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 .
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 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.
Examiner's Note.
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and/or columns and line numbers and/or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
The Examiner notes that it has been held that a recitation that a structural element is "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to” perform a function does not limit the claim to a particular structure and thus only requires the ability to so perform the function. (See In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138. See also, MPEP 2111.04) As such, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims and the prior art, the recitations of "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to” will be deemed met by an element in the prior art capable of performing the function recited in connection with "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of”, “arranged to”, “intended to”, "so as" or “operable to”.
The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. SEE MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
Specification objections
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 2, 7 and 16 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. The above identified claims will be examined as best understood.
Re claims 2, 7 and 16 the phrases "near, approximately” are a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The terms "near” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Reference of prior art
Baghdasarian et al. (US 9248922, Reflector Deployment Techniques For Satellites).
Toland et al. (US 6504514, Dual-band Equal-beam Reflector Antenna System)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-13 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1), (a)(2) as being anticipated by Baghdasarian.
Re claim 1 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: A method of stowing and deploying an antenna, the method comprising:
stowing an antenna reflector on a spacecraft platform with a multi-axis boom, the multi-axis boom foldable at multiple joints (abstract, … in the yaw axis direction and in a direction orthogonal to the yaw axis direction);
releasing a first set of hold and release mechanism (HRM) securing the antenna reflector to the spacecraft platform (col. 14, l 13-15); and
deploying the antenna reflector to a deployed position by sequentially unfolding the boom at the joints to reflect radiofrequency (RF) waves to or from a feed device (figs. 2A-2D, items 220, 222 and 230).
Re claim 2 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the antenna reflector is stowed on a nadir deck of the spacecraft platform, and wherein the boom when folded positions the antenna reflector parallel or near parallel to the nadir deck (fig. 2A, items 220, 222).
Re claim 3 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein sequentially unfolding the boom at the joints includes unfolding the boom via at least three joints (fig. 2A, items 211, 225 and 227).
Re claim 4 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The method of claim 1, further comprising actuating at least one of the joints of the boom to move the antenna reflector closer to the spacecraft platform or further away from the spacecraft platform to change a focal length of the antenna (figs. 2A, 2D, items 220, 222 are capable of performing the limitation, please note the intended use).
Re claim 5 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the boom includes a trimming joint for trimming the antenna by rotating the antenna reflector by the trimming joint (fig. 2D, item 211).
Re claim 6 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The method of claim 5, wherein trimming joint trims the antenna in elevation by rotating the trimming joint (figs. 2A, 2D, item 211).
Re claim 7 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The method of claim 6, wherein the method further comprises trimming the antenna in azimuth by at least one of the multiple joints, wherein the axis of rotation of the trimming joint and the axis of rotation of the at least one of the multiple joints are approximately orthogonal (col. 10, l 64-67 and figs. 2A, 2C, axes of items 211 and 227).
Re claim 8 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the antenna is a first antenna and the antenna reflector is a first antenna reflector, the method further comprising performing, for a second antenna on the spacecraft platform (figs. 2A-2D, items 221, 223): stowing a second antenna reflector on the spacecraft platform with a second multi-axis boom (abstract, items 2A), the second multi-axis boom foldable at multiple joints (fig. 2A, items 211, 225 and 227); releasing a second set of hold and release mechanism (HRM) securing the second antenna reflector to the spacecraft platform(col. 14, l 13-15); and deploying the second antenna reflector to a deployed position by sequentially unfolding the second boom at the joints to reflect radiofrequency (RF) waves to or from a second feed device (item 231); wherein the second antenna reflector and the first antenna reflector are stacked on one another when stowed (claims 5-7, the figs., and col. 14, l 13-15).
Re claim 9 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The method of claim 8, wherein the first and second antenna reflectors are stowed on a nadir deck of the spacecraft platform (fig. 2A).
Re claim 10 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The method of claim 9, wherein the first antenna and the second antenna deploy on opposite sides of the spacecraft platform (figs. 2A-2D, items 221, 223).
Re claim 11 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: A system for stowing and deploying an antenna on a spacecraft, the system comprising: a feed device for transmitting and/or receiving radiofrequency (RF) waves; an antenna reflector for reflecting the RF waves to or from the feed device; a boom attached to the antenna reflector and to the spacecraft, the boom comprising a plurality of joints for folding the boom to stow the antenna reflector and sequentially unfolding the boom to deploy the antenna reflector to a deployed position.
(Claim 11 is similar in scope to Claim 1; therefore, Claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale as Claim 1).
Re claim 12 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The system of claim 11, wherein the boom comprises an additional joint for trimming the antenna, the additional joint having an axis of rotation that is nonparallel to the parallel axes of rotation for unfolding the boom (col. 10, l 64-67 and figs. 2A, 2C, axes of items 211 and 227).
Re claim 13 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The system of claim 12, wherein the additional joint is for trimming in elevation (figs. 2A, 2D, item 211).
Re claim 16 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The system of claim 11, wherein the antenna reflector is stowed on a nadir deck of the spacecraft platform, and wherein the boom when folded positions the antenna reflector parallel or near parallel to the nadir deck (fig. 2A).
Re claim 17 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The system of claim 11, wherein sequentially unfolding the boom at the joints includes unfolding the boom via at least three joints (fig. 2A, items 211, 225 and 227).
Re claim 18 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The system of claim 11, wherein the boom adjusts a focal length of the antenna by actuating at least one of the joints to move the antenna reflector closer to the spacecraft platform or further away from the spacecraft platform (figs. 2A, 2D, items 220, 222 are capable of performing the limitation, please note the intended use).
Re claim 19 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The system of claim 11, wherein the antenna is a first antenna and the system further comprises a second antenna (figs. 2A-2D, items 221, 223, 216), the second antenna comprising: a second feed device for transmitting and/or receiving a second set of radiofrequency (RF) waves (item 231); a second antenna reflector for reflecting the second set of RF waves to or from the second feed device (figs. 2A-2D, items 221, 223); a second boom attached to the second antenna reflector and to the spacecraft (item 216), the second boom comprising a second plurality of joints for folding the second boom to stow the second antenna reflector on top of the antenna reflector of the first antenna and unfolding the boom to deploy the second antenna reflector to a second primary deployed position (items 226, 228 and second pivot, claim 5).
Re claim 20 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian discloses: The system of claim 19, wherein the first and second antennas deploy on opposite sides of the spacecraft platform (figs. 2A-2D, items 221, 223, 216).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baghdasarian in view of Toland.
Re claim 14 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian fails to teach as disclosed by Toland: The system of claim 11, wherein the boom includes at least two boom segments connected in series and three joints (fig. 4, items 22, 24 and 26 to modify Baghdasarian item 215), and wherein one of the three joints is either (i) coupled to a third boom segment that is fixedly attached to the antenna reflector (fig. 4, items 22, 24 and 26 proximate to the antenna reflector), or (ii) coupled to a fourth joint that is coupled to the antenna reflector and that rotates along an axis of rotation nonparallel to the one of the three joints.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to add the Toland teachings of the boom includes at least two boom segments connected in series and three joints, and wherein one of the three joints is either (i) coupled to a third boom segment that is fixedly attached to the antenna reflector into the Baghdasarian to provide more flexibility to the boom when deployed and decrease its volume in stowing position.
Re claim 15 Referring to the figures and the Detailed Description, Baghdasarian, as modified above, discloses: The system of claim 14, wherein rotation of the fourth joint trims the antenna in elevation (the limitation in claim 14 was not addressed since it is optional, however the combined references disclose the limitation).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEDHAT BADAWI whose telephone number is (571)270-5983. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri during office hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JOSHUA MICHENER can be reached on 571-272-1467. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MEDHAT BADAWI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights