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 .
This action is in response to the communication filed on January 14, 2026 in response to the first office action on merit.
Remarks
Pending claims for reconsideration are claims 1, 3-8, 10, and 12-18. Applicant has
Amended claims 1, and 10.
Canceled claims 2, 9, and 11.
Added new claims 12-18.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on January 14, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the remarks, applicant argues in substance:
In response to argument (Page 7, Para 1) - Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s argument that Metzger failed to disclose splitting data for transmission in regard to independent claims 1, 10, and 12. Metzger discloses distributing the data object to multiple satellites, where a portion of the data object i.e., “splitting data” into two or more portions and storing at different satellites, where the satellites distributes the data objects to a receiving/transmitting station on the ground i.e., object of interest (boat, truck, etc.) (Para 0041-0042). Metzger further discloses obtaining the data objects from multiple satellites (Para0065).
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 1-8, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Metzger et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No.: US 2019/0289018 A1 / or “Metzger” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Metzger discloses “A method for transmitting data from a transmission source to a transmission target using at least two components of a network moving relative to the transmission source and/or transmission target, the method comprising” (Abstract: methods, systems, and software for managing data stored in satellites; and Para 0034: storing data on plurality of satellites i.e., “two components of a network moving”; and Para 0035: a subset of satellites are selected; and Para 0042: a portion of the data object may be stored at different satellites):
“splitting data into at least two parts” (Para 0041-0042: distributing the data object to multiple satellites, where a portion of the data object i.e., “splitting data” into two or more portions and storing at different satellites, where the satellites distributes the data objects to a receiving/transmitting station on the ground i.e., object of interest (boat, truck, etc.) and Para 0065, also discloses obtaining the data objects from multiple satellites);
“and sending the data using a distributed database, wherein the at least two parts are transmitted by the at least two components” (Para 0046: satellites with distributed database generates new blocks and distributes them),
“wherein the at least two parts are linked cryptographically to one another” (Para 0045: lines 3-6, the blocks are cryptographically linked to each other).
Regarding claim 3, in view of claim 1, Metzger discloses “wherein the at least two components comprise at least one vehicle” (Para 0041: vehicle).
Regarding claim 4, in view of claim 1, Metzger discloses “wherein one of the at least two parts is transmitted by a respective one of the components” (Para 0045: lines 3-6, the blocks are cryptographically linked to each other).
Regarding claim 5, in view of claim 1, Metzger discloses “wherein in each case one of the two parts is transmitted multiple times by way of a respective one, of the at least two components” (Para 0042: distributes the data to one more satellites).
Regarding claim 6, in view of claim 1, Metzger discloses “wherein the moving components are not used to transmit in each case all parts of the distributed database, but rather at most an actual partial set of the parts of the distributed database” (Para 0046: satellites with distributed database generates new blocks and distributes them i.e., only new blocks are distributed).
Regarding claim 7, in view of claim 1, Metzger discloses “wherein the parts are linked cryptographically to one another such that the parts are arranged in at least one sequence in relation to one another; each part of the sequence that follows a preceding part is provided with at least one hash value of this preceding part” (Para 0045: the blocks are cryptographically linked to each other by calculating hash).
Regarding claim 8, in view of claim 1, Metzger discloses “wherein in each case a signature of the parts is requested or received in each case by a component by way of which these parts are transmitted” (Para 0045: signature is generated).
Regarding claim 10, Metzger discloses “A non-transitory computer memory storing a set of instructions, where the set of instruction cause a processor to” (Abstract: methods, systems, and software for managing data stored in satellites; and Para 0034: storing data on plurality of satellites i.e., “two components of a network moving”; and Para 0035: a subset of satellites are selected; and Para 0042: a portion of the data object may be stored at different satellites):
“split a data into at least two parts” (Para 0042: a portion of the data object may be stored at different satellites);
“transmit the at least two parts from a transmission source to a transmission target using at least two components moving relative to the transmission source and/or transmission target” (Para 0041-0042: distributing the data object to multiple satellites, where a portion of the data object i.e., “splitting data” into two or more portions and storing at different satellites, where the satellites distributes the data objects to a receiving/transmitting station on the ground i.e., object of interest (boat, truck, etc.) and Para 0065, also discloses obtaining the data objects from multiple satellites);
“and distribute the data into a distributed database or compose said data from a distributed database, wherein the two parts are linked cryptographically to one another” (Para 0045: lines 3-6, the blocks are cryptographically linked to each other);
“and request or receive a respective signature of the parts by a component by way of which these parts are transmitted” (Para 0045: signature is generated).
Regarding claim 12, Metzger discloses “A method for transmitting data from a transmission source to a transmission target using at least two components of a network moving relative to the transmission source and/or transmission target, the method comprising” (Abstract: methods, systems, and software for managing data stored in satellites; and Para 0034: storing data on plurality of satellites i.e., “two components of a network moving”; and Para 0035: a subset of satellites are selected; and Para 0042: a portion of the data object may be stored at different satellites):
“sending data comprising at least two parts using a distributed database” (Para 0041-0042: distributing the data object to multiple satellites, where a portion of the data object i.e., “splitting data” into two or more portions and storing at different satellites, where the satellites distributes the data objects to a receiving/transmitting station on the ground i.e., object of interest (boat, truck, etc.) and Para 0065, also discloses obtaining the data objects from multiple satellites),
“wherein the at least two parts are transmitted by the at least two components” (Para 0046: satellites with distributed database generates new blocks and distributes them);
“and composing the at least two parts into a single data set” (Para 0054” “…maintain full copies of the blockchain for an application executing across a subset of satellites 710-713…”);
“wherein the at least two parts are linked cryptographically to one another” (Para 0045: lines 3-6, the blocks are cryptographically linked to each other).
Regarding claims 13-18, claims 13-18 is directed to a method corresponding to the method recited in claims 3-8. Claims 13-18 is similar in scope to claims 3-8, and is therefore, rejected under similar rationale.
Relevant Prior Arts
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rao et al. (US 2023/0161052 A1) discloses “…Correspondingly, the processor 322 may also select and process parameters modelling the atmosphere in a direct line of sight between receiver-side devices 100 placed in a given subarea 138 and the corresponding set of satellites 200. As a consequence, each one of the data sets 140-1 to 140-N is much smaller than the entire collection of service area correction data 312 provided in the database 310.…” (Para 0072: lines 10-16).
Mord et al. (US 20200106605 A1) discloses “…single shared virtual blockchain that is validated using N satellites, where a user can consider a consistent copy of the virtual blockchain to be valid up to and including the most recent block for which signatures from at least a majority of the N satellites have been observed…” (Para 0120).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDULLAH ALMAMUN whose telephone number is (571) 270-3392. The examiner can normally be reached on 8 AM - 5 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, Lynn Feild can be reached on (571) 272-2092. 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.
/ABDULLAH ALMAMUN/Examiner, Art Unit 2431
/SARAH SU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431
Prosecution Insights