It's a common trick. The patent attorney doesn't know how dumb the examiner is, but it's a fair bet he's not that smart (otherwise he would be listed as the inventor, not the examiner). So first you write "I invented the wheel", then you start with "the wheel of claim 1 fitted with a tyre", onto " the wheel of claim 1 fitted with wheel nuts" etc. The examiner comes back with "claim 1 isn't new, but it would be if combined with claims 14 and 17". So you get the examiner to define your limitations for you. Occasionally you come across a really dumb examiner who allows claim 1 as is (it has happened in my industry). Such a patent would never stand up in court, but that isn't the examiners' problem.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.