Art Rejection
1. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
2. Claims 1-3, 5-10, 13 and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uthaman, U.S. pat. No. 11,171,720.
Per claim 1, Uthaman discloses a computer implemented method comprising:
a) receiving, at a satellite control system on a satellite and from a user terminal 131 over a user-to-terminal wireless communication link 1, a request from the user terminal for compute resources configured on the satellite (see col 5, ln 28-31, 54-59), wherein the compute resources comprising at least one hardware computer processor configured on the satellite to execute an application (see col 16, ln 17-29), wherein the request comprising user input data as part of a workflow and/or workload to be processed by the satellite (see col 3, ln 15-19 and col 5, ln 54-59);
b) generating output user data by executing a compute function to process the workload without using any data obtained from a sensor on the satellite (see col 6, ln 5-8); and
c) transmitting the output user data to the user terminal (see col 6, ln 9-10).
Uthaman does not explicitly teach executing an application on at least one computer processor to process user workload. Uthaman however clearly teaches providing various computing functions on the satellite by executing one or more applications by at least one computer processor (see col 16, ln 17-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to recognize such execution of an application by the computer processor on the satellite for processing user workload because it would have enabled the satellite to provide compute functions to process the workload (see col 6, ln 5-8).
Per claim 2, Uthaman teaches that the compute resources on the satellite are provided in a multi-tenant hosted environment in which the resources are available for reservation and use by different private users at different times (see col 10, ln 20-53).
Per claims 3 and 10, Uthaman teaches that the compute resources on the satellite comprise a cloud service, data storage, computer processors, endpoint-to-endpoint communication channel, and user interface application module (see col 3, ln 3-19 and col 16, ln 16-29).
Per claims 5-6, Uthaman teaches identifying/verifying that compute resources being associated with an account of a user and authorizing access to the compute resources for a user (see col 24, ln 1-21).
Per claims 7-8, Uthaman teaches that the compute resources comprises hardware processor or a virtual machine, wherein a computing environment is configured as one of a plurality of computing environments on the satellite (see col 13, ln 59 – col 14, ln 15).
Per claim 9, Uthaman teaches the user input data comprises a media presentation, e.g., via graphical UI (see col 24, ln 12-21).
Per claim 13, Uthaman teaches that access to the compute resources is provided across a group of moving satellites in which a dynamic or static clustering of two or more satellites in the group of satellite provides the access to the compute resources over time (see col 3, ln 3-19 and col 5, ln 49-53).
Claim 45 is similar in scope as that of claim 1.
3. Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uthaman, in view of Ashrafi, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2017/0105153.
Uthaman does not teach using a load balancing module operated to select a satellite among a plurality of satellite to provide the compute resources based on one of energy balance or orbital parameters. However, Ashrafi discloses a load balancing algorithm for use in the satellite system for selecting a satellite among a plurality of satellites to provide the compute resources based on one of energy balance or orbital parameters (see Ashrafi par 0101-0103).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Uthaman with Ashrafi teaching because it would have enabled leveraging computing resources of the satellite system more efficiently by selecting/switching to the most suitable satellite for handling user request in response to changing orbit and power conditions of the satellite.
4. Claims 21-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uthaman, in view of Ning, U.S. pat. No. 10,536,107.
Per claim 21, Uthaman does not disclose many specific components of a satellite. However, Ning discloses such satellite components including:
a) a satellite control system (202, fig. 2);
b) an antenna connected to the satellite control system (221, fig. 2 and col 6, ln 20-23);
c) a solar panel (253, fig. 2);
d) a battery (212, fig. 2 and col 3, ln 41-44);
e) a memory device (232, fig. 2);
f) a computing environment configured on the satellite (201, fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize such satellite components in Uthaman because it would have enabled the satellite operate properly.
Per claim 22, Uthaman teaches managing user access to the compute resources (see col 24, ln 1-21).
Per claim 23, Uthaman teaches providing a user interface module for providing to the satellite control system a user interface for transmission to the user terminal (see col 24, ln 12-21).
Per claim 24, Uthaman teaches that the satellite system comprises a plurality of computing environments (see col 10, ln 54-67).
Per claims 25-26, Uthaman teaches, when the user terminal requests the compute resources, a user account associated with the computing environment is used to determine that the computing environment is a chosen computing environment among a plurality of computing environments configured on the satellite (see col 11, ln 16-50).
Per claim 27, Uthaman teaches that the satellite is part of a group of satellites configured to provide the requested compute resources (see col 3, ln 3-19 and col 5, ln 49-53).
Per claims 28-29, Uthaman teaches managing a schedule of workloads across the plurality of compute resources of one or more satellites including routing a request to another computing environment when the requested resource is not available on a current computing environment (see col 6, ln 22-56).
Per claim 30, Uthaman teaches the computing environment is configured as a virtual environment (see col 13, ln 59 – col 14, ln 15).
Per claim 31, Uthaman teaches that the requested compute resource comprises media presentation, e.g., via graphical UI (see col 24, ln 12-21).
Response to Amendment
5. Applicant’s arguments filed August 7, 2026 with respect to claims 1-3, 5-13, 21-31 and 45 have been considered but are not found persuasive. It should be noted that the rejection has been revised to better address claim limitations.
Applicant alleges that Uthaman fails to disclose the claimed limitation “a request from the user terminal for use of compute resources configured on the satellite, the compute resources comprising at least one hardware computer processor configured on the satellite to execute an application”. Examiner disagrees.
Uthaman clearly teaches accepting a request from the user terminal for use of compute resources configured on the satellite (see col 5, ln 54-60), wherein the compute resources comprising at least one hardware computer processor configured on the satellite to execute an application (see col 16, ln 17-29).
Applicant also alleges that Uthaman does not disclose the claimed limitation “the request comprising user input data as part of a workload to be processed by executing the application on the at least cone computer processor”. Examiner disagrees.
Uthaman clearly teaches that user request comprises user input data such as workflow and/or workload to be processed by the satellite (see col 3, ln 16-19 and col 5, ln 54-60), wherein the workload is processed by performing a compute function on the satellite (see col 6, ln 5-8), and wherein the compute function is performed by executing an application on the at least one computer processor on the satellite (see col 16, ln 17-29). Thus, the examiner submits that Uthaman discloses the alleged limitations.
Applicant further alleges that there is no suggestion from Uthaman that the request from a user to run a function include a request for compute resources that include a hardware computer processor.
The examiner is however unable to find the alleged limitation in the current claims.
Conclusion
6. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 C.F.R. 1.136(a).
A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR RESPONSE TO THIS FINAL ACTION IS SET TO EXPIRE THREE MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ACTION. IN THE EVENT A FIRST RESPONSE IS FILED WITHIN TWO MONTHS OF THE MAILING DATE OF THIS FINAL ACTION AND THE ADVISORY ACTION IS NOT MAILED UNTIL AFTER 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 C.F.R. § 1.136(a) WILL BE CALCULATED FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THE ADVISORY ACTION. IN NO EVENT WILL THE STATUTORY PERIOD FOR RESPONSE EXPIRE LATER THAN SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THIS FINAL ACTION.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Viet Vu whose telephone number is 571-272-3977. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday from 8:00am to 6:00pm. The Group general information number is 571-272-2400. The Group fax number is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Emmanuel Moise, can be reached at 571-272-3865.
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).
/Viet D Vu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
9/8/26
Prosecution Insights