialist (user) establishes identity using the portable device];
a GPS module configured to obtain location coordinates [see Paragraph 0063 – discusses a GPS];
a validation module configured to verify compliance with standard operating procedures [see Paragraph 0049 – ‘the document viewing application may check to determine whether the maintenance specialist has captured a photograph or video clip for purposes of reporting the completion of the maintenance task. Accordingly, at method operation 908, it is determined that no such photo or video has yet been captured, and thus the maintenance specialist is prompted to capture a photograph or video.’]; and
wherein the system
validates aviation service completion [see Paragraph 0049 - discusses that a task has determined to be completed when a user submits an image/video and a checkmark for the maintenance task is checked].
Glatfelter discloses establishing aircraft identity using GPS coordinates [see Paragraphs 0048, and 0062-0063 – discusses that an aircraft electronic maintenance technical publication is determined when a GPS location of a mobile device is in proximity of the aircraft (structure)].
Glatfelter suggests that using GPS location of a mobile device allows for quickly and efficiently locating a particular aircrafts component for maintenance [see Paragraph 0003].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify
the portable electronic device as taught by Klatt to establish aircraft identity using GPS coordinates (from a portable electronic device) as taught by Glatfelter in order to quickly and efficiently locate a particular aircraft component to aid personnel in the maintenance of the aircraft [Glatfelter, see Paragraph 0003].
Regarding claim 26, Klatt and Glatfelter disclose the invention with respect to claim 25. Klatt further discloses a template module storing predefined standard operating procedures [see Paragraph 0037 - discusses that "the user interface 700 shows a view of an electronic document having a first portion 702 with a combination of illustrations and instructions for performing a set of tasks associated with an equipment maintenance procedure. In this example, the first portion 702 is original content, e.g., as published with the original maintenance manual for the equipment. ", and see Paragraph 0047 - the method begins at operation 902 when an enhanced electronic document is presented via a document viewing application executing on a head-worn computer having a head-mounted display. The original content of the electronic document has been enhanced to include an interactive workflow consisting of a set of checklist items].
Regarding claim 27, Klatt and Glatfelter disclose the invention with respect to claim 26. Klatt further discloses a conversion module configured to generate reports [see Paragraphs 0045-0046 - discusses that the report is generated at the conclusion of the maintenance task, the report indicating tasks completed for maintenance of an aircraft, the report follows formats of the FAA].
Regarding claim 28, Klatt and Glatfelter disclose the invention with respect to claim 27. Klatt further discloses wherein a graphical user interface module displays an inspection dashboard with real-time aircraft status [see Figure 7 below - depicts an inspection dashboard showing the status of the maintenance of an aircraft].
PNG
media_image2.png
677
825
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 7 of Klatt
Regarding claim 33, Klatt and Glatfelter disclose the invention with respect to claim 25. Klatt further discloses wherein the portable electronic device comprises at least one of a smartphone, tablet, or handheld computer [see Paragraph 0024 - discusses a tablet or mobile phone].
Regarding claim 34, Klatt discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to:
display a graphical user interface on a portable electronic device [see Paragraph 0024 - discusses a portable device (phone, tablet) that has a display/touchscreen];
receive user authentication credentials [see Paragraph 0033 - discusses that a maintenance specialist (user) establishes identity using the portable device];
obtain GPS coordinates from the portable electronic device [see Paragraph 0063 – discusses a GPS];
present a standard operating procedure for an aviation service [see Figure 7 below - depicts a standard operating procedure];
PNG
media_image2.png
677
825
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 7 of Klatt
collect data confirming completion of the standard operating procedure [see Paragraph 0049 - discusses during a maintenance procedure, prompting a user to capture an image or photograph]; and
generate a compliance validation record [see Paragraphs 0045-0046 - discusses that the report is generated at the conclusion of the maintenance task, the report indicating tasks completed for maintenance of an aircraft, the report follows formats of the FAA].
Glatfelter discloses establishing aircraft identity using GPS coordinates [see Paragraphs 0048, and 0062-0063 – discusses that an aircraft electronic maintenance technical publication is determined when a GPS location of a mobile device is in proximity of the aircraft (structure)].
Glatfelter suggests that using GPS location of a mobile device allows for quickly and efficiently locating a particular aircrafts component for maintenance [see Paragraph 0003].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify
the portable electronic device as taught by Klatt to establish aircraft identity using GPS coordinates (from a portable electronic device) as taught by Glatfelter in order to quickly and efficiently locate a particular aircraft component to aid personnel in the maintenance of the aircraft [Glatfelter, see Paragraph 0003].
Regarding claim 35, Klatt discloses a method for aviation service documentation, comprising the steps of:
receiving, at a portable electronic device, selection of an aircraft via a graphical user interface [see Figure 6 below - depicts selecting a make and model of an aircraft];
PNG
media_image1.png
486
650
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 6 of Klatt
automatically determining location of the portable electronic device using GPS [see Paragraph 0063 – discusses a GPS];
displaying a checklist of required service items [see Figure 7 below - depicts a checklist of items];
recording completion status for each service item [see Figure 7 below - depicts a checkbox indicated a mark that an item was completed]; and
PNG
media_image2.png
677
825
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 7 of Klatt
generating a timestamped service record [see Paragraph 0045 - discusses date and time of a maintenance operation along with images, video, and audio is stored].
Glatfelter discloses verifying an aircraft identity matches the GPS location [see Paragraphs 0048, and 0062-0063 – discusses that an aircraft electronic maintenance technical publication is determined when a GPS location of a mobile device is in proximity of the aircraft (structure)].
Glatfelter suggests that using GPS location of a mobile device allows for quickly and efficiently locating a particular aircrafts component for maintenance [see Paragraph 0003].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify
the portable electronic device as taught by Klatt to establish aircraft identity using GPS coordinates (from a portable electronic device) as taught by Glatfelter in order to quickly and efficiently locate a particular aircraft component to aid personnel in the maintenance of the aircraft [Glatfelter, see Paragraph 0003].
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klatt in view of Glatfelter further in view of Kahn (U.S. Publication No. 2018/017057 A1) hereinafter Kahn.
Regarding claim 18, Klatt and Glatfelter disclose the invention with respect to claim 17. Klatt further discloses wherein the inspection dashboard displays aircraft checked-in status [see Figure 7 below - depicts the aircraft is maintenance status and is being checked in through a check list].
PNG
media_image2.png
677
825
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 7 of Klatt
Kahn discloses displaying arriving aircraft and departing aircraft [see Figure 3 below – depicts observing a number of departing flights, arriving flights for an aircraft].
Kahn suggest that using flight data (arrivals and departures) improves safety, efficiency, and behavior of an aircraft, reduce operating costs, and increase aircraft utilization. Further, the flight data may be collected and analyzed to reveal high-risk events and trends which can enable operators to proactively and effectively manage risk. Additionally, flight data analysis is also widely used in support of maintenance and engineering of an aircraft by optimizing fuel usage, reducing emissions, and improving aircraft component life [see Paragraph 0018].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify
the inspection dashboard as taught by Klatt to display arriving aircraft and departing aircraft as taught by Kahn in order to improve safety, efficiency, and behavior of an aircraft, reduce operating costs, increase aircraft utilization, enable operators to proactively and effectively manage risk, and support of maintenance and engineering of an aircraft by optimizing fuel usage, reducing emissions, and improving aircraft component life [Kahn, see Paragraph 0018].
PNG
media_image3.png
436
209
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Figure 3 of Kahn
Regarding claim 19, Klatt, Glatfelter, and Kahn disclose the invention with respect to claim 18. Klatt further discloses the step of recording date and time when the data was collected [see Paragraph 0045 - discusses date and time of a maintenance operation along with images, video, and audio is stored].
Regarding claim 20, Klatt, Glatfelter, and Kahn disclose the invention with respect to claim 19. Klatt further discloses the step of storing the collected data on the portable electronic device [see Paragraph 0045 - discusses that the data is stored locally on the portable device 'when a maintenance operation has concluded, a report generating process is invoked to extract or obtain information generated during the maintenance procedure and stored locally on one or more of the mobile computing devices’].
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klatt in view of Glatfelter in view of Kahn further in view of Hochman (U.S. Publication No. 2020/0279214 A1) hereinafter Hochman.
Regarding claim 21, Klatt, Glatfelter, and Kahn disclose the invention with respect to claim 20.
However, the combination of Klatt, Glatfelter, and Kahn fails to disclose the step of uploading the collected data to a cloud-based server.
Hochman discloses the step of uploading collected data to a cloud-based server [see Paragraph 0015 - discusses that collected data is recorded and shared to a cloud based system].
Hochman suggests that storing in a cloud based storage allows for cross referencing and data exchange [see Paragraph 0030].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify
the method as taught by Klatt to upload collected data to a cloud-based server as taught by Hochman in order to allow for cross referencing and data exchange with other collected data [Hochman, see Paragraph 0030].
Regarding claim 22, Klatt, Glatfelter, Kahn and Hochman disclose the invention with respect to claim 21. Klatt further discloses the step of generating a status update of the aircraft [see Paragraph 0046 - discusses that the report is generated, the report indicating tasks completed for maintenance of an aircraft].
Regarding claim 23, Klatt, Glatfelter, Kahn and Hochman disclose the invention with respect to claim 22. Klatt further discloses the step of communicating the status update to at least one of a supervisor, pilot, or owner [see Paragraphs 0045-0046 - discusses that the report is generated for use by aircraft owner and aircraft operator (pilots) and communicated over a network to the reporting application].
Claims 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klatt in view of Glatfelter further in view of Allgair (U.S. Publication No. 2014/0059468 A1) hereinafter Allgair.
Regarding claim 29, Klatt and Glatfelter disclose the invention with respect to claim 28.
However, the combination of Klatt and Glatfelter fails to disclose wherein the inspection dashboard displays timestamps for each status update.
Allgair discloses wherein an inspection dashboard displays timestamps for each status update [see Paragraphs 0045 and 0048 - discusses displaying timestamps for maintenance repair tasks].
Allgair suggests that the timestamps shows period of activity on a maintenance repair task [see Paragraphs 0045 and 0048].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify
the inspection dashboard as taught by Klatt to display timestamps for each status update as taught by Allgair in order to show periods of activity of a maintenance repair task [Allgair, see Paragraphs 0045 and 0048].
Regarding claim 30, Klatt, Glatfelter, and Allgair disclose the invention with respect to claim 29. Klatt further discloses a data storage module for storing collected inspection data locally [see Paragraph 0045 - discusses that a report of the maintenance operation is stored locally on the mobile computing device (personal electronic device)].
Claims 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klatt in view of Glatfelter further in view of Allgair in view of Hochman.
Regarding claim 31, Klatt, Glatfelter, and Allgair disclose the invention with respect to claim 30.
However, the combination of Klatt, Glatfelter, and Allgair fails to disclose a synchronization module for uploading data to a cloud server.
Hochman discloses a synchronization module for uploading data to a cloud server. [see Paragraph 0015 - discusses that collected data is recorded and shared to a cloud based system].
Hochman suggests that storing in a cloud based storage allows for cross referencing and data exchange [see Paragraph 0030].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify
the method as taught by Klatt to upload collected data to a cloud-based server as taught by Hochman in order to allow for cross referencing and data exchange with other collected data [Hochman, see Paragraph 0030].
Regarding claim 32, Klatt, Glatfelter, Allgair and Hochman disclose the invention with respect to claim 31. Klatt further discloses wherein the validation module compares collected data against required standard operating procedure checkpoints [see Paragraph 0049 - discusses determining whether data has been captured during a maintenance operation, if the data has not been captured then the maintenance specialist is prompted to capture data and then the task is updated to have been completed by the maintenance specialist].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shayne M Gilbertson whose telephone number is (571)272-4862. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday - Friday: 10:30 AM - 9:30 PM EST.
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, Christian Chace can be reached at 571-272-4190. 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.
/SHAYNE M. GILBERTSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights