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 .
Claims 1-7 are currently pending.
The official correspondence below is a first action non-final.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of priority documents electronically retrieved by the USPTO 02-25-2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07-04-2024 have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
Drawings submitted on 07-04-2024 have been considered by the examiner.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ross (US 5218467 A) in view of Sobhani (US 20170034250 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 1, Ross discloses, obtaining information pertaining to an orbit (Ross: [ABS] The earth pointing geosynchronous satellite terminal has no gimbal but has a separate tracking mechanism for tracking each low Earth orbiting satellite; The acquisition detector 22 compares the multiple incoming signals deflected by the bifurcating mirror 21 to determine the direction from which the signal is coming, and the communication and fine track detector 23 analyzes the incoming control signals for information concerning its orbit or data transmissions (Col. 4, Ln. 11-17)) of each of a plurality of satellite apparatuses (Ross: The transmission laser beam 11 and reception laser beam 10 travel along the same path for two-way communication and tracking with the LEO satellites (Col. 3, Ln. 30-35); [ABS]; (Col. 4, Ln. 11-17)) each of which includes optical communication equipment (Ross: [ABS] An optical pickup mechanism at the end of each arm is positioned for optical communication with one of the orbiting satellites by rotation of the ring); and setting any one of the plurality of satellite apparatuses as a first satellite apparatus in order (Ross: A multi-access laser terminal 4 which communicates with the LEOs is located on the GEO 1 (Col. 2, Ln. 52-53)), and then a determining process of determining, on the basis of the information (Ross: The acquisition detector 22 compares the multiple incoming signals deflected by the bifurcating mirror 21 to determine the direction from which the signal is coming, and the communication and fine track detector 23 analyzes the incoming control signals for information concerning its orbit or data transmissions. Both the acquisition detector 22 and the communications and fine track detector 23 feed information back to the control electronics 24 which will use the information to appropriately adjust the gimballed optics 15, TMBS 18, and TMBS point ahead 20 and terminal in general (Col. 4, Ln. 11-22)), whether each of a plurality of second satellite apparatuses which are included in the plurality of satellite apparatuses and which are other than the first satellite apparatus is capable of being acquired (Ross: The image pickup system 5 enables a small optical system to move to each LEO satellite's approximate position on the plane and then acquire, track, and communicate with the LEO (Col. 3, Ln. 8-12)) and tracked from the first satellite apparatus by optical communication (Ross: The GEO control electronics 12 performs satellite computer analysis of LEO orbits for guiding the multiplicities of image pickups and performs feedback control on the received signals to position the pick-ups precisely to enable tracking of each LEO satellite (Col. 3, Ln. 40-45)), a command creating process of creating a command for acquiring and tracking (Ross: provides command and control data to the LEOs 2 (Col. 2, Ln. 37-38)), by optical communication (Ross: The transmission laser beam 11 and reception laser beam 10 travel along the same path for two-way communication and tracking with the LEO satellites (Col. 3, Ln. 32-34)), a second satellite apparatus which is capable of being acquired and tracked from the first satellite apparatus by optical communication (Ross: The transmission laser beam 11 and reception laser beam 10 travel along the same path for two-way communication and tracking with the LEO satellites (Col. 3, Ln. 32-34)), on the basis of a result of determination made in the determining process (Ross: The acquisition detector 22 compares the multiple incoming signals deflected by the bifurcating mirror 21 to determine the direction from which the signal is coming, and the communication and fine track detector 23 analyzes the incoming control signals for information concerning its orbit or data transmissions. Both the acquisition detector 22 and the communications and fine track detector 23 feed information back to the control electronics 24 which will use the information to appropriately adjust the gimballed optics 15, TMBS 18, and TMBS point ahead 20 and terminal in general (Col. 4, Ln. 11-22)).
Ross does not explicitly disclose, a transmitting process of transmitting the command to the first satellite apparatus.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Sobhani discloses, obtaining information pertaining to an orbit (Sobhani: [0062] In some embodiments, navigation and fleet management of communications satellites 120 and network satellites 110 are performed by Telemetry, Tracking and Control (“TT&C”) stations (not shown) placed on planet 1 where geographically desired ... TT&C monitoring and requests can be transmitted directly from the ground to any network satellite 110 which can in turn relay the TT&C transmissions to any other network satellite 110 wirelessly connected to the satellite cloud network; [FIG. 1]), for the benefit of providing alternate utility for the communications system with satellites in alternate orbital planes or radii.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Ross to include a fleet manager on the ground taught by Sobhani. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide alternate utility for the communications system with satellites in alternate orbital planes or radii.
REGARDING CLAIM 2, Ross, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further, Sobhani also discloses, in the transmitting process, the at least one processor includes, in the command, information indicating a path to the first satellite apparatus (Sobhani: [0059]; [0079] the geosynchronous communications satellites 120 in turn transmit data and instructions 10 to and retrieve data and instructions 10 from terrestrial access terminals 130 on the surface of the Earth 1; [0070] The satellite network 100 may adjust the most recently received authorized instruction according to changing parameters, such as ... orbital adjustments).
Sobhani does not explicitly recite the terminology "indicating a path to the first satellite apparatus". However, Sobhani does disclose adjusting recently received instruction, including orbital adjustments and collision avoidance. Which, implies or suggests originally receiving orbital instructions.
REGARDING CLAIM 3, Ross, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further, Sobhani also discloses, in the command creating process, in a case where there is a difference between the command which has been created and which is for the first satellite apparatus (Sobhani: [0059]; [0079] the geosynchronous communications satellites 120 in turn transmit data and instructions 10 to and retrieve data and instructions 10 from terrestrial access terminals 130 on the surface of the Earth 1; [0070] The satellite network 100 may adjust the most recently received authorized instruction according to changing parameters, such as ... orbital adjustments) and a previous command which is for the first satellite apparatus (Sobhani: [0059]; [0079] the geosynchronous communications satellites 120 in turn transmit data and instructions 10 to and retrieve data and instructions 10 from terrestrial access terminals 130 on the surface of the Earth 1; [0070] The satellite network 100 may adjust the most recently received authorized instruction according to changing parameters, such as ... orbital adjustments), the at least one processor creates a command based on the difference (Sobhani: [0059]; [0079] the geosynchronous communications satellites 120 in turn transmit data and instructions 10 to and retrieve data and instructions 10 from terrestrial access terminals 130 on the surface of the Earth 1; [0070] The satellite network 100 may adjust the most recently received authorized instruction according to changing parameters, such as ... orbital adjustments).
REGARDING CLAIMS 6, Ross discloses, (a) obtaining information pertaining to an orbit (Ross: [ABS]; (Col. 4, Ln. 11-17)) of each of a plurality of satellite apparatuses (Ross: (Col. 3, Ln. 30-35)) each of which includes optical communication equipment (Ross: [ABS]); and (b) setting any one of the plurality of satellite apparatuses as a first satellite apparatus in order (Ross: (Col. 2, Ln. 52-53)), and then (c) determining, on the basis of the information (Ross: (Col. 2, Ln. 57-59); (Col. 4, Ln. 11-22)), whether each of a plurality of second satellite apparatuses which are included in the plurality of satellite apparatuses and which are other than the first satellite apparatus is capable of being acquired (Ross: (Col. 3, Ln. 8-12)) and tracked from the first satellite apparatus by optical communication (Ross: (Col. 3, Ln. 40-45)), (d) creating a command for acquiring and tracking (Ross: (Col. 2, Ln. 37-38)), by optical communication (Ross: (Col. 3, Ln. 32-34)), a second satellite apparatus which is capable of being acquired and tracked from the first satellite apparatus by optical communication (Ross: (Col. 3, Ln. 32-34)), on the basis of a result of determination made in (b) (Ross: (Col. 2, Ln. 57-59); (Col. 4, Ln. 11-22)), wherein at least one processor included in a satellite control apparatus carries out (a) to (e) (Ross: The GEO control electronics 12 performs satellite computer analysis (Col. 3, Ln. 40-41)).
Ross does not explicitly disclose, (e) transmitting the command to the first satellite apparatus.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Sobhani discloses, (e) transmitting the command to the first satellite apparatus, wherein at least one processor included in a satellite control apparatus carries out (a) to (e) (Sobhani: [0062]; [FIG. 1]), for the benefit of providing alternate utility for the communications system with satellites in alternate orbital planes or radii.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Ross to include a fleet manager on the ground taught by Sobhani. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide alternate utility for the communications system with satellites in alternate orbital planes or radii.
REGARDING CLAIMS 7, Ross discloses, obtaining information pertaining to an orbit (Ross: [ABS]; (Col. 4, Ln. 11-17)) of each of a plurality of satellite apparatuses (Ross: (Col. 3, Ln. 30-35); [ABS]; (Col. 4, Ln. 11-17)) each of which includes optical communication equipment (Ross: [ABS]); and setting any one of the plurality of satellite apparatuses as a first satellite apparatus in order (Ross: (Col. 2, Ln. 52-53)), and then a determining process of determining, on the basis of the information (Ross: (Col. 4, Ln. 11-22)), whether each of a plurality of second satellite apparatuses which are included in the plurality of satellite apparatuses and which are other than the first satellite apparatus is capable of being acquired (Ross: (Col. 3, Ln. 8-12)) and tracked from the first satellite apparatus by optical communication (Ross: (Col. 3, Ln. 40-45)), a command creating process of creating a command for acquiring and tracking (Ross: (Col. 2, Ln. 37-38)), by optical communication (Ross: (Col. 3, Ln. 32-34)), a second satellite apparatus which is capable of being acquired and tracked from the first satellite apparatus by optical communication (Ross: (Col. 3, Ln. 32-34)), on the basis of a result of determination made in the determining process (Ross: (Col. 4, Ln. 11-22)).
Ross does not explicitly disclose, a transmitting process of transmitting the command to the first satellite apparatus.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Sobhani discloses, obtaining information pertaining to an orbit (Sobhani: [0062]; [FIG. 1]), for the benefit of providing alternate utility for the communications system with satellites in alternate orbital planes or radii.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Ross to include a fleet manager on the ground taught by Sobhani. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to provide alternate utility for the communications system with satellites in alternate orbital planes or radii.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ross (US 5218467 A) in view of Sobhani (US 20170034250 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Panthi (US 20220368415 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 4, Ross, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 1. Further, Ross, as modified, does not explicitly disclose, calculates, on the basis of the information, a relative position vector which is a difference between a position vector of the first satellite apparatus and a position vector of the each of the plurality of second satellite apparatuses and a relative velocity vector which is a difference between a velocity vector of the first satellite apparatus and a velocity vector of the each of the plurality of second satellite apparatuses, and determines, on the basis of the relative position vector and the relative velocity vector, whether the each of the plurality of second satellite apparatuses is capable of being acquired and tracked from the first satellite apparatus by optical communication.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Panthi discloses, calculates, on the basis of the information, a relative position vector (Ross: [0052] the relative position of the GSO satellite is fixed and predictable which facilitates communication link acquisition of the GSO satellite by an aircraft based SATCOM terminal; [0055] The relative position of an LEO satellite changes in time. Antenna direction pointing and tracking of LEO satellites by the SATCOM terminal can be effectively controlled using the management information received through the GEO satellite) which is a difference between a position vector of the first satellite apparatus and a position vector of the each of the plurality of second satellite apparatuses (Ross: [0052] the relative position of the GSO satellite is fixed and predictable which facilitates communication link acquisition of the GSO satellite by an aircraft based SATCOM terminal; [0055] The relative position of an LEO satellite changes in time. Antenna direction pointing and tracking of LEO satellites by the SATCOM terminal can be effectively controlled using the management information received through the GEO satellite) and a relative velocity vector which is a difference between a velocity vector of the first satellite apparatus and a velocity vector of the each of the plurality of second satellite apparatuses (Ross: [0061] The relative velocity of the LEO satellite changes with respect to the aircraft based SATCOM terminal depending upon aircraft speed and heading. In reference to the aircraft based SATCOM terminal, a LEO satellite rises at a relative low velocity then increases velocity until peaking, followed by falling velocity until the LEO satellite falls out of the range. FIG. 4 illustrates example velocity vectors of a pair of LEO satellites relative to an aircraft velocity vector; [0108] The two velocity vectors are used to determine the relative velocity between a particular LEO satellite and aircraft SATCOM terminal), and determines, on the basis of the relative position vector and the relative velocity vector, whether the each of the plurality of second satellite apparatuses is capable of being acquired and tracked from the first satellite apparatus by optical communication (Ross: [0073] The multicast stream and therefore contain not just the management & control information used for acquiring and performing handoff between LEO satellites; [0090] aircraft motion necessitates active control of where the aperture antenna is pointed to track an acquired satellite), for the benefit of acquiring communications link and managing handoffs.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by a modified Ross to include considering heading and speed for linking/line-of-site/acquiring multicast streams taught by Panthi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, with a reasonable expectation of success, in order to acquire communications link and managing handoffs.
REGARDING CLAIM 5, Ross, as modified, remains as applied above to claim 4. Further, Panthi also discloses, in the determining process, in a case where each of the relative position vector and the relative velocity vector satisfies a constraint condition for carrying out optical communication-based acquisition and tracking, the at least one processor determines that the each of the plurality of second satellite apparatuses is capable of being acquired and tracked from the first satellite apparatus by optical communication (Panthi: [0052] GEO satellites provide an ideal pathway because they have the largest service field-of-view and can effectively capture near-entire-global coverage ... [0053] information transmitted through a selected one of the GEO satellites based on which of the LEO satellites among the larger constellation of operational LEO satellites are predicted to be within the service coverage area of the selected one of the GEO satellites. Selectively transmitting the subset of LEO satellite and associated ground station positions and other information reduces the uplink and downlink resource utilization of the selected GEO satellite path by avoiding transmission of position information for LEO satellites that are not predicted to be presently within the service coverage area of the selected GEO satellite; Also see [0055-0056] for GEO acquiring LEO's).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Yunck (US 20180128925 A1)
Nagata (US 20250167891 A1)
Tsunemachi (US 20230421244 A1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARRON SANTOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5288. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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, ANGELA ORTIZ can be reached at (571) 272-1206. 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.
/A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663