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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Applicants’ communication filed on 12/20/2023. In virtue of this communication, claims 1-17 are currently pending in the instant application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-13 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oza et al. (US 2017/0180038 A1).
Regarding Claim 1 Oza teaches the limitations "A communication terminal apparatus configured to communicate with a communication satellite apparatus by means of a radio beam, the apparatus comprising:
an antenna configured to receive a plurality of beacons from at least one communication satellite apparatus, and to transmit and receive a directional radio beam; and (see abstract, fig. 1 and par. 0020-0021 “For example, as aero terminal 130 transitions into a satellite spot beam, the transceiver mechanism 131 is tuned to the appropriate frequency for that spot beam. Additionally, the antenna may be physically positioned to best receive the signal, as aero terminal 130 travels throughout the spot beam region.” Here, the mobile terminal with antenna receives signals from satellites);
at least one processor, the at least one processor executing a control process of determining a plurality of candidate directions of the radio beam to be transmitted from the antenna, on the basis of information included in the plurality of beacons" (see par. 0005 “Accordingly, a beneficial design would allow for the mobile terminal to select the best possible satellite data beam based on an expected travel path, continually evaluate adjacent candidate beams and select an appropriate beam at the appropriate time, and prevent unnecessary switching between multiple satellite beams when traveling through an overlap of multiple satellite data beams.”).
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected for the same reasons set forth above because the claims have similar limitations or have been addressed.
Regarding Claim 10 Oza teaches the limitations "A satellite communication system comprising the communication terminal apparatus according to claim 1 and a communication satellite apparatus configured to communicate with the communication terminal apparatus, the communication satellite apparatus being configured to communicate with the communication terminal apparatus by means of a radio beam, (see abstract, fig. 1 and par. 0020-0021 “For example, as aero terminal 130 transitions into a satellite spot beam, the transceiver mechanism 131 is tuned to the appropriate frequency for that spot beam. Additionally, the antenna may be physically positioned to best receive the signal, as aero terminal 130 travels throughout the spot beam region.” Here, the mobile terminal with antenna receives signals from satellites);
the communication satellite apparatus comprising: an antenna configured to receive a radio beam including a connection request from the communication terminal apparatus; and at least one processor, the at least one processor executing a control process in which a response radio beam is transmitted in response to the radio beam including the connection request" (see par. 0022 “Internet requests from are managed through multiple devices in order to provide a user with the requested information on aero terminal 130. For example, when a user, such as an airplane passenger, makes a request to view a web page from a computing device 120, the request is sent to satellite 100 via satellite spot beam 140. Once received by satellite 100, the request is transmitted such that internet server 180 provides a response.”).
Claim 9 is rejected for the same reasons set forth above because the claims have similar limitations or have been addressed.
Regarding Claim 2 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication terminal apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, in the control process, the at least one processor:
assigns priorities to the plurality of candidate directions; selects a direction from among the plurality of candidate directions on the basis of the priorities; and transmits a radio beam including a connection request in the selected direction" (see par. 0030 “The combined weight value is used to determine a Weighted Look Ahead Factor (WLAF), which ranks the candidate satellite spot beams accessible to the mobile terminal at each projected location 380.”).
Regarding Claim 3 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication terminal apparatus according to claim 2, wherein, in the control process, the at least one processor:
determines whether or not a response radio beam has been received in response to the connection request of the radio beam transmitted in the selected direction; and
when it is determined that no response radio beam has been received, selects another direction from among the remaining candidate directions and transmits a radio beam including a connection request, whereas, when it is determined that the response radio beam has been received, continues communication by means of the radio beam" (see par. 0026 “As aero terminal 130 travels, it may move through an entire coverage area of a satellite spot beam. For example, as aero terminal 130 travels it may reach the boundary of satellite spot beam 140a and into satellite spot beam 140b. When aero terminal 130 determines that a beam switch is necessary, aero terminal 130 sends a message to network IP gateway 150 via satellite gateway 110a. The message informs the network IP gateway 150 that a satellite spot beam switch is imminent and that network IP gateway 150 should stop sending and buffer data packets being transmitted via gateway 110. In order to switch from satellite spot beam 140a to 140b, aero terminal 130 tunes receiver portion 131b of transceiver mechanism 131 to an out route carrier that is assigned to the new satellite spot beam.”. Also see par. 0028 “If it is not time to determine the best available satellite spot beam, the mobile terminal maintains its connection to the current satellite spot beam at step 325.”).
Regarding Claim 4 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication terminal apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the information includes a movement speed of the at least one communication satellite apparatus, and in the control process, the at least one processor continues communication by means of the radio beam by adjusting a direction of the radio beam on the basis of the movement speed of the at least one communication satellite apparatus" (see par. 0030 “The ordering of multiple available satellite spot beams can account for multiple projected locations at various time intervals. For example, the system determines current and future locations of the mobile terminal based on various factors, including relative trajectory and speed of the mobile terminal with respect to the satellite per 360.” Here, the relative speed of the mobile terminal to the satellite speed determines satellite speed and is used in selecting spot beams).
Regarding Claim 5 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication terminal apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the information includes a first coordinate of the at least one communication satellite apparatus, (see par. 0028 “In order to make such a determination, the mobile terminal takes into account its own location and determines the available spot beams based on the geographic coordinates for each spot beam stored within the mobile terminal's memory.”);
a first sent time of a first beacon from the first coordinate, a second coordinate of the at least one communication satellite apparatus, and a second sent time of a second beacon from the second coordinate, and in the control process, the at least one processor: obtains a first receipt time of the first beacon, and a second receipt time of the second beacon; derives a first distance between the first coordinate and the communication terminal apparatus, on the basis of the first sent time and the first receipt time; derives a second distance between the second coordinate and the communication terminal apparatus, on the basis of the second sent time and the second receipt time; and determines the plurality of candidate directions on the basis of the first and second coordinates and the first and second distances" (see par. 0031 and fig. 4 “The ordering of multiple available satellite spot beams can account for multiple projected locations at various time intervals 410.”. Also see par. 0047-0048 “Based on the terminal's location, e.g., longitude and latitude coordinates, and the actual satellite location obtained from the terminal's configuration file or satellite ephemeris data, the terminal computes an azimuth and elevation angle within the satellite coordinate system. The coordinates of the terminal are defined as x.sub.Term and y.sub.Term.”).
Regarding Claim 6 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication terminal apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the information includes a first transmitted signal strength of the first beacon and a second transmitted signal strength of the second beacon, and in the control process, the at least one processor: obtains a first received signal strength of the first beacon, and a second received signal strength of the second beacon; and corrects the first and second distances on the basis of the first and second transmitted signal strengths and the first and second received signal strengths" (see par. 0028 “Next, the system determines the Weighted Fractional Distance (WFD), or distance between the mobile terminal and the location of strongest signal strength for each of the available satellite spot beam, 340. Other parameters can also be considered when ranking various satellite spot beams at multiple locations.”).
Regarding Claim 7 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication terminal apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the information includes a first transmitted signal strength of the first beacon and a second transmitted signal strength of the second beacon, and in the control process, the at least one processor: obtains a first received signal strength of the first beacon, and a second received signal strength of the second beacon; and (see par. 0028 “Next, the system determines the Weighted Fractional Distance (WFD), or distance between the mobile terminal and the location of strongest signal strength for each of the available satellite spot beam, 340. Other parameters can also be considered when ranking various satellite spot beams at multiple locations.”);
calibrates time of a timer on the basis of the first and second distances, the first and second transmitted signal strengths, and the first and second received signal strengths, the calibrated timer being for use in obtaining the first receipt time and the second receipt time" (see par. 0005 “…allow for the mobile terminal to select the best possible satellite data beam based on an expected travel path, continually evaluate adjacent candidate beams and select an appropriate beam at the appropriate time, and prevent unnecessary switching between multiple satellite beams when traveling through an overlap of multiple satellite data beams.” Here, the mobile terminal selects the best candidate beam at the appropriate time (i.e. timer calibration) with the highest signal strength for connecting to satellites).
Regarding Claim 8 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication terminal apparatus according to claim 5, wherein, in the control process, the at least one processor determines a first candidate direction corresponding to the first coordinate and a second candidate direction corresponding to the second coordinate" (see par. 0005 “Accordingly, a beneficial design would allow for the mobile terminal to select the best possible satellite data beam based on an expected travel path, continually evaluate adjacent candidate beams and select an appropriate beam at the appropriate time, and prevent unnecessary switching between multiple satellite beams when traveling through an overlap of multiple satellite data beams.”).
Regarding Claim 11 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication terminal apparatus according to claim 5, wherein, in the control process, the at least one processor determines two candidate directions corresponding to a first communication satellite apparatus on the basis of the first and second coordinates and the first and second distances" (see par. 0047-0048 “Based on the terminal's location, e.g., longitude and latitude coordinates, and the actual satellite location obtained from the terminal's configuration file or satellite ephemeris data, the terminal computes an azimuth and elevation angle within the satellite coordinate system. The coordinates of the terminal are defined as x.sub.Term and y.sub.Term. The mobile terminal calculates the satellite spot beam center Az and El, collectively 500, which are based upon the Satellite Antenna Coordinates.”
Regarding Claim 12 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication satellite apparatus according to claim 9, wherein, in the control process, the at least one processor:
obtains a received signal strength of the radio beam including the connection request; determines whether or not to transmit the response radio beam on the basis of the received signal strength; and transmits the response radio beam when the response radio beam is determined to be transmitted" (see par. 0020 showing the request is an internet request and par. 0028 “the system determines the Weighted Fractional Distance (WFD), or distance between the mobile terminal and the location of strongest signal strength for each of the available satellite spot beam, 340. Other parameters can also be considered when ranking various satellite spot beams at multiple locations.”).
Regarding Claim 13 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication satellite apparatus according to claim 9, wherein, in the control process, the at least one processor
determines that it is unable to connect with the communication terminal apparatus when a state in which no connection is established with the communication terminal apparatus continues for a predetermined duration of time after transmission of the response radio beam" (see par. 0003 “This operation is inherently inefficient, as data packets are retransmitted to account for the time period that a physical satellite link being unavailable.” This shows there is a time duration of when satellite spot beams are received or transmitted. Par. 0026 shows “When aero terminal 130 determines that a beam switch is necessary, aero terminal 130 sends a message to network IP gateway 150 via satellite gateway 110a. The message informs the network IP gateway 150 that a satellite spot beam switch is imminent and that network IP gateway 150 should stop sending and buffer data packets being transmitted via gateway 110. In order to switch from satellite spot beam 140a to 140b, aero terminal 130 tunes receiver portion 131b of transceiver mechanism 131 to an out route carrier that is assigned to the new satellite spot beam. The aero terminal 130 also receives information about the available in routes in the new spot beam, tunes transmitter 131a of transceiver mechanism 131 to use a new in route carrier. This establishes two-way communication with satellite gateway 110b, which transmits data in the newly selected satellite spot beam, e.g., spot beam 140b.” Also see par. 0005 “select the best possible satellite data beam based on an expected travel path, continually evaluate adjacent candidate beams and select an appropriate beam at the appropriate time, and prevent unnecessary switching between multiple satellite beams when traveling through an overlap of multiple satellite data beams.” Lastly see par. 0028 “However, if the mobile terminal is receiving a signal via a satellite spot beam, the system determines whether to invoke the subsystem 320, which periodically determines whether the current spot beam that is providing a signal to the mobile terminal is the best available. If it is not time to determine the best available satellite spot beam, the mobile terminal maintains its connection to the current satellite spot beam at step 325. Otherwise, the first step 330 in this process is to determine each of the spot beams broadcasting in the area of the mobile terminal.” This shows the satellite is unable to connect with terminal periodically or at times when beyond range or line of sight.).
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 of this title, 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 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oza as applied to claim 9 above.
Regarding Claim 14 Oza teaches the limitations "The communication satellite apparatus according to claim 9, but does not explicitly disclose “wherein the antenna transmits and receives an inter-satellite beacon from and to another communication satellite apparatus, and in the control process, the at least one processor: obtains a coordinate and a movement speed of the another communication satellite apparatus, included in the inter-satellite beacon; and causes a beacon including the coordinate and the movement speed of the another communication satellite apparatus to be transmitted to the communication terminal apparatus.”
However, Oza does show in par. 0019 “The signal, which is subsequently transmitted to the controlling network access server, informs the network access server that it will soon be switching to another spot beam and gateway. The network access server transmits a signal to the gateway that is currently transmitting data informing it to stop transmitting data to the mobile terminal. The network access server transmits a second signal informing the adjacent gateway selected by the mobile terminal that it will soon be transmitting data to the mobile terminal. As the mobile terminal crosses the boundary from one spot beam to another, the mobile terminal tunes its frequency to that of the adjacent spot beam according to the parameters of the responsible gateway.”) This shows handovers to adjacent satellite beams configured via network.
In the same field of endeavor Clark discloses a beacon for satellite registration, where “Each GPS satellite calculates beacon position data 'such as the distance between the GPS satellite and the beacon. Each GPS satellite then transmits the beacon position data to the other in-view GPS satellites via inter-satellite links. The beacon position data allows each GPS satellite to calculate the relative position of the beacon. Once each GPS satellite determines its position relative to beacon, the GPS satellite calculates its own coordinates in space, since the earth coordinates of the beacon are known. Once the position of the GPS satellite is calculated, this calculated position is then compared with other satellite position data to verify the integrity of the GPS system. The other satellite position data can include 1) ephemeris data received from a ground station, and/or 2) Autonav position data. The position of the GPS satellite from either or both of these sources can be compared to the satellite position determination based on the beacon registration. If the positions match within a certain error, then the GPS satellite can verify its own integrity.” (see fig. 2, col. 3 lines 7-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to communicate inter-satellite beacons including coordinates and movement as taught by Clark in the system of Oza, in order to improve communication integrity (see col. 2 lines 47-58).
Regarding Claim 15 Oza and Clark teach the limitations "The communication satellite apparatus according to claim 14, wherein the inter-satellite beacon includes a connection request to the another communication satellite apparatus, and a connection status between the another communication satellite apparatus and the communication terminal apparatus, and when the communication satellite apparatus receives, from the communication terminal apparatus, a radio beam including the connection request to the another communication satellite apparatus, the at least one processor determines, in the control process, whether or not to transmit the response radio beam in place of the another communication satellite apparatus on the basis of the connection request to the another communication satellite apparatus and the connection status" (see par. 0019 “The signal, which is subsequently transmitted to the controlling network access server, informs the network access server that it will soon be switching to another spot beam and gateway. The network access server transmits a signal to the gateway that is currently transmitting data informing it to stop transmitting data to the mobile terminal. The network access server transmits a second signal informing the adjacent gateway selected by the mobile terminal that it will soon be transmitting data to the mobile terminal. As the mobile terminal crosses the boundary from one spot beam to another, the mobile terminal tunes its frequency to that of the adjacent spot beam according to the parameters of the responsible gateway.”) This shows handovers to adjacent satellite beams configured via network. Here, Clark shows the use of inter-satellite beacons for handovers and Oza shows the communication requests and current status of the terminal to satellite link).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to communicate inter-satellite beacons including connection requests in the modified system of Oza and Clark, in order to improve communication integrity (see col. 2 lines 47-58).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID BILODEAU whose telephone number is (571)270-3192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:00am-4:00pm Eastern Standard Time. 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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/David Bilodeau/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648