Second Office Action

System and Method For Safely Flying Unmanned Aerial Vehicles in Civilian Airspace

Examiner: Ronnie M. Mancho

Mail Date: 02/15/2011

Converted to html using OCR.

I have attempted to make this html version as accurate as possible, including the Examiner’s misspellings.

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 2

Art Unit: 3664

DETAILED ACTION

Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103

1. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:

(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.

2. Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Margolin (5904724) in view of Duggan et al (US 2005004723).

Regarding claim 1, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) discloses a system for safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle in civilian airspace comprising:

(a) a ground station 400 (fig. 1&4) equipped with a synthetic vision system (figs. 1&3; col. 5, lines 50-60; col. 4, lines 1 to col. 5, lines 67);

(b) an unmanned aerial vehicle 300 (figs. 1&3) capable of supporting said synthetic vision system (305, 306, 307, 311 on aircraft; col. 5, lines 50-60; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67);

(c) a remote pilot 102 operating said ground station 400 (figs. 1&4; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67);

(d) a communications link between said unmanned aerial vehicle 300 and said ground station 400;

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 3

Art Unit: 3664

e) a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle 300 for detecting the presence and position of nearby aircraft (305, 306, 307, 311 on aircraft) and communicating this information to said remote pilot 102 (col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67);

whereas said remote pilot uses said synthetic vision system (305, 306, 307, 311 on aircraft; col. 5, lines 50-60) to control said unmanned aerial vehicle 300 during at least selected phases of the flight of said unmanned aerial vehicle (selected phases implies some or all phases during flight).

Margolin did not disclose that the vehicle is flown using an autonomous control system (e.g. autopilot). However, Duggan teach of a system for safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle in civilian airspace comprising:

a ground station controlling an unmanned aerial vehicle (sec. 0352, 00353), wherein during phases of a flight of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV, sec 0318, 0322, 0353) when a synthetic vision (sec. 0356, 0365, 0388, 0390) is not used to control said unmanned aerial vehicle said unmanned aerial vehicle is flown using an autonomous control system (autopilot, sec 0346 to 0350, 0390-0329).

Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Margolin as taught by Duggan for the purpose of incorporating an autopilot to ensure smooth transitions (Duggan abstract, sec 0014, 0085, 0086).

The different embodiments in both prior arts are combinable as it would be obvious to ne having ordinary skill in the art.

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 4

Art Unit: 3664

Regarding claim 2, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose the system of claim 1 whereby said selected phases of the flight of said unmanned aerial vehicle comprise:

(a) when said unmanned aerial vehicle is within a selected range of an airport or other designated location and is below a first specified altitude;

(b) when said unmanned aerial vehicle is outside said selected range of an airport or other designated location and is below a second specified altitude.

Regarding claim 3, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose the system of claim 1 further comprising a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for periodically transmitting the identification, location, altitude, and bearing of said unmanned aerial vehicle.

Regarding claim 4, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose the system of claim 1 further comprising a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for providing a communications channel for Air Traffic Control and the pilots of other aircraft to communicate directly with said remote pilot.

Regarding claim 5, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose a system for safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle in civilian airspace comprising:

(a) a ground station equipped with a synthetic vision system;

(b) an unmanned aerial vehicle capable of supporting said synthetic vision system;

(d) a communications link between said unmanned aerial vehicle and said ground station;

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 5

Art Unit: 3664

e) a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for detecting the presence and position of nearby aircraft and communicating this information to said remote pilot;

whereas said remote pilot uses said synthetic vision system to control said unmanned aerial vehicle during at least selected phases of the flight of said unmanned aerial vehicle, and during those phases of the flight of said unmanned aerial vehicle when said synthetic vision system is not used to control said unmanned aerial vehicle said unmanned aerial vehicle is flown using an autonomous control system, and

whereas the selected phases of the flight of said unmanned aerial vehicle comprise:

(a) when said unmanned aerial vehicle is within a selected range of an airport or other designated location and is below a first specified altitude;

(b) when said unmanned aerial vehicle is outside said selected range of an airport or other designated location and is below a second specified altitude.

Margolin did not disclose that the vehicle is flown using an autonomous control system. However, Duggan teach of a system for safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle in civilian airspace comprising:

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 6

Art Unit: 3664

The different embodiments in both prior arts are combinable as it would be obvious to ne having ordinary skill in the art.

Regarding claim 6, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose the system of claim 5 further comprising a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for periodically transmitting the identification, location, altitude, and bearing of said unmanned aerial vehicle.

Regarding claim 7, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose the system of claim 5 further comprising a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for providing a communications channel for Air Traffic Control and the pilots of other aircraft to communicate directly with said remote pilot.

Regarding claim 8, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose a method for safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle as part of a unmanned aerial system equipped with a synthetic vision system in civilian airspace comprising the steps of:

(a) using a remote pilot to fly said unmanned aerial vehicle using synthetic vision during at least selected phases of the flight of said unmanned aerial vehicle, and during those phases of the flight of said unmanned aerial vehicle when said synthetic vision system is not used to control said unmanned aerial vehicle an autonomous control system is used to fly said unmanned aerial vehicle;

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 7

Art Unit: 3664

(b) providing a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for detecting the presence and position of nearby aircraft and communicating this information to said remote pilot.

Margolin did not disclose that the vehicle is flown using an autonomous control system. However, Duggan teach of a system for safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle in civilian airspace comprising:

The different embodiments in both prior arts are combinable as it would be obvious to ne having ordinary skill in the art.

Regarding claim 9, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose the method of claim 8 whereby said selected phases of the flight of said unmanned aerial vehicle comprise:

(a) when said unmanned aerial vehicle is within a selected range of an airport or other designated location and is below a first specified altitude;

(b) when said unmanned aerial vehicle is outside said selected range of an airport or other designated location and is below a second specified altitude.

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 8

Art Unit: 3664

Regarding claim 10, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose the method of claim 8 further comprising the step of providing a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for periodically transmitting the identification, location, altitude, and bearing of said unmanned aerial vehicle.

Regarding claim 11, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose the method of claim 8 further comprising the step of providing a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for providing a communications channel for Air Traffic Control and the pilots of other aircraft to communicate directly with said remote pilot.

Regarding claim 12, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose a method for safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle as part of a unmanned aerial system equipped with a synthetic vision system in civilian airspace comprising the steps of:

(b) providing a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for detecting the presence and position of nearby aircraft and communicating this information to said remote pilot; whereas said selected phases of the flight of said unmanned aerial vehicle comprise:

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 9

Art Unit: 3664

(a) when said unmanned aerial vehicle is within a selected range of an airport or other designated location and is below a first specified altitude;

(b) when said unmanned aerial vehicle is outside said selected range of an airport or other designated location and is below a second specified altitude.

Margolin did not disclose that the vehicle is flown using an autonomous control system. However, Duggan teach of a system for safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle in civilian airspace comprising:

The different embodiments in both prior arts are combinable as it would be obvious to ne having ordinary skill in the art.

Regarding claim 13, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose the method of claim 12 further comprising the step of providing a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for periodically transmitting the identification, location, altitude, and bearing of said unmanned aerial vehicle.

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 10

Art Unit: 3664

Regarding claim 14, Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) in view of Duggan disclose the method of claim 12 further comprising the step of providing a system onboard said unmanned aerial vehicle for providing a communications channel for Air Traffic Control and the pilots of other aircraft to communicate directly with said remote pilot.

Response to Arguments

3. Applicant's arguments filed 11/29/10 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.

Applicant's specification is ONLY 16 pages long. However, applicant has provided an affidavit and remarks that are over 200 pages. The affidavits are referring to paying rents and mortgages, etc. The examiner does not understand how paying rents and mortgages are related to the present invention drawn to flying an un-manned aerial vehicle.

Applicant further argues that Margolin belongs to the inventor. It is noted that the prior art is a statutory bar since it was published more that 8 years before filing of the present application.

Applicant further argues that the prior art do not disclose flying an unmanned aerial vehicle (i.e. an aircraft) in civilian airspace. The examiner does not acquiesce to applicant's remarks. The prior art clearly shows flying an unmanned aerial vehicle (i.e. an aircraft) in civilian airspace since the air space in which the vehicle is flown is not restricted. As further noted applicant fails to provide a particular meaning attached to "civilian airspace".

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 11

Art Unit: 3664

Applicant further argues that both prior art do not disclose "a synthetic vision system". The examiner disagrees. It appears that applicant is insisting that the prior art must recite the exact same terms as disclosed in the claims. Applicant first of all does not present an argument which first provide the meaning of the claimed "synthetic vision system". As disclosed in applicant's specification the claimed, "a synthetic vision system" is referring to 3-D vision. The prior art disclose 3-D presentation of image to a pilot (here a remote pilot) thus the prior art anticipates the claimed, "a synthetic vision system".

Applicant further argues about the abstract cited in the prior. The purpose of the argument is not understood since applicant is arguing that the popular interpretation of 608.01 (b) is that the purpose of the abstract is to provide search terms. It is unclear whether "popular" refers to the manner abstracts are interpreted in Florida, Washington, or somewhere else. Abstracts are not excluded during the examination process.

Some of applicant's remarks are that the prior art does not recite the phrase, "safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle in civilian airspace comprising:...".

Applicant thus insists that the rejection is conclusory and is not supported. The examiner disagrees and notes that any particular level of safety is not described or disclosed in the specification nor is there any meaning provided for " civilian airspace" or "safety". It is believed that the aircraft flown in the prior art is flown safely and further that the aircraft is flown in all airspaces since a particular airspace was not prohibited.

Applicant continues that the examiner fails to address all of the recitations of the rejected claims. The examiner disagrees and notes that the prior art anticipates all limitations in the

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 12

Art Unit: 3664

claims. There is not rule in MPEP that insist that the prior must recite the terms in the claims exactly as they are disclosed in the claims.

4. Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Margolin (5904724) in view of Duggan et al (US 2005004723).

Margolin (abstract; figs. 1-7; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67) discloses a system for safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle in civilian airspace comprising:

(a) a ground station 400 (fig. 1&4) equipped with a synthetic vision system (figs. 1&3; col. 5, lines 50-60; col. 4, lines 1 to col. 5, lines 67);

(c) a remote pilot 102 operating said ground station 400 (figs. 1&4; col. 3, lines 8-67; col. 4, lines 1-67; col. 5, lines 1-67);

(d) a communications link between said unmanned aerial vehicle 300 and said ground station 400;

whereas said remote pilot uses said synthetic vision system (305, 306, 307, 311 on aircraft) to control said unmanned aerial vehicle 300 during at least selected phases of the flight of said unmanned aerial vehicle.

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 13

Art Unit: 3664

Margolin did not disclose that the vehicle is flown using an autonomous control system (e.g. an autopilot). However, Duggan teach of a system for safely flying an unmanned aerial vehicle in civilian airspace comprising:

The different embodiments in both prior arts are combinable as it would be obvious to ne having ordinary skill in the art.

It is believed that the rejection is proper and thus shall stand. Applicant may file an RCE, Appeal to the Board, or abandon the case.

Conclusion

5. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).

A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 14

Art Unit: 3664

the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.

Communication

6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONNIE MANCHO whose telephone number is (571)272-6984. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thurs: 9-5.

If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Tran Khoi can be reached on 571-272-6919. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.

Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov, Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.

----------

Application/Control Number: 11/736,356 Page 15

Art Unit: 3664

/Ronnie Mancho/

Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664

/Ronnie Mancho/

Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664