Ex parte Banno

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Nov 26, 2001

08703907 (B.P.A.I. Nov. 26, 2001)

1–
The opinion in support of the decision being
entered today was not written for publication
and is not binding precedent of the Board.
Paper No. 16
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
________________
BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
________________
Ex parte KOZO BANNO
________________
Appeal No. 2000-1459
Application No. 08/703,907
________________
ON BRIEF
________________
Before KRASS, JERRY SMITH, and BARRY, Administrative Patent
Judges.
KRASS, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
This is a decision on appeal from the final rejection of
claims 1 and 6. Claims 2-5 and 7-20 have been allowed.
The invention is directed to multi-beam satellite
Appeal No. 2000-1459
Application No. 08/703,907
2–
communication systems. More particularly, the conventional
manner of determining a new satellite communication beam to be
selected based on a computed position and a moving direction
of a mobile unit requires determination of adjacent beams, the
selection of a switching candidate and the determination of
availability of the candidate, calculations which require a
long period of time, resulting in disconnected calls during
this time. The instant invention is said to solve this
problem by providing a position-beam correspondence data table
which stores data correlating each of a plurality of regions
on the ground to a particular beam of the multi-beam
communication satellite covering the general area. Once the
position of the mobile terminal is computed, this position is
used to index the position-beam correspondence data table and
looks up the corresponding beam in the table. In this manner,
the appropriate beam selection is determined at any time
merely by determining the ground position of the mobile
satellite communication terminal and accessing the position-
beam correspondence data table. Unlike the conventional
systems, it is not necessary to wait until communication line
quality starts to deteriorate before initiating a beam
Appeal No. 2000-1459
Application No. 08/703,907
3–
switching procedure. Further, complex calculations are not
required.
Representative independent claim 6 is reproduced as
follows:
6. An automatic beam switching apparatus in a multi-beam
satellite communication system comprising:
a position computing means for computing a first position
of a mobile satellite communication terminal;
a position-beam correspondence table having a plurality
of stored positions that correspond to a plurality of adjacent
beams; and
a beam switching means for selecting a first beam by
referencing said position-beam correspondence table using said
computed first position of said mobile satellite communication
terminal.
The examiner relies on the following reference:
Moritz et al. [Moritz] 5,483,664 Jan. 9 1996
[filed Jul. 26, 1993]
Claims 1 and 6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as
anticipated by Moritz.
Reference is made to the briefs and answer for the
respective positions of appellant and the examiner.
Appeal No. 2000-1459
Application No. 08/703,907
4–
OPINION
We REVERSE.
Claims 1 and 6 require a “position-beam correspondence
table” from which a beam is selected by referencing the table
using a computed position of a mobile satellite communication
terminal. Moritz neither discloses nor suggests such a look-
up table.
It is the examiner’s position that the storage of ground
positions in a position beam correspondence table reads on the
cell position data of Moritz, citing column 5, line 54 through
column 6, line 10. The examiner identifies the computation of
a first position as being disclosed in Moritz at column 7,
lines 17-20 and column 9, lines 45-46. The examiner
identifies the claimed limitation of “selecting a first
beam...by referencing said position-beam correspondence table,
utilizing said first position...as an index into said
position-beam correspondence table” [claim 1] as reading on
channel assignment and schedule, disclosed at column 9, lines
55-65, of Moritz.
However, column 5, line 54 through column 6, line 10 of
Appeal No. 2000-1459
Application No. 08/703,907
5–
Moritz is concerned with a “simulating” positions of cells
with respect to the earth. By calculating cell positions,
based on orbit position, satellite speed, orbits’ distance
from the earth and angles of displacement for various beams
supported by the satellites’ antennas away from the
satellites’ Nadir directions, Moritz determines the location
of the center of each cell and assigns active or inactive
status to the cells. Overlaps are declared based on distances
between two cells. The cell position simulation and
assignment process is repeated numerous times to determine
when particular cells go active and inactive. This improves
scheduled handoffs in cellular communications since Moritz can
anticipate, or forecast, when movement of the cells will cause
a subscriber unit to cross cell boundaries.
We find nothing in the cited portion of Moritz, column 5
to column 6, that suggests anything about a position-beam
correspondence table, as claimed. With regard to the
scheduler of Moritz, cited by the examiner, as pointed out by
appellant in the reply brief, it is clear that schedule 800 in
Figure 8 of Moritz stores a channel/cell list indexed against
time, not position. Also, Moritz discloses a process for
Appeal No. 2000-1459
Application No. 08/703,907
6–
finding a possible reconnection cell when a signal has been
lost, by searching in frequency, time and/or coding, [column
11, lines 52-58 of Moritz] but there is no indication of any
table, wherein access to the table by the position of a mobile
satellite communication terminal can be used to select a beam
of a plurality of beams, as required y instant claims 1 and 6.
Since the examiner has failed to present a prima facie
case
of anticipation, the examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1
and 6
under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) is reversed.
REVERSED
ERROL A. KRASS )
Administrative Patent Judge )
)
)
)
)
JERRY SMITH ) BOARD OF PATENT
Administrative Patent Judge ) APPEALS AND
Appeal No. 2000-1459
Application No. 08/703,907
7–
) INTERFERENCES
)
)
)
LANCE LEONARD BARRY )
Administrative Patent Judge )
EK/RWK
ROTHWELL FIGG ERNST & KURZ
555 13 STREET STE 701-E NWTH
WASHINGTON, DC 20004