Ex parte MASS - Page 7




              Appeal No. 95-2552                                                                                                                       
              Application 07/886,228                                                                                                                   

              As previously noted, § 105 has nothing to do with determining statutory subject matter.  It is true that                                 
              the mere use of the word "system" does not make a claim to a system statutory.  See In re Walter,                                        
              618 F.2d 758, 205 USPQ 397 (CCPA 1980) ("system" for seismic prospecting nonstatutory).  However,                                        
              here we are satisfied that the system is statutory subject matter under the § 101 class of a "manufacture."                              
              As to the examiner's comment that "it appears that the 'novelty' lies in the arrangement of the satellites,"                             
              patentable subject matter is based on the claimed subject matter as a whole, not on the point of novelty.                                
              Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 188, 209 USPQ 1, 9 (1981) ("It is inappropriate to dissect the claims                                    
              into old and new elements and then to ignore the presence of the old elements in the analysis.").                                        
                       Our conclusion that a "communication system including a constellation of a plurality of artificial                              
              satellites orbiting  the  Earth,  each  artificial  satellite  having  communication  means  providing                                   
              communication with the Earth," as recited in claims 1 and 15, is a "manufacture" is bolstered by the                                     
              discussion in Interferometrics, Inc. v. Mobile Communications Holdings, Inc., 1994 U.S. App.                                             
              LEXIS  7504  (4th  Cir.  1994)  (unpublished).  Interferometrics  involved  a  dispute  between                                          
              Interferometrics, Inc. ("IF") and Mobile Communications Holdings, Inc. ("MCHI") involving a                                              
              partnership formed by the parties in the Ellipsat Corporation ("Ellipsat").  Ellipsat was formed to                                      
              contruct an elliptical orbit satellite system, known as Ellipso, the final objective being to establish a                                
              communication system for cellular phone systems.  The partnership agreement provided that IF would                                       
              select "the most appropriate Interferometrics satellite class that is determined in the orbital system                                   
              hereof" to be used in the Ellipso system.  The parties also prepared an FCC application for the Ellipso                                  
              system.  "For filing purposes, the Ellipso system was divided into two constellations, Ellipso I and                                     

                                                                     - 7 -                                                                             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007