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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 07/31/2025. Claims 1-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
As per claim 1
Step 1: The claim is directed to a process as it recites (a method for aircraft trajectory planning).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A method for aircraft trajectory planning, comprising:
accessing, with a computing system comprising one or more computing devices on- board an aircraft, data corresponding to a global flight trajectory for the aircraft from a first location to a second location;
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the global flight trajectory towards the second location;
accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding a current position of the aircraft as the aircraft flies along the global flight trajectory towards the second location;
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to an updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location using an objective function, wherein the computing system repeats computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory at a frequency no less than fifty millihertz as the aircraft flies towards the second location; and
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the updated global flight trajectory.
The recited limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as this step fall within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because it covers a concept performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. The nominal recitation of the computing system does not take the limitation out of the mental process grouping. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea. Computing data corresponding to autonomous control instructions is not sufficient to claim vehicle control, rather it indicates intended use.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A method for aircraft trajectory planning, comprising:
accessing, with a computing system comprising one or more computing devices on- board an aircraft, data corresponding to a global flight trajectory for the aircraft from a first location to a second location;
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the global flight trajectory towards the second location;
accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding a current position of the aircraft as the aircraft flies along the global flight trajectory towards the second location;
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to an updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location using an objective function, wherein the computing system repeats computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory at a frequency no less than fifty millihertz as the aircraft flies towards the second location; and
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the updated global flight trajectory.
The instructions for accessing data corresponding to a global flight trajectory and accessing data corresponding a current position (i.e., as a general means for accessing…data corresponding to a global flight trajectory and accessing…data corresponding a current position), amount to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the computing system is recited at a high level of generality and merely applies the exception using generic computer components to automate the abstract idea. Further, the additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to utilize generic processors to determine vehicle routes. Further the mere collection or receipt of data for the purposes of making determinations, such as formulating an understanding of a vehicle’s behavior to determine where it should travel to next, is also well understood and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103. For these reasons, claim 1 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
As per claims 2-10
These method claims further define the abstract ideas of the mental processes illustrated in claim 1, they do not recite any additional elements or other limitations that transform the determination of vehicle routes, and these elements are well-understood, routine and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103.
As per claim 11
Step 1: The claim is directed to a process as it recites (a method for aircraft trajectory planning).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A method for aircraft trajectory planning, comprising:
computing, with a computing system comprising one or more computing devices on- board an aircraft, a precursor flight trajectory for an aircraft from a current position to a final precursor waypoint;
computing, with the computing system, a global flight trajectory for the aircraft from a current position to a destination;
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the global flight trajectory;
accessing, with the computing device, data corresponding to a potential conflict around the aircraft;
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to an updated precursor flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the final precursor waypoint to avoid the potential conflict;
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to an updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft based on the updated precursor flight trajectory; and
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the updated global flight trajectory.
The recited limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as this step fall within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because it covers a concept performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. The nominal recitation of the computing system does not take the limitation out of the mental process grouping. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea. Computing data corresponding to autonomous control instructions is not sufficient to claim vehicle control, rather it indicates intended use.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A method for aircraft trajectory planning, comprising:
computing, with a computing system comprising one or more computing devices on- board an aircraft, a precursor flight trajectory for an aircraft from a current position to a final precursor waypoint;
computing, with the computing system, a global flight trajectory for the aircraft from a current position to a destination;
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the global flight trajectory;
accessing, with the computing device, data corresponding to a potential conflict around the aircraft;
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to an updated precursor flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the final precursor waypoint to avoid the potential conflict;
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to an updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft based on the updated precursor flight trajectory; and
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the updated global flight trajectory.
The instructions for accessing data corresponding to a potential conflict (i.e., as a general means for accessing…data corresponding to a potential conflict), amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the computing system is recited at a high level of generality and merely applies the exception using generic computer components to automate the abstract idea. Further, the additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to utilize generic processors to determine vehicle routes. Further the mere collection or receipt of data for the purposes of making determinations, such as formulating an understanding of a vehicle’s behavior to determine where it should travel to next, is also well understood and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103. For these reasons, claim 11 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
As per claims 12-19
These method claims further define the abstract ideas of the mental processes illustrated in claim 11, they do not recite any additional elements or other limitations that transform the determination of vehicle routes, and these elements are well-understood, routine and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103.
As per claim 20
Step 1: The claim is directed to an apparatus as it recites (an aircraft).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
An aircraft, comprising:
one or more processors located on-board the aircraft; and
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media located on-board the aircraft, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to perform operations, the operations comprising
computing a precursor flight trajectory for an aircraft from a current position to a final precursor waypoint,
computing a global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to a destination,
computing data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the precursor flight trajectory and the global flight trajectory,
accessing data corresponding to a potential conflict around the aircraft,
computing data corresponding to an updated precursor flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the final precursor waypoint to avoid the potential conflict,
computing data corresponding to an updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft based on the updated precursor flight trajectory, and
computing data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the updated precursor flight trajectory and the updated global flight trajectory.
The recited limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as this step fall within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because it covers a concept performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. The nominal recitation of the generic processors does not take the limitation out of the mental process grouping. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea. Computing data corresponding to autonomous control instructions is not sufficient to claim vehicle control, rather it indicates intended use.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
An aircraft, comprising:
one or more processors located on-board the aircraft; and
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media located on-board the aircraft, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to perform operations, the operations comprising
computing a precursor flight trajectory for an aircraft from a current position to a final precursor waypoint,
computing a global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to a destination,
computing data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the precursor flight trajectory and the global flight trajectory,
accessing data corresponding to a potential conflict around the aircraft,
computing data corresponding to an updated precursor flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the final precursor waypoint to avoid the potential conflict,
computing data corresponding to an updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft based on the updated precursor flight trajectory, and
computing data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the updated precursor flight trajectory and the updated global flight trajectory.
The instructions for accessing data corresponding to a potential conflict around the aircraft (i.e., as a general means for accessing data corresponding to a potential conflict around the aircraft), amount to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the generic processors are recited at a high level of generality and merely applies the exception using generic computer components to automate the abstract idea. Further, the additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to utilize generic processors to determine vehicle routes. Further the mere collection or receipt of data for the purposes of making determinations, such as formulating an understanding of a vehicle’s behavior to determine where it should travel to next, is also well understood and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103. For these reasons, claim 20 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Han, US-20190339721-A1, in view of Linscott et al., US-20190361443-A1, hereinafter referred to as Han, and Linscott.
As per claim 1
Han discloses [a] method for aircraft trajectory planning, comprising (flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle - Han ¶7):
accessing, with a computing system comprising one or more computing devices on- board an aircraft, data corresponding to a global flight trajectory for the aircraft from a first location to a second location (developing a flight path for the unmanned aerial vehicle based on coordinates of a target position and current coordinates; and flying according to the developed flight path, obtaining an initial flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle based on the coordinates (xa1 , ya1 ) of the starting point and the coordinates (xb1 , yb1 ) of the end point - Han ¶16 & ¶17);
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the global flight trajectory towards the second location (developing a flight path for the unmanned aerial vehicle based on coordinates of a target position and current coordinates; and flying according to the developed flight path - Han ¶16);
accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding a current position of the aircraft as the aircraft flies along the global flight trajectory towards the second location (obtaining, at every interval of a predetermined time T, a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle in a straight flight path section - Han ¶7);
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to an updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location using an objective function, wherein the computing system repeats computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory (obtaining, at every interval of a predetermined time T, a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle in a straight flight path section; and correcting a flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle according to a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle obtained at a preceding time, a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle obtained at a current time, and an end position of the straight flight path section encompassing the position of the unmanned aerial vehicle at the current time - Han ¶7);
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the updated global flight trajectory (adjusts the flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle, thereby correcting the flight direction by means of the unmanned aerial vehicle by itself. - Han ¶24).
Han does not specifically disclose [update the vehicle trajectory] at a frequency no less than fifty millihertz as the aircraft flies towards the second location.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Linscott teaches [update the vehicle trajectory] at a frequency no less than fifty millihertz as the [vehicle moves] towards the second location (trajectory module 108 can have a third frequency of operation (e.g., f3). In at least one example, the first frequency can be the lowest frequency (e.g., 10 Hertz) and the third frequency can be the highest frequency (e.g., 100 Hertz)…a time period in which individual modules need to process and output data - Linscott ¶14).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Linscott teaches methods, apparatuses, and systems for generating and executing trajectories to control autonomous vehicles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with methods, apparatuses, and systems for generating and executing trajectories to control autonomous vehicles, as taught by Linscott, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide enhanced safety, redundancy, and optimization, see Linscott ¶10 for details, and because the principle of frequently updating the autonomous vehicle’s trajectory can be applied to aircraft as well, see Linscott ¶11 for details.
As per claim 2
Han further discloses wherein: accessing the data corresponding to the current position of the aircraft comprises accessing the data corresponding to the current position of the aircraft from a positioning system on-board the aircraft; and the positioning system on-board the aircraft comprises one or more of an avionic system of the aircraft, an automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) system, and a global positioning system (GPS) (the flight path (high dynamic GPS receiver) is developed through the current GPS and the target GPS - Han ¶63).
As per claim 3
Han further discloses wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory when the current position of the aircraft deviates from the global flight trajectory (determines the degree of deviation of the current position according to the position of the unmanned aerial vehicle obtained at the preceding time…adjusts the flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle, thereby correcting the flight direction by means of the unmanned aerial vehicle by itself. - Han ¶24).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable Han, in view of Linscott, as per claim 1, and further in view of Nichols et al., US-20060106506-A1, and Tate, US-20180253110-A1, hereinafter referred to as Nichols, and Tate.
As per claim 4
Han does not specifically disclose wherein: accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory comprises accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the first location to the second location along a plurality of waypoints between the first and second locations; computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location such that the updated global flight trajectory passes through any remaining unpassed waypoints of the plurality of waypoints.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Nichols teaches wherein: accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory comprises accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the first location to the second location along a plurality of waypoints between the first and second locations; computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location such that the updated global flight trajectory passes through any remaining unpassed waypoints of the plurality of waypoints (determining a route for an unmanned air vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: (a) identifying a destination point; (b) constructing a first vector from a location of the aircraft to the destination point; (c) determining if the first vector passes through a no-fly zone…establishing a waypoint near the tangent point, constructing a third vector from a waypoint to the destination point…using additional vectors until a vector to the endpoint is constructed that does not pass through a no-fly zone - Nichols Fig 5 (106, 138,140, 148) + ¶6).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Nichols teaches control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies, as taught by Nichols, with a reasonable expectation of success for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route, see Nichols ¶7 for details.
Han does not specifically disclose one or more of the waypoints comprises one or more of a specified airspeed, a specified altitude, a specified rate of climb, and a specified rate of descent for the aircraft at each of the one or more of the waypoints.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Tate teaches one or more of the waypoints comprises one or more of a specified airspeed, a specified altitude, a specified rate of climb, and a specified rate of descent for the aircraft at each of the one or more of the waypoints (planned route is formed by a plurality of waypoints of a route along which the drone will fly. Each waypoint has the information of latitude, longitude, and altitude. The drone autonomously flies to follow the waypoints in order - Tate ¶24).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Tate teaches a device that controls the flight of an unmanned aerial vehicle in accordance with a planned route on the basis of a measured position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with a device that controls the flight of an unmanned aerial vehicle in accordance with a planned route on the basis of a measured position, as taught by Tate, with a reasonable expectation of success to enable the unmanned aerial vehicle to continue the flight with the measurement accuracy secured, see Tate ¶8 for details.
As per claim 5
Han does not specifically disclose wherein: accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory comprises accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the first location to the second location along a plurality of waypoints between the first and second locations; computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location such that the updated global flight trajectory bypasses a next unpassed waypoint of the plurality of waypoints.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Nichols teaches wherein: accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory comprises accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the first location to the second location along a plurality of waypoints between the first and second locations; computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location such that the updated global flight trajectory bypasses a next unpassed waypoint of the plurality of waypoints (determining a route for an unmanned air vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: (a) identifying a destination point; (b) constructing a first vector from a location of the aircraft to the destination point; (c) determining if the first vector passes through a no-fly zone…establishing a waypoint near the tangent point, constructing a third vector from a waypoint to the destination point…using additional vectors until a vector to the endpoint is constructed that does not pass through a no-fly zone, To reach the new end point, the UAV must construct a route to fly from waypoint 106 to the initial approach fix (IAF) 126. To determine a new route, the ACG generates a vector 128 from waypoint 106 to the IAF. Since this vector passes through both no-fly zones, the UAV cannot follow this vector to the IAF. Thus the ACG must search for alternate routes. The search for alternate routes begins by generating vectors 130 and 132 to tangent points 134 and 136 on the first no-fly zone 120. Candidate waypoints 138 and 140 are established near the ends of these vectors., ACG generates a vector 144 from waypoint 138 to a tangent point 146 on no-fly zone 122 and establishes a new waypoint 148. - Nichols Fig 5 (106, 138,140, 148) + ¶6 & ¶22 & ¶23).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Nichols teaches control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies, as taught by Nichols, with a reasonable expectation of success for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route, see Nichols ¶7 for details.
Han does not specifically disclose one or more of the waypoints comprises one or more of a specified airspeed, a specified altitude, a specified rate of climb, and a specified rate of descent for the aircraft at each of the one or more of the waypoints.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Tate teaches one or more of the waypoints comprises one or more of a specified airspeed, a specified altitude, a specified rate of climb, and a specified rate of descent for the aircraft at each of the one or more of the waypoints (planned route is formed by a plurality of waypoints of a route along which the drone will fly. Each waypoint has the information of latitude, longitude, and altitude. The drone autonomously flies to follow the waypoints in order - Tate ¶24).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Tate teaches a device that controls the flight of an unmanned aerial vehicle in accordance with a planned route on the basis of a measured position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with a device that controls the flight of an unmanned aerial vehicle in accordance with a planned route on the basis of a measured position, as taught by Tate, with a reasonable expectation of success to enable the unmanned aerial vehicle to continue the flight with the measurement accuracy secured, see Tate ¶8 for details.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable Han, in view of Linscott, as per claim 1, and further in view of Nichols.
As per claim 6
Han does not specifically disclose wherein the objective function evaluates one or more of total flight time, energy consumption, passenger comfort requirements, instantaneous path curvatures, and total control effort.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Nichols teaches wherein the objective function evaluates one or more of total flight time, energy consumption, passenger comfort requirements, instantaneous path curvatures, and total control effort (determining a route for an unmanned air vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: (a) identifying a destination point, build flight routes to return to the main operating base…uses a performance modeler 40 to validate the route with respect to energy requirements, time, and fuel burned - Nichols Fig 5 (106, 138,140, 148) + ¶6 & ¶16).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Nichols teaches control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies, as taught by Nichols, with a reasonable expectation of success for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route, see Nichols ¶7 for details.
As per claim 7
Han does not specifically disclose further comprising accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to one or more no-fly zones for the aircraft, wherein: accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory comprises accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the first location to the second location along a plurality of waypoints between the first and second locations; and computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location based on the plurality of waypoints and the one or more no-fly zones.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Nichols teaches further comprising accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to one or more no-fly zones for the aircraft, wherein: accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory comprises accessing the data corresponding to the global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the first location to the second location along a plurality of waypoints between the first and second locations; and computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location based on the plurality of waypoints and the one or more no-fly zones (determining a route for an unmanned air vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: (a) identifying a destination point; (b) constructing a first vector from a location of the aircraft to the destination point; (c) determining if the first vector passes through a no-fly zone…establishing a waypoint near the tangent point, constructing a third vector from a waypoint to the destination point…using additional vectors until a vector to the endpoint is constructed that does not pass through a no-fly zone, To reach the new end point, the UAV must construct a route to fly from waypoint 106 to the initial approach fix (IAF) 126. To determine a new route, the ACG generates a vector 128 from waypoint 106 to the IAF. Since this vector passes through both no-fly zones, the UAV cannot follow this vector to the IAF. Thus the ACG must search for alternate routes. The search for alternate routes begins by generating vectors 130 and 132 to tangent points 134 and 136 on the first no-fly zone 120. Candidate waypoints 138 and 140 are established near the ends of these vectors., ACG generates a vector 144 from waypoint 138 to a tangent point 146 on no-fly zone 122 and establishes a new waypoint 148. - Nichols Fig 5 (106, 138,140, 148) + ¶6 & ¶22 & ¶23).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Nichols teaches control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies, as taught by Nichols, with a reasonable expectation of success for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route, see Nichols ¶7 for details.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable Han, in view of Linscott, and Nichols, as per claim 7, and further in view of Zeng et al., US-20170132937-A1, hereinafter referred to as Zeng.
As per claim 8
Han does not specifically disclose wherein accessing the data corresponding to the one or more no-fly zones comprises accessing the data corresponding to the one or more no-fly zones from a user interface.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Zeng teaches wherein accessing the data corresponding to the one or more no-fly zones comprises accessing the data corresponding to the one or more no-fly zones from a user interface (setting method is used to send information of the no-fly zone to a locator device of the unmanned aerial vehicles or a hand-held terminal of the users of the unmanned aerial vehicle when an emergency happens - Zeng ¶11).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle. Zeng teaches a method for setting a no-fly zone for unmanned aerial vehicles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with a method for setting a no-fly zone for unmanned aerial vehicles, as taught by Zeng, with a reasonable expectation of success to avoid fighting in the no-fly zone, for protecting the privacy of the nominal users or avoiding affecting work of the emergency, see Zeng ¶8 for details.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable Han, in view of Linscott, and Nichols, as per claim 7, and further in view of Dadkhah Tehrani et al., US-20220269290-A1, hereinafter referred to as Dadkhah Tehrani.
As per claim 9
Han does not specifically disclose further comprising accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to one or more updated no-fly zones for the aircraft, wherein: computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location based on the plurality of waypoints and the one or more updated no-fly zones.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Dadkhah Tehrani teaches further comprising accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to one or more updated no-fly zones for the aircraft, wherein: computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location based on the plurality of waypoints and the one or more updated no-fly zones (static no-fly zones (NFZs), moving NFZs (MNFZs)…global planner module 202 is configured to insert free waypoints, check the collision of route segments in the global route against static no-fly zones (NFZ), moving NFZs (MNFZs), and terrain. MNFZs are intended to capture bad atmospheric conditions such as turbulence, tornados, storms, etc…The moving NFZs can be modeled as 2D polygons (which can be convex or concave) with a speed and heading (VMNFZ, ΨMNFZ) - Dadkhah Tehrani Fig. 5 + ¶53 & ¶56).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle. Dadkhah Tehrani teaches autonomous global route planning among no-fly zones and terrain.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with autonomous global route planning among no-fly zones and terrain, as taught by Dadkhah Tehrani, with a reasonable expectation of success for computing safe and dynamically feasible motion plans from a current vehicle state to a goal location, see Dadkhah Tehrani ¶44 for details.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable Han, in view of Linscott, as per claim 1, and further in view of Lacombe et al., US-20140200752-A9, hereinafter referred to as Lacombe.
As per claim 10
Han does not specifically disclose further comprising: accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to a plurality of waypoints between the first and second locations; and accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to wind patterns between the first and second locations, wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location based on the plurality of waypoints and the wind patterns.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Lacombe teaches further comprising: accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to a plurality of waypoints between the first and second locations; and accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to wind patterns between the first and second locations, wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the second location based on the plurality of waypoints and the wind patterns (positioning, guidance and navigation management systems, the aircraft follows the programmed trajectory… wind data for each waypoint of the aircraft's forecast nominal route, calculating an aircraft flight plan, the said flight plan being made up of a route comprising a plurality of waypoints interconnected by segments and each of the waypoints being associated with meteorological prediction data…acquisition of the meteorological prediction data related to the waypoints…alternative routes while in flight, and guiding the aircraft on a trajectory, wind data for the waypoints surrounding the nominal route, when the navigation management system computes a new flight plan for an alternative route, it uses as input data the wind data existing in the system for these new waypoints, compute a wind profile for this new route…determining a wind profile…executes all the steps 2 to 6 to determine a new flight plan according to this alternative route - Lacombe ¶6 & ¶12 & ¶21 & ¶56).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle. Dadkhah Lacombe teaches schemes for calculating an aircraft's flight plan prediction data, for calculating the flight plan and for modelling the profile of the winds on the navigation management system onboard the aircraft.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with schemes for calculating an aircraft's flight plan prediction data, for calculating the flight plan and for modelling the profile of the winds on the navigation management system onboard the aircraft, as taught by Lacombe, with a reasonable expectation of success to improve flight prediction systems so as to guarantee the safety but also the economic viability of air transport, see Lacombe ¶3 for details.
Claims 11-15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Han, in view of Nichols.
As per claim 11
Han discloses [a] method for aircraft trajectory planning, comprising (flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle - Han ¶7):
computing, with a computing system comprising one or more computing devices on- board an aircraft, a precursor flight trajectory for an aircraft from a current position to a final precursor waypoint (developing a flight path for the unmanned aerial vehicle based on coordinates of a target position and current coordinates; and flying according to the developed flight path, obtaining an initial flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle based on the coordinates (xa1 , ya1 ) of the starting point and the coordinates (xb1 , yb1 ) of the end point - Han ¶16 & ¶17);
computing, with the computing system, a global flight trajectory for the aircraft from a current position to a destination (developing a flight path for the unmanned aerial vehicle based on coordinates of a target position and current coordinates; and flying according to the developed flight path, obtaining an initial flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle based on the coordinates (xa1 , ya1 ) of the starting point and the coordinates (xb1 , yb1 ) of the end point - Han ¶16 & ¶17);
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the global flight trajectory (developing a flight path for the unmanned aerial vehicle based on coordinates of a target position and current coordinates; and flying according to the developed flight path - Han ¶16);
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to an updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft based on the updated precursor flight trajectory (obtaining, at every interval of a predetermined time T, a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle in a straight flight path section; and correcting a flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle according to a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle obtained at a preceding time, a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle obtained at a current time, and an end position of the straight flight path section encompassing the position of the unmanned aerial vehicle at the current time - Han ¶7);
computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the updated global flight trajectory (adjusts the flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle, thereby correcting the flight direction by means of the unmanned aerial vehicle by itself. - Han ¶24).
Han does not specifically disclose accessing, with the computing device, data corresponding to a potential conflict around the aircraft; computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to an updated precursor flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the final precursor waypoint to avoid the potential conflict.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Nichols teaches accessing, with the computing device, data corresponding to a potential conflict around the aircraft; computing, with the computing system, data corresponding to an updated precursor flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the final precursor waypoint to avoid the potential conflict (determining a route for an unmanned air vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: (a) identifying a destination point; (b) constructing a first vector from a location of the aircraft to the destination point; (c) determining if the first vector passes through a no-fly zone…establishing a waypoint near the tangent point, constructing a third vector from a waypoint to the destination point…using additional vectors until a vector to the endpoint is constructed that does not pass through a no-fly zone, To reach the new end point, the UAV must construct a route to fly from waypoint 106 to the initial approach fix (IAF) 126. To determine a new route, the ACG generates a vector 128 from waypoint 106 to the IAF. Since this vector passes through both no-fly zones, the UAV cannot follow this vector to the IAF. Thus the ACG must search for alternate routes. The search for alternate routes begins by generating vectors 130 and 132 to tangent points 134 and 136 on the first no-fly zone 120. Candidate waypoints 138 and 140 are established near the ends of these vectors., ACG generates a vector 144 from waypoint 138 to a tangent point 146 on no-fly zone 122 and establishes a new waypoint 148. - Nichols Fig 5 (106, 138,140, 148) + ¶6 & ¶22 & ¶23).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Nichols teaches control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies, as taught by Nichols, with a reasonable expectation of success for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route, see Nichols ¶7 for details.
As per claim 12
Han further discloses wherein a length of the precursor flight trajectory between the aircraft and the final precursor waypoint varies proportionally with an airspeed of the aircraft (developing a flight path for the unmanned aerial vehicle based on coordinates of a target position and current coordinates; and flying according to the developed flight path, obtaining an initial flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle based on the coordinates (xa1 , ya1 ) of the starting point and the coordinates (xb1 , yb1 ) of the end point - Han ¶16 & ¶17 – Examiner reasons that the Applicant is making reference to the distance = speed x time equation in this claim).
As per claim 13
Han further discloses further comprising accessing data corresponding to the current position of the aircraft from a positioning system on-board the aircraft prior to computing the data corresponding to the updated precursor flight trajectory, wherein the positioning system on-board the aircraft comprises one or more of an avionic system of the aircraft, an automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) system, and a global positioning system (GPS) (the flight path (high dynamic GPS receiver) is developed through the current GPS and the target GPS - Han ¶63).
As per claim 14
Han does not specifically disclose wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to the destination along a plurality of waypoints between the final precursor waypoint and the destination.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Nichols teaches wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to the destination along a plurality of waypoints between the final precursor waypoint and the destination (determining a route for an unmanned air vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: (a) identifying a destination point; (b) constructing a first vector from a location of the aircraft to the destination point; (c) determining if the first vector passes through a no-fly zone…establishing a waypoint near the tangent point, constructing a third vector from a waypoint to the destination point…using additional vectors until a vector to the endpoint is constructed that does not pass through a no-fly zone, To reach the new end point, the UAV must construct a route to fly from waypoint 106 to the initial approach fix (IAF) 126. To determine a new route, the ACG generates a vector 128 from waypoint 106 to the IAF. Since this vector passes through both no-fly zones, the UAV cannot follow this vector to the IAF. Thus the ACG must search for alternate routes. The search for alternate routes begins by generating vectors 130 and 132 to tangent points 134 and 136 on the first no-fly zone 120. Candidate waypoints 138 and 140 are established near the ends of these vectors., ACG generates a vector 144 from waypoint 138 to a tangent point 146 on no-fly zone 122 and establishes a new waypoint 148. - Nichols Fig. 5 (106, 138,140, 148) + ¶6 & ¶22 & ¶23).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Nichols teaches control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies, as taught by Nichols, with a reasonable expectation of success for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route, see Nichols ¶7 for details.
As per claim 15
Han does not specifically disclose wherein one or both of: computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to the destination such that the updated global flight trajectory passes through any remaining unpassed waypoints of the plurality of waypoints; and computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to the destination such that the updated global flight trajectory bypasses a next unpassed waypoint of the plurality of waypoints.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Nichols teaches wherein one or both of: computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to the destination such that the updated global flight trajectory passes through any remaining unpassed waypoints of the plurality of waypoints; and computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to the destination such that the updated global flight trajectory bypasses a next unpassed waypoint of the plurality of waypoints (determining a route for an unmanned air vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: (a) identifying a destination point; (b) constructing a first vector from a location of the aircraft to the destination point; (c) determining if the first vector passes through a no-fly zone…establishing a waypoint near the tangent point, constructing a third vector from a waypoint to the destination point…using additional vectors until a vector to the endpoint is constructed that does not pass through a no-fly zone, To reach the new end point, the UAV must construct a route to fly from waypoint 106 to the initial approach fix (IAF) 126. To determine a new route, the ACG generates a vector 128 from waypoint 106 to the IAF. Since this vector passes through both no-fly zones, the UAV cannot follow this vector to the IAF. Thus the ACG must search for alternate routes. The search for alternate routes begins by generating vectors 130 and 132 to tangent points 134 and 136 on the first no-fly zone 120. Candidate waypoints 138 and 140 are established near the ends of these vectors., ACG generates a vector 144 from waypoint 138 to a tangent point 146 on no-fly zone 122 and establishes a new waypoint 148. - Nichols Fig 5 (106, 138,140, 148) + ¶6 & ¶22 & ¶23).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Nichols teaches control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies, as taught by Nichols, with a reasonable expectation of success for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route, see Nichols ¶7 for details.
As per claim 17
Han does not specifically disclose wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the updated global flight trajectory using an objective function that evaluates one or more of total flight time, energy consumption, passenger comfort requirements, instantaneous path curvatures, and total control effort.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Nichols teaches wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the updated global flight trajectory using an objective function that evaluates one or more of total flight time, energy consumption, passenger comfort requirements, instantaneous path curvatures, and total control effort (determining a route for an unmanned air vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: (a) identifying a destination point, build flight routes to return to the main operating base…uses a performance modeler 40 to validate the route with respect to energy requirements, time, and fuel burned - Nichols Fig 5 (106, 138,140, 148) + ¶6 & ¶16).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Nichols teaches control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies, as taught by Nichols, with a reasonable expectation of success for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route, see Nichols ¶7 for details.
As per claim 20
Han discloses [a]n aircraft, comprising (flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle - Han ¶7):
computing a precursor flight trajectory for an aircraft from a current position to a final precursor waypoint (developing a flight path for the unmanned aerial vehicle based on coordinates of a target position and current coordinates; and flying according to the developed flight path, obtaining an initial flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle based on the coordinates (xa1, ya1) of the starting point and the coordinates (xb1, yb1) of the end point - Han ¶16 & ¶17);
computing a global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to a destination (developing a flight path for the unmanned aerial vehicle based on coordinates of a target position and current coordinates; and flying according to the developed flight path, obtaining an initial flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle based on the coordinates (xa1 , ya1 ) of the starting point and the coordinates (xb1 , yb1 ) of the end point - Han ¶16 & ¶17);
computing data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the precursor flight trajectory and the global flight trajectory (developing a flight path for the unmanned aerial vehicle based on coordinates of a target position and current coordinates; and flying according to the developed flight path - Han ¶16);
computing data corresponding to an updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft based on the updated precursor flight trajectory (obtaining, at every interval of a predetermined time T, a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle in a straight flight path section; and correcting a flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle according to a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle obtained at a preceding time, a position of the unmanned aerial vehicle obtained at a current time, and an end position of the straight flight path section encompassing the position of the unmanned aerial vehicle at the current time - Han ¶7);
computing data corresponding to autonomous control instructions for the aircraft to fly along the updated precursor flight trajectory and the updated global flight trajectory (adjusts the flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle, thereby correcting the flight direction by means of the unmanned aerial vehicle by itself. - Han ¶24).
Han does not specifically disclose one or more processors located on-board the aircraft;
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media located on-board the aircraft, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to perform operations, the operations comprising;
accessing data corresponding to a potential conflict around the aircraft, computing data corresponding to an updated precursor flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the final precursor waypoint to avoid the potential conflict.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Nichols teaches one or more processors located on-board the aircraft (a first automatic contingency generator for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route - Nichols + ¶7);
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media located on-board the aircraft, the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that are executable by the one or more processors to perform operations, the operations comprising (ACG software can exist both on the UAV - Nichols ¶18);
accessing data corresponding to a potential conflict around the aircraft, computing data corresponding to an updated precursor flight trajectory for the aircraft from the current position to the final precursor waypoint to avoid the potential conflict (determining a route for an unmanned air vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: (a) identifying a destination point; (b) constructing a first vector from a location of the aircraft to the destination point; (c) determining if the first vector passes through a no-fly zone…establishing a waypoint near the tangent point, constructing a third vector from a waypoint to the destination point…using additional vectors until a vector to the endpoint is constructed that does not pass through a no-fly zone, To reach the new end point, the UAV must construct a route to fly from waypoint 106 to the initial approach fix (IAF) 126. To determine a new route, the ACG generates a vector 128 from waypoint 106 to the IAF. Since this vector passes through both no-fly zones, the UAV cannot follow this vector to the IAF. Thus the ACG must search for alternate routes. The search for alternate routes begins by generating vectors 130 and 132 to tangent points 134 and 136 on the first no-fly zone 120. Candidate waypoints 138 and 140 are established near the ends of these vectors., ACG generates a vector 144 from waypoint 138 to a tangent point 146 on no-fly zone 122 and establishes a new waypoint 148. - Nichols Fig 5 (106, 138,140, 148) + ¶6 & ¶22 & ¶23).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Nichols teaches control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies, as taught by Nichols, with a reasonable expectation of success for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route, see Nichols ¶7 for details.
Claims 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable Han, in view of Nichols, as per claim 15, and further in view of Tate.
As per claim 16
Han does not specifically disclose wherein one or more of the waypoints comprises one or more of a specified airspeed, a specified altitude, a specified rate of climb, and a specified rate of descent for the aircraft at each of the one or more of the waypoints.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Tate teaches wherein one or more of the waypoints comprises one or more of a specified airspeed, a specified altitude, a specified rate of climb, and a specified rate of descent for the aircraft at each of the one or more of the waypoints (planned route is formed by a plurality of waypoints of a route along which the drone will fly. Each waypoint has the information of latitude, longitude, and altitude. The drone autonomously flies to follow the waypoints in order - Tate ¶24).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Tate teaches a device that controls the flight of an unmanned aerial vehicle in accordance with a planned route on the basis of a measured position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with a device that controls the flight of an unmanned aerial vehicle in accordance with a planned route on the basis of a measured position, as taught by Tate, with a reasonable expectation of success to enable the unmanned aerial vehicle to continue the flight with the measurement accuracy secured, see Tate ¶8 for details.
Claims 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable Han, in view of Nichols, as per claim 11, and further in view of Linscott.
As per claim 18
Han further discloses wherein the computing system repeats computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory (adjusts the flight direction of the unmanned aerial vehicle, thereby correcting the flight direction by means of the unmanned aerial vehicle by itself. - Han ¶24).
Han does not specifically disclose further comprising: accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to a plurality of waypoints between the final precursor waypoint and the destination; and accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to one or more no-fly zones for the aircraft, wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory based on the plurality of waypoints and the one or more no-fly zones.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Nichols teaches further comprising: accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to a plurality of waypoints between the final precursor waypoint and the destination; and accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to one or more no-fly zones for the aircraft, wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory based on the plurality of waypoints and the one or more no-fly zones (determining a route for an unmanned air vehicle, the method comprising the steps of: (a) identifying a destination point; (b) constructing a first vector from a location of the aircraft to the destination point; (c) determining if the first vector passes through a no-fly zone…establishing a waypoint near the tangent point, constructing a third vector from a waypoint to the destination point…using additional vectors until a vector to the endpoint is constructed that does not pass through a no-fly zone, To reach the new end point, the UAV must construct a route to fly from waypoint 106 to the initial approach fix (IAF) 126. To determine a new route, the ACG generates a vector 128 from waypoint 106 to the IAF. Since this vector passes through both no-fly zones, the UAV cannot follow this vector to the IAF. Thus the ACG must search for alternate routes. The search for alternate routes begins by generating vectors 130 and 132 to tangent points 134 and 136 on the first no-fly zone 120. Candidate waypoints 138 and 140 are established near the ends of these vectors., ACG generates a vector 144 from waypoint 138 to a tangent point 146 on no-fly zone 122 and establishes a new waypoint 148. - Nichols Fig 5 (106, 138,140, 148) + ¶6 & ¶22 & ¶23).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Nichols teaches control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with control systems that provide for automatic control of an aircraft based on the occurrence of various in-flight contingencies, as taught by Nichols, with a reasonable expectation of success for automatically determining a contingent air vehicle route, see Nichols ¶7 for details.
Han does not specifically disclose [update the vehicle trajectory] at a frequency no less than fifty millihertz as the aircraft flies towards the destination.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Linscott teaches [update the vehicle trajectory] at a frequency no less than fifty millihertz as the [vehicle moves] towards the destination (trajectory module 108 can have a third frequency of operation (e.g., f3). In at least one example, the first frequency can be the lowest frequency (e.g., 10 Hertz) and the third frequency can be the highest frequency (e.g., 100 Hertz)…a time period in which individual modules need to process and output data - Linscott ¶14).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle.
Linscott teaches methods, apparatuses, and systems for generating and executing trajectories to control autonomous vehicles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with methods, apparatuses, and systems for generating and executing trajectories to control autonomous vehicles, as taught by Linscott, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide enhanced safety, redundancy, and optimization, see Linscott ¶10 for details, and because the principle of frequently updating the autonomous vehicle’s trajectory can be applied to aircraft as well, see Linscott ¶11 for details.
Claims 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable Han, in view of Nichols, and Linscott, as per claim 18, and further in view of Lacombe.
As per claim 19
Han does not specifically disclose further comprising: accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to a plurality of waypoints between the final precursor waypoint and the destination; and accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to wind patterns, wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to the destination based on the plurality of waypoints and the wind patterns.
Han discloses an updating an aircraft’s trajectory. However, Lacombe teaches further comprising: accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to a plurality of waypoints between the final precursor waypoint and the destination; and accessing, with the computing system, data corresponding to wind patterns, wherein computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory comprises computing the data corresponding to the updated global flight trajectory for the aircraft from the final precursor waypoint to the destination based on the plurality of waypoints and the wind patterns (positioning, guidance and navigation management systems, the aircraft follows the programmed trajectory…wind data for each waypoint of the aircraft's forecast nominal route, calculating an aircraft flight plan, the said flight plan being made up of a route comprising a plurality of waypoints interconnected by segments and each of the waypoints being associated with meteorological prediction data…acquisition of the meteorological prediction data related to the waypoints…alternative routes while in flight, and guiding the aircraft on a trajectory, wind data for the waypoints surrounding the nominal route, when the navigation management system computes a new flight plan for an alternative route, it uses as input data the wind data existing in the system for these new waypoints, compute a wind profile for this new route…determining a wind profile…executes all the steps 2 to 6 to determine a new flight plan according to this alternative route - Lacombe ¶6 & ¶12 & ¶21 & ¶56).
Han discloses a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle. Dadkhah Lacombe teaches schemes for calculating an aircraft's flight plan prediction data, for calculating the flight plan and for modelling the profile of the winds on the navigation management system onboard the aircraft.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Han, a flight direction correction method for an unmanned aerial vehicle, with schemes for calculating an aircraft's flight plan prediction data, for calculating the flight plan and for modelling the profile of the winds on the navigation management system onboard the aircraft, as taught by Lacombe, with a reasonable expectation of success to improve flight prediction systems so as to guarantee the safety but also the economic viability of air transport, see Lacombe ¶3 for details.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIS ASIM SHAIKH whose telephone number is (571)272-6426. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:30 M-F 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, Fadey S. Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
/F.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Thomas Ingram/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
