DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 § 102
2. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-3, 10-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Karabinis et al., U.S. Patent No. 6,975,582 (hereinafter Karabinis).
Regarding claim 1, Karabinis discloses a system (disclosed are a ground station and a plurality of satellites that communicate with said ground station, according to column 20 lines 66-67, Fig. 10) comprising:
a station configured to transmit or receive one or more signals having path delay to or from a satellite or satellite formation or to or from a user end device, said the station configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay of the one or more signals to provide a substantially constant path delay for the one or more signals (the ground station comprises time alignment units that are configured to approximately equalize delays for signals that are transmitted to mobile units via the satellites, according to column 21 lines 9-14).
Regarding claim 14, Karabinis discloses a method (disclosed is a satellite communication method, according to column 20 line 66 to column 21 line 30), comprising:
identifying, by a processing device of a station, a signal path delay between a satellite or satellite formation and a user end device (time alignment units of a ground station identify signal path delays to mobile units via the satellites, according to column 21 lines 9-14);
determining, by the processing device of the station, a variable delay based on the signal path delay (the time alignment units determined adjustments that result in approximately equalize delays, according to column 21 lines 9-14); and
causing the variable delay to be applied to one or more signals between the satellite or satellite formation and the user end device to provide a substantially constant path delay (the time alignment units operate to provide an approximately equalized delay in the signals that are transmitted to the mobile units via the satellites, according to column 21 lines 9-14).
Regarding claim 2, Karabinis discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the station is configured to form a beam with the satellite or satellite formation, wherein the beam is compensated based on satellite ephemeris and beam-center latitude-longitude, for Doppler frequency shift induced by the satellite or satellite formation (the ground station compensates for Doppler shift based on the center of a beam and a satellite’s velocity [“satellite ephemeris”], according to column 21 lines 9-30).
Regarding claim 3, Karabinis discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the station is configured to provide a delayed-transmission communication protocol to account for communication delay between the station and the satellite or satellite formation (the ground station acts to approximately equalize transmission delay to mobile units via the satellites, according to column 21 lines 9-14).
Regarding claim 10, Karabinis discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the system is further configured to apply an inverse Doppler to cancel Doppler effect to provide an equalized near zero Doppler and a variable delay based on a path delay to provide an equalized final constant path delay (both the Doppler shift and the delay are corrected for such that the modulated signal is frequency aligned and time aligned, according to column 21 lines 9-30).
Regarding claim 11, Karabinis discloses the system of claim 2, the station configured to provide a delayed-transmission communication protocol to account for communication delay between the station and the satellite or satellite formation (the delay in the communication path via the satellite is corrected for such that the modulated signal is time aligned, according to column 21 lines 9-30).
Regarding claim 12, Karabinis discloses the system of claim 2, the satellite or satellite formation configured to provide a delayed-transmission communication protocol to account for communication delay between the satellite or satellite formation with at least one of the station or the end user device (the delay in the communication path to a mobile unit via the satellite is corrected for such that the modulated signal is time aligned, according to column 21 lines 9-30).
Regarding claim 13, Karabinis discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the station is a ground station (the station is a ground station, according to column 20 lines 66-67, Fig. 10).
Claim 15 does not differ substantively from claim 2, and is therefore rejected on the same grounds as claim 2.
Claim 16 does not differ substantively from claim 3, and is therefore rejected on the same grounds as claim 3.
Claim 20 does not differ substantively from claim 11, and is therefore rejected on the same grounds as claim 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
7. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
8. Claims 4 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karabinis as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, in view of Nawata, U.S. Patent No. 5,465,096 (hereinafter Nawata).
Regarding claim 4, Karabinis discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Karabinis does not expressly disclose that an overall delay induced by the station at each beam-center is a constant.
Nawata discloses that an overall delay induced by the station at each beam-center is a constant (a delay time settings means delays time for each delay circuit so that delays between an orbiting satellite and spot beam centers are fixed, according to column 3 line 56 to column 4 line 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Karabinis with Nawata such that an overall delay induced by the station at each beam-center is a constant.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate frame synchronization (Nawata: Column 3 Lines 8-24).
Claim 17 does not differ substantively from claim 4, and is therefore rejected on the same grounds as claim 4.
9. Claims 5-9 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karabinis as applied to claims 1-2 and 14 above, in view of Chapin et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2009/0170472 (hereinafter Chapin).
Regarding claim 5, Karabinis discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Karabinis does not expressly disclose that the system further comprises a plurality of virtual base-stations, and a frequency division multiplexer configured to receive a signal from each of the plurality of virtual base-stations to form a composite signal.
Chapin discloses that the system further comprises a plurality of virtual base-stations, and a frequency division multiplexer configured to receive a signal from each of the plurality of virtual base-stations to form a composite signal (disclosed is a system comprising a plurality of virtual base stations, according to [0083]-[0084], [0087], Fig. 3 [elements 26a, 26b, and 26c], whereby the separate data flows of the respective virtual base stations are multiplexed (whereby each virtual base station communicates with wireless devices using a different corresponding frequency band, according to [0019], [0025], [0029]) and sent via a satellite backhaul that links the virtual base stations to a base station/radio network controller, according to [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Karabinis with Chapin such that the system further comprises a plurality of virtual base-stations, and a frequency division multiplexer configured to receive a signal from each of the plurality of virtual base-stations to form a composite signal.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate cost savings when providing cellular service to rural areas (Chapin: [0034]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Karabinis and Chapin discloses all the limitations of claim 5.
Karabinis does not expressly disclose that the system further comprises an up converter configured to receive the composite signal from the frequency division multiplexer and to transmit an up-converted composite signal to the satellite or satellite formation.
Chapin discloses that the system further comprises an up converter configured to receive the composite signal from the frequency division multiplexer and to transmit an up-converted composite signal to the satellite or satellite formation (the system comprises means for upconverting signals, according to [0076], [0092], whereby the virtual base stations use RF frequencies and share a satellite backhaul link, whereby the backhaul link may use microwave frequencies, according to [0086]-[0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Karabinis as modified by Chapin with Chapin such that the system further comprises an up converter configured to receive the composite signal from the frequency division multiplexer and to transmit an up-converted composite signal to the satellite or satellite formation.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate cost savings when providing cellular service to rural areas (Chapin: [0034]).
Regarding claim 7, Karabinis discloses all the limitations of claim 2.
Karabinis does not expressly disclose that the system further comprises a plurality of virtual base-stations and a down converter configured to receive a composite signal from the satellite or satellite formation and provide a down-converted signal.
Chapin discloses that the system further comprises a plurality of virtual base-stations and a down converter configured to receive a composite signal from the satellite or satellite formation and provide a down-converted signal (disclosed is a system comprising a plurality of virtual base stations, according to [0083]-[0084], [0087], Fig. 3 [elements 26a, 26b, and 26c], whereby the system comprises means for downconverting signals, according to [0076], [0092], whereby the virtual base stations use RF frequencies and share a satellite backhaul link, whereby the backhaul link may use microwave frequencies, according to [0086]-[0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Karabinis with Chapin such that the system further comprises a plurality of virtual base-stations and a down converter configured to receive a composite signal from the satellite or satellite formation and provide a down-converted signal.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate cost savings when providing cellular service to rural areas (Chapin: [0034]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Karabinis and Chapin discloses all the limitations of claim 7.
Karabinis does not expressly disclose that the system further comprises a demultiplexer configured to receive the down-converted signal and provide a demultiplexed down-converted signal to each of the plurality of virtual base-stations.
Chapin discloses that the system further comprises a demultiplexer configured to receive the down-converted signal and provide a demultiplexed down-converted signal to each of the plurality of virtual base-stations (separate data flows received by the respective virtual base stations are demultiplexed from a signal received via a satellite backhaul that links the virtual base stations to a base station/radio network controller, according to [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Karabinis as modified by Chapin with Chapin such that the system further comprises a demultiplexer configured to receive the down-converted signal and provide a demultiplexed down-converted signal to each of the plurality of virtual base-stations.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate cost savings when providing cellular service to rural areas (Chapin: [0034]).
Regarding claim 9, Karabinis discloses all the limitations of claim 2.
Karabinis does not expressly disclose that the system further comprises a plurality of virtual base-stations; a frequency division multiplexer/demultiplexer configured to receive a signal from each of the plurality of virtual base-stations to form a station composite signal; and, an up/down converter configured to receive the station composite signal from the frequency division multiplexer and transmit an up-converted composite signal to the satellite or satellite formation, the up/down converter further configured to receive a satellite composite signal from the satellite or satellite formation and provide a down-converted signal, wherein the multiplexer/demultiplexer is further configured to receive the down-converted signal and provide a demultiplexed down-converted signal to each of the plurality of virtual base-stations.
Chapin discloses that the system further comprises a plurality of virtual base-stations (disclosed is a system comprising a plurality of virtual base stations, according to [0083]-[0084], [0087], Fig. 3 [elements 26a, 26b, and 26c]);
a frequency division multiplexer/demultiplexer configured to receive a signal from each of the plurality of virtual base-stations to form a station composite signal (the separate data flows of the respective virtual base stations are multiplexed and demultiplexed (whereby each virtual base station communicates with wireless devices using a different corresponding frequency band, according to [0019], [0025], [0029]) and sent and received via a satellite backhaul that links the virtual base stations to a base station/radio network controller, according to [0088]); and,
an up/down converter configured to receive the station composite signal from the frequency division multiplexer and transmit an up-converted composite signal to the satellite or satellite formation, the up/down converter further configured to receive a satellite composite signal from the satellite or satellite formation and provide a down-converted signal (the system comprises means for upconverting and downconverting signals, according to [0076], [0092], whereby the virtual base stations use RF frequencies and share a satellite backhaul link, whereby the backhaul link may use microwave frequencies, according to [0086]-[0088]),
wherein the multiplexer/demultiplexer is further configured to receive the down-converted signal and provide a demultiplexed down-converted signal to each of the plurality of virtual base-stations (separate data flows received by the respective virtual base stations are demultiplexed from a signal received via a satellite backhaul that links the virtual base stations to a base station/radio network controller, according to [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Karabinis with Chapin such that the system further comprises a plurality of virtual base-stations; a frequency division multiplexer/demultiplexer configured to receive a signal from each of the plurality of virtual base-stations to form a station composite signal; and, an up/down converter configured to receive the station composite signal from the frequency division multiplexer and transmit an up-converted composite signal to the satellite or satellite formation, the up/down converter further configured to receive a satellite composite signal from the satellite or satellite formation and provide a down-converted signal, wherein the multiplexer/demultiplexer is further configured to receive the down-converted signal and provide a demultiplexed down-converted signal to each of the plurality of virtual base-stations.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate cost savings when providing cellular service to rural areas (Chapin: [0034]).
Regarding claim 18, Karabinis discloses all the limitations of claim 14.
Karabinis does not expressly disclose receiving a signal from each of a plurality of virtual base-stations; forming a composite signal with each of the received signals; up-converting the composite signal; and transmitting the up-converted signal to the satellite or satellite formation.
Chapin discloses receiving a signal from each of a plurality of virtual base-stations (signals from a plurality of virtual base stations are received, according to [0088]);
forming a composite signal with each of the received signals (the signals from the virtual base stations are multiplexed together, according to [0088]);
up-converting the composite signal (the system comprises means for upconverting signals, according to [0076], [0092], whereby the virtual base stations use RF frequencies and share a satellite backhaul link, whereby the backhaul link may use microwave frequencies, according to [0086]-[0088]); and
transmitting the up-converted signal to the satellite or satellite formation (the signal from the virtual base stations is transmitted via a satellite backhaul, according to [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Karabinis with Chapin by receiving a signal from each of a plurality of virtual base-stations; forming a composite signal with each of the received signals; up-converting the composite signal; and transmitting the up-converted signal to the satellite or satellite formation.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate cost savings when providing cellular service to rural areas (Chapin: [0034]).
Regarding claim 19, Karabinis discloses all the limitations of claim 14.
Karabinis does not expressly disclose receiving a composite signal from the satellite or satellite formation; down-converting the received composite signal into a down-converted signal; demultiplexing the down-converted signal into a demultiplexed signal; and providing the demultiplexed signal to a plurality of virtual base-stations.
Chapin discloses receiving a composite signal from the satellite or satellite formation (a plurality of virtual base stations receive a signal via a satellite backhaul, according to [0088]);
down-converting the received composite signal into a down-converted signal (the system comprises means for downconverting signals, according to [0076], [0092], whereby the virtual base stations use RF frequencies and share a satellite backhaul link, whereby the backhaul link may use microwave frequencies, according to [0086]-[0088]);
demultiplexing the down-converted signal into a demultiplexed signal (the signals for the virtual base stations are demultiplexed, according to [0088]); and
providing the demultiplexed signal to a plurality of virtual base-stations (the virtual base stations receive their respective signals, according to [0088]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Karabinis with Chapin by receiving a composite signal from the satellite or satellite formation; down-converting the received composite signal into a down-converted signal; demultiplexing the down-converted signal into a demultiplexed signal; and providing the demultiplexed signal to a plurality of virtual base-stations.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate cost savings when providing cellular service to rural areas (Chapin: [0034]).
Double Patenting
10. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
11. Claims 1-4, 10-13, 14-17, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 5 and 27-28 of U.S. Patent No. 9,973,266. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in U.S. Patent No. 9,973,266 with obvious wording variations. Take an example of comparing independent claim 1 of the pending application and claim 28 of U.S. Patent No. 9,973,266:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 9,973,266
“A system comprising:”
“A high throughput satellite system, comprising:”
“a station configured to transmit or receive one or more signals having path delay to or from a satellite or satellite formation or to or from a user end device, said the station configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay of the one or more signals to provide a substantially constant path delay for the one or more signals.”
“a dense large phased array of a plurality of coordinated small remote satellites … wherein the array forms multiple beams, and wherein each beam is pre-compensated based on satellite ephemeris and beam-center latitude-longitude, for delay so that the overall delay induced by the remote satellite at each beam-center is a constant.”
Claim 1 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 28 of U.S. Patent No. 9,973,266.
Take an example of comparing independent claim 14 of the pending application and claim 28 of U.S. Patent No. 9,973,266:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 9,973,266
“A method, comprising:”
“A high throughput satellite system, comprising: … a dense large phased array of a plurality of coordinated small remote satellites, each remote satellite having one or more antenna and a relative positioning system including an electromagnetic device that maintains a distance in close proximity to other remote satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) in space …”
“identifying, by a processing device of a station, a signal path delay between a satellite or satellite formation and a user end device;”
“The system of claim 1, wherein the array forms multiple beams, and wherein each beam is pre-compensated based on satellite ephemeris and beam-center latitude-longitude, for delay so that the overall delay induced by the remote satellite at each beam-center is a constant.”
“determining, by the processing device of the station, a variable delay based on the signal path delay; and”
“The system of claim 1, wherein the array forms multiple beams, and wherein each beam is pre-compensated based on satellite ephemeris and beam-center latitude-longitude, for delay so that the overall delay induced by the remote satellite at each beam-center is a constant.”
“causing the variable delay to be applied to one or more signals between the satellite or satellite formation and the user end device to provide a substantially constant path delay.”
“The system of claim 1, wherein the array forms multiple beams, and wherein each beam is pre-compensated based on satellite ephemeris and beam-center latitude-longitude, for delay so that the overall delay induced by the remote satellite at each beam-center is a constant.”
Claim 14 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 28 of U.S. Patent No. 9,973,266.
Claims 2-4, 10-13, 15-17, and 20 of the pending application 18/517,478 correspond to claims 27, 28, 28, 27 and 28, 28, 28, 5, 27, 28, 28, and 28, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 9,973,266.
12. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 6, and 8-11 of U.S. Patent No. 10,979,133. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in U.S. Patent No. 10,979,133 with obvious wording variations. Take an example of comparing independent claim 1 of the pending application and claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 10,979,133:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 10,979,133
“A system comprising:”
“A communication system comprising:”
“a station configured to transmit or receive one or more signals having path delay to or from a satellite or satellite formation or to or from a user end device, said the station configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay of the one or more signals to provide a substantially constant path delay for the one or more signals.”
“a ground station for transmitting and receiving signals to and from a satellite or satellite formation … wherein the signals having a path delay, said ground station further configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay to provide an equalized final constant path delay for the signals.”
Claim 1 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 10,979,133.
Take an example of comparing independent claim 14 of the pending application and claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 10,979,133:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 10,979,133
“A method, comprising:”
“A communication system comprising: a ground station for transmitting and receiving signals to and from a satellite or satellite formation …”
“identifying, by a processing device of a station, a signal path delay between a satellite or satellite formation and a user end device;”
“a ground station for transmitting and receiving signals to and from a satellite or satellite formation … wherein the signals having a path delay, said ground station further configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay to provide an equalized final constant path delay for the signals.”
“determining, by the processing device of the station, a variable delay based on the signal path delay; and”
“wherein the signals having a path delay, said ground station further configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay to provide an equalized final constant path delay for the signals.”
“causing the variable delay to be applied to one or more signals between the satellite or satellite formation and the user end device to provide a substantially constant path delay.”
“wherein the signals having a path delay, said ground station further configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay to provide an equalized final constant path delay for the signals.”
Claim 14 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 10,979,133.
Claims 2-13 and 15-20 of the pending application 18/517,478 correspond to claims 6, 4, 3, 10, 11, 8, 9, 11, 1, 4, 4, 1, 6, 4, 3, 11, 9, and 4, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 10,979,133.
13. Claims 1-4, 10-17, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3-4, and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,750,275. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in U.S. Patent No. 11,750,275 with obvious wording variations. Take an example of comparing independent claim 1 of the pending application and claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,750,275:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 11,750,275
“A system comprising:”
“A satellite communication system comprising:”
“a station configured to transmit or receive one or more signals having path delay to or from a satellite or satellite formation or to or from a user end device, said the station configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay of the one or more signals to provide a substantially constant path delay for the one or more signals.”
“one or more low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites comprising: a phased antenna array configured to provide a plurality of beams and a field of view, the field of view having a plurality of cells and each of the plurality of beams is associated with one of the plurality of cells within the field of view; and one or more delay compensators configured to perform delay compensation on signals relative to center or approximately center of each of the plurality of beams so as to obtain an approximately constant or fixed delay;”
Claim 1 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,750,275.
Take an example of comparing independent claim 14 of the pending application and claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,750,275:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 11,750,275
“A method, comprising:”
“A method for satellite communication, the method comprising:”
“identifying, by a processing device of a station, a signal path delay between a satellite or satellite formation and a user end device;”
“delay compensating signals relative to center or approximately center of each of the plurality of beams.”
“determining, by the processing device of the station, a variable delay based on the signal path delay; and”
“delay compensating signals relative to center or approximately center of each of the plurality of beams.”
“causing the variable delay to be applied to one or more signals between the satellite or satellite formation and the user end device to provide a substantially constant path delay.”
“receiving, via the plurality of phased array antennas, a signal from a terrestrial user device via one of the plurality of beams so as to obtain an approximately constant or fixed delay based on the one or more frequencies;”
Claim 14 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,750,275.
Claims 2-4, 10-13, 15-17, and 20 of the pending application 18/517,478 correspond to claims 3, 1, 1, 1 and 3, 1, 1, 4, 3, 1, 1, and 1, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 11,750,275.
14. Claims 1-4, 10-17, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 11,870,540. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in U.S. Patent No. 11,870,540 with obvious wording variations. Take an example of comparing independent claim 1 of the pending application and claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 11,870,540:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 11,870,540
“A system comprising:”
“A station configured to …”
“a station configured to transmit or receive one or more signals having path delay to or from a satellite or satellite formation or to or from a user end device, said the station configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay of the one or more signals to provide a substantially constant path delay for the one or more signals.”
“A station configured to support direct communication between a set of discrete satellite modules … wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform the delay compensation by adding a proportionate delay to achieve a substantially constant delay.”
Claim 1 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 11,870,540.
Take an example of comparing independent claim 14 of the pending application and claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 11,870,540:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 11,870,540
“A method, comprising:”
“A station configured to support direct communication between a set of discrete satellite modules operating in low Earth orbit (LEO) and forming a distributed phased-array antenna with a single aperture and a set of end user devices, the station comprising:”
“identifying, by a processing device of a station, a signal path delay between a satellite or satellite formation and a user end device;”
“The station of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform the delay compensation by adding a proportionate delay to achieve a substantially constant delay.”
“determining, by the processing device of the station, a variable delay based on the signal path delay; and”
“The station of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform the delay compensation by adding a proportionate delay to achieve a substantially constant delay.”
“causing the variable delay to be applied to one or more signals between the satellite or satellite formation and the user end device to provide a substantially constant path delay.”
“The station of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform the delay compensation by adding a proportionate delay to achieve a substantially constant delay.”
Claim 14 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 11,870,540.
Claims 2-4, 10-13, 15-17, and 20 of the pending application 18/517,478 correspond to claims 1, 1, 3, 1, 1, 1, 6, 1, 1, 3, and 1, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 11,870,540.
15. Claims 1, 3, 10-14, 16, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3-4, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,063,098. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in U.S. Patent No. 12,063,098 with obvious wording variations. Take an example of comparing independent claim 1 of the pending application and claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,063,098:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 12,063,098
“A system comprising:”
“A satellite communication system, comprising:”
“a station configured to transmit or receive one or more signals having path delay to or from a satellite or satellite formation or to or from a user end device, said the station configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay of the one or more signals to provide a substantially constant path delay for the one or more signals.”
“wherein the doppler compensation is performed so that residual doppler within a given cell results in a substantially constant delay experienced by the user device.”
Claim 1 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,063,098.
Take an example of comparing independent claim 14 of the pending application and claim 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,063,098:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 12,063,098
“A method, comprising:”
“A method for satellite communication, comprising:”
“identifying, by a processing device of a station, a signal path delay between a satellite or satellite formation and a user end device;”
“performing, using one or more delay compensators, delay compensation of at least one of the second or fourth signals.”
“determining, by the processing device of the station, a variable delay based on the signal path delay; and”
“performing, using one or more delay compensators, delay compensation of at least one of the second or fourth signals.”
“causing the variable delay to be applied to one or more signals between the satellite or satellite formation and the user end device to provide a substantially constant path delay.”
“The method of claim 14, wherein the doppler compensation is performed so that residual doppler within a given cell results in a substantially constant delay experienced by the user device.”
Claim 14 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,063,098.
Claims 3, 10-13, 16, and 20 of the pending application 18/517,478 correspond to claims 1, 3, 1, 1, 1, 1, and 1, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 12,063,098.
16. Claims 1-4, 10-12, 14-17, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,095,544. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in U.S. Patent No. 12,095,544 with obvious wording variations. Take an example of comparing independent claim 1 of the pending application and claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,095,544:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 12,095,544
“A system comprising:”
“A global-system-for-mobiles (GSM) satellite communication system …”
“a station configured to transmit or receive one or more signals having path delay to or from a satellite or satellite formation or to or from a user end device, said the station configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay of the one or more signals to provide a substantially constant path delay for the one or more signals.”
“… in communication with a satellite … wherein the one or more compensating devices are configured to add one or more artificial delays to radio frequency delays associated with the plurality of beam centers to achieve constant delays for the plurality of beam centers.”
Claim 1 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,095,544.
Take an example of comparing independent claim 14 of the pending application and claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,095,544:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 12,095,544
“A method, comprising:”
“A global-system-for-mobiles (GSM) satellite communication system in communication with a satellite …”
“identifying, by a processing device of a station, a signal path delay between a satellite or satellite formation and a user end device;”
“the processing device being configured to normalize delay for a plurality of beam centers of the plurality of cells, and to provide the normalized delay to another processing device …”
“determining, by the processing device of the station, a variable delay based on the signal path delay; and”
“the processing device being configured to normalize delay for a plurality of beam centers of the plurality of cells, and to provide the normalized delay to another processing device …”
“causing the variable delay to be applied to one or more signals between the satellite or satellite formation and the user end device to provide a substantially constant path delay.”
“The GSM satellite communication system of claim 6, wherein the one or more compensating devices are configured to add one or more artificial delays to radio frequency delays associated with the plurality of beam centers to achieve constant delays for the plurality of beam centers.”
Claim 14 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,095,544.
Claims 2-4, 10-12, 15-17, and 20 of the pending application 18/517,478 correspond to claims 1, 1, 8, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 8, and 1, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 12,095,544.
17. Claims 1, 3-4, 11-14, 16-17, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,143,197. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in U.S. Patent No. 12,143,197 with obvious wording variations. Take an example of comparing independent claim 1 of the pending application and claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,143,197:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 12,143,197
“A system comprising:”
“A satellite communication system, comprising:”
“a station configured to transmit or receive one or more signals having path delay to or from a satellite or satellite formation or to or from a user end device, said the station configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay of the one or more signals to provide a substantially constant path delay for the one or more signals.”
“one or more low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites … wherein the delay compensation is performed so as to obtain an approximately constant or a fixed delay.”
Claim 1 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,143,197.
Take an example of comparing independent claim 14 of the pending application and claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,143,197:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 12,143,197
“A method, comprising:”
“A satellite communication system, comprising: one or more low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites having a phased antenna array configured to provide a plurality of beams for communication …”
“identifying, by a processing device of a station, a signal path delay between a satellite or satellite formation and a user end device;”
“one or more delay compensators configured to perform delay compensation on signals relative to a beam center for each respective beam of the plurality of beams;”
“determining, by the processing device of the station, a variable delay based on the signal path delay; and”
“one or more delay compensators configured to perform delay compensation on signals relative to a beam center for each respective beam of the plurality of beams;”
“causing the variable delay to be applied to one or more signals between the satellite or satellite formation and the user end device to provide a substantially constant path delay.”
“The satellite communication system of claim 1, wherein the delay compensation is performed so as to obtain an approximately constant or a fixed delay.”
Claim 14 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,143,197.
Claims 3-4, 11-13, 16-17, and 20 of the pending application 18/517,478 correspond to claims 1, 6, 1, 1, 1, 1, 6, and 1, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 12,143,197.
18. Claims 1-4, 10-17, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 9, and 15-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,401,395. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in U.S. Patent No. 12,401,395 with obvious wording variations. Take an example of comparing independent claim 1 of the pending application and claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,401,395:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 12,401,395
“A system comprising:”
“A satellite communication handover system …”
“a station configured to transmit or receive one or more signals having path delay to or from a satellite or satellite formation or to or from a user end device, said the station configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay of the one or more signals to provide a substantially constant path delay for the one or more signals.”
“wherein the satellite communication handover system is configured to perform delay and Doppler compensation for each beam to normalize delay to a constant amount.”
Claim 1 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,401,395.
Take an example of comparing independent claim 14 of the pending application and claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,401,395:
Pending Application 18/517,478
U.S. Patent No. 12,401,395
“A method, comprising:”
“A satellite communication handover system configured for communication with a first setting satellite …”
“identifying, by a processing device of a station, a signal path delay between a satellite or satellite formation and a user end device;”
“The satellite communication handover system of claim 1, wherein the satellite communication handover system is configured to perform delay and Doppler compensation for each beam to normalize delay to a constant amount.”
“determining, by the processing device of the station, a variable delay based on the signal path delay; and”
“The satellite communication handover system of claim 1, wherein the satellite communication handover system is configured to perform delay and Doppler compensation for each beam to normalize delay to a constant amount.”
“causing the variable delay to be applied to one or more signals between the satellite or satellite formation and the user end device to provide a substantially constant path delay.”
“The satellite communication handover system of claim 1, wherein the satellite communication handover system is configured to perform delay and Doppler compensation for each beam to normalize delay to a constant amount.”
Claim 14 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,401,395.
Claims 2-4, 10-13, 15-17, and 20 of the pending application 18/517,478 correspond to claims 9, 1, 1, 9, 1, 1, 16, 9, 1, 1, and 1, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 12,401,395.
19. Claims 1-4, 10-17, and 20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 13, and 15-16 of copending application 18/766,811. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations recited in the present application are transparently found in copending application 18/766,811 with obvious wording variations. Take an example of comparing independent claim 1 of the pending application and claim 15 of copending application 18/766,811:
Pending Application 18/517,478
Copending Application 18/766,811
“A system comprising:”
“A satellite communication system …”
“a station configured to transmit or receive one or more signals having path delay to or from a satellite or satellite formation or to or from a user end device, said the station configured to apply a variable delay based on the path delay of the one or more signals to provide a substantially constant path delay for the one or more signals.”
“wherein the system is configured to buffer data on each beam so that an overall delay at each bean-center is substantially constant.”
Claim 1 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 15 of copending application 18/766,811.
Take an example of comparing independent claim 14 of the pending application and claim 15 of copending application 18/766,811:
Pending Application 18/517,478
Copending Application 18/766,811
“A method, comprising:”
“A satellite communication system operable in low Earth orbit (LEO), comprising: a plurality of phased array antennas spatially arranged together to provide an antenna aperture, the plurality of phased array antennas configured to:
provide a plurality of beams …”
“identifying, by a processing device of a station, a signal path delay between a satellite or satellite formation and a user end device;”
“one or more delay compensators configured to delay compensate at least one of the second or fourth signals.”
“determining, by the processing device of the station, a variable delay based on the signal path delay; and”
“one or more delay compensators configured to delay compensate at least one of the second or fourth signals.”
“causing the variable delay to be applied to one or more signals between the satellite or satellite formation and the user end device to provide a substantially constant path delay.”
“The satellite communication system of claim 1, wherein the system is configured to buffer data on each beam so that an overall delay at each bean-center is substantially constant.”
Claim 14 of the pending application 18/517,478 is anticipated by claim 15 of copending application 18/766,811.
Claims 2-4, 10-13, 15-17, and 20 of the pending application 18/517,478 correspond to claims 13 and 16, 1, 15, 1, 1, 1, 1, 13 and 16, 1, 15, and 1, respectively, of copending application 18/766,811. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Conclusion
20. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW W GENACK whose telephone number is (571)272-7541. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Eastern 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, Anthony Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/MATTHEW W GENACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights