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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 07/04/2025 has been entered. Claims 1 and 3-9 remain pending in this application. Claims 1, 8, and 9 have been amended. Claims 2 and 10 have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/04/2025 regarding prior art rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The prior art rejections are therefore maintained.
Regarding amendments to claim 1, the Examiner disagrees with the Applicant and maintains the rejection in consideration of amendments made to reflect elements of now cancelled claim 2. The claim as currently amended recites “determining a first integrity datum”, however the Applicant appears to argue an interpretation of ‘determining’ as calculating or limiting away from the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “determining” which includes to cause something to occur or be done in a particular way. In the cited portions, Sun discloses a system where a RAIM operation uses GNSS and signals of opportunity (SOPS) including cellular (5G) signals results in (determines) a reduced protection level. The Applicant further argues that the cited portion of the reference only refers to prior art, however later in the document, such as in [0018], also refer to 5G used as an improvement/upgrade/evolution to this existing RAIM SOP cellular signal system which would have the same improvements in integrity and protection level.
Therefore, the Examiner maintains the prior art rejections of claim 1 with similar arguments applied to dependent claims 3-9 in view of Sun.
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/04/2025 regarding double patenting have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The nonstatutory double patenting rejections of based on Strobel/Sun of claims 1 and 3-6 are maintained for the same or similar reasoning as provided above regarding the teachings of Sun.
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/04/2025 regarding 112(a) rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. All 112(a) rejections are overcome in consideration of claim cancellations.
Applicant’s arguments filed 07/04/2025 regarding 101 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. All 101 rejections are overcome in consideration of claim amendments
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 and 3-9 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 8, 9, and 10 of copending Application No. 18,547,158 in view of Sun (CN114167469A), hereinafter Sun. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as evidenced by the rejection below. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Regarding claim 1, copending Application No. 18,547,158 discloses a method for determining an integrity datum regarding a GNSS-based localization of a vehicle, comprising: receiving GNSS satellite signals from at least one GNSS satellite and determining GNSS localization data using the received GNSS satellite signals; receiving 5G signals and determining 5G localization data using the received 5G signals; and determining a first integrity datum in consideration of at least received 5G signals or determined 5G localization data. (See claim 1 copending Application No. 18/547,158). Copending Application No. 18,547,158 does not disclose operating the vehicle based upon the determined first integrity datum, wherein the first integrity datum is a protection level. However, Sun further discloses operating the vehicle based upon the determined first integrity datum, wherein the first integrity datum is a protection level (See at least [0011] “This type of method adopts the Advanced RAIM (ARAIM) framework, combines GNSS and LTE systems, reduces the protection level (HPL) of the integrity monitoring system, and thus improves the integrity of the system.”). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the localization system disclosed by copending Application No. 18,547,158 with the integrity system disclosed by Sun. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve integrity of a system (See at least [0005] “This type of method adopts the Advanced RAIM (ARAIM) framework, combines GNSS and LTE systems, reduces the protection level (HPL) of the integrity monitoring system, and thus improves the integrity of the system.”).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of copending Application No. 18,547,158 and Sun as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Copending Application No. 18,547,158 does not disclose the differences between GNSS localization data and 5G localization data are used in order to determine the first integrity datum. However, Sun further discloses the differences between GNSS localization data and 5G localization data are used in order to determine the first integrity datum (See at least [0057] “First, the possible error sources and magnitudes of 5G signal and GNSS signal positioning are collected. The main sources of GNSS errors are ionospheric delay, tropospheric delay, errors caused by clock asynchrony, and receiver noise; the main sources of 5G signal ranging errors are multipath interference caused by signal reflection, fault deviation caused by NLOS, receiver noise, etc.” Sun discloses error sources as differences collected for use in determination of integrity datum). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the localization system disclosed by copending Application No. 18,547,158 with the integrity system disclosed by Sun. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve integrity of a system (See at least [0005] “This type of method adopts the Advanced RAIM (ARAIM) framework, combines GNSS and LTE systems, reduces the protection level (HPL) of the integrity monitoring system, and thus improves the integrity of the system.”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of copending Application No. 18,547,158 and Sun as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Copending Application No. 18,547,158 does not disclose a second integrity datum is determined in consideration of at least received GNSS satellite signals or determined GNSS localization data. However, Sun further discloses a second integrity datum is determined in consideration of at least received GNSS satellite signals or determined GNSS localization data (See at least [0023] “Get multiple error sources of GNSS signal positioning and the magnitude of any corresponding error source.” Sun discloses error sources of positioning signals as integrity data). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the localization system disclosed by copending Application No. 18,547,158 with the integrity system disclosed by Sun. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve integrity of a system (See at least [0005] “This type of method adopts the Advanced RAIM (ARAIM) framework, combines GNSS and LTE systems, reduces the protection level (HPL) of the integrity monitoring system, and thus improves the integrity of the system.”).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of copending Application No. 18,547,158 and Sun as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 4. Copending Application No. 18,547,158 does not disclose wherein an overall integrity datum is determined using the first integrity datum and the second integrity datum. However, Sun further discloses wherein an overall integrity datum is determined using the first integrity datum and the second integrity datum (See at least [0011] “This type of method adopts the Advanced RAIM (ARAIM) framework, combines GNSS and LTE systems, reduces the protection level (HPL) of the integrity monitoring system, and thus improves the integrity of the system.” Sun discloses an overall ARAIM framework/protection level integrity data used for a navigation solution based on a first integrity data which may be collected 5 G errors and second integrity data which may be collected GNSS errors. See also [0057] and [0023] regarding errors). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the localization system disclosed by copending Application No. 18,547,158 with the integrity system disclosed by Sun. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve integrity of a system (See at least [0005] “This type of method adopts the Advanced RAIM (ARAIM) framework, combines GNSS and LTE systems, reduces the protection level (HPL) of the integrity monitoring system, and thus improves the integrity of the system.”).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of copending Application No. 18,547,158 and Sun as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1, 4, and 5. Copending Application No. 18,547,158 does not disclose when determining the overall integrity datum, a weighting of first integrity datum to second integrity datum is performed as a function of at least one weighting indicator. However, Sun further discloses when determining the overall integrity datum, a weighting of first integrity datum to second integrity datum is performed as a function of at least one weighting indicator (See at least [0058] “A weighted least squares estimator is often used to compute the navigation solution from the pseudorange measurements.” Equations [0059] and [0059] disclose weights assigned to errors of both first (5 G) and second (GNSS) integrity datum). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the localization system disclosed by copending Application No. 18,547,158 with the integrity system disclosed by Sun. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve integrity of a system (See at least [0005] “This type of method adopts the Advanced RAIM (ARAIM) framework, combines GNSS and LTE systems, reduces the protection level (HPL) of the integrity monitoring system, and thus improves the integrity of the system.”).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of copending Application No. 18,547,158 and Sun as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, copending Application No. 18,547,158 discloses a computer program for carrying out a method according to claim 1 (See claim 8 copending Application No. 18,547,158)
Regarding claim 8, the combination of copending Application No. 18,547,158 and Sun as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 7. Additionally, copending Application No. 18,547,158 discloses a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium on which the computer program according to claim 7 is stored (See claim 9 copending Application No. 18/547,158)
Regarding claim 9, the combination of copending Application No. 18,547,158 and Sun as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, copending Application No. 18,547,158 discloses a localization device for a vehicle configured so as to carry out a method according to claim 1. (See claim 10 copending Application No. 18/547,158)
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)(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 and 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sun (CN114167469A), hereinafter Sun.
Regarding claim 1, Sun discloses a method for determining an integrity datum regarding a GNSS-based localization of a vehicle, comprising:
receiving GNSS satellite signals from at least one GNSS satellite and determining GNSS localization data using the received GNSS satellite signals (See at least [0097] “1) Establish a pseudo-range measurement model: Collect the error sources and magnitude of each error source of 5G positioning and GNSS positioning, and establish a pseudo-range measurement model”);
receiving 5G signals and determining 5G localization data using the received 5G signals (See at least [0097] “1) Establish a pseudo-range measurement model: Collect the error sources and magnitude of each error source of 5G positioning and GNSS positioning, and establish a pseudo-range measurement model”); and
determining a first integrity datum in consideration of at least received 5G signals or determined 5G localization data (See at least [0011] “This type of method adopts the Advanced RAIM (ARAIM) framework, combines GNSS and LTE systems, reduces the protection level (HPL) of the integrity monitoring system, and thus improves the integrity of the system.”).
operating the vehicle based upon the determined first integrity datum, wherein the first integrity datum is a protection level (See at least [0011] “This type of method adopts the Advanced RAIM (ARAIM) framework, combines GNSS and LTE systems, reduces the protection level (HPL) of the integrity monitoring system, and thus improves the integrity of the system.”, [0013] “The embodiments of the present application provide a vehicle navigation monitoring method, apparatus, computer equipment and storage medium based on a 5G/GNSS combination.”)
Regarding claim 3, Sun, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Sun additionally discloses
the differences between GNSS localization data and 5G localization data are used in order to determine the first integrity datum (See at least [0057] “First, the possible error sources and magnitudes of 5G signal and GNSS signal positioning are collected. The main sources of GNSS errors are ionospheric delay, tropospheric delay, errors caused by clock asynchrony, and receiver noise; the main sources of 5G signal ranging errors are multipath interference caused by signal reflection, fault deviation caused by NLOS, receiver noise, etc.” Sun discloses error sources as differences collected for use in determination of integrity datum).
Regarding claim 4, Sun, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Sun additionally discloses
a second integrity datum is determined in consideration of at least received GNSS satellite signals or determined GNSS localization data (See at least [0023] “Get multiple error sources of GNSS signal positioning and the magnitude of any corresponding error source.” Sun discloses error sources of positioning signals as integrity data).
Regarding claim 5, Sun, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 4. Sun additionally discloses
wherein an overall integrity datum is determined using the first integrity datum and the second integrity datum (See at least [0011] “This type of method adopts the Advanced RAIM (ARAIM) framework, combines GNSS and LTE systems, reduces the protection level (HPL) of the integrity monitoring system, and thus improves the integrity of the system.” Sun discloses an overall ARAIM framework/protection level integrity data used for a navigation solution based on a first integrity data which may be collected 5 G errors and second integrity data which may be collected GNSS errors. See also [0057] and [0023] regarding errors).
Regarding claim 6, Sun, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1, 4, and 5. Sun additionally discloses
when determining the overall integrity datum, a weighting of first integrity datum to second integrity datum is performed as a function of at least one weighting indicator (See at least [0058] “A weighted least squares estimator is often used to compute the navigation solution from the pseudorange measurements.” Equations [0059] and [0059] disclose weights assigned to errors of both first (5 G) and second (GNSS) integrity datum).
Regarding claim 7, Sun, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Sun additionally discloses
A computer program for carrying out a method (See at least [0124] “In one embodiment, a computer device is proposed, the computer device includes a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, and the processor implements the following steps when executing the computer program”).
Regarding claim 8, Sun, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 7. Sun additionally discloses
A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium on which the computer program (See at least [0124] “In one embodiment, a computer device is proposed, the computer device includes a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, and the processor implements the following steps when executing the computer program”).
Regarding claim 9, Sun, as shown above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Sun additionally discloses
A localization device for a vehicle configured so as to carry out the method (See at least [0001] “The present invention relates to the field of wireless positioning and navigation technology, and in particular to a vehicle navigation information monitoring method and device based on a 5G/GNSS combination.”).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH W GOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-4186. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thu 7:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, William J. Kelleher can be reached on (571) 272-7753. 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.
/KENNETH W GOOD/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/William Kelleher/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights