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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 2 and 12 recite the limitation “wherein the set of GEO satellites are positioned to have line of sight to the ground gateways confined to a local geographic area such that traffic can be routed between the ground gateways and ones of the LEO satellites without line of sight to the set of GEO satellites through the selected LEO satellites of each orbital plane”, where the language does not positively recite the intended features, which makes the claim ambiguous. As described below, the examiner has interpreted this feature as being positively recited such as defining where the GEO satellite is located based on the ability to communicate with ground gateways confined to a local geographic area. The language “can be” is interpreted as intended use and/or meaning the subsequent text is not required and/or as currently written this language has little to no patentable weight.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-9, 11-12, 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Pub. 2017/0302377 to Boroson in view of U.S. Patent Pub. 2018/0227054 to Hreha.
Regarding the feature of claims 1 and 11 reciting “low-earth orbit (LEO) satellites configured to communicate within orbital planes over free space LEO optical links, with selected LEO satellites of each orbital plane configured to communicate optically with at least one among a set of geostationary earth orbit (GEO) satellites based at least on present line of sight”, Boroson teaches an “OMA system 100 includes a GEO relay satellite 110 that can communicate with one or more LEO satellites 120, ground stations 130, and MEO satellites 140 simultaneously. The GEO relay satellite 110 communicates with the LEO satellite 120 and MEO satellite 140 via respective free-space optical low-rate, on-demand links 154a and 154b (collectively, low-rate, on-demand links 154) and with the ground station 130 via an optical or RF relay ground connection link 152” (see Fig. 1, 2 and section [0038]). However, as it does not teach the LEO satellites communicating directly with each other via optical links, Hreha is added.
In an analogous art, Hreha teaches a ground-based subsystem for inclusion in an optical gateway and for use in transmitting an optical feeder uplink beam to a satellite network. See Fig. 1 and section [0039], where Hreha teaches “ the satellite 100 can communicate with other satellites 150 and 160 over respective inter-satellite link (ISL) beams 152 and 162…in a low earth orbit (LEO), and such satellites may only send an optical ISL beam from one satellite to another when the other satellite comes into the view of the optical coverage area of the satellite”.
Therefore, as both Boroson and Hreha teach networks for communication between satellites (either LEO or GEO) and a ground station and as Hreha explicitly teaches a network of LEO satellites in communications with each other and an outside entity, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at or before the time of invention to modify Boroson by implementing direct communication between the plurality of LEO satellites, as this would allow the destination LEO satellite to receive its payload without direct line of sight to the GEO relay and could minimize link length to avoid interferences.
Regarding the feature of claims 1 and 11 reciting “each of the set of GEO satellites configured to communicate over communication links with ground gateways and convert among uplink communications of the communication links and optical communications of free space GEO-to-LEO optical links established with the selected LEO satellites of each orbital plane, wherein the free space GEO-to-LEO optical links each comprise optical beams within a wavelength multiplexed arrangement individually assigned to corresponding LEO satellites in each orbital plane”, Boroson teaches an “OMA system 100 includes a GEO relay satellite 110 that can communicate with one or more LEO satellites 120, ground stations 130, and MEO satellites 140 simultaneously. The GEO relay satellite 110 communicates with the LEO satellite 120 and MEO satellite 140 via respective free-space optical low-rate, on-demand links 154a and 154b (collectively, low-rate, on-demand links 154) and with the ground station 130 via an optical or RF relay ground connection link 152.” and “shorter wavelengths have a number of benefits over longer wavelengths … narrow optical beams allow for very large numbers of even slightly spatially-separated users to share a single node telescope/antenna and not interfere with each other” (see Fig. 1, 2 and sections [0038] and [0039]). Boroson also teaches “This (wavelength-division multiplex) WDM can be implemented by setting the transmitters to operate at a different carrier wavelength from the uplink MA signals (e.g., a unique carrier wavelength for each transmitter) (see section [0058])”.
Regarding the feature of claims 1 and 11 reciting “each of the selected LEO satellites configured to optically demultiplex a GEO-to-LEO optical link into local optical beams on individual optical fibers, direct a demultiplexed assigned optical beam of an incoming LEO optical link from a previous in-plane LEO satellite to an onboard destination with an optical splitter on a corresponding optical fiber, and multiplex the local optical beams on the individual optical fibers for an outgoing free space LEO optical link directed to a subsequent in-plane LEO satellite”, Boroson teaches “a user terminal 500 that can be mounted on a LEO satellite … comprise a single, small aperture, fully-gimballed, telescope 510 with a fiber-fed transmitter 522, an acquisition/tracking detector 560, and a communications receiver 572, with a point-ahead actuator 562 if desired (see Fig. 5C and section [0071])”. However, as it does not explicitly teach the LEO being able to de/multiplex incoming or outgoing optical beams, Hreha is again added.
Hreha teaches, in Figs. 9A and 9B and sections [0121] through [0127], “the space segment forward ISL equipment 900A is shown as including receiver optics 302, an optical amplifier (OA) 304, a wavelength division multiplexing (WDM) demultiplexer (DEMUX) 306, two hundred and fifty beam splitters (BS) 932_1 to 932_250, a wavelength-division multiplexing (WDM) multiplexer (MUX) 936, an optical amplifier (OA) 938 and transmitter optics 940”. It continues, teaching “the receiver optics 302 … can receive an optical feeder uplink beam” and “an optical ISL beam that is transmitted by another satellite”. Then, “the WDM DEMUX 306 demultiplexes (i.e., separates) the received optical feeder uplink beam (or the received optical ISL beam) after it has been optically amplified, into two hundred and fifty separate optical data signals, each of which has a different peak optical wavelength, and each of which is provided to a separate beam splitter (BS) 932”. It’s then stated that the “two hundred and fifty optical data signals … are multiplexed (i.e., combined) by the WDM MUX 936 onto a single optical fiber, with each of the two hundred and fifty optical data signals being carried at the same time on its own separate optical wavelength within a specified contiguous wavelength range”. This multiplexed optical signal is then optionally amplified and “provided (e.g., via an optical fiber) to the transmitter optics 940 … outputs a collimated optical ISL beam that is aimed at another satellite”. Fig. 9C and section [0134] of Hreha, then teaches “one or more of the optical signals that is/are output by the WDM DEMUX 306 on a satellite can be provided to and consumed by equipment that is located on the satellite”.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, which recites “wherein the set of GEO satellites are positioned to have line of sight to the ground gateways confined to a local geographic area such that traffic can be routed between the ground gateways and ones of the LEO satellites without line of sight to the set of GEO satellites through the selected LEO satellites of each orbital plane”, see section [0029] of Boroson, which teaches “(a GEOs) receiver is a relatively fast-readout optical detector array, such as a focal plane array (FPA), that looks through a telescope at either the entire Earth, subregions of the Earth, or, possibly, the Earth plus spacecraft in low Earth orbit (LEO)”.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, which recites “wherein the selected LEO satellites of each orbital plane activate at least an optical amplifier associated with the free space GEO-to-LEO optical links based on having line of sight with the at least one among the set of GEO satellites”, see Fig. 9A-9B and section [0122] of Hreha, which teaches “provides the received optical feeder uplink beam (e.g., via an optical fiber) to the OA 304 … the OA 304 is used to amplify the received optical feeder uplink beam before it is provided to the WDM DEMUX 306”. In order for the optical amplifier to have an optical feeder uplink beam to process, it must have a line-of-sight to the source of the beam for transmission and must be activated.
Regarding claims 5 and 15, which recites “wherein the LEO satellites are configured to convert incoming free space optical links to fiber optical links, and convert the fiber optical links to outgoing free space optical links”, see section [0124] of Hreha, which teaches “the WDM DEMUX 306 demultiplexes (i.e., separates) the received optical feeder uplink beam (or the received optical ISL beam), after it has been optically amplified, into two hundred and fifty separate optical data signals”. Hreha then further teaches, in sections [0125] through [0127], “The … optical data signals that are provided … to the WDM MUX 936 (which signals, as noted above, may or may not first be filtered by a respective one of the filters 934) are multiplexed (i.e., combined) by the WDM MUX 936 onto a single optical fiber”. After passing through an optical amplifier, the single optical signal is then “provided (e.g., via an optical fiber) to the transmitter optics 940 … the transmitter optics 940 outputs a collimated optical ISL beam that is aimed at another satellite”.
Regarding claims 6 and 16, which recites “wherein the demultiplexed assigned optical beam is directed to a payload comprising at least one among a sensing instrument or a transmit antenna for distribution of communications traffic from a corresponding LEO satellite”, see section Fig. 9C and section [0134] of Hreha, which teaches “one or more of the optical signals that is/are output by the WDM DEMUX 306 on a satellite can be provided to and consumed by equipment that is located on the satellite, which equipment is generically represented by block 950. Examples of such equipment include a command and data handling (C&DH) system, an RF communication payload, and one or more digital payloads. If the equipment 950 is designed to accept optical signals, one or more optical signals output by the WDM DEMUX 306 can be provided directly to the equipment 950”.
Regarding claims 7 and 17, which recites “wherein demultiplexed optical beams of the incoming LEO optical link other than the demultiplexed assigned optical beam are directed to optical loads on the corresponding LEO satellite”, see Fig. 9C and section [0135] of Hreha, which teaches “the optical signals output by the WDM DEMUX 306 are shows as being provided to specific predetermined signal paths. For example, certain optical signals are shown as being provided to the WDM MUX 936 and being included in an optical ISL beam”.
Regarding claims 8 and 18, which recites “wherein each of the set of GEO satellites are configured to communicate with more than one satellite of more than one orbital plane”, see Fig. 1B and section [0038] of Boroson, which teaches “The OMA system 100 includes a GEO relay satellite 110 that can communicate with one or more LEO satellites 120”. Boroson also teaches, in section [0042], “intra-system links 158a-158e between GEO nodes 110 and the LEO satellites 120 and MEO satellites 140 and among the GEO nodes 110 themselves”.
Regarding claims 9 and 19, which recites “wherein the communication links with the ground gateways comprise radio frequency (RF) links; and
wherein each of the set of GEO satellites are configured to convert among the RF links comprising the uplink communications and the optical communications of the free space GEO- to-LEO optical links”, see Fig. 1 and section [0038] of Boroson, which teaches “the GEO relay satellite 110 communicates … with the ground station 130 via an optical or RF relay ground connection link 152”. In addition, see section [0073] of Hreha, which teaches “the space segment return link equipment … is also configured to convert the RF signals that it receives (from the service terminals STs) into optical signals”.
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Pub. 2017/0302377 to Boroson in view of U.S. Patent Pub. 2018/0227054 to Hreha and U.S. Patent No. 7,103,280 to Ionov.
Regarding claims 4 and 14, which recites “wherein within the wavelength multiplexed arrangement, individual wavelengths corresponding to individual beams are assigned to individual LEO satellites of each orbital plane, such that each LEO satellite of each orbital plane receives traffic over an assigned beam and all beams of a corresponding orbital plane propagate through each LEO satellite”, Boroson and Hreha, as applied to claim 1 above, teach the satellite system utilizing wavelength division multiplexing. However, as they don’t explicitly describe assigning each satellite a wavelength corresponding to an individual beam, Ionov is added.
In an analogous art, Ionov discloses an optical satellite communication method utilizing a plurality of satellites in communication with each other (via optical links) and a ground station (via RF link). See Fig. 4 and section [0025], where it is taught “wavelength assignment for one-way traffic in a peripheral cord is illustrated … an individual optical carrier for each data stream is assigned, i.e. .lamda..sub.1, .lamda..sub.2 and .lamda..sub.3 for the data streams between satellites j-2 and j, j-1 and j, and j-1 and j+1, respectively. The data streams designated for satellite j at wavelengths lamda..sub.1 and lamda..sub.2 are dropped from the optical system.”
Therefore, as Boroson, Hreha and Ionov all teach networks for communication between satellites (either LEO or GEO) and a ground station and as Ionov explicitly teaches satellite specific identifiers based on assigned wavelength, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at or before the time of invention to modify Boroson and Hreha by assigning wavelengths to each LEO satellite. This would assist in avoiding interference and eliminate the need for synchronization, as described by Ionov.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Pub. 2017/0302377 to Boroson in view of U.S. Patent Pub. 2018/0227054 to Hreha and U.S. Patent Pub. 2020/0274611 to Mendelsohn.
Regarding the limitation directed to the LEO satellite of claims 10 and 20 reciting “a second optical demultiplexer configured to demultiplex a second optical link established over free space with a first neighboring LEO satellite into second wavelength separated optical beams carried by second optical fibers”, Hroha teaches, in section [0124], a single demultiplexer that “demultiplexes (i.e., separates) the received optical feeder uplink beam (or the received optical ISL beam)”. However, as Hreha and Boroson do not explicitly teach a second, separate demultiplexer for processing optical ISL beams only, Mendelsohn is added.
In an analogous art, Mendelsohn discloses features generally relate to adjusting a native antenna pattern of a satellite to adapt communications via the satellite. See section [0167], where Mendelsohn teaches “the communications satellite 120-b may include a second receiver 1060-a, and a second demultiplexer 1070-a, which may provide a second set of feed element Tx component signals 1075-a”.
Therefore, as Boroson, Hreha and Mendelsohn all teach networks for communication with satellites and a ground station and as Mendelsohn explicitly teaches multiple receivers and demultiplexers for different incoming signals, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at or before the time of invention to modify Boroson and Hreha by delegating the reception and processing of the inter-satellite to its own equipment rather than operating on the same equipment as the uplink/downlink signals. This would be trivial as Hreha already discloses a single system able to process both signal types.
Regarding the limitation directed to the LEO satellite of claims 10 and 20 reciting “a first optical demultiplexer configured to, based at least on the present line of sight, demultiplex a GEO-to-LEO optical link established over free space with a corresponding GEO satellite into first wavelength separated optical beams carried by first optical fibers”, see section [0124] of Hreha, which teaches “the WDM DEMUX 306 demultiplexes (i.e., separates) the received optical feeder uplink beam (or the received optical ISL beam), after it has been optically amplified, into two hundred and fifty separate optical data signals”.
Regarding the limitation directed to the LEO satellite of claims 10 and 20 reciting “optical splitters configured to direct at least a portion of the second wavelength separated optical beams to on board destinations over third optical fibers, and direct at least a portion of the first wavelength separated optical beams onto fourth optical fibers”, see section [0124] or Hreha, which teaches “the WDM DEMUX 306 demultiplexes (i.e., separates) the received optical feeder uplink beam (or the received optical ISL beam … into two hundred and fifty separate optical data signals … and each of which is provided to a separate beam splitter (BS) 932. Each BS 932 splits the optical data signal it receives into two optical data signals, which include the same data, but may have different power, depending upon how the BS is implemented”. The output optical signals are then sent to subsequent onboard satellite equipment, such as photodetectors and optical filters.
Regarding the limitation directed to the LEO satellite of claims 10 and 20 reciting “and a multiplexer configured to multiplex at least the portion of the first wavelength separated optical beams carried by the fourth optical fibers for an outgoing free space optical link directed to a second neighboring LEO satellite”, see sections [0125] through [0127] of Hreha, which teach “The … optical data signals that are provided … to the WDM MUX 936 (which signals, as noted above, may or may not first be filtered by a respective one of the filters 934) are multiplexed (i.e., combined) by the WDM MUX 936 onto a single optical fiber”. After passing through an optical amplifier, the single optical signal is then “provided (e.g., via an optical fiber) to the transmitter optics 940 … the transmitter optics 940 outputs a collimated optical ISL beam that is aimed at another satellite”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN SHAUN KELLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-5652. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays to Fridays.
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, Jeanette Parker can be reached at (571)270-3647. 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.
/STEVEN S KELLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights