Appeal No. 95-2552
Application 07/886,228
27. A method of deploying a constellation of artificial satellites communicating with and
orbiting the Earth, comprising placing a plurality of the artificial satellites in
triply-geosynchronous (TGS) orbits having a period of eight sidereal hours, or
twice-triply-geosynchronous (TTGS) orbits having a period of sixteen sidereal hours, which
orbits are inclined with respect to the Equator and synchronized with the Earth's rotation, such
as to exploit the natural spacing of approximately 120E in longitude of the major land masses of
Europe, North America and the Far East for communication with the artificial satellites to
provide for higher elevation angles in such land masses than in other areas.
No prior art is relied upon in the rejections.
Claims 1-7, 15-18, 20-25, and 27-31 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to
nonstatutory subject matter. The examiner's position is that the claimed arrangement does not appear
to be a new "process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter" under § 101.
Claims 15-18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for
failing to particular point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as his
invention. The examiner states that the language "obtain longer stays" in claim 15 is indefinite
(Examiner's Answer, page 4): "The language 'longer stays' is deemed indefinite, since it is unclear what
the length of 'stay' would be for a satellite in an elliptical orbit in which the perigee and apogee are not
offset from the extremes."
OPINION
We reverse.
35 U.S.C. § 101
Appellant argues that the communication systems of claims 1 and 15 fall within the class of a
"manufacture" under § 101. We agree. A manufacture is defined to include: "Every article devised by
- 3 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007