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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “mounting feature” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 – 8, 10 – 15, and 18 – 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caplin (US 5,806,800).
Regarding claims 1, 4, and 10, Caplin discloses a chassis (Fig. 3) for a spacecraft (10), the chassis comprising: a solid plate (70 or 72) comprising a first side (facing inward of the spacecraft) and an opposing second side (facing outward of the spacecraft), wherein the second side is positioned for exposure to outer space upon deployment of the spacecraft (Fig. 3); and a plurality of transverse walls (62, 64) extending from a surface of the second side and configured to radiate heat generated from the spacecraft into outer space; and at least one heat-generating component mounted, directly on the first side for direct conductive heat exchange with the solid plate (“A removed panel shows the interior space 74 where the heat generating modules reside. Heat generating modules may also reside on the fixed radiators 70 and 72”, col. 4, lines 44 – 47).
While Caplin teaches that the heat-generating component is mounted directed on 70 or 72, it fails to teach a mounting feature. However, Examiner takes Official Notice that mounting features such as threaded holes and fasteners are very well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, with reasonable expectation of success, to include a threaded hole and fastener in the device of Caplin ‘800 for easy removal/installation of the deployable radiators as needed.
Regarding claim 2, Caplin discloses that the plurality of transverse walls defines a cellular grid structure (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, Caplin discloses that the plate is formed from a metal material (claim 5 of Caplin).
Regarding claims 5 and 11, Caplin ‘800 fails to teach that the at least one mounting feature is a threaded hole configured to receive a threaded fastener after passing through a portion of the at least one heat-generating component. However, Examiner takes Official Notice that mounting features such as threaded holes and fasteners are very well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, with reasonable expectation of success, to include a threaded hole and fastener in the device of Caplin ‘800 for easy removal/installation of the deployable radiators as needed.
Regarding claim 6, Caplin discloses that the at least one heat-generating component is a payload component selected from a group consisting of phased array transmit and receive panels, a satellite network computer, and modem boards (Caplin teaches that the heat generated may come from many sources including any energy dissipating units typically found within a satellite’s payload structure – satellite typically house a network computer on board).
Regarding claims 7 and 12, Caplin ‘800 fails to disclose that the at least one heat generating component comprises a plurality of heat generating components spaced apart to facilitate heat dissipation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to space apart the heat generating components, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Regarding claim 8, Caplin discloses a spacecraft (10), comprising: a plate-shaped chassis body (70) defining a first side (facing inward of the spacecraft) and an opposing second side (facing outward of the spacecraft); at least one heat-generating component secured to the first side for direct conductive heat exchange with the chassis body (Caplin discloses that the heat generating components reside in the interior space 74 and are directly coupled to the first side of the solid plate. Furthermore, Caplin states in col. 4, lines 46 and 47 that “heat generating modules may also reside on the fixed radiators 70 and 72”); and a plurality of transverse walls (62, 64) extending from a surface of the second side and configured to radiate heat generated from the spacecraft into outer space; and a solar array (18) assembly carried by the chassis body.
Regarding claim 13, Caplin discloses that the at least one heat-generating component is a payload component selected from a group consisting of phased array transmit and receive panels, a satellite network computer, and modem boards (Caplin teaches that the heat generated may come from many sources including any energy dissipating units typically found within a satellite’s payload structure – satellite typically house a network computer on board).
Regarding claim 14, Caplin discloses that the plurality of transverse walls defines a cellular grid structure (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 15, Caplin discloses that the chassis body (70) is an elongated solid flat panel.
Regarding claims 18 and 19, Caplin discloses at least one low heat component mounted to the chassis body near a perimeter of the chassis body, such as an antenna system (20, Caplin).
Regarding claim 20, Caplin discloses that the at least one low heat component (antenna 20) is cantilevered from the chassis body (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 21, Caplin discloses a thermal gap filler (vulcanized rubber) disposed between at least one heat-generating component and the first side (Col. 3, lines 47 – 62).
Claim(s) 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caplin (US 5,806,800) in view of Caplin (US 5,823,476).
Regarding claim 16, Caplin ‘800 fails to disclose at least one power storage and distribution component mounted to the chassis body at substantially a center of the chassis body. However, Caplin ‘476 discloses a spacecraft having power storage and distribution component (claims 2 – 4, col. 2; lines 64 – 67, Caplin ‘476). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed, with reasonable expectation of success, to include a power storage and distribution system as taught by Caplin ‘476 in the assembly of Caplin ‘800 in order to provide power to the components mounted to the chassis.
Regarding claim 17, Caplin ‘800 as modified by Caplin ‘476 discloses that the at least one power storage and distribution component is one of a battery (col. 2; line 64 – col. 3; line 5, Caplin ‘476) and a flight computer connected to at least one heat- generating component of the spacecraft through at least one power harness connection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Caplin’s walls 62 and 64 do not correspond to the claimed plurality of transverse walls since the panels 62 and 64 are connected at the edges of the solid plate by hinges, instead of extending from the second side of the solid plate 70. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Figure 2 of Caplin clearly illustrates that 62 and 64 are mounted onto the surface of the second side (see annotated figures 2 and 3 below) of the plate 70. In annotated figure 2, “E” indicates the location where the edge of the transvers wall (62 or 64) lies and it is located well within the perimeter of 70 and not at the outer edge. Similarly, in annotated figure 3, the connection points of the walls 62 , 64, 66, 68 are shown to be positioned entirely inside the perimeter of 70 or 72 rather than at the edge of the plate. Because Caplin’s heat-dissipating panels project from the surface of the second side of the plate 70, they structurally satisfy the limitaiton of the transverse walls as claimed.
PNG
media_image1.png
1120
927
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1051
975
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 VALENTINA XAVIER whose telephone number is (571)272-9853. The examiner can normally be reached 10 am - 6:30 pm.
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, Joshua Huson can be reached on (571) 270-5301. 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.
/VALENTINA XAVIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights