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 .
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.
Claim(s) 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu et al (US 2016/0134813).
Regarding claim 16, Hu et al shows in Figs.2A-4B the following elements of applicant’s claim: a housing (22, 26; Figs.4A-4B), the housing comprising a first end and a second end, wherein the first end comprises an opening into an internal portion of the housing; an image sensor (27) positioned within the internal portion of the housing (Fig.4B); and an optical element (21) positioned within the internal portion of the housing (Fig.4B), wherein the optical element has a length parameter and a width parameter, wherein at least one of the length parameter and the width parameter is larger than the other of the length parameter and the width parameter (Figs.2A-3B).
Regarding claim 19, the limitations therein are shown in Fig.4B of Hu et al.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) s 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al (US 2016/0134813).
Regarding claim 17, the specific dimension utilized for an optical element would have been an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art depending on the needs of particular application and involving only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 18, the specific scheme and configuration utilized would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements and achieving the particular desired performance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 and 20-28 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 1-15, while the prior art (i.e. Hu et al ) discloses the use of a housing, an image sensor and an optical element, it fails to discloses or make obvious a spacecraft comprising, in addition to the other recited features of the claim, the details and functions of a primary payload sensor and a secondary imaging system comprising a housing, an image sensor and an optical sensor in the manner recited in claim 1. Regarding claims 20-28, the prior art fails to disclose or make obvious a method for determining an attitude of a spacecraft comprising, in addition to the other recited features of the claim, the features of capturing, by the claimed at least one second imaging system of the spacecraft, an image of one or more starts, wherein the at least one secondary imaging system being aligned along a second axis that is different than a first axis of a primary payload sensor of the spacecraft; comparing the image of the one or more starts to a stored image of the one or more stars; and determining the attitude of the spacecraft in the manner recited in claim 20.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lapstun et al (US 9,185,290) is cited for disclosing a wide area aerial camera system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN K PYO whose telephone number is (571)272-2445. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Georgia Y Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/KEVIN K PYO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878