DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to amendments filed on 9/17/2026.
Claims 1, 9 and 18 are amended.
Claim 1 – 5 and 7 – 21 are pending.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 3, 5, 7, 8 and 18 – 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gummaraju et al (US 20160378554, hereinafter Gummaraju), in view of Fang (US 20180359670, prior art part of IDS dated 5/31/2023), and further in view of Roth et al (US 20190199726, hereinafter Roth).
As per claim 1, Gummaraju discloses: A [device] comprising:
a plurality of abstracted hardware components representing physical hardware components of the [device] (Gummaraju figure 1A and [0003]: “A virtual machine (VM) is a software-based abstraction of a physical computer system…”); at least one processor; and a memory storing data thereon that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:
receive, from a node, a request via [an interface]; (Gummaraju figure 2 and [0031]: “The system receives a job request (step 202). Generally, a job request is a request to process input data identified in the request using a specific service.”.)
utilize a processing layer to access, based on the request, one or more computation modules linked to the processing layer, wherein the one or more computation modules are instructed to use the plurality of abstracted hardware components to perform, using at least one of the physical hardware components, a task based on the request; provision, on the [device] and based on the request, the one or more computation modules to handle the request; (Gummaraju figure 2 and [0032]: “The system selects a parent special purpose VM from among a set of parent special purpose VMs to perform the job request (step 204).”; [0034]: “The system instantiates one or more child special purpose VMs using the selected parent special purpose VM (step 208). That is, the system causes the hypervisor that manages the parent special purpose VM to instantiate the child special purpose VMs from the parent special purpose VM.”; [0039]: “The system assigns one or more of the identified tasks to each child special purpose VM (step 210).”; [0041]: “The system causes each child special purpose VM to execute the assigned tasks by having each of the child special purpose VMs launch the necessary daemons or tools to process the tasks assigned to the child special purpose VM (step 212).”. Examiner notes that the actual processing is performed by the underlying hardware of the node hosting the VMs.)
generate, with the one or more computation modules performing the [device]-based task, a result; and forward, to the [node], information describing the result. (Gummaraju figure 2 and [0042]: “For each completed assigned task, the system receives an output from the child special purpose VM assigned to perform the task.”; [0042]: “After the system receives an output from each child special purpose VM assigned to perform a task, the system aggregates and integrates the each output (step 214). That is, the system generates a collective output based on the output from each child special purpose VM by aggregating and integrating the received output. The system then provides the job results to a user device (step 216).”.)
Gummaraju did not explicitly disclose:
Wherein the device comprises satellite deployed in orbit;
wherein the interface comprises a satellite interface that uses a protocol for transmission of communications and information between the node and space;
wherein the request including information identifying a tenant;
determine, based on the information identifying the tenant, one or more computation modules on the satellite that are available to the tenant;
and wherein the forwarding comprises to the node via the satellite interface using the protocol.
However, Fang teaches:
wherein the device comprises satellite deployed in orbit; (Fang [0025].)
wherein the interface comprises a satellite interface that uses a protocol for transmission of communications and information between the node and space; (Fang figure 1 and [0027]: “Ground communication interface 306 can be a wireless RF or optical receiver/transmitter known in the art for communicating between satellites and ground stations (such as gateways and subscriber terminals)”.)
and wherein the forwarding comprises to the node via the satellite interface using the protocol. (Fang [0027])
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Fang into that of Gummaraju in order to have the interface comprises a satellite interface and wherein the forwarding comprises to a ground node via the satellite interface. Fang [0037] – [0038] teaches the satellite network can be implemented via software defined cloud technique using virtualization, one of ordinary skill in the art can easily see applicants have merely claimed the application of virtualization technology into a specific technology area (satellites), and is therefore rejected under 35 UCS 103.
Roth teaches:
wherein the request including information identifying a tenant; determine, based on the information identifying the tenant, one or more computation modules on the satellite that are available to the tenant; (Roth [0014]: “a user wanting to utilize at least a portion of the resources 114 can submit a request that is received to an interface layer 108 of the multi-tenant environment 106… A resource manager 110 receiving the request can perform tasks such as to authenticate an identity of the user submitting the request, as well as to determine whether that user has an existing account, or is associated with a customer having an existing account, with the resource provider,… If the user has an account with the appropriate permissions, status, etc., the resource manager can determine whether there are adequate resources available to suit the user's request, and if so can provision the resources or otherwise grant access to the corresponding portion of those resources for use by the user for an amount specified by the request.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Roth into that of Gummaraju and Wardell in order to have the request including information identifying a tenant; determine, based on the information identifying the tenant, one or more computation modules available with the tenant. Roth [0014] has shown the claimed limitations are merely commonly known steps for authenticating users and determining their access rights, applicants have thus merely claimed the combination of known parts in the field to achieve predictable results of using authentications to verify user tenancy and performs task scheduling accordingly and is therefore rejected under 35 USC 103.
As per claim 2, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 1, wherein the processing layer is linked to the one or more computation modules via a wireless interface. (Fang [0028])
As per claim 3, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 1, further comprising: a solar panel. (Fang [0020])
As per claim 5, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 1, wherein the one or more computation modules include a computational cluster. (Roth [0032])
As per claim 7, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 1, further comprising: an expandable satellite bus. (Fang [0020])
As per claim 8, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 7, wherein the expandable satellite bus is accessible by a command and control Application Programming Interface (API). (Fang [0031])
As per claim 18, it is the method variant of claim 1 and is therefore rejected under the same rationale.
As per claim 19, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The method of claim 18, wherein the set of satellite resources that execute the first satellite-based computation comprise edge computing resources. (Fang figure 1.)
As per claim 20, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The method of claim 18, wherein the set of satellite resources comprise abstracted hardware components. (Gummaraju figure 1A and Fang figure 1.)
As per claim 21, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 1, wherein the one or more computation modules available to the tenant are unavailable to one or more other tenants. (Roth [0014])
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gummaraju, Fang and Roth, and further in view of Harper et al (US 20170168907, hereinafter Harper).
As per claim 4, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Wardell did not teach:
The satellite of claim 3, wherein the solar panel abstracted, and wherein the solar panel is accessible to the at least one processor via a power monitoring controller to retrieve information from the solar panel.
However, Harper teaches:
The satellite of claim 3, wherein the solar panel abstracted, and wherein the solar panel is accessible to the at least one processor via a power monitoring controller to retrieve information from the solar panel. (Harper [0058])
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Harper into that of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth in order to have the solar panel abstracted, and wherein the solar panel is accessible to the at least one processor via a power monitoring controller to retrieve information from the solar panel. Fang [0020] teaches the satellite comprises solar panel while Harper [0058] shows the concept of virtualize resources and allocate virtualized resource based on actual resource usage is commonly known and used in the field, applicants have thus merely claimed the combination of known parts in the field to achieve predictable results and is therefore rejected under 35 USC 103.
Claim(s) 9 – 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gummaraju, Fang and Roth, and further in view of Sharon et al (US 20210256845, hereinafter Sharon)
As per claim 9, Gummaraju discloses: An autonomous [device], comprising:
a plurality of abstracted hardware components representing physical hardware components of the [device] (Gummaraju figure 1A and [0003]: “A virtual machine (VM) is a software-based abstraction of a physical computer system…”); at least one processor; and a memory storing data thereon that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:
receive, from a node, a request via [an interface]; (Gummaraju figure 2 and [0031]: “The system receives a job request (step 202). Generally, a job request is a request to process input data identified in the request using a specific service.”.)
utilize a processing layer to access, based on the request, one or more computation modules linked to the processing layer, wherein the one or more computation modules are instructed to use the plurality of abstracted hardware components to perform, using at least one of the physical hardware components, a task based on the request; provision, on the [device] and based on the request, the one or more computation modules to handle the request; (Gummaraju figure 2 and [0032]: “The system selects a parent special purpose VM from among a set of parent special purpose VMs to perform the job request (step 204).”; [0034]: “The system instantiates one or more child special purpose VMs using the selected parent special purpose VM (step 208). That is, the system causes the hypervisor that manages the parent special purpose VM to instantiate the child special purpose VMs from the parent special purpose VM.”; [0039]: “The system assigns one or more of the identified tasks to each child special purpose VM (step 210).”; [0041]: “The system causes each child special purpose VM to execute the assigned tasks by having each of the child special purpose VMs launch the necessary daemons or tools to process the tasks assigned to the child special purpose VM (step 212).”. Examiner notes that the actual processing is performed by the underlying hardware of the node hosting the VMs.)
generate, with the one or more computation modules performing the [device]-based task, a result; and forward, to the [node], information describing the result. (Gummaraju figure 2 and [0042]: “For each completed assigned task, the system receives an output from the child special purpose VM assigned to perform the task.”; [0042]: “After the system receives an output from each child special purpose VM assigned to perform a task, the system aggregates and integrates the each output (step 214). That is, the system generates a collective output based on the output from each child special purpose VM by aggregating and integrating the received output. The system then provides the job results to a user device (step 216).”.)
Gummaraju did not explicitly disclose:
Wherein the device comprises satellite deployed in orbit;
wherein the interface comprises a secure communication link that uses a protocol for transmission of communications and information between the terrestrial node and space;
identify, based on the computation request, an identity of a sender of the computation request;
wherein the first set of abstracted hardware component are associated with and available the sender of the computational request;
wherein the enabling comprises recording, using a sensor on the satellite, one or more measurements.
However, Fang teaches:
wherein the device comprises satellite deployed in orbit; (Fang [0025].)
wherein the interface comprises a secure communication link that uses a protocol for transmission of communications and information between the terrestrial node and space; (Fang [0027] and [0044])
identify, based on the computation request, an identity of a sender of the computation request; (Fang [0060]: authenticate the aircraft, make sure the aircraft is authorized.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Fang into that of Gummaraju in order to have the interface comprises a secure communication link and identify, based on the computation request, an identity of a sender of the computation request. Fang [0037] – [0038] teaches the satellite network can be implemented via software defined cloud technique using virtualization, one of ordinary skill in the art can easily see applicants have merely claimed the application of virtualization technology into a specific technology area (satellites), and is therefore rejected under 35 UCS 103.
Roth teaches:
wherein the first set of abstracted hardware component are associated with and available the sender of the computational request; (Roth [0014]: “a user wanting to utilize at least a portion of the resources 114 can submit a request that is received to an interface layer 108 of the multi-tenant environment 106… A resource manager 110 receiving the request can perform tasks such as to authenticate an identity of the user submitting the request, as well as to determine whether that user has an existing account, or is associated with a customer having an existing account, with the resource provider,… If the user has an account with the appropriate permissions, status, etc., the resource manager can determine whether there are adequate resources available to suit the user's request, and if so can provision the resources or otherwise grant access to the corresponding portion of those resources for use by the user for an amount specified by the request.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Roth into that of Gummaraju and Wardell in order to have the request including information identifying a tenant; determine, based on the information identifying the tenant, one or more computation modules available with the tenant. Roth [0014] has shown the claimed limitations are merely commonly known steps for authenticating users and determining their access rights, applicants have thus merely claimed the combination of known parts in the field to achieve predictable results of using authentications to verify user tenancy and performs task scheduling accordingly and is therefore rejected under 35 USC 103.
Sharon teaches:
wherein the enabling comprises recording, using a sensor on the satellite, one or more measurements. (Sharon [0061])
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Sharon into that of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth in order to record, using a sensor on the satellite, one or more measurements. Sharon [0061] has shown that the claimed limitation is merely commonly known functions and components of a satellite, and applicants have thus merely claimed the combination of known parts in the field to achieve predictable results and is therefore rejected under 35 USC 103.
As per claim 10, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 9, wherein the secure communication link comprises a satellite link, and wherein the at least one processor is communicably coupled with an antenna that establishes the satellite link. (Fang [0020])
As per claim 11, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 9, wherein the identity of the sender of the computation request is determined within an operating system of the satellite. (Fang [0051] and [0053]: authentication/authorization.)
As per claim 12, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 9, further comprising: a controller that manages at least one aspect of the plurality of abstracted hardware components. (Gummaraju figure 1A: hypervisor.)
As per claim 13, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 9, further comprising: an Application Programming Interface (API); one or more core controllers; and one or more edge processors coupled to the one or more core controllers via the API, wherein the one or more core controllers exchange control signals with the one or more edge processors via the API. (Fang figure 1.)
As per claim 14, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 13, further comprising at least one of: a reaction wheel; a navigation module; an inertial measurement unit; a camera; and a software-defined radio. (Fang [0017])
As per claim 15, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 9, wherein the first set of abstracted hardware components comprise cloud-based computation nodes. (Roth [0002])
As per claim 16, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 9, wherein the first set of abstracted hardware components are containerized. (Gummaraju figure 1A)
As per claim 17, the combination of Gummaraju, Fang and Roth further teach:
The satellite of claim 9, further comprising a payload provided as part of a server architecture, wherein the at least one processor executes an operating system that communicates with the server architecture via an Application Programming Interface (API). (Gummaraju [0020])
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 – 5 and 7 – 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES M SWIFT whose telephone number is (571)270-7756. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9:30 AM - 7PM.
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, April Blair can be reached at 5712701014. 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.
/CHARLES M SWIFT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2196
