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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/11/2025 has been entered.
Notice to Applicant
Claims 9-20 have been examined in this application. This communication is a non-final rejection in response to the “Amendments to the claims” and “Remarks” filed 12/11/2025.
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.
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over US Patent Number 6,205,327 to Benedetti in view of US Patent Number 5,755,406 to Aston.
Regarding claim 9, Benedetti discloses a method for manufacturing a modular spacecraft system, the method comprising:
Assembling a propulsion assembly (propulsion module 24) that includes a frame around an exterior circumference of the propulsion assembly (see frame of configurable space module 22 around propulsion module 24 in Figures 2-4);
Testing the propulsion assembly for spaceworthiness (column 7, lines 26-28 disclose “Each propulsion module is a fully assembled and pressure tested system before installation on the spacecraft”);
Assembling a top plate assembly (upper module 22a);
Independently testing the top plate assembly for spaceworthiness (column 2, lines 59-62 disclose “a modular spacecraft structure in which the various subsystems are segregated into separate modules to permit parallel production and testing”);
Assembling a bottom plate assembly (lower module 22b);
Independently testing the bottom plate assembly for spaceworthiness (column 2, lines 59-62 disclose “a modular spacecraft structure in which the various subsystems are segregated into separate modules to permit parallel production and testing”); and
Integrating the propulsion assembly, the top plate assembly, and the bottom plate assembly to form the modular spacecraft system (see Figure 7).
Benedetti does not disclose affixing the frame to a middle portion of each of the plurality of legs, affixing the top plate to the top end of each one of the plurality of legs at an exterior circumference of the top plate, and affixing the bottom plate to the bottom end of each one of the plurality of legs such that the top plate assembly and the bottom plate assembly are spaced apart from one another with the propulsion assembly and the frame disposed therein. However, these limitations are taught by Aston. Aston discloses a space module (lower bus module 24) with top plate assembly including a top plate (top panel 64), the bottom plate assembly including a bottom plate (base 42), wherein the propulsion assembly includes a frame (see Figures 4-6) attached to a plurality of legs (support walls 86 and 88), and the frame being affixed to a middle portion of each of the plurality of legs (Figures 4-6 show side walls 52, 54, 56, 58 forming a frame affixed to a middle portion of support walls 86 and 88), the top plate being affixed to a top end of each one of the plurality of legs, and the bottom plate being affixed to the bottom end of each one of the plurality of legs (column 4, lines 50-53 disclose “A pair of support walls 86, 88 are attached to base 42 via U-shaped fitting 90 (or via bonding) which are attached to fittings 74. The support walls 86, 88 are also attached to interface 64”) such that the top plate assembly and the bottom plate assembly are spaced apart from one another by the propulsion assembly and the frame disposed therein (Figures 4 and 5 show at least part of the propulsion assembly and the side walls 52, 54, 56, 58 being disposed between top panel 64 and base 42). It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Benedetti using the teachings from Aston in order to use the testing and assembly methods of Benedetti on other types of space modules.
Regarding claim 18 (dependent on claim 17), Aston further teaches a first set of components is attached to the top plate (column 5, lines 17-22 disclose “The interface 64 has one or more attachment elements or engagement elements 98 which are always arranged thereon in a predetermined and standard pattern so that they receive one or more connection elements from a standard aft end 100 of a satellite payload module 26”), and wherein the propulsion assembly may be modified without detaching of the first set of components on the top plate (Figures 4 and 5 show the side walls and bottom of the bus module 24 allow access to the propulsion module which would allow them to be modified without detaching components on the top plate).
Regarding claim 19 (dependent on claim 17), Benedetti as modified by Aston further teaches the frame supports at least one propellent tank (tank portion 25) and at least one thruster (thrusters 29), and wherein all of the affixed top plate, the affixed bottom plate, the affixed plurality of legs, and the affixed frame supporting the at least one propellant tank and the at least one thruster together are spaceworthy (the modular spacecraft bus of Benedetti and the satellite bus of Aston are both designed to be used in space, and thus all of their components are spaceworthy).
Regarding claim 20 (dependent on claim 17), Benedetti and Aston do not disclose the top plate, the bottom plate, and the frame each have an octagonal shape at their exterior circumference. However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the different portions of the bus of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-16 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Benedetti and Aston discloses a method of manufacturing a modular spacecraft system as claimed, but does not teach nor suggest such a method with the top plate as claimed being the top of the fuel tank in an assembled modular spacecraft system and the bottom plate as claimed being a bottom of the fuel tank in the assembled modular spacecraft system.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/11/2025 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s amendments to claims 9-16 distinguish over the prior art, and these claims are allowed. However, newly added claims 17-20 are rejected, as discussed above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL H WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6554. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6:30.
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, Josh Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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.
MICHAEL H. WANG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3642
/MICHAEL H WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642