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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "routes the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signals for uplink transmission to the satellite via the metasurface”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, with respect to “to the satellite”.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "routes the second packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite via the metasurface”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, with respect to “to the satellite”.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "to select the downlink transcoder path to convert the non-terrestrial downlink communication signals from the satellite”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, with respect to “the non-terrestrial downlink communication signals”.
Claims 2-14, 16-18,20 are rejected as indefinite due to their dependence from indefinite parent claims, and the fact that they do not recite subject matter that would obviate the indefiniteness.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 15,19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/902,158 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
As to claim 1, claim 1 of the reference application discloses
A system, comprising: a metasurface (claim 1: “a metasurface”); and
a device comprising a controller, a first multiplexer and a second multiplexer, wherein the device obtains terrestrial uplink communication signals from a user equipment configured for cellular telecommunications, wherein the controller controls the first multiplexer to select, as an uplink output path, between: a first Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink transcoder path that converts the terrestrial uplink communication signals to non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signals, and routes the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signals for uplink transmission to the satellite via the metasurface (claim 1: “an uplink multiplexer …”, “wherein the L1-PHY uplink transcoder path …”), or
a first bypass path that bypasses the first L1-PHY uplink transcoder path and routes the terrestrial uplink communication signals for uplink transmission to the satellite via the metasurface, wherein the controller obtains non-terrestrial downlink communication signals from the satellite as redirected by the metasurface (claim 1: “wherein the uplink bypass path …”), and
wherein the controller controls the second multiplexer to select, as a downlink output path, between: a second L1-PHY downlink transcoder path that converts the non-terrestrial downlink communication signals to terrestrial downlink communication signals, and routes the terrestrial downlink satellite communication signals for downlink transmission to the user equipment (claim 1: “a downlink multiplexer …”, “wherein the L1-PHY downlink transcoder path converts …”), or
a second bypass path that bypasses the second L1-PHY downlink transcoder path and routes the non-terrestrial downlink communication signals for downlink transmission to the user equipment (claim 1: “wherein the downlink bypass path bypasses …”).
As to claim 19, see ODP rejection for claim 1.
As to claim 15, claim 1 of reference application discloses A method, comprising: obtaining, by a system comprising at least one processor, a terrestrial uplink communication signal comprising first uplink packet data, from a user equipment configured for cellular communications (claim 1: “an uplink multiplexer …”, “wherein the L1-PHY uplink transcoder path …”);
selecting, using a trained model of the system, between: a Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink transcoder path that converts the first uplink packet data to second uplink packet data for a non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal, and routes the second packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite via a metasurface (claim 1: “an uplink multiplexer …”, “wherein the L1-PHY uplink transcoder path …”), or
a bypass path that bypasses the L1-PHY uplink transcoder path and routes the first uplink packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite (claim 1: “wherein the uplink bypass path …”).
Claims 1, 15,19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 7, respectively as set forth below, of copending Application No. 18/902,268 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
As to claim 1, claim 1 of the reference application discloses
A system, comprising: a metasurface (claim 1: “a metasurface”); and
a device comprising a controller, a first multiplexer and a second multiplexer, wherein the device obtains terrestrial uplink communication signals from a user equipment configured for cellular telecommunications, wherein the controller controls the first multiplexer to select, as an uplink output path, between: a first Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink transcoder path that converts the terrestrial uplink communication signals to non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signals, and routes the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signals for uplink transmission to the satellite via the metasurface (claim 1: “wherein the device obtains first/second terrestrial uplink communication signals …”, “controls the cross-point switch to couple the first terrestrial uplink communication signals to a L1-PHY uplink transcoder path that converts …”), or
a first bypass path that bypasses the first L1-PHY uplink transcoder path and routes the terrestrial uplink communication signals for uplink transmission to the satellite via the metasurface, wherein the controller obtains non-terrestrial downlink communication signals from the satellite as redirected by the metasurface (claim 1: “controls the cross-point switch to couple the first terrestrial uplink communication signals to the uplink bypass path …”), and
wherein the controller controls the second multiplexer to select, as a downlink output path, between: a second L1-PHY downlink transcoder path that converts the non-terrestrial downlink communication signals to terrestrial downlink communication signals, and routes the terrestrial downlink satellite communication signals for downlink transmission to the user equipment (claim 4: “wherein the device obtains first non-terrestrial downlink communication signals …”), or
a second bypass path that bypasses the second L1-PHY downlink transcoder path and routes the non-terrestrial downlink communication signals for downlink transmission to the user equipment (claim 7: “wherein the first bypass path …”).
As to claim 19, see ODP rejection for claim 1.
As to claim 15, claim 1 of reference application discloses A method, comprising: obtaining, by a system comprising at least one processor, a terrestrial uplink communication signal comprising first uplink packet data, from a user equipment configured for cellular communications (claim 1: “wherein the device obtains first/second terrestrial uplink communication signals …”, “controls the cross-point switch to couple the first terrestrial uplink communication signals to a L1-PHY uplink transcoder path that converts …”);
selecting, using a trained model of the system, between: a Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink transcoder path that converts the first uplink packet data to second uplink packet data for a non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal, and routes the second packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite via a metasurface (claim 1: “wherein the device obtains first/second terrestrial uplink communication signals …”, “controls the cross-point switch to couple the first terrestrial uplink communication signals to a L1-PHY uplink transcoder path that converts …”), or
a bypass path that bypasses the L1-PHY uplink transcoder path and routes the first uplink packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite (claim 1: “controls the cross-point switch to couple the first terrestrial uplink communication signals to the uplink bypass path …”).
Claims 1, 15,19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, of copending Application No. 18/902,052 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
As to claim 1, claim 1 of the reference application discloses
A system, comprising: a metasurface (claim 1: “via a metasurface”); and
a device comprising a controller, a first multiplexer and a second multiplexer, wherein the device obtains terrestrial uplink communication signals from a user equipment configured for cellular telecommunications, wherein the controller controls the first multiplexer to select, as an uplink output path, between: a first Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink transcoder path that converts the terrestrial uplink communication signals to non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signals, and routes the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signals for uplink transmission to the satellite via the metasurface (claim 1: “a controller, a first multiplexer and a second multiplexer …”, “in response to the satellite being configured for SATCOM communication signals, controls the first multiplexer …”), or
a first bypass path that bypasses the first L1-PHY uplink transcoder path and routes the terrestrial uplink communication signals for uplink transmission to the satellite via the metasurface, wherein the controller obtains non-terrestrial downlink communication signals from the satellite as redirected by the metasurface (claim 1: “in response to the satellite being configured for direct-to-device communication signals, controls …”), and
wherein the controller controls the second multiplexer to select, as a downlink output path, between: a second L1-PHY downlink transcoder path that converts the non-terrestrial downlink communication signals to terrestrial downlink communication signals, and routes the terrestrial downlink satellite communication signals for downlink transmission to the user equipment (claim 1: “controls the second multiplexer to couple terrestrial downlink …”), or
a second bypass path that bypasses the second L1-PHY downlink transcoder path and routes the non-terrestrial downlink communication signals for downlink transmission to the user equipment (claim 1: “controls the second multiplexer to couple a second downlink bypass path …”).
As to claim 19, see ODP rejection for claim 1.
As to claim 15, claim 1 of reference application discloses A method, comprising: obtaining, by a system comprising at least one processor, a terrestrial uplink communication signal comprising first uplink packet data, from a user equipment configured for cellular communications (claim 1: “a controller, a first multiplexer and a second multiplexer …”, “in response to the satellite being configured for SATCOM communication signals, controls the first multiplexer …”);
selecting, using a trained model of the system, between: a Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink transcoder path that converts the first uplink packet data to second uplink packet data for a non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal, and routes the second packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite via a metasurface (claim 1: “a controller, a first multiplexer and a second multiplexer …”, “in response to the satellite being configured for SATCOM communication signals, controls the first multiplexer …”), or
a bypass path that bypasses the L1-PHY uplink transcoder path and routes the first uplink packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite (claim 1: “in response to the satellite being configured for direct-to-device communication signals, controls …”).
Claims 1, 15,19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, of copending Application No. 18/899,739 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
As to claim 1, claim 1 of the reference application discloses
A system, comprising: a metasurface (claim 1: “via a metasurface”); and
a device comprising a controller, a first multiplexer and a second multiplexer, wherein the device obtains terrestrial uplink communication signals from a user equipment configured for cellular telecommunications, wherein the controller controls the first multiplexer to select, as an uplink output path, between: a first Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink transcoder path that converts the terrestrial uplink communication signals to non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signals, and routes the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signals for uplink transmission to the satellite via the metasurface (claim 1: “a device that …”, “a first L1-PHY uplink transcoder path that converts …”), or
a first bypass path that bypasses the first L1-PHY uplink transcoder path and routes the terrestrial uplink communication signals for uplink transmission to the satellite via the metasurface, wherein the controller obtains non-terrestrial downlink communication signals from the satellite as redirected by the metasurface (claim 1: “a first bypass path …”), and
wherein the controller controls the second multiplexer to select, as a downlink output path, between: a second L1-PHY downlink transcoder path that converts the non-terrestrial downlink communication signals to terrestrial downlink communication signals, and routes the terrestrial downlink satellite communication signals for downlink transmission to the user equipment (claim 1: “a second L1-PHY downlink transcoder path …”), or
a second bypass path that bypasses the second L1-PHY downlink transcoder path and routes the non-terrestrial downlink communication signals for downlink transmission to the user equipment (claim 1: “a second bypass path …”).
As to claim 19, see ODP rejection for claim 1.
As to claim 15, claim 1 of reference application discloses A method, comprising: obtaining, by a system comprising at least one processor, a terrestrial uplink communication signal comprising first uplink packet data, from a user equipment configured for cellular communications (claim 1: “a device that …”, “a first L1-PHY uplink transcoder path that converts …”);
selecting, using a trained model of the system, between: a Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink transcoder path that converts the first uplink packet data to second uplink packet data for a non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal, and routes the second packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite via a metasurface (claim 1: “a device that …”, “a first L1-PHY uplink transcoder path that converts …”), or
a bypass path that bypasses the L1-PHY uplink transcoder path and routes the first uplink packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite (claim 1: “a first bypass path …”).
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.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2026/0058718 A1 to Magesacher et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2002/0073167 A1 to Powell et al., further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2025/0343577 A1 to Abu Al Haija et al.
As to claim 15, Magesacher discloses A method, comprising:
obtaining, by a system comprising at least one processor (Figs. 2,4-7, paragraphs 50-64: “smart satellite(s) 204(1),(2)”, disclosing “system” ), a terrestrial uplink communication signal comprising first uplink packet data, from a user equipment configured for cellular communications (Figs. 2,4-7, paragraphs 50-64: “smart satellite(s) 204(1),(2)”, disclosing “system”, where each smart satellite 204(x) may receive uplink packet data/signal from UE 110 and/or “smart UE 210”, i.e., “a terrestrial uplink communication signal comprising first uplink packet data, from a user equipment configured for cellular communications”);
selecting, using a trained model of the system, between: a Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink path that routes the data of the first uplink packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite (Figs. 2,4-7, paragraphs 50-64, disclosing a “smart satellite 204(1/N)” routing the UL data/signal from UE/smart-UE, i.e., “data of the first uplink packet data”, in an UL direction in the “satellite constellation 202”, towards a destination “satellite 104/smart satellite 204”, teaching “via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite”, wherein the path/route taken through the “satellite constellation 202” from the origin “smart satellite (1/N)” to the destination “satellite 104/smart satellite 204” including the specific “intersatellite communication interface 402” utilized in the origin smart satellite (1/N)”, is the “L1-PHY UL path”), or
a bypass path that bypasses the L1-PHY uplink path and routes the first uplink packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite (Figs. 2,4-7, paragraphs 50-64, teaching that the same origin “smart satellite (1/N)” may route the first UL packet data to the destination “satellite 104/smart satellite 204” through a different path in satellite constellation 202”, including a different “intersatellite communication interface 402” utilized in the origin smart satellite (1/N)” than the interface 402 discussed in the paragraph above, teaching the recited “bypass path”).
Magesacher does not appear to explicitly disclose uplink transcoder path that converts the first uplink packet data to second uplink packet data for a non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal, and routes the second packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite.
Powell discloses uplink transcoder path that converts the first uplink packet data to second uplink packet data for a non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal, and routes the second packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite. (Fig. 1, “central proxy server”; Fig. 8, “transmission queue 346”, “packetizer module 348” and “satellite uplink 16/18”, paragraphs 102-109, disclosing “logical messages” [“first UL packet data”] being packetized at 348 into “packets” [“second UL packet data”] that are then transmitted in the UL to a satellite, teaching this limitation).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Powell’s teachings discussed above with Magesacher’s teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to nonterrestrial, satellite communications. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a phosita to incorporate Powell’s teaching above pertaining to uplink transcoder path that converts the first uplink packet data to second uplink packet data for a non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal, in Magesacher’s disclosed Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink path, to reject “selecting, using a trained model of the system, between: a Layer-1 physical interface (L1-PHY) uplink transcoder path that converts the first uplink packet data to second uplink packet data for a non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal, and routes the second packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite, or a bypass path that bypasses the L1-PHY uplink transcoder path and routes the first uplink packet data via the non-terrestrial uplink satellite communication signal for uplink transmission to the satellite”, since Powell’s and Magesacher’s uplink paths are utilized for nonterrestrial satellite communications. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for wireless communications, especially pertaining to nonterrestrial satellite communications (Powell, paragraphs 1-17; Magesacher, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
Neither Magesacher nor Powell discloses “via a metasurface”.
Abu Al Haija discloses “via a metasurface” (paragraphs 51, 56).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Abu Al Haija’s teachings discussed above with Magesacher and Powell’s combined teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, at least since all references pertain to nonterrestrial communications (Abu Al Haija, paragraph 56). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a phosita to incorporate the metasurface teachings in Abu Al Haija in the satellite teachings taught in Magesacher and Powell, to reject the limitations of this claim featuring “metasurface”. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for wireless communications, especially pertaining to nonterrestrial satellite communications (Powell, paragraphs 1-17; Magesacher, paragraphs 1-8; Abu Al Haija, paragraphs 1-23, 56). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14, 16-20 may potentially be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims (if applicable), and if all outstanding rejections/objections were successfully traversed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHI TANG P CHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-9021. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM - 6PM.
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, Asad M Nawaz can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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.
/CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights