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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on February, 12, 2025, and June 27, 2025 have been considered by the examiner. Claims 1-21 are pending.
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 1-4, 6-7, 12, 15-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 12549246 B1, hereinafter “Evans”), in view of Beeler at al. (US 8914536 B2, hereinafter “Beeler”), and further in view of Speidel et al. (US 12040880 B2, hereinafter “Speidel”).
Regarding Claim 1, Evans discloses, a method for determining link budget of a satellite system comprising at least one satellite, the method comprising: “Link Budget Analysis” as used herein refers broadly to a mathematical exercise where elements including but not limited to the gains and losses of power, gain, attenuation, atmospherics, scintillation effects, ionospheric effects, Faraday rotation, Adjacent Channel Interference (ACI), Adjacent Satellite Interference, and combinations thereof.” [24], and “The methods and systems described herein comprise planning a communications link to and from a repeating relay, such as a satellite link.” [30]
receiving a set of orientation parameters and a set of antenna parameters associated with the at least one satellite, “This implementation shows azimuth (true) and azimuth (magnetic), and elevation to the satellite.” [67], and “The satellite ephemeris data is information about the current and predicted (future) position of the satellite. These data include estimates of the location (orbital), timing, health of the satellite, and beam location.” [20], and “available frequencies, satellite footprints (beams), polarization (circular or linear), optimal antenna size, and potential obstacles” [67]
receiving a set of user equipment parameters associated with each user equipment of a plurality of user equipment within a coverage area of the at least one satellite and a set of environmental parameters, “A link-budget analysis is performed based on the transmit and receive terminal's configuration to ensure a link can be created.” [23], and “the machine learning system can be configured to access and/or process data comprising weather data, terrain data, video data, geographic data, traffic data, satellite cost data, crowd-sourced data, signal strength, satellite positions, cost of satellite service, transmission times, obstructions to communications, wavelengths, location, optionally comprising latitude and longitude, altitude, terminal configuration” [7], and “Further other conditions such as terrain, weather, ionospheric effects, tropospheric effects, optionally attenuation, rain attenuation, gas absorption, depolarization, sky noise, or combinations thereof, and space-based debris may be considered for the transmission planning.” [23]
selecting at least one analysis technique of a plurality of analysis techniques to process the set of orientation parameters, the set of antenna parameters, the set of user equipment parameters, and the set of environmental parameters, “The machine learning system may utilize an algorithm selected from the group consisting of decision tree (DT), linear regression (LIR), logistic regression (LOR), support vector machine (SVM), Naïve Bayes (NB), k-nearest neighbors (KNN), K-means (KM), Random Forest (RF), Dimensionality Reduction Algorithms (DRA), Gradient Boosting (GB) algorithms, or a combination of more than one algorithm.” [59], and “the machine learning system can be configured to access and/or process data comprising weather data, terrain data, video data, geographic data, traffic data, satellite cost data, crowd-sourced data, signal strength, satellite positions, cost of satellite service, transmission times, obstructions to communications, wavelengths, location, optionally comprising latitude and longitude, altitude, terminal configuration, available satellites, available beam on a given satellite, topography, weather, minimum or maximum antenna size.” [7]
based on the set of orientation parameters, the set of antenna parameters, the set of user equipment parameters, and the set of environmental parameters, “the machine learning system can be configured to access and/or process data comprising weather data, terrain data, video data, geographic data, traffic data, satellite cost data, crowd-sourced data, signal strength, satellite positions, cost of satellite service, transmission times, obstructions to communications, wavelengths, location, optionally comprising latitude and longitude, altitude, terminal configuration, available satellites, available beam on a given satellite, topography, weather, minimum or maximum antenna size.” [7]
wherein the link budgets of the at least one satellite are iteratively determined as the at least one satellite traverses through a respective orbit of the at least one satellite, “The satellite ephemeris data is information about the current and predicted (future) position of the satellite. These data include estimates of the location (orbital), timing, health of the satellite, and beam location. Data are considered good for up to 30 days into the future” [20], and “the program accesses information and calculates the satellite communications link in real time, optionally adjusting for real time changes in the information” [34]
dynamically rendering a user interface to display a visualization representing the link budgets in the coverage area of the at least one satellite based on the simulating of the plurality of link budgets, “the location of the terminal's position (latitude and longitude) on the Earth (via a map location), the latitude and longitude are utilized to determine a look angle for all available satellite resources.” [50], and “A filter is enabled to only show LEO satellites and the tracks and times of each LEO satellite chosen are shown in the list, track and look angles to the satellite via either a Polar or Cartesian chart” [50], and “one would know the periods of availably, outage time, level of quality for a given link, and potential blockages by terrain” [69]
However, Evans does not explicitly teach, each user equipment of a plurality of user equipment within a coverage area of the at least one satellite; simulating, via a parallel processor, a plurality of link budgets of the at least one satellite for each of the plurality of user equipment in parallel; or determining link budgets for each of a plurality of user equipment.
In the same field of endeavor, Beeler teaches a plurality of remote terminals within a satellite communication network in which link budget analysis is repeatedly performed for multiple communication links, each user equipment of a plurality of user equipment within a coverage area of the at least one satellite, “point-to-multipoint and multipoint-to-multipoint networks” [Col. 5, lines 38-39], and further “a plurality fixed remote sites” [Col. 10, line 48]
simulating, via a parallel processor, a plurality of link budgets of the at least one satellite for each of the plurality of user equipment in parallel, “the process is repeated for a plurality or every link in a network.” [Col. 8, lines 37-38], and further “processed by a plurality of processors 1000, 1010 as layers and then processed as dimensions 1020” [Col. 9, lines 65-67], and “a Digital Signal Processor (DSP), Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), General Purpose Processor (GPP), or Graphic Processing Unit (GPU).” [Col. 6, lines 26-28]
determining link budgets for each of a plurality of user equipment, “the process is repeated for a plurality or every link in a network.” [Col. 8, lines 37-38]
The combination of Evans and Beeler does not explicitly teach, storing the link budgets in a buffer after the simulating using the selected at least one analysis technique.
In the same field of endeavor, Speidel teaches calculating link budgets across stored points and retaining such calculated values for subsequent processing, storing the link budgets in a buffer after the simulating using the selected at least one analysis technique, “the link budget engine might compute possible (within reason) link budgets for various possible satellite beams, at various points in each polygon of interest, as well as each point in the mesh of the Earth as a whole” [Col. 55, lines 45-49], and “link budgets are calculated across stored points” [Col. 55, lines 50-51]
It would have been obvious to temporarily store the computed link-budget values in memory or a buffer to support reuse during iterative processing across the stored points.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Evans’ satellite link budget analysis system with Beeler’s parallelized multi-terminal link budget processing because both references are directed to satellite communication link budget analysis and because doing so would enable efficient determination of link budgets across multiple uses terminals and network links.
It would have further been obvious to incorporate Speidel’s stored-point link budget processing into the combined Evans-Beeler system because retaining computed link budget values for reuse in subsequent processing would improve computational efficiency during iterative link budget analysis across multiple coverage points. The combination merely applies known techniques for multi-terminal link budget analysis and storage of computed results to achieve predictable improvements in satellite link budget processing.
Regarding Claim 2, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 2 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Evans further teaches that the set of orientation parameters comprises a position of the at least one satellite, wherein the set of orientation parameters comprises at least one of: a position, a velocity, and an orientation of the at least one satellite, “The satellite ephemeris data is information about the current and predicted (future) position of the satellite. These data include estimates of the location (orbital), timing, health of the satellite, and beam location. Data are considered good for up to 30 days into the future.” [20]
Regarding Claim 3, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 3 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Evans further teaches that the set of antenna parameters associated with the at least one satellite comprises a frequency, wherein the set of antenna parameters comprises at least one of: an antenna power, an antenna type, an antenna arrangement, physical parameters, a frequency, a bandwidth, a bit rate, an antenna orientation angle, and losses in an antenna of the at least one satellite, “The methods and systems described herein for planning a satellite communication path include the combination of the location of a given satellite resource with the ability to combine not only what satellites will be (or were) in view at a given time (past, present, and future), the combination of knowing the available frequencies, satellite footprints (beams), polarization (circular or linear), optimal antenna size, and obstacles to a successful satellite communication path, e.g., weather, geographic formations, buildings, space events (e.g., solar flares, micrometeorites, space debris) and then interfaces with a steerable satellite antenna or antennas for supporting a communications link.” [32]
Regarding Claim 4, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 4 as recited above in the rejection of claim 3. In addition, Evans further teaches that the antenna arrangement comprises size of an antenna array, wherein the antenna arrangement comprises at least one of: a size of an antenna array, a size of an antenna subarray, and a spacing between two antennas of the antenna subarray, “calculating the optimal antenna size based on current or future locations of the satellite,” [3(j)], and “The methods and systems described herein for planning a satellite communication path include the combination of the location of a given satellite resource with the ability to combine not only what satellites will be (or were) in view at a given time (past, present, and future), the combination of knowing the available frequencies, satellite footprints (beams), polarization (circular or linear), optimal antenna size, and obstacles to a successful satellite communication path” [32]
Regarding Claim 6, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 6 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Evans further teaches that the set of user equipment parameters comprises a location of the user equipment, wherein the set of user equipment parameters comprises at least one of: a location of the user equipment and surroundings information that indicate a type of obstruction that obstructs a communication path between the at least one satellite and the user equipment, “inputting the user location, optionally via a terminal” [3(a)], and “Depending on the location of the user's position (latitude and longitude) on the Earth, the look angle is then utilized to determine available satellite resources based on the past, current, and/or further location of a given satellite in the form of ephemeris positional data.” [32]
Regarding Claim 7, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 7 as recited above in the rejection of claim 6. In addition, Evans further teaches that the type of obstruction includes geographic features of landforms that obstruct the communication path between the at least one satellite and the user equipment, wherein the type of obstruction includes at least one of: geographic features of landforms that obstruct a communication path between the at least one satellite and the user equipment, water that obstructs a communication path between the at least one satellite and the user equipment, soil that obstructs the communication path between the at least one satellite and the user equipment, foliage that obstructs the communication path between the at least one satellite and the user equipment, glass that obstructs the communication path between the at least one satellite and the user equipment, metal that obstructs the communication path between the at least one satellite and the user equipment, and concrete that obstructs the communication path between the at least one satellite and the user equipment, “The transmission planning process can comprise blockage and impediment information based on geographical blockages (obstruction of the line-of-sight (LOS) view from the satellite antenna to the satellite), such as buildings and mountains, based on three-dimensions topographical information; and weather events such as heavy rain that may cause rain-attenuation based on the band of operation, resulting in lower signal quality.” [52]
Regarding Claim 12, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 12 as recited above in the rejection of claim 6. In addition, Evans further teaches, determining a change in the signal coverage for the user equipment based on the surroundings information, “the program accesses information and calculates the satellite communications link in real time, optionally adjusting for real time changes in the information.” [34], and “The transmission planning process can comprise blockage and impediment information based on geographical blockages (obstruction of the line-of-sight (LOS) view from the satellite antenna to the satellite), such as buildings and mountains, based on three-dimensions topographical information; and weather events such as heavy rain that may cause rain-attenuation based on the band of operation, resulting in lower signal quality.” [52]
wherein the link budgets of the at least one satellite for each of the plurality of user equipment are determined further based on the change in the signal coverage, “The method and systems described herein may provide a planned link, planned using a link-budget analysis (LBA) where a cursory or detailed LBA may be utilized to ensure the viability of a link based on the location of the user terminal or the track of a satellite terminal.” [36], and further “Weather data can be used in the analysis when a known time for service can be re-engineered to confirm the link availability based on the initial parameters established using the described method.” [48]
Regarding Claim 15, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 15 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Evans further teaches three-dimensional analysis, wherein the plurality of analysis techniques comprise at least one of: a two-dimensional analysis, a three-dimensional analysis, and a hexagonal hierarchical geospatial indexing system (H3) discretization, “The transmission planning process can comprise blockage and impediment information based on geographical blockages (obstruction of the line-of-sight (LOS) view from the satellite antenna to the satellite), such as buildings and mountains, based on three-dimensions topographical information” [52]
Regarding Claim 16, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 16 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Evans further teaches, wherein the link budget corresponds to signal coverage received by the user equipment from the at least one satellite over a communication channel between a transmitter of the at least one satellite and a receiver of the user equipment, “Link Budget Analysis” as used herein refers broadly to a mathematical exercise where elements including but not limited to the gains and losses of power, gain, attenuation, atmospherics, scintillation effects, ionospheric effects, Faraday rotation, Adjacent Channel Interference (ACI), Adjacent Satellite Interference, and combinations thereof.” [24], and “The methods and systems described herein comprise planning a communications link to and from a repeating relay, such as a satellite link or airborne relay using the information that is available for link planning.” [30], and further ““Satellite Communications,” as used herein, refers broadly to a network where a fixed or mobile Earth Terminal (ET) or an Airborne Terminal (AT) sends a signal to a repeating relay overhead. The repeating relay can be a LEO, MEO, GEO, or HEO space-based satellite. The repeating relay may be an aircraft or balloon. Upon exiting the repeating relay, the signal, processor or in a native format, is then relayed to the same or different (disparate) ET or AT.” [14]
and wherein the link budget comprises: a power budget of the communication channel between the transmitter of the at least one satellite and the receiver of the user equipment to achieve sufficient received signal power at the receiver to maintain reliable communication connectivity between the transmitter and the receiver, “the method can further comprise processing a Link-Budget Analysis (LBA) to calculate free-space path loss (FSPL), atmospheric degradation, signal degradation, or a combination thereof.” [28], and “upon successful identification of a satellite and satellite beam map, an LBA is planned and the results returned to the user along with a list of time and satellite (or satellites) where service may be obtained. If a satisfactory transmission link cannot be established, e.g., “the link can't be closed,” with an LBA, the link planning is again passed back to the user to assist in link planning for other alternatives.” [47]
Regarding Claim 17, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 17 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Evans further teaches, wherein the set of orientation parameters, the set of antenna parameters, the set of user equipment parameters, and the set of environmental parameters are input based on an interaction with the user interface rendered on a computing device, “In an embodiment, the method can be executed on an user interface” [26], and “ The user is presented with numerous configuration options to plan for a given type of satellite communications band, link, or established criteria a minimum (or maximum) including but not limited to antenna size, power amplifier, geography, or power level to support a given mission. A flow-based operation controlled by a human following a known flow or procedure to plan out a satellite communications path can be used.” [37], and “inputting the user location, optionally via a terminal” [3(a)], and further “Particular implementations described herein are, and may use, but are not limited to programs, computer programming languages, microprocessors, Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), and combinations of Central Processing Units (CPUs), Graphic Processing Units (GPUs), System on a Chip (SoC) comprised of a CPU and a hardware acceleration device, and High-Performance Computing (HPC) resulting in servers using a combination of CPUs, GPUs, or FPGAs in either standalone or cloud-based architecture.” [44]
Regarding Claim 18, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 18 as recited above in the rejection of claim 17. In addition, Evans further teaches, wherein the link budgets of the at least one satellite are iteratively determined when at least one of the set of orientation parameters, the set of antenna parameters, the set of user equipment parameters, and the set of environmental parameters are modified, “ the program accesses information and calculates the satellite communications link in real time, optionally adjusting for real time changes in the information.” [34], and “If a satisfactory transmission link cannot be established, e.g., “the link can't be closed,” with an LBA, the link planning is again passed back to the user to assist in link planning for other alternatives. Otherwise, the transmission link engineering of a satellite link is determined and confirmed that the link can be closed.” [47], and further “Through ML, one may establish thresholds of signal quality or system availability that must be achieved using an iterative approach where only specific configuration and locations would be attempted based meeting a minimum standard of service level” [63]
Regarding Claim 19, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 19 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, Evans further teaches that the visualization corresponds to a two-dimensional plot, wherein the visualization corresponds to at least one of: a two-dimensional plot, a three-dimensional model of the Earth, and a two-dimensional contour, “FIG. 7 shows an implementation of an embodiment of a user interface according to the present disclosure. As shown, the location of the terminal's position (latitude and longitude) on the Earth (via a map location), the latitude and longitude are utilized to determine a look angle for all available satellite resources. A filter is enabled to only show LEO satellites and the tracks and times of each LEO satellite chosen are shown in the list, track and look angles to the satellite via either a Polar or Cartesian chart.” [50], and further “As shown the location of the terminal's position (latitude and longitude) on the Earth (via a map location), the latitude and longitude is utilized to determine a look angle for all available satellite resources. This may include both past, current, or further location of a given satellite in the form of ephemeris positional data. As shown, the type of service may be filtered by LEO, MEO, GEO, and HEO or any and all types of services on any and all configurations.” [67]
Regarding Claim 20, Evans teaches, a system for determining link budget of a satellite system comprising at least one satellite, “The methods and systems described herein comprise planning a communications link to and from a repeating relay, such as a satellite link” [30], and “The methods and systems described herein can be supported on a computer or computers that operate in a standalone or cloud-based fashion” [39]
the system comprising: at least one hardware-based processor and memory, wherein the memory comprises processor-executable instructions encoded on a non-transient processor-readable media, wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed by the at least one hardware-based processor, configure the system to: “Particular implementations described herein are, and may use, but are not limited to programs, computer programming languages, microprocessors, Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), and combinations of Central Processing Units (CPUs), Graphic Processing Units (GPUs), System on a Chip (SoC) comprised of a CPU and a hardware acceleration device, and High-Performance Computing (HPC) resulting in servers using a combination of CPUs, GPUs, or FPGAs in either standalone or cloud-based architecture.” [44], and “The methods and systems described herein can be supported on a computer or computers that operate in a standalone or cloud-based fashion using standard computing practices and languages.” [39], and further “optionally, storing the session data for future retrieval and analysis.” [3(m)]
receiving a set of orientation parameters and a set of antenna parameters associated with the at least one satellite, “This implementation shows azimuth (true) and azimuth (magnetic), and elevation to the satellite.” [67], and “The satellite ephemeris data is information about the current and predicted (future) position of the satellite. These data include estimates of the location (orbital), timing, health of the satellite, and beam location.” [20], and “available frequencies, satellite footprints (beams), polarization (circular or linear), optimal antenna size, and potential obstacles” [67]
receiving a set of user equipment parameters associated with each user equipment of a plurality of user equipment within a coverage area of the at least one satellite and a set of environmental parameters, “A link-budget analysis is performed based on the transmit and receive terminal's configuration to ensure a link can be created.” [23], and “the machine learning system can be configured to access and/or process data comprising weather data, terrain data, video data, geographic data, traffic data, satellite cost data, crowd-sourced data, signal strength, satellite positions, cost of satellite service, transmission times, obstructions to communications, wavelengths, location, optionally comprising latitude and longitude, altitude, terminal configuration” [7], and “Further other conditions such as terrain, weather, ionospheric effects, tropospheric effects, optionally attenuation, rain attenuation, gas absorption, depolarization, sky noise, or combinations thereof, and space-based debris may be considered for the transmission planning.” [23]
selecting at least one analysis technique of a plurality of analysis techniques to process the set of orientation parameters, the set of antenna parameters, the set of user equipment parameters, and the set of environmental parameters, “The machine learning system may utilize an algorithm selected from the group consisting of decision tree (DT), linear regression (LIR), logistic regression (LOR), support vector machine (SVM), Naïve Bayes (NB), k-nearest neighbors (KNN), K-means (KM), Random Forest (RF), Dimensionality Reduction Algorithms (DRA), Gradient Boosting (GB) algorithms, or a combination of more than one algorithm.” [59], and “the machine learning system can be configured to access and/or process data comprising weather data, terrain data, video data, geographic data, traffic data, satellite cost data, crowd-sourced data, signal strength, satellite positions, cost of satellite service, transmission times, obstructions to communications, wavelengths, location, optionally comprising latitude and longitude, altitude, terminal configuration, available satellites, available beam on a given satellite, topography, weather, minimum or maximum antenna size.” [7]
based on the set of orientation parameters, the set of antenna parameters, the set of user equipment parameters, and the set of environmental parameters, “the machine learning system can be configured to access and/or process data comprising weather data, terrain data, video data, geographic data, traffic data, satellite cost data, crowd-sourced data, signal strength, satellite positions, cost of satellite service, transmission times, obstructions to communications, wavelengths, location, optionally comprising latitude and longitude, altitude, terminal configuration, available satellites, available beam on a given satellite, topography, weather, minimum or maximum antenna size.” [7]
wherein the link budgets of the at least one satellite are iteratively determined as the at least one satellite traverses through a respective orbit of the at least one satellite, “The satellite ephemeris data is information about the current and predicted (future) position of the satellite. These data include estimates of the location (orbital), timing, health of the satellite, and beam location. Data are considered good for up to 30 days into the future” [20], and “the program accesses information and calculates the satellite communications link in real time, optionally adjusting for real time changes in the information” [34]
dynamically rendering a user interface to display a visualization representing the link budgets in the coverage area of the at least one satellite based on the simulating of the plurality of link budgets, “the location of the terminal's position (latitude and longitude) on the Earth (via a map location), the latitude and longitude are utilized to determine a look angle for all available satellite resources.” [50], and “A filter is enabled to only show LEO satellites and the tracks and times of each LEO satellite chosen are shown in the list, track and look angles to the satellite via either a Polar or Cartesian chart” [50], and “one would know the periods of availably, outage time, level of quality for a given link, and potential blockages by terrain” [69]
However, Evans does not explicitly teach, each user equipment of a plurality of user equipment within a coverage area of the at least one satellite; simulating, via a parallel processor, a plurality of link budgets of the at least one satellite for each of the plurality of user equipment in parallel; or determining link budgets for each of a plurality of user equipment.
In the same field of endeavor, Beeler teaches a plurality of remote terminals within a satellite communication network in which link budget analysis is repeatedly performed for multiple communication links, each user equipment of a plurality of user equipment within a coverage area of the at least one satellite, “point-to-multipoint and multipoint-to-multipoint networks” [Col. 5, lines 38-39], and further “a plurality fixed remote sites” [Col. 10, line 48]
simulating, via a parallel processor, a plurality of link budgets of the at least one satellite for each of the plurality of user equipment in parallel, “the process is repeated for a plurality or every link in a network.” [Col. 8, lines 37-38], and further “processed by a plurality of processors 1000, 1010 as layers and then processed as dimensions 1020” [Col. 9, lines 65-67], and “a Digital Signal Processor (DSP), Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), General Purpose Processor (GPP), or Graphic Processing Unit (GPU).” [Col. 6, lines 26-28]
determining link budgets for each of a plurality of user equipment, “the process is repeated for a plurality or every link in a network.” [Col. 8, lines 37-38]
The combination of Evans and Beeler does not explicitly teach, storing the link budgets in a buffer after the simulating using the selected at least one analysis technique.
In the same field of endeavor, Speidel teaches calculating link budgets across stored points and retaining such calculated values for subsequent processing, storing the link budgets in a buffer after the simulating using the selected at least one analysis technique, “the link budget engine might compute possible (within reason) link budgets for various possible satellite beams, at various points in each polygon of interest, as well as each point in the mesh of the Earth as a whole” [Col. 55, lines 45-49], and “link budgets are calculated across stored points” [Col. 55, lines 50-51]
It would have been obvious to temporarily store the computed link-budget values in memory or a buffer to support reuse during iterative processing across the stored points.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Evans’ satellite link budget analysis system with Beeler’s parallelized multi-terminal link budget processing because both references are directed to satellite communication link budget analysis and because doing so would enable efficient determination of link budgets across multiple uses terminals and network links.
It would have further been obvious to incorporate Speidel’s stored-point link budget processing into the combined Evans-Beeler system because retaining computed link budget values for reuse in subsequent processing would improve computational efficiency during iterative link budget analysis across multiple coverage points. The combination merely applies known techniques for multi-terminal link budget analysis and storage of computed results to achieve predictable improvements in satellite link budget processing.
Regarding Claim 21, Evans teaches, a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions for determining link budget of a satellite system comprising at least one satellite, the set of instructions comprising: one or more instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a device, cause the device to: “The methods and systems described herein can be supported on a computer or computers that operate in a standalone or cloud-based fashion using standard computing practices and languages.” [39], and “Particular implementations described herein are, and may use, but are not limited to programs, computer programming languages, microprocessors, Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), and combinations of Central Processing Units (CPUs), Graphic Processing Units (GPUs), System on a Chip (SoC) comprised of a CPU and a hardware acceleration device, and High-Performance Computing (HPC) resulting in servers using a combination of CPUs, GPUs, or FPGAs in either standalone or cloud-based architecture.” [44], and “optionally, storing the session data for future retrieval and analysis.” [3(m)]
receiving a set of orientation parameters and a set of antenna parameters associated with the at least one satellite, “This implementation shows azimuth (true) and azimuth (magnetic), and elevation to the satellite.” [67], and “The satellite ephemeris data is information about the current and predicted (future) position of the satellite. These data include estimates of the location (orbital), timing, health of the satellite, and beam location.” [20], and “available frequencies, satellite footprints (beams), polarization (circular or linear), optimal antenna size, and potential obstacles” [67]
receiving a set of user equipment parameters associated with each user equipment of a plurality of user equipment within a coverage area of the at least one satellite and a set of environmental parameters, “A link-budget analysis is performed based on the transmit and receive terminal's configuration to ensure a link can be created.” [23], and “the machine learning system can be configured to access and/or process data comprising weather data, terrain data, video data, geographic data, traffic data, satellite cost data, crowd-sourced data, signal strength, satellite positions, cost of satellite service, transmission times, obstructions to communications, wavelengths, location, optionally comprising latitude and longitude, altitude, terminal configuration” [7], and “Further other conditions such as terrain, weather, ionospheric effects, tropospheric effects, optionally attenuation, rain attenuation, gas absorption, depolarization, sky noise, or combinations thereof, and space-based debris may be considered for the transmission planning.” [23]
selecting at least one analysis technique of a plurality of analysis techniques to process the set of orientation parameters, the set of antenna parameters, the set of user equipment parameters, and the set of environmental parameters, “The machine learning system may utilize an algorithm selected from the group consisting of decision tree (DT), linear regression (LIR), logistic regression (LOR), support vector machine (SVM), Naïve Bayes (NB), k-nearest neighbors (KNN), K-means (KM), Random Forest (RF), Dimensionality Reduction Algorithms (DRA), Gradient Boosting (GB) algorithms, or a combination of more than one algorithm.” [59], and “the machine learning system can be configured to access and/or process data comprising weather data, terrain data, video data, geographic data, traffic data, satellite cost data, crowd-sourced data, signal strength, satellite positions, cost of satellite service, transmission times, obstructions to communications, wavelengths, location, optionally comprising latitude and longitude, altitude, terminal configuration, available satellites, available beam on a given satellite, topography, weather, minimum or maximum antenna size.” [7]
based on the set of orientation parameters, the set of antenna parameters, the set of user equipment parameters, and the set of environmental parameters, “the machine learning system can be configured to access and/or process data comprising weather data, terrain data, video data, geographic data, traffic data, satellite cost data, crowd-sourced data, signal strength, satellite positions, cost of satellite service, transmission times, obstructions to communications, wavelengths, location, optionally comprising latitude and longitude, altitude, terminal configuration, available satellites, available beam on a given satellite, topography, weather, minimum or maximum antenna size.” [7]
wherein the link budgets of the at least one satellite are iteratively determined as the at least one satellite traverses through a respective orbit of the at least one satellite, “The satellite ephemeris data is information about the current and predicted (future) position of the satellite. These data include estimates of the location (orbital), timing, health of the satellite, and beam location. Data are considered good for up to 30 days into the future” [20], and “the program accesses information and calculates the satellite communications link in real time, optionally adjusting for real time changes in the information” [34]
dynamically rendering a user interface to display a visualization representing the link budgets in the coverage area of the at least one satellite based on the simulating of the plurality of link budgets, “the location of the terminal's position (latitude and longitude) on the Earth (via a map location), the latitude and longitude are utilized to determine a look angle for all available satellite resources.” [50], and “A filter is enabled to only show LEO satellites and the tracks and times of each LEO satellite chosen are shown in the list, track and look angles to the satellite via either a Polar or Cartesian chart” [50], and “one would know the periods of availably, outage time, level of quality for a given link, and potential blockages by terrain” [69]
However, Evans does not explicitly teach, each user equipment of a plurality of user equipment within a coverage area of the at least one satellite; simulating, via a parallel processor, a plurality of link budgets of the at least one satellite for each of the plurality of user equipment in parallel; or determining link budgets for each of a plurality of user equipment.
In the same field of endeavor, Beeler teaches a plurality of remote terminals within a satellite communication network in which link budget analysis is repeatedly performed for multiple communication links, each user equipment of a plurality of user equipment within a coverage area of the at least one satellite, “point-to-multipoint and multipoint-to-multipoint networks” [Col. 5, lines 38-39], and further “a plurality fixed remote sites” [Col. 10, line 48]
simulating, via a parallel processor, a plurality of link budgets of the at least one satellite for each of the plurality of user equipment in parallel, “the process is repeated for a plurality or every link in a network.” [Col. 8, lines 37-38], and further “processed by a plurality of processors 1000, 1010 as layers and then processed as dimensions 1020” [Col. 9, lines 65-67], and “a Digital Signal Processor (DSP), Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA), General Purpose Processor (GPP), or Graphic Processing Unit (GPU).” [Col. 6, lines 26-28]
determining link budgets for each of a plurality of user equipment, “the process is repeated for a plurality or every link in a network.” [Col. 8, lines 37-38]
The combination of Evans and Beeler does not explicitly teach, storing the link budgets in a buffer after the simulating using the selected at least one analysis technique.
In the same field of endeavor, Speidel teaches calculating link budgets across stored points and retaining such calculated values for subsequent processing, storing the link budgets in a buffer after the simulating using the selected at least one analysis technique, “the link budget engine might compute possible (within reason) link budgets for various possible satellite beams, at various points in each polygon of interest, as well as each point in the mesh of the Earth as a whole” [Col. 55, lines 45-49], and “link budgets are calculated across stored points” [Col. 55, lines 50-51]
It would have been obvious to temporarily store the computed link-budget values in memory or a buffer to support reuse during iterative processing across the stored points.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Evans’ satellite link budget analysis system with Beeler’s parallelized multi-terminal link budget processing because both references are directed to satellite communication link budget analysis and because doing so would enable efficient determination of link budgets across multiple uses terminals and network links.
It would have further been obvious to incorporate Speidel’s stored-point link budget processing into the combined Evans-Beeler system because retaining computed link budget values for reuse in subsequent processing would improve computational efficiency during iterative link budget analysis across multiple coverage points. The combination merely applies known techniques for multi-terminal link budget analysis and storage of computed results to achieve predictable improvements in satellite link budget processing.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 12549246 B1, hereinafter “Evans”), in view of Beeler et al. (US 8914536 B2, hereinafter “Beeler”), in view of Speidel et al. (US 12040880 B2, hereinafter “Speidel”), and further in view of Judd (US 7250905 B2, hereinafter “Judd”)
Regarding Claim 5, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 5 as recited above in the rejection of claim 4. Evans teaches antenna size, beam information, and link budget determination, “ calculating the optimal antenna size based on current or future locations of the satellite” [3(j)], and “the combination of knowing the available frequencies, satellite footprints (beams), polarization (circular or linear), optimal antenna size” [67], and “Upon choosing the beam the method may perform a link budget analysis” [51]
However, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel do not explicitly teach, determining beam shaping information, beam forming information, and beam steering information based on the size of the antenna subarray, wherein Link budgets determined further based on beam shaping, forming, and steering information.
Judd teaches antenna subarrays and beam characteristics derived from those subarrays, determining beam shaping information based on the size of the antenna subarray, “Each individual sub-patch array 1–16 has an annular ring and is perturbed in elevation angle to have a different elevation angle center, such as 40°, 45°, 35° and 40° for sub-patch arrays 1–4 as illustrated in FIG. 3B.” [Col. 7, lines 47-51]
beam forming information based on the size of the antenna subarray, “Four rows and four columns of 3x3 Sub-arrays, having a total size of approximately 12 inches by 12 inches, are combined appropriately to achieve a passive gain improvement of 10 log(16)=12 dBi.” [Col. 6, lines 33-37], and “Each individual antenna patch sub array is beam formed Summed to the same point in space as shown in FIG. 2G, producing constructive interference.” [Col. 6, lines 44-46]
beam steering information based on the size of the antenna subarray, “for most satellite applications, the direction (beam) to the satellite is between a fixed range in the elevation plane, so that Sub-element arrays can be used to generate the beams (M element Sub-array), reducing the number of effective array elements by M and correspondingly reducing the number of required digital beam forming transmit/receive modules by M.” [Col. 7, lines 25-31]
Link budgets determined further based on beam shaping, forming, and steering information, “Assuming that a 3×3 sub-array generates approximately 13.5 to 15 dBi gain towards the satellite between a 30° and 50° elevation angle, beamform summing the sub-arrays to the same point simply adds their power together, so that 16 sub-arrays produce a gain of 10 log(16)=12 dBi with an effective total antenna gain of 13.5 dBi+12 dBi=25.5 dBi or 15 dBi+12 dBi=27 dBi.” [Col. 6, lines 56-62], and “By increasing the overall array size of the 16x16 array to 18 inches by 18 inches, with LNAs directly at the feed points, +34 dBi gain should be generated.” [Col. 7, lines 3-5]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Judd’s subarray-based beam shaping, beamforming, and beam steering techniques into the satellite link-budget analysis system of Evans, as modified by Beeler, in order to account for phased-array antenna characteristics when determining satellite communication link performance and link budgets. The combination merely applies known antenna-array techniques to improve the accuracy of satellite link-budget calculations and would have yield predictable results.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 12549246 B1, hereinafter “Evans”), in view of Beeler et al. (US 8914536 B2, hereinafter “Beeler”), in view of Speidel et al. (US 12040880 B2, hereinafter “Speidel”). and further in view of Harrison et al. (US 20190102493 A1, hereinafter “Harrison”)
Regarding Claim 8, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 8 as recited above in the rejection of claim 6. However, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel do not explicitly teach a size of the obstruction, wherein the surroundings information for each type of obstruction further comprises at least one of: electrical properties of material forming an obstruction, wherein the electrical properties include a loss tangent that describes to what degree a material is a conductor or insulator; and a size of the obstruction.
Harrison teaches, wherein the surroundings information for each type of obstruction further comprises at least one of: a size of the obstruction, “we need to calculate the width of the object and its offset from the signal path.” [0030], and “The effective width of the blocking object is then determined” [0041]
It would have been obvious to modify the Evans/Beeler/Speidel system with Harrison’s teaching of determining obstruction size in order to improve RF propagation modeling and link-budget calculations by accounting for attenuation and diffraction effects caused by physical obstructions, yielding predictable results.
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 12549246 B1, hereinafter “Evans”), in view of Beeler et al. (US 8914536 B2, hereinafter “Beeler”), in view of Speidel et al. (US 12040880 B2, hereinafter “Speidel”), in view of Edge (US 11811488 B2, hereinafter “Edge”), and further in view of Wei et al. (T. Wei, W. Feng, J. Wang, N. Ge, and J. Lu “Exploiting the Shipping Lane Information for Energy-Efficient Maritime Communications” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 68, no. 7, pp. 7204-7208, July 2019, hereinafter “Wei”)
Regarding Claim 9, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 9 as recited above in the rejection of claim 6. Evans teaches determining the location of user equipment with a satellite communication system and performing link-budget analysis based on the determined location.
However, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel do not explicitly teach, wherein the location of the user equipment is determined based on a database comprising: country borders information, ocean borders information, and shipping lanes information.
Edge teaches geographic information used for determining the location of user equipment, including country border information and geographic information associated with oceans and international areas, wherein the location of the user equipment is determined based on a database comprising: country borders information, ocean borders information, and shipping lanes information, “In case of proximity to a country border, the UE 105 may need to determine in which country it is located” [Col. 15, lines 64-65], and “Country determination may be possible by the UE 105 based on a UE location if extra data is broadcast by an SV 115 (or provided in some other way to UE 105 such as from an Internet server or by a home PLMN for the UE 105) to define a border region “ [Col. 16, lines 7-11], and “When a UE 105 is close to an international border, the UE 105 may first determine the country “ [Col. 18, lines 4-5], and further “The grid points and associated virtual cells and virtual TAs can be extended to cover international areas, e.g., 360 and 460 in FIGS. 3 and 4 , such as oceans and polar regions.” [Col. 18, lines 15-18]
The combination of Evans, Beeler, Speidel, and Edge does not explicitly teach, shipping lanes information.
Wei teaches the use of shipping-lane information to determine the position of marine users for communication-link calculation, shipping lanes information, “each user sails according to its designated shipping lane”, and “The location information during its voyage, i.e.,dk,m,j, is known before hand to the BS based on the shipping lane and timetable.”, and further “the resource allocation of all users and all time slots during the service is jointly optimized, exploiting the large-scale CSIT predicted from the users’ location information.” Accordingly, Wei teaches shipping-lane information used to determine the location of marine users and support communication-link calculations and resource-allocation decisions based on that determined location.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate the geographic database teachings of Edge and the shipping-lanes information teachings of Wei into the satellite link-budget system of Evans/Beeler/Speidel. Evans teaches determining user-equipment location and performing satellite link-budget analysis based on that location. Edge teaches the use of country-border information and geographic information associated with oceans and international areas for determining user location. Wei teaches that shipping-lane information provides known position information for marine uses and is useful for communication-link calculations.
Regarding Claim 10, Evans, Beeler, Speidel, Edge, and Wei et al. disclose the limitations of claim 10 as recited above in the rejection of claim 9. In addition, Evans further teaches, receiving a latitude and a longitude of the user equipment, “As shown the location of the terminal's position (latitude and longitude) on the Earth (via a map location), the latitude and longitude is utilized to determine a look angle for all available satellite resources.” [67], and “ The methods and systems described herein for planning a satellite communication path include the combination of the location of a given satellite resource” [32]
wherein the link budgets of the at least one satellite for each of the plurality of user equipment are determined further based on the country in which the user equipment is located., “The method and systems described herein may provide a planned link, planned using a link-budget analysis (LBA) where a cursory or detailed LBA may be utilized to ensure the viability of a link based on the location of the user terminal” [36], and “The user is presented with numerous configuration options to plan for a given type of satellite communications band, link, or established criteria” [37]
However, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel do not explicitly teach, determining a country in which the user equipment is located based on the country borders information and the latitude and the longitude of the user equipment;
Edge teaches, determining a country in which the user equipment is located based on the country borders information and the latitude and the longitude of the user equipment, “the UE 105 may select a virtual cell by first determining the country in which the UE 105 is located” [Col. 16, lines 4-5], and “In case of proximity to a country border, the UE 105 may need to determine in which country it is located” [Col. 15, lines 64-65], and “ the UE 105 may first determine the country (e.g. if additional information is broadcast by a satellite defining the locations of an international border) and then determine the closest grid point in the same country” [Col. 18, lines 5-8], and further “Country determination may be possible by the UE 105 based on a UE location if extra data is broadcast by an SV 115 (or provided in some other way to UE 105 such as from an Internet server or by a home PLMN for the UE 105) to define a border region” [Col. 16, lines 7-11], and “Grid point locations (e.g. latitude/longitude) may be broadcast by satellites 115” [Col. 17, lines 53-54]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate Edge’s country-determination techniques into the satellite link-budget system of Evans as modified by Beeler/Speidel/Edge, and further supplemented by Wei et al. because Evans, Beeler, and Speidel teach determining satellite communication link budgets using user-location information, Edge teaches determining the country associated with latitude/longitude information using country-border data, and Wei et al. teaches the use of geographic maritime location information for communication-link analysis. Incorporating country-level geographic determination into the location information used by Evans system would have predictably improved geographic characterization of user equipment for satellite communication planning while employing know techniques according to their established functions.
Regarding Claim 11, Evans, Beeler, Speidel, Edge, and Wei et al. disclose the limitations of claim 11 as recited above in the rejection of claim 9. In addition, Evans further teaches, receiving a latitude and a longitude of the user equipment, “As shown the location of the terminal's position (latitude and longitude) on the Earth (via a map location), the latitude and longitude is utilized to determine a look angle for all available satellite resources.” [67], and “ The methods and systems described herein for planning a satellite communication path include the combination of the location of a given satellite resource” [32]
wherein the link budgets of the at least one satellite for each of the plurality of user equipment are determined further based on whether the user equipment is located on the shipping lane in the ocean, “The method and systems described herein may provide a planned link, planned using a link-budget analysis (LBA) where a cursory or detailed LBA may be utilized to ensure the viability of a link based on the location of the user terminal” [36], and “The user is presented with numerous configuration options to plan for a given type of satellite communications band, link, or established criteria” [37]
However, Evans, Beeler, Speidel, and Edge do not explicitly teach, determining whether the user equipment is located on a shipping lane in an ocean based on the shipping lanes information and the latitude and the longitude of the user equipment.
Wei et al. teaches, determining whether the user equipment is located on a shipping lane in an ocean based on the shipping lanes information and the latitude and the longitude of the user equipment, “As depicted in Fig.1,each user sails according to its designated shipping lane.” [7205], and “The location information during its voyage, i.e.,dk,m,j, is known before hand to the BS based on the shipping lane and time table.” [7205], and further “Fig.1. Illustration of a MCN, where long-term resource allocation is performed based on the shipping lane information.” [7205]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate the shipping-lane location determination techniques taught by Wei et al. into the satellite link-budget system of Evans as modified by Beeler, Speidel, and Edge because Evans, Beeler, and Speidel teach determining satellite communication link-budgets using user location information, while Wei et al. teaches determining user positions from shipping-lance information and utilizing those positions for communication resource-allocation calculations. Incorporating shipping-lane-based location determination in to Evans system would have predictably improved location characterization for maritime user equipment and enhanced the accuracy of satellite communication link-budget calculations using known geographic information according to its established function.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 12549246 B1, hereinafter “Evans”), in view of Beeler et al. (US 8914536 B2, hereinafter “Beeler”), in view of Speidel et al. (US 12040880 B2, hereinafter “Speidel”), and further in view of ITU-R P.618-12
Regarding Claim 13, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 13 as recited above in the rejection of claim 1. Evans teaches environmental and weather parameters used in satellite link planning, “Further other conditions such as terrain, weather, ionospheric effects, tropospheric effects, optionally attenuation, rain attenuation, gas absorption, depolarization, sky noise, or combinations thereof, and space-based debris may be considered for the transmission planning.” [23], and “weather events such as heavy rain that may cause rain-attenuation based on the band of operation, resulting in lower signal quality.” [52]
However, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel do not explicitly teach, rain information comprising a raining rate.
ITU-R P.618-12 teaches, raining rate, “Obtain the rainfall rate, R0.01, exceeded for 0.01% of an average year (with an integration time of 1 min). [ITU-R P.618-12, Page. 6, Step 4]
It would have been obvious to incorporate the known rain-rate parameter of ITU-R P.618-12 into the Evans, Beeler, and Speidel’s system to improve satellite link-budget and propagation-loss calculations.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Evans (US 12549246 B1, hereinafter “Evans”), in view of Beeler et al. (US 8914536 B2, hereinafter “Beeler”), in view of Speidel et al. (US 12040880 B2, hereinafter “Speidel”), and further in view of ITU-R P.618-12 and ITU-R P.840-9
Regarding Claim 14, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel disclose the limitations of claim 14 as recited above in the rejection of claim 13. However, Evans, Beeler, and Speidel do not explicitly teach, determining a change in the signal coverage for the user equipment, utilizing a rain and fog model, based on the raining rate and the percentage of fog, wherein the link budgets of the at least one satellite for each of the plurality of user equipment are determined further based on the change in the signal coverage.
ITU-R P.618-12 teaches utilizing a rain model based on rainfall rate, utilizing a rain model, based on the raining rate, “Obtain the rainfall rate, R0.01, exceeded for 0.01% of an average year (with an integration time of 1 min). [ITU-R P.618-12, Page. 6, Step 4]
ITU-R P.840-9 further teaches utilizing a fog/cloud attenuation model and determining attenuation based on cloud/fog parameters, “the specific attenuation within a cloud or fog can be written as: γ𝑐(𝑓,𝑇) = 𝐾𝑙(𝑓,𝑇)ρ𝑙” [ITU-R P.840-9, Page. 2], and “The predicted slant path statistical cloud attenuation, 𝐴𝐶, is: 𝐴𝐶(𝑓,𝑝)=𝐾𝐿(𝑓)∙𝐿(𝑝) sinθ” [ITU-R P.840-9, Page. 4], and “𝑝 : exceedance probability (CCDF) of interest, in %” [ITU-R P.840-9, Page. 4].
It would have been obvious to utilize the known rain attenuation model of ITU-R P.618-12 together with the cloud/fog attenuation model of ITU-R P.840-9 in the satellite link-budget determination systems of Evans, Beeler, and Speidel in order to account for atmospheric propagation losses and improve the accuracy of coverage and link-budget predictions.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record not relied upon and considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure:
Reis et al. (US 20180316416 A1), Satellite communication for the internet of things, discloses the techniques herein provide a fully automated satellite-based backhaul system. In particular, a system in accordance with the techniques herein may utilize a satellite communication terminal to allow an Internet of Things (IoT) device (or any device) to be deployed in any location which has a line of sight towards a communication satellite. Specifically, the placement, orientation, and/or communication characteristics of the IoT device and/or satellite communication terminal (or antenna) may be manipulated (e.g., manual adjustment based on calculated directions and/or completely autonomously) to ensure avoidance of interference in any other wireless communication network.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG PHUOC LE whose telephone number is (571)272-3659. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 am - 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, Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
SANG PHUOC. LE
Examiner
Art Unit 2641
/SANG PHUOC LE/Examiner, Art Unit 2641
/CHARLES N APPIAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights