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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 6/30/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anand (US 11,595,932)
As to claim 1 Anand discloses an airport collision avoidance system comprising:
a tow vehicle configured to move an aircraft, the tow vehicle having a first beacon(Column 14 lines 65-Column 15 lines 1-5 “n some embodiments, the system 10 provides a mobile solution for crew chiefs, which are often the users of the remote user devices, by leveraging IoT device technology and related platforms. In some embodiments, the ground equipment items are enabled with geo location Bluetooth beacons. In some embodiments, the plurality of gateways 55, which is an IoT device receiver, detects the location of Bluetooth devices and pushes the location to the cloud (IoT).”);
at least one second beacon associated with at least one object(Column 14 lines 65-Column 15 lines 1-5 “n some embodiments, the system 10 provides a mobile solution for crew chiefs, which are often the users of the remote user devices, by leveraging IoT device technology and related platforms. In some embodiments, the ground equipment items are enabled with geo location Bluetooth beacons. In some embodiments, the plurality of gateways 55, which is an IoT device receiver, detects the location of Bluetooth devices and pushes the location to the cloud (IoT).”); and
one or more processing circuits including one or more processors and one or more memories having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:
form a mesh network connection between the first beacon and the at least one second beacon (Column 19 lines 35-41 “n several example embodiments, any networks and/or one or more portions thereof may be designed to work on any specific architecture. In an example embodiment, one or more portions of any networks may be executed on a single computer, local area networks, client-server networks, wide area networks, internets, hand-held and other portable and wireless devices, and networks.”);
identify relative positionings between the tow vehicle, the aircraft, and the at least one object based on the mesh network connection (Column 9 lines 6-17 “In some embodiments and at the step 140, the GEM application 75 displays the location of nearby, available ground equipment. In one embodiment, the GEM application 75 displays the window 225 as illustrated in FIG. 9 in response to the GEM application 75 receiving an indication that the “Equip Me” button has been selected. The window 225 depicts a map that includes a depiction of a terminal or portion thereof, gate identifiers, aircraft, and equipment indicators. In some embodiments, the equipment indicators include gem icons or other icons that are placed on the map to indicate the location of the equipment relative to the terminal, gates, and aircraft.”); and
at least partially control the tow vehicle based on the relative positionings between the tow vehicle, the aircraft, and the at least one object (Column 14 lines 4-15 “In some embodiments, the GEM application 75 causes a signal to be sent to the equipment instructing the equipment to move itself to the location at which it is needed. For example, if the equipment is a motorized, drivable tug and the tug is equipped with self-driving or autonomous technology, then the GEM application 75 can instruct and/or control the movement of the tug so that the tug drives itself to the needed location. In some embodiments, the GEM application 75 provides the location to the tug with instructions indicating when the tug is needed, and the tug drives itself to the location prior to the time at which it is needed.” Column 9 lines 6-17 “In some embodiments and at the step 140, the GEM application 75 displays the location of nearby, available ground equipment. In one embodiment, the GEM application 75 displays the window 225 as illustrated in FIG. 9 in response to the GEM application 75 receiving an indication that the “Equip Me” button has been selected. The window 225 depicts a map that includes a depiction of a terminal or portion thereof, gate identifiers, aircraft, and equipment indicators. In some embodiments, the equipment indicators include gem icons or other icons that are placed on the map to indicate the location of the equipment relative to the terminal, gates, and aircraft.”).
As to claim 7 Anand discloses an airport collision avoidance system wherein the at least one object is at least one airport object comprising one or more of another tow vehicle, another aircraft, a boarding bridge, a light pole, a luggage transport vehicle, a baggage loader, a cargo loader, a de-icer, a fueling truck, a food truck, a dolly, a stair truck, or a passenger bus (Column 12 lines 52-62).
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 2-6, 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anand (US 11,595,932) in view of Burch (US 2020/0033872)
As to claim 2 Burch teaches an airport collision avoidance system wherein identifying the relative positionings between the tow vehicle, the aircraft, and the at least one object comprises:
identifying a beacon identifier associated with the at least one object (Paragraph 78);
obtaining at least one of location information, orientation information, dimensional information, or shape information associated with the at least one object using the beacon identifier(Paragraph 78); and
identifying the relative positionings between the tow vehicle, the aircraft, and the at least one object using the at least one of the location information, the orientation information, the dimensional information, or the shape information associated with the at least one object(Paragraph 78, 100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to modify Anand to include the teachings identifying relative positioning of the tow vehicle and objects for the purpose of avoiding collisions with objects.
As to claim 3 Burch teaches an airport collision avoidance system wherein the instructions cause the one or more processors to:
create a geofence around one or more of the tow vehicle, the aircraft, or the at least one object(Paragraph 99); and
prevent the tow vehicle and the aircraft from colliding with the at least one object while the tow vehicle is moving the aircraft based on the geofence (Paragraph 99).
As to claim 4 Burch teaches an airport collision avoidance system wherein the instructions cause the one or more processors to create the geofence around the at least one object, and wherein creating the geofence includes:
determining an outer profile of the at least one object based on the one or more of location information, orientation information, dimensional information or shape information associated with the at least one object(Paragraph 99); and
creating the geofence based on the outer profile of the at least one object, the geofence being larger than the outer profile (Paragraph 99).
As to claim 5 Anand discloses an airport collision avoidance system wherein the instructions cause the one or more processors to:
generate a user interface depicting the tow vehicle, the aircraft, and the at least one object based on the relative positionings between the tow vehicle, the aircraft, and the at least one object(Figure 9, Column 22 lines 32- Column 23 lines 1-7); and
display the user interface via a display (Figure 9).
As to claim 6 Burch teaches an airport collision avoidance system wherein the user interface further depicts the geofence (Paragraph 99).
As to claim 8 Burch teaches an airport collision avoidance system wherein instructions cause the one or more processors to:
acquire, via the mesh network connection, movement information associated with the at least one object, the movement information including one or more of a current speed of the at least one object, a current travel direction of the at least one object, or an intended travel route of the at least one object (Paragraph 64-65); and
at least partially control the tow vehicle based on the movement information associated with the at least one object (Paragraph 36).
As to claim 9 Burch teaches an airport collision avoidance system wherein the movement information is received in real-time or near-real-time, and the tow vehicle is at least partially controlled to avoid a collision between the at least one object and both of the tow vehicle and the aircraft (Paragraph 75-76).
As to claim 10 Burch teaches an airport collision avoidance system wherein the instructions cause the one or more processors to, based on the relative positionings between the tow vehicle, the aircraft, and the at least one object, at least one of (i) provide visual feedback to an operator of the tow vehicle or (ii) provide haptic feedback to the operator of the tow vehicle(Paragraph 90).
As to claim 11 Burch teaches an airport collision avoidance system wherein the instructions cause the one or more processors to:
determine a first relative positioning between the tow vehicle and the at least one object based on the mesh network connection(Paragraph 39);
recognize a type of the aircraft being towed by the tow vehicle; determine a second relative positioning between the tow vehicle and the aircraft based on the type of the aircraft (Paragraph 34);
determine a third relative positioning between the aircraft and the at least one object based on the first relative positioning and the second relative positioning(Paragraph 39); and
at least partially control the tow vehicle based on the third relative positioning between the aircraft and the at least one object(Paragraph 39).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IMRAN K MUSTAFA whose telephone number is (571)270-1471. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-5.
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, James J Lee can be reached at 571-270-5965. 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.
IMRAN K. MUSTAFA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3668
/IMRAN K MUSTAFA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
7/21/2026
Prosecution Insights