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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-10 filed on 05/28/2024 have been examined.
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s amendments and remarks filed on 03/17/2026. No claims have been amended. Claims 1-10 are currently pending and addressed below.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant’s accompanying amendments and arguments, on pages 10-14 of the Applicant Arguments/Remarks (hereinafter referred to as the “Remarks”), filed 03/17/2026, with respect to the rejection of independent claims 1 and 9 under 35 U.S.C 103 stating “… Of note, the foregoing method only uses optical camera, with no LiDAR, radar or equivalent sensors. All navigation computation is performed autonomously on-board based only on images obtained by a single camera. No other sensor is used by the Applicant's claimed method… Hablani's attitude determination is not tied to the "detect and identify space objects" function in the way claim 1 requires; it uses a conventional star tracker, not the cluster-based, catalogue-matching long-range detection of the claimed invention. Thus Hablani fails to disclose the claimed long-range processing "configured to detect and identify space objects within said images, calculate their relative orbits and distances ... and determine the attitude of the host satellite" as a single vision-only pipeline…” have been considered and are not persuasive.
The Examiner submits that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims, long-range processing is a broad term and is not defined in the claim with the details presented in the arguments above, so long-range processing can be interpreted as processing image data obtained for space objects away from the host satellite to detect and identify the objects within the images.
The Examiner also submits that independent claims 1 and 9 recite “a method/system for autonomous navigation of a satellite… equipped with … at least one on-board camera for acquiring images of the area surrounding said satellite, said method comprising: acquiring a plurality of images by said on-board camera…” is broad since the claim does not specifically define which one of the plurality of on-board cameras are used for image processing, so under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims, any of the images from the on-board cameras may be used to determine the parameters in the long-range processing.
Therefore, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of currently recited independent claims 1 and 9, Hablani discloses acquiring a plurality of images by said on-board camera (See at least [0065]-[0067] of Hablani – “… The target may be first acquired with a narrow field-of-view visible camera … The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined by using … a star tracker…” Examiner notes that a star tracker is an optical sensor used to figure out a spacecraft's orientation or attitude in space. It captures images of the surrounding star field, identifies the stars by comparing them to an onboard catalog),
default processing said acquired images, referred to as long-range processing, configured to detect and to identify space objects within said images (See at least [0065]-[0067] – “The target may be first acquired with a narrow field-of-view visible camera…The visible camera may provide the azimuth and elevation angle measurements that are used to point the camera and the laser range finder at the target … The visible camera may continue to track the target satellite in a closed-loop system … The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined by using … a star tracker…”, [0106]-[0107] – “FIG. 5a illustrates relative geometry of chaser and target satellites, a focal plane of an imaging sensor of the chaser satellite… the target image remains within the field-of-view of the sensor… Using these measurements, the chaser spacecraft may be accurately pointed to the target…” and [0180] of Hablani – “… a tight pointing control system for the laser rangefinder of one embodiment of the present invention is provided that includes visible sensor focal plane angle measurements… achieves the estimated long-range pointing accuracy …” Examiner also notes that the images obtained by the star tracker are processed to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite, and the images obtained by the visible sensors are processed to point the camera at a target satellite and track the target satellite to estimate a relative position between a chaser satellite and the target satellite), to calculate their relative orbits (See at least [0109] of Hablani – “… Using these angle measurements and, when available, a range measurement, a Kalman filter may estimate position and velocity of the target satellite relative to the chaser satellite. The orbital motion of the two satellites that may be expressed in Cartesian frames governs the relative position and velocity… The relative position vector r.sub.CW is expressed in the target LVLH orbit frame F.sub.0…”) and distances with respect to the host satellite (See at least [0122] of Hablani – “… a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) attitude controller may point the visible sensor at a target spacecraft in a circular orbit … to measure the relative range to the target…”), and to determine the attitude of the host satellite (See at least [0067] of Hablani – The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined by using … a star tracker…”).
Applicant’s accompanying amendments and arguments, on pages 14-19 of the Applicant Arguments, filed 03/17/2026, with respect to the rejection of independent claims 1 and 9 under 35 U.S.C 103 stating “… Zhang, the calculation of the relative orbits and distances from the host satellite is not done solely on the basis of the images acquired by the camera, but on the basis of merged data derived in particular from the five lasers carried by Zhang. Zhang also does not describe a stage of conditional processing of said acquired images, known as short-range processing, configured to estimate the attitude of at least one of said detected and identified space objects, known as the target object, during long-range processing… In Zhang , the attitude calculation is not performed based on images acquired by the camera, but based on merged data derived in particular from the five lasers carried by Zhang….” have been considered and are not persuasive.
The Examiner submits that Hablani already discloses acquiring a plurality of images by said on-board camera, default processing said acquired images, referred to as long-range processing, configured to detect and to identify space objects within said images, as provided above, and Zhang, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of recited claims 1 and 9, teaches conditional processing said acquired images, referred to as short-range processing, configured to estimate the attitude of at least one of said space objects, referred to as target object, detected and identified during the long-range processing, said short-range step being implemented when said long-range step detects at least one space object located at a distance estimated to be less than a predetermined threshold distance (See at least [0031]-[0037] of Zhang – “… As shown in FIG. 5, the method for implementing super-close distance autonomous navigation by using the above apparatus includes the following steps… judging whether the relative distance between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object is greater than 100 m, if yes, pushing the navigation apparatus towards the spatial object… otherwise, sequentially performing step (3)… (3) collecting a binocular infrared image… to obtain three-dimensional structure information, three-dimensional distance information, and a three-dimensional motion parameter of the spatial object… judging whether the relative distance between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object is greater than 20 m… if yes, pushing the navigation apparatus towards the spatial object, and returning to step (3); and otherwise, sequentially performing step (5)… (5) collecting laser data by using the first to fifth laser distance measuring sensors, and using the laser data, in combination with the three-dimensional structure information and the three-dimensional motion parameter of the spatial object obtained in step (3), to obtain the relative distance and a relative attitude angle between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object… (6) judging whether the relative attitude angle between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object is 0, if yes, sequentially performing step (7); and otherwise, adjusting the attitude of the navigation apparatus, reducing the relative attitude angle between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object…”).
Although the applicant argues that their claimed invention uses image data from only a single camera, it has already been established that under the broadest reasonable interpretation of claims 1 and 9, any of the plurality of onboard cameras may be used to perform the functions of the claimed invention. Therefore, while the cameras in Hablani are support the long-range processing, Zhang, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of recited claims 1 and 9, teaches using image data obtained using infrared and visible light imaging sensors in the short-range processing along with laser data to determine the parameters in the short-range processing for claims 1 and 9.
Applicant’s accompanying amendments and arguments, on pages 19-22 of the Applicant Arguments, filed 03/17/2026, with respect to the rejection of independent claims 1 and 9 under 35 U.S.C 103 stating “… Guarnieri's rendezvous/avoidance decisions are derived from sensor data and control logic that are independent of the dual-stage image pipeline defined in claim. There is no teaching that the rendezvous is determined specifically "from an estimation of the trajectory of said target object and of said host satellite" where both trajectories are derived from camera imagery processed as in the preceding steps… it appears that the Examiner's reasoning is to take the "rendezvous module" from Guarnieri and to inject it into the claimed method, ignoring the particular upstream constraints (vision-only long-range and short-range processing) that define the nature of the trajectories in claim 1… Guarnieri's rendezvous/avoidance modules are in a different context and are not tied to camera-only navigation; the combination as proposed changes the principles of operation of all systems, which weighs against obviousness…. A reconsideration is therefore respectfully requested…” have been considered and are not persuasive.
The Examiner submits that claims independent claims 1 and 9 do not specifically recite determining a possible rendezvous between at least said target object and the host satellite from an estimation of the trajectory of said target object and of said host satellite based on the upstream constraints (vision-only long-range and short-range processing) and under the broadest reasonable interpretation of claims 1 and 9, Guarnieri, in the same field of endeavor teaches determining a possible rendezvous between at least said target object and the host satellite from an estimation of the trajectory of said target object and of said host satellite (See at least Col. 8 lines 42-48 of Guarnieri – “… Satellite 442, equipped with the SPS (self-preservation system), evaluates the probability of collision with satellite 652, which is now in orbit 654(b) and autonomously executes an orbit adjust SPM (self-preservation maneuver) avoiding the collision by changing the orbit of satellite 442 from trajectory 444(a) to trajectory 444(b)...”), and
preparing and transmitting command instructions to said control unit of said means for moving and orienting said satellite based on at least one rendezvous determined in the previous step (See at least Col. 4 lines 49-64 – “… FIG. 1 shows a representation 100 of a self-preservation/self-protection system (SPS) 102 … The SPS actuators 108 augment the existing spacecraft actuators as desired and include propulsion, reaction wheels, and other attitude and obit control subsystems…” and Col. 8 lines 51-54 of Guarnieri – “… first satellite 442 autonomously executes orbit and attitude adjust maneuvers to avoid a collision with second satellite 652...”).
Therefore, the rejections of independent claims 1 and 9, and their corresponding dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 are maintained by the Examiner.
Examiner note to help applicant overcome the art on record:
Applicant may overcome the art on record by amending claims 1 and 9, with cited reference sections that support the amendments provided in the Application Specification, to specifically recite that only a single monocular camera is used to obtain the images that are used in the long-range and short-range processing steps and that the determining a possible rendezvous between at least said target object and the host satellite from an estimation of the trajectory of said target object and of said host satellite is determined using the long-range and short-range processing to define the respective trajectories
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“long-range module” provided in claim 9
“short-range module” provided in claim 9
“a module for determining a possible rendezvous between at least said target object and the host satellite” provided in claim 9
“a module for preparing and transmitting command instructions to said control unit of said means for moving and orienting said satellite” provided in claim 9
The specification and drawings were used to define the generic placeholders specified above (items a-d):
Specification – “…the modules of the system in accordance with the invention are preferably implemented by software means, i.e. by a sequence of instructions of a computer program, this sequence of instructions being able to be stored on any type of medium which can be partially or totally read by a computer or by a microprocessor on-board the satellite…” , “… control unit which controls the means for moving and orienting the satellite (navigational computer, reaction wheels and engines)…”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 7, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hablani US 20050060092 A1 (“Hablani”) in view of Zhang et al. US 20160363451 A1 (“Zhang”) and Guarnieri et al. US 11745902 B1 (“Guarnieri”).
For claim 1, Hablani discloses a method for autonomous navigation of a satellite (See at least [0008] of Hablani – “… A closed-loop control system for autonomous spacecraft navigation is disclosed...”), referred to as host satellite (See at least [0067] of Hablani – “… The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined … according to guidance algorithms… “), equipped with means for moving and orienting said satellite, a unit for controlling these means (See at least [0184] of Hablani – “… The control processor may interface with other system components to accept inputs and generate outputs, including translation and rotation commands for a chaser satellite to rendezvous with a target satellite… may interface with … an attitude controller, a reaction jet controller, and a reaction wheel controller…”), and at least one on-board camera for acquiring images of the area surrounding said satellite (See at least [0066]-[0067] of Hablani – “… The visible camera may continue to track the target satellite in a closed-loop system of one example embodiment of the present invention… The attitude of the chaser spacecraft, quaternion q in FIG. 1, is determined by using … a star tracker … “. Examiner notes that star trackers are used to determine the attitude of a spacecraft by obtaining images of stars to identify the stars and measure their positions relative to the spacecraft), said method comprising:
acquiring a plurality of images by said on-board camera (See at least [0065]-[0067] of Hablani – “… The target may be first acquired with a narrow field-of-view visible camera … The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined by using … a star tracker…”),
default processing said acquired images, referred to as long-range processing, configured to detect and to identify space objects within said images (See at least [0065]-[0067] – “The target may be first acquired with a narrow field-of-view visible camera…The visible camera may provide the azimuth and elevation angle measurements that are used to point the camera and the laser range finder at the target … The visible camera may continue to track the target satellite in a closed-loop system … The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined by using … a star tracker…”, [0106]-[0107] – “FIG. 5a illustrates relative geometry of chaser and target satellites, a focal plane of an imaging sensor of the chaser satellite… the target image remains within the field-of-view of the sensor… Using these measurements, the chaser spacecraft may be accurately pointed to the target…” and [0180] of Hablani – “… a tight pointing control system for the laser rangefinder of one embodiment of the present invention is provided that includes visible sensor focal plane angle measurements… achieves the estimated long-range pointing accuracy …” Examiner also notes that the images obtained by the star tracker are processed to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite, and the images obtained by the visible sensors are processed to point the camera at a target satellite and track the target satellite to estimate a relative position between a chaser satellite and the target satellite), to calculate their relative orbits (See at least [0109] of Hablani – “… Using these angle measurements and, when available, a range measurement, a Kalman filter may estimate position and velocity of the target satellite relative to the chaser satellite. The orbital motion of the two satellites that may be expressed in Cartesian frames governs the relative position and velocity… The relative position vector r.sub.CW is expressed in the target LVLH orbit frame F.sub.0…”) and distances with respect to the host satellite (See at least [0122] of Hablani – “… a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) attitude controller may point the visible sensor at a target spacecraft in a circular orbit … to measure the relative range to the target…”), and to determine the attitude of the host satellite (See at least [0067] of Hablani – The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined by using … a star tracker…”).
Hablani fails to specifically disclose conditional processing said acquired images, referred to as short-range processing, configured to estimate the attitude of at least one of said space objects, referred to as target object, detected and identified during the long-range processing, said short-range step being implemented when said long-range step detects at least one space object located at a distance estimated to be less than a predetermined threshold distance.
However, Zhang, in the same field of endeavor teaches conditional processing said acquired images, referred to as short-range processing, configured to estimate the attitude of at least one of said space objects, referred to as target object, detected and identified during the long-range processing, said short-range step being implemented when said long-range step detects at least one space object located at a distance estimated to be less than a predetermined threshold distance (See at least [0031]-[0037] of Zhang – “… As shown in FIG. 5, the method for implementing super-close distance autonomous navigation by using the above apparatus includes the following steps… judging whether the relative distance between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object is greater than 100 m, if yes, pushing the navigation apparatus towards the spatial object… otherwise, sequentially performing step (3)… (3) collecting a binocular infrared image… to obtain three-dimensional structure information, three-dimensional distance information, and a three-dimensional motion parameter of the spatial object… judging whether the relative distance between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object is greater than 20 m… if yes, pushing the navigation apparatus towards the spatial object, and returning to step (3); and otherwise, sequentially performing step (5)… (5) collecting laser data by using the first to fifth laser distance measuring sensors, and using the laser data, in combination with the three-dimensional structure information and the three-dimensional motion parameter of the spatial object obtained in step (3), to obtain the relative distance and a relative attitude angle between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object… (6) judging whether the relative attitude angle between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object is 0, if yes, sequentially performing step (7); and otherwise, adjusting the attitude of the navigation apparatus, reducing the relative attitude angle between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object…”). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Zhang teaches a super-close distance autonomous navigation apparatus that determines whether a spatial object is located at a distance less than a threshold distance and then determines a relative attitude of the spatial object with respect to the autonomous navigation apparatus.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the feature of processing said acquired images to estimate the attitude of at least one of said space objects detected and identified during the long-range processing when said long-range step detects at least one space object located at a distance estimated to be less than a predetermined threshold distance as taught by Zhang, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to adjust the attitude of the navigation apparatus as necessary for the navigation apparatus to arrive at the spatial object as specified in at least [0035]-[0039] of Zhang.
Furthermore, Hablani also fails to specifically disclose determining a possible rendezvous between at least said target object and the host satellite from an estimation of the trajectory of said target object and of said host satellite, and
preparing and transmitting command instructions to said control unit of said means for moving and orienting said satellite based on at least one rendezvous determined in the previous step.
However, Guarnieri, in the same field of endeavor teaches determining a possible rendezvous between at least said target object and the host satellite from an estimation of the trajectory of said target object and of said host satellite (See at least Col. 8 lines 42-48 of Guarnieri – “… Satellite 442, equipped with the SPS (self-preservation system), evaluates the probability of collision with satellite 652, which is now in orbit 654(b) and autonomously executes an orbit adjust SPM (self-preservation maneuver) avoiding the collision by changing the orbit of satellite 442 from trajectory 444(a) to trajectory 444(b)...”), and
preparing and transmitting command instructions to said control unit of said means for moving and orienting said satellite based on at least one rendezvous determined in the previous step (See at least Col. 4 lines 49-64 – “… FIG. 1 shows a representation 100 of a self-preservation/self-protection system (SPS) 102 … The SPS actuators 108 augment the existing spacecraft actuators as desired and include propulsion, reaction wheels, and other attitude and obit control subsystems…” and Col. 8 lines 51-54 of Guarnieri – “… first satellite 442 autonomously executes orbit and attitude adjust maneuvers to avoid a collision with second satellite 652...”). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Guarnieri teaches a self-preservation/self-protection system (SPS) for autonomous satellites that determines a possibility of collision with other space objects based on estimated trajectories of the satellite and other spaces objects and executes control of actuators of the satellite in order to avoid collision with other space objects.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the feature of determining a possible rendezvous between at least said target object and the host satellite from an estimation of the trajectory of said target object and of said host satellite as taught by Guarnieri, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to execute an orbit adjust SPM (self-preservation maneuver) to avoid a collision with another space object with a crossing trajectory as specified in at least Col. 8 lines 32-48 of Guarnieri.
For claim 2, Hablani fails to specifically disclose wherein said long-range processing further comprises:
thresholding the images,
clustering different points of the thresholded images,
calculating the centers of the different clusters of the image, and
classifying and filtering the different clusters forming said detected celestial and space objects.
However, Zhang, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein said long-range processing further comprises:
thresholding the images (See at least [0034]-[0036] of Zhang – “… (3) collecting a binocular infrared image by using the first and second infrared imaging sensors, collecting a binocular visible light image by using the first and second visible light imaging sensors… judging whether the relative distance between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object is greater than 20 m according to the three-dimensional distance information of the spatial object, if yes, pushing the navigation apparatus towards the spatial object, and returning to step (3); and otherwise, sequentially performing step (5)… (5) collecting laser data by using the first to fifth laser distance measuring sensors, and using the laser data… to obtain the relative distance and a relative attitude angle between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object…”),
clustering different points of the thresholded images (See at least [0009] of Zhang – “… collecting the binocular infrared image by using the first and second infrared imaging sensors, collecting the binocular visible light image by using the first and second visible light imaging sensors… respectively detecting line segment and angular point features in the binocular infrared image and the binocular visible light image, to obtain a feature point in the binocular infrared image and a feature point in the binocular visible light image… matching the feature points in the left infrared image and the right infrared image of the binocular infrared image, matching the feature points in the left visible light image and the right visible light image of the binocular visible light image…”),
calculating the centers of the different clusters of the image (See at least [0041]-[0042] of Zhang – “… collecting the binocular infrared image by using the first and second infrared imaging sensors… separating the spatial object from a background, to obtain a region of interest of the spatial object… extracting a spatial object profile, tracking the spatial object profile, calculating a two-dimensional graphics center of the spatial object profile…”), and
classifying and filtering the different clusters forming said detected celestial and space objects (See at least [0041]-[0042] of Zhang – “… collecting the binocular infrared image by using the first and second infrared imaging sensors… separating the spatial object from a background, to obtain a region of interest of the spatial object… extracting a spatial object profile, tracking the spatial object profile, calculating a two-dimensional graphics center of the spatial object profile…”). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Zhang teaches a super-close distance autonomous navigation apparatus that determines whether a spatial object is located at a distance less than a threshold distance and then determines a relative attitude of the spatial object with respect to the autonomous navigation apparatus .
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the feature of classifying and filtering the different clusters forming said detected celestial and space objects as taught by Zhang, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to separate the spatial object from a background to obtain a region of interest of the spatial object and calculate a two-dimensional graphics center of the spatial object profile as specified in at least [0041]-[0042] of Zhang.
For claim 7, Hablani discloses wherein determining a possible rendezvous comprises:
estimating the trajectory of the host satellite from a linearized model of the satellite's dynamics (See at least [0005] – “… When two spacecraft in near-Earth circular orbits are within a distance of approximately 10 km, guidance policies for a chaser satellite may be based on linear Clohessy-Wiltshire equations... for rendezvous and proximity operations requires position and velocity estimates of the chaser satellite relative to the target satellite…” and [0066] of Hablani – “… The visible camera may continue to track the target satellite in a closed-loop system … commands require a relative position vector… may be estimated using a relative six-state navigation Kalman filter… If the target satellite is in a circular orbit and is passive … and if the chaser satellite is sufficiently close to the target satellite such that the arc separation between the two vehicles is less than the angle measurement noise of the visible camera, then the relative Kalman filter may be based on the linear, time-invariant Clohessy-Wiltshire equations. One such filter is described in Ref. 1…”).
Hablani fails to specifically disclose calculating the probability of collision with an identified space object.
However, Guarnieri, in the same field of endeavor teaches calculating the probability of collision with an identified space object (See at least Col. 8 lines 42-48 of Guarnieri – “… Satellite 442, equipped with the SPS (self-preservation system), evaluates the probability of collision with satellite 652, which is now in orbit 654(b) and autonomously executes an orbit adjust SPM (self-preservation maneuver) avoiding the collision by changing the orbit of satellite 442 from trajectory 444(a) to trajectory 444(b)...”). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Guarnieri teaches a self-preservation/self-protection system (SPS) for autonomous satellites that determines a possibility of collision with other space objects based on estimated trajectories of the satellite and other spaces objects and executes control of actuators of the satellite in order to avoid collision with other space objects.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the feature of calculating the probability of collision with an identified space object as taught by Guarnieri, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to execute an orbit adjust SPM (self-preservation maneuver) to avoid a collision with another space object with a crossing trajectory as specified in at least Col. 8 lines 32-48 of Guarnieri.
For claim 9, Hablani discloses a system for autonomous navigation of a satellite (See at least [0008] of Hablani – “… A closed-loop control system for autonomous spacecraft navigation is disclosed...”), referred to as host satellite (See at least [0067] of Hablani – “… The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined … according to guidance algorithms… “), equipped with means for moving and orienting said satellite, a unit for controlling these means (See at least [0184] of Hablani – “… The control processor may interface with other system components to accept inputs and generate outputs, including translation and rotation commands for a chaser satellite to rendezvous with a target satellite… may interface with … an attitude controller, a reaction jet controller, and a reaction wheel controller…”), said system comprising:
at least one camera for acquiring a plurality of images of the area surrounding said host satellite (See at least [0065]-[0067] of Hablani – “… The target may be first acquired with a narrow field-of-view visible camera … The visible camera may continue to track the target satellite in a closed-loop system of one example embodiment of the present invention… The attitude of the chaser spacecraft, quaternion q in FIG. 1, is determined by using … a star tracker … “. Examiner notes that star trackers are used to determine the attitude of a spacecraft by obtaining images of stars to identify the stars and measure their positions relative to the spacecraft),
a module for default processing of said acquired images, referred to as long-range module, configured to detect and to identify space objects within said images (See at least [0065]-[0067] – “The target may be first acquired with a narrow field-of-view visible camera…The visible camera may provide the azimuth and elevation angle measurements that are used to point the camera and the laser range finder at the target … The visible camera may continue to track the target satellite in a closed-loop system … The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined by using … a star tracker…”, [0106]-[0107] – “FIG. 5a illustrates relative geometry of chaser and target satellites, a focal plane of an imaging sensor of the chaser satellite… the target image remains within the field-of-view of the sensor… Using these measurements, the chaser spacecraft may be accurately pointed to the target…” and [0180]-[0184] of Hablani – “… a tight pointing control system for the laser rangefinder of one embodiment of the present invention is provided that includes visible sensor focal plane angle measurements… achieves the estimated long-range pointing accuracy … The …relative navigation… pointing and rate commands components of the present invention … associated computer programs or computer program products required for performing the described functionality… the present invention may be effected by a computer system… connected to, and implementing software and data stored by, memory…” Examiner also notes that the images obtained by the star tracker are processed to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite, and the images obtained by the visible sensors are processed to point the camera at a target satellite and track the target satellite to estimate a relative position between a chaser satellite and the target satellite), to calculate their relative orbits (See at least [0109] of Hablani – “… Using these angle measurements and, when available, a range measurement, a Kalman filter may estimate position and velocity of the target satellite relative to the chaser satellite. The orbital motion of the two satellites that may be expressed in Cartesian frames governs the relative position and velocity… The relative position vector r.sub.CW is expressed in the target LVLH orbit frame F.sub.0…”) and distances with respect to the host satellite (See at least [0122] of Hablani – “… a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) attitude controller may point the visible sensor at a target spacecraft in a circular orbit … to measure the relative range to the target…”), and to determine the attitude of said host satellite (See at least [0067] of Hablani – The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined by using … a star tracker…”).
Hablani fails to specifically disclose a module for conditional processing of said acquired images, referred to as short-range module, configured to estimate the attitude of at least one of said space objects, referred to as target object, detected and identified by said long-range module, said short-range module being implemented when said long-range module has detected at least one space object located at a distance estimated to be less than a predetermined threshold distance.
However, Zhang, in the same field of endeavor teaches a module for conditional processing of said acquired images, referred to as short-range module, configured to estimate the attitude of at least one of said space objects, referred to as target object, detected and identified by said long-range module, said short-range module being implemented when said long-range module has detected at least one space object located at a distance estimated to be less than a predetermined threshold distance (See at least [0031]-[0037] of Zhang – “… As shown in FIG. 5, the method for implementing super-close distance autonomous navigation by using the above apparatus includes the following steps… judging whether the relative distance between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object is greater than 100 m, if yes, pushing the navigation apparatus towards the spatial object… otherwise, sequentially performing step (3)… (3) collecting a binocular infrared image… to obtain three-dimensional structure information, three-dimensional distance information, and a three-dimensional motion parameter of the spatial object… judging whether the relative distance between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object is greater than 20 m… if yes, pushing the navigation apparatus towards the spatial object, and returning to step (3); and otherwise, sequentially performing step (5)… (5) collecting laser data by using the first to fifth laser distance measuring sensors, and using the laser data, in combination with the three-dimensional structure information and the three-dimensional motion parameter of the spatial object obtained in step (3), to obtain the relative distance and a relative attitude angle between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object… (6) judging whether the relative attitude angle between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object is 0, if yes, sequentially performing step (7); and otherwise, adjusting the attitude of the navigation apparatus, reducing the relative attitude angle between the navigation apparatus and the spatial object…”). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Zhang teaches a super-close distance autonomous navigation apparatus that determines whether a spatial object is located at a distance less than a threshold distance and then determines a relative attitude of the spatial object with respect to the autonomous navigation apparatus.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the feature of processing said acquired images to estimate the attitude of at least one of said space objects detected and identified during the long-range processing when said long-range step detects at least one space object located at a distance estimated to be less than a predetermined threshold distance as taught by Zhang, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to adjust the attitude of the navigation apparatus as necessary for the navigation apparatus to arrive at the spatial object as specified in at least [0035]-[0039] of Zhang.
Furthermore, Hablani also fails to specifically disclose a module for determining a possible rendezvous between at least said target object and the host satellite from an estimation of the trajectory of said target object and of said host satellite, and
a module for preparing and transmitting command instructions to said control unit of said means for moving and orienting said satellite based on said rendezvous determined by said rendezvous-determining module.
However, Guarnieri, in the same field of endeavor teaches a module for determining a possible rendezvous between at least said target object and the host satellite from an estimation of the trajectory of said target object and of said host satellite (See at least Col. 8 lines 42-48 of Guarnieri – “… Satellite 442, equipped with the SPS (self-preservation system), evaluates the probability of collision with satellite 652, which is now in orbit 654(b) and autonomously executes an orbit adjust SPM (self-preservation maneuver) avoiding the collision by changing the orbit of satellite 442 from trajectory 444(a) to trajectory 444(b)...”), and
a module for preparing and transmitting command instructions to said control unit of said means for moving and orienting said satellite based on said rendezvous determined by said rendezvous-determining module (See at least Col. 4 lines 49-64 – “… FIG. 1 shows a representation 100 of a self-preservation/self-protection system (SPS) 102 … The SPS actuators 108 augment the existing spacecraft actuators as desired and include propulsion, reaction wheels, and other attitude and obit control subsystems…” and Col. 8 lines 51-54 of Guarnieri – “… first satellite 442 autonomously executes orbit and attitude adjust maneuvers to avoid a collision with second satellite 652...”). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Guarnieri teaches a self-preservation/self-protection system (SPS) for autonomous satellites that determines a possibility of collision with other space objects based on estimated trajectories of the satellite and other spaces objects and executes control of actuators of the satellite in order to avoid collision with other space objects.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the feature of determining a possible rendezvous between at least said target object and the host satellite from an estimation of the trajectory of said target object and of said host satellite as taught by Guarnieri, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to execute an orbit adjust SPM (self-preservation maneuver) to avoid a collision with another space object with a crossing trajectory as specified in at least Col. 8 lines 32-48 of Guarnieri.
For claim 10, Hablani discloses further comprising an image-acquisition camera intended to provide images to the long-range processing module and an image-acquisition camera intended to provide images to the short-range processing module (See at least [0065]-[0067] of Hablani – “… The target may be first acquired with a narrow field-of-view visible camera … The attitude of the chaser spacecraft… is determined by using … a star tracker…”).
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hablani in view of Zhang and Guarnieri, as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Cantu et al. US 20200377240 A1 (“Cantu”).
For claim 3, Hablani discloses wherein said long-range processing further comprises:
a star tracker for determining the attitude of said host satellite from a position of at least one of the identified celestial objects (See at least [0067] of Hablani – “… The attitude of the chaser spacecraft, quaternion q in FIG. 1, is determined by using … a star tracker … “. Examiner notes that star trackers are used to determine the attitude of a spacecraft by obtaining images of stars to identify the stars and measure their positions relative to the spacecraft).
Hablani fails to specifically disclose wherein said long-range processing further comprises:
comparing said detected celestial and space objects with a predetermined catalogue of celestial objects so as to identify at least one celestial object from among the detected objects.
However, Cantu, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein said long-range processing further comprises:
comparing said detected celestial and space objects with a predetermined catalogue of celestial objects so as to identify at least one celestial object from among the detected objects (See at least [0024] of Cantu – “… the star trackers 34 include one or more star tracker processors 46 (FIG. 1) that measure an apparent position of the heavenly bodies in a reference frame of the spacecraft 20, determine an identity of each of the heavenly bodies (e.g., as the Sun, Moon, stars, etc.), and compare the apparent position of the heavenly bodies with a known absolute position from a reference catalog to create measurements that represent the current attitude of the spacecraft 20…”). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Cantu teaches a spacecraft that uses star trackers to compare detected heavenly bodies with a predetermined catalogue of celestial objects so as to identify the heavenly bodies.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the feature of comparing detected celestial and space objects with a predetermined catalogue of celestial objects so as to identify at least one celestial object from among the detected objects as taught by Cantu, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to determine the attitude of the spacecraft as specified in at least [0024] of Cantu.
For claim 4, Hablani discloses wherein said long-range processing further comprises:
calculating the position of at least one detected and identified space object within the image, referred to as target object (See at least [0109] of Hablani – “… Using these angle measurements and, when available, a range measurement, a Kalman filter may estimate position and velocity of the target satellite relative to the chaser satellite. The orbital motion of the two satellites that may be expressed in Cartesian frames governs the relative position and velocity… The relative position vector r.sub.CW is expressed in the target LVLH orbit frame F.sub.0…”), and
calculating orbital features of said target object from the determination of the attitude of the host satellite and the position of said calculated target object (See at least [0066] – “… the architecture required for pointing a visible camera with precision and tracking the target is shown in FIG. 1. The attitude of the chaser spacecraft, quaternion q in FIG. 1, is determined by using gyros and a star tracker (q.sub.gyro/ST)… to bring the chaser satellite closer to the target satellite, according to guidance algorithms described in Ref. 1… for estimated relative position…” and [0109] of Hablani – “… Using these angle measurements and, when available, a range measurement, a Kalman filter may estimate position and velocity of the target satellite relative to the chaser satellite. The orbital motion of the two satellites that may be expressed in Cartesian frames governs the relative position and velocity… The relative position vector r.sub.CW is expressed in the target LVLH orbit frame F.sub.0…”).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hablani in view of Zhang, Guarnieri, and Cantu, as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Cidonio et al. US 11919663 B2 (“Cidonio”).
For claim 5, Hablani fails to specifically disclose wherein said attitude-determining comprises:
implementing an extended Kalman filter from a first estimation of the angular speed and attitude of the host satellite and the position of at least one identified celestial object.
However, Cidonio, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein said attitude-determining comprises:
implementing an extended Kalman filter from a first estimation of the angular speed and attitude of the host satellite and the position of at least one identified celestial object (See at least Col. 6 lines 42-67 of Cidonio – “… The present invention also concerns a method for estimating … an attitude of the space platform… equipped with at least one star tracker… estimating an attitude of the space platform based on the first and second images acquired… inputting the angular velocity and attitude estimates… into a predefined Kalman filter configured to correct said angular velocity and attitude estimates …”). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Cidonio teaches a system that estimates the angular velocity and attitude of a satellite.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the feature of implementing an extended Kalman filter from a first estimation of the angular speed and attitude of the host satellite and the position of at least one identified celestial object as taught by Cidonio, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to correct the angular velocity and attitude estimates as specified in at least Col. 6 lines 42-67 of Cidonio.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hablani in view of Zhang, and Guarnieri, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shao WO 2021078001 A1 (“Shao”), Tal et al. US 20220020230 A1 (“Tal”), and Rothberg et al. JP 2019521745 A (“Rothberg”).
For claim 6, Hablani fails to specifically disclose wherein said short-range processing comprises:
detecting a zone of interest comprising the target object of interest by executing a first neural network,
detecting landmarks in said detected zone of interest, and
estimating the pose of the target object from the landmarks detected in the previous step.
However, Shao, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein said short-range processing comprises:
detecting a zone of interest comprising the target object of interest by executing a first neural network (See at least pages 7-8 of Shao – “… The target object in the first image is enhanced by a neural network according to the target object in the guide image to obtain a target image… the target object is the moon…”),
detecting landmarks in said detected zone of interest (See at least page 40 of Shao – “… the electronic device may determine whether there is a target object in the guide image … based on the landmark detection …” Examiner notes that landmarks may be detected for the various objects captured in an image), and
estimating the pose of the target object from the landmarks detected in the previous step (See at least page 40 of Shao – “… electronic device may determine whether there is a target object in the guide image that is similar to the face pose in the first image based on the landmark detection …” Examiner notes that landmarks may be detected for the various objects captured in an image). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Shao teaches an image enhancement system that uses a neural network to detect an object in an image, detect landmarks for the objects in the image, and determine the pose of the object based on the landmarks.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the feature of detecting a zone of interest comprising the target object of interest by executing a first neural network as taught by Shao, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to enhance the image of the object as specified in at least page 5 of Shao.
Hablani also fails to specifically disclose wherein said short-range processing comprises:
detecting a zone of interest comprising a target object of interest by executing a first neural network,
detecting landmarks in said detected zone of interest by executing a second neural network.
However, Tal, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein said short-range processing comprises:
detecting a zone of interest comprising a target object of interest by executing a first neural network (See at least [0128] of Tal – “One neural network 905 can be responsible for detecting 902 objects 12 and/or regions 12 of interest in the image(s) 16…”),
detecting landmarks in said detected zone of interest by executing a second neural network (See at least [0128] of Tal – “…one or more additional neural network(s) 905 can be responsible for extracting landmarks (1005 see FIG. 10) from the objects 12 and/or regions 12 of interest …”). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Tal teaches a system that acquires images of objects on a road and uses one neural network to detect zones of interest for detected objects and another neural network to determine landmarks for the regions of interest.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the features of detecting a zone of interest comprising a target object of interest by executing a first neural network and detecting landmarks in said detected zone of interest by executing a second neural network as taught by Tal, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to simplify neural networks and reduce the memory and processing requirements for each neural network as specified in at least [0129] of Tal.
Lastly, Hablani also fails to specifically disclose regressively detecting landmarks in said detected zone of interest.
However, Rothberg, in the same field of endeavor teaches regressively detecting landmarks in said detected zone of interest (See at least [0289] of Rothberg – “Regression modeling is used to detect … landmark positions in an image, visually track an object or feature, and estimate body poses. Deep learning methods perform better than previous techniques…” Examiner notes that regressively detecting landmarks in images may be applied to for objects captured in the image). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Rothberg teaches an imaging system that detects landmarks for objects in the images using regression techniques.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the features of regressively detecting landmarks in said detected zone of interest as taught by Rothberg, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to estimate body poses as specified in at least [0289] of Rothberg.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hablani in view of Zhang, and Guarnieri, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schilling US 20190389602 A1 (“Schilling”).
For claim 8, Hablani fails to specifically disclose wherein said preparing and transmitting command instructions to said control unit comprises:
dynamically simulating the flight of said host satellite,
modelling the commands from said dynamic simulation, and
repeating the previous steps until said target object is reached or avoided.
However, Schilling, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein said preparing and transmitting command instructions to said control unit comprises:
dynamically simulating the flight of said host satellite (See at least [0027] of Schilling – “… the object detection device can select a minimum diameter d.sub.k of the collision tube autonomously such that at least the small satellite is included… avoidance device can in case of overlapping of the collision tube with the other body tube in an overlapping area A.sub.k, determine a trajectory correction T.sub.kk such that in particular multiple trajectory corrections with a cost function are simulated…”),
modelling the commands from said dynamic simulation (See at least [0027] of Schilling – “… the collision tube with the other body tube in an overlapping area A.sub.k, determine a trajectory correction T.sub.kk such that in particular multiple trajectory corrections with a cost function are simulated… to control the propulsion system to achieve the trajectory correction T.sub.kk… Fuzzy Logic or similar simulation … can be used to achieve a minimum cost for a trajectory correction…”), and
repeating the previous steps until said target object is reached or avoided (See at least Claim 17 of Schilling – “…the avoidance device determines a trajectory correction T.sub.kk while the collision tube overlapping the foreign object tube in an overlap area A.sub.kf, in particular simulates several trajectory corrections with a cost function and determines a minimal cost trajectory correction T.sub.kk and controls the propulsion system to follow the trajectory correction T.sub.kk…”). Thus, Hablani discloses a closed loop system for a chaser satellite that uses imaging sensors to capture stars in space and track a target satellite in order to determine the attitude of the chaser satellite and a relative position of the chaser satellite with respect to a target satellite for navigation guidance and control for autonomous rendezvous and proximity operations, while Schilling teaches a satellite collision avoidance system that is able to simulate multiple trajectories for the satellite to avoid collision with another body.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation method and navigation system as disclosed in Hablani to include the features of dynamically simulating the flight of said host satellite as taught by Schilling, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to achieve a minimum cost for a trajectory correction for the satellite as specified in at least [0027] of Schilling.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MICHAEL J HERRERA whose telephone number is (571)270-5271. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST.
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, FADEY JABR can be reached at (571)272-1516. 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.
/M.J.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/NAEEM TASLIM ALAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights