DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 2-3, 10-11, 17 are canceled.
Claims 1, 4, 9, 12, 16, 18 are amended.
Claims 1, 4-9, 12-16, 18-20 are pending.
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.
Claims 1, 4-9, 12-16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 20210109227) in view of Wang (CN 103176191).
Regarding Claim 1, Jones teaches the following limitations:
A Global Positioning System (GPS) or global navigation satellite system (GNSS) comprising at least: (Jones - [0028] FIG. 1 illustrates an example global navigation satellite system (GNSS) 100 according to this disclosure. As shown in FIG. 1, the GNSS 100 includes multiple satellites 102, where the satellites 102 transmit wireless position signals 104. The satellites 102 here support any suitable satellite navigation system, such as the Global Positioning System (GPS),)
antenna electronics configured to provide signals to a GPS or GNSS receiver, (Jones - [0082] The expected gain vectors can be determined in any suitable manner, such as based on platform attitude, a rough location of the receiver 106 or azimuths and elevations obtained from a GNSS receiver, and an antenna array manifold.)
wherein the signals comprise GPS or GNSS satellite signals received from a set of GPS or GNSS satellites and/or one or more falsified signals, and (Jones - [0038] the GNSS 100 may include any suitable number of satellites 102 in any suitable configuration, and the satellites 102 that are visible to any given receiver 106 at any specific time can vary. In addition, depending on the circumstances, there may be any number of spoofing transmitters on the ground or in the air for a given environment.)
wherein to provide the signals comprises to provide a set of antenna beams formed based on the signals; (Jones - [0035] an antenna array manifold (which identifies how gains and phases of the multi-element antenna vary with direction). Jones does not explicitly teach “antenna beams”.)
a digital signal processor (DSP) configured to determine, based on an expected location of a respective GPS or GNSS satellite of the set of GPS or GNSS satellites, an expected gain or expected power for a respective signal of the signals, and (Jones - [0035] the receiver 106 may determine if gain vectors for received GNSS signals correspond to expected gain vectors based on known or expected satellite positions. [0043] The processor 204 includes any suitable processing device or devices configured to analyze at least GNSS signals to identify and suppress spoofed GNSS signals. For example, the processor 204 may include one or more microprocessors, microcontrollers, digital signal processors (DSPs),)
wherein the expected gain or expected power for the respective signals is based on an expected gain for a respective antenna beam of the set of antenna beams at the expected location of the respective GPS or GNSS satellite, and (Jones - [0035])
the GPS or GNSS receiver, wherein the GPS or GNSS receiver is configured to track the respective signals of the set of antenna beams, measure a power of the respective signal, (Jones - [0035], [0051] Multiple tracking channels 304 receive the electrical signals output by the antenna elements 302a-302n and process the electrical signals to identify GNSS signals. Each tracking channel 304 generally attempts to identify a GNSS signal from a single satellite 102, and different tracking channels 304 generally attempt to identify different GNSS signals from different single satellites 102. However, as noted above, one or more of the tracking channels 304 may identify spoofed GNSS signals, which would otherwise interfere with the operation of a receiver. Using the techniques disclosed in this patent document, these spoofed GNSS signals can be suppressed so that only valid GNSS signals identified by the tracking channels 304 are used.)
wherein the measured power of the respective signals comprises a measured power of the respective signal while the respective signal is tracked on the respective antenna beam, (Jones - [0051])
compare the measured power to the expected gain or expected power, and (Jones - [0035])
determine whether the respective signal is falsified based on the comparison. (Jones - [0035], [0036] The receiver 106 can use any GNSS signal that is determined to be legitimate in order to identify a position of the receiver 106, meaning any GNSS signal that is determined not to be spoofed.)
Jones does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Wang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the respective antenna beam is steered to a respective steering location; (Wang – [Abstract] Signals received by an antenna array are subjected to A/D (analog/digital) sampling, bandpass filtering, amplitude-phase error correction, covariance matrix and inverse matrix calculation, MUSIC (multiple signal classification) direction finding, pseudo-satellite and navigation satellite signal power estimation, calculation of constraint response vectors corresponding to the direction of pseudo-satellite signals, calculation of multi-constrained beam forming weight, digital beam forming, and navigation solution, so that local position is obtained finally. [claim 1] associate matrix of steering vector corresponding to Pseudolite signal direction, a (βk) be steering vector corresponding to Pseudolite signal direction,)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the antenna array and processor of Jones with the beamforming and steering vectors of Wang in order to obtain consistent and strong navigational signal power (Wang – [pg. 10 para. 14]).
Regarding Claims 4, 12, 18, Jones further teaches:
wherein the GPS or GNSS receiver is further configured to rank the expected gain or expected power relative to a second expected gain or second expected power for a second antenna beam, and (Jones – [0033] the receiver 106 may calculate the squared cross-correlation magnitude between each pair of gain vectors and compare each squared cross-correlation magnitude value to a threshold value. A squared cross-correlation magnitude value that exceeds the threshold may indicate that a spoofer is transmitting multiple GNSS signals from the same location. [0035] similarities of these expected gain vectors to the gain vectors for the received GNSS signals can be determined (such as based on squared cross-correlation magnitude). Here, higher similarities would indicate that received GNSS signals have gain vectors that are more similar to expected gain vectors. Jones does not explicitly teach “antenna beams”.)
rank the measured power relative to a second measured power for the second antenna beam, and (Jones – [0033], [0035])
to compare the measured power to the expected gain or expected power is based on the rankings. (Jones – [0033], [0035])
Jones does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Wang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
antenna beams (Wang – [Abstract])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the antenna array and processor of Jones with the beamforming of Wang in order to obtain consistent and strong navigational signal power (Wang – [pg. 10 para. 14]).
Regarding Claims 5, 13, 19, Jones further teaches:
wherein to determine whether the respective signal is falsified based on the comparison further comprises to determine whether the respective signal is falsified based on a change over time in one or more of: (Jones – [0033], [0035-0036])
the expected location of the respective GPS or GNSS satellite, (Jones – [0035])
an attitude or orientation of a GPS or GNSS antenna array, or (Jones – [0035])
a disparity in expected gain among the signals on an antenna beam. (Jones – [0035])
Regarding Claims 6, 14, 20, Jones further teaches:
wherein to determine the expected gain or expected power for the respective signal is based on a set of weights. (Jones – [0035], [0062] Each of the amplitude and phase adjusters 332 includes any suitable structure for adjusting the amplitude and phase of a signal, such as a weighting network. Note that the signals received by the amplitude and phase adjusters 332 may represent the pre-processed GNSS signals. Also note that the processor 204 can use the identification of genuine and spoofed GNSS signals in other ways, such as to identify a direction to a potential or actual spoofer based on the gain vectors that are determined to be substantially similar.)
Regarding Claims 7, 15, Jones further teaches:
further comprising adder and/or multiplier circuitry configured to compute a covariance matrix specifying spatial cross-correlations of antenna elements, and (Jones – [0033], [0035-0036], [0043] Jones does not explicitly teach “a covariance matrix”.)
Jones does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Wang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the set of weights is based on an inverse of the covariance matrix, and a beam constraint matrix. (Wang – [claim 1] Steps F-H)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the antenna array and processor of Jones with the multiple constraint beamforming algorithm of Wang in order to obtain consistent and strong navigational signal power (Wang – [pg. 10 para. 14]).
Regarding Claim 8, Jones further teaches:
wherein: the respective signal is authentic and originates from the respective GPS or GNSS satellite; or (Jones – [0035-0036])
the respective signal is falsified and originates from one or more of a satellite spoofer, an aircraft spoofer, a drone spoofer, a maritime spoofer, or a land based spoofer. (Jones – [0035-0036])
Regarding Claim 9, Jones teaches the following limitations:
A Global Positioning System (GPS) or global navigation satellite system (GNSS) method, comprising: (Jones – [0028], [0007] a method for identifying spoofed navigation signals includes receiving a plurality of navigation signals at a multi-element antenna.)
providing, by antenna electronics and to a GPS or GNSS receiver, signals, (Jones - [0082])
wherein the signals comprise GPS or GNSS satellite signals received from a set of GPS or GNSS satellites and/or one or more falsified signals, (Jones - [0038])
wherein determining the expected gain or expected power for the respective signal comprises determining an expected gain or expected power for a respective antenna beam of the set of antenna beams at the expected location of the respective GPS or GNSS satellite, (Jones - [0035])
determining, by a digital signal processor (DSP) and based on an expected location of a respective GPS or GNSS satellite of the set of GPS or GNSS satellites, an expected gain or expected power for a respective signal of the signals, (Jones - [0035], [0043])
wherein determining the expected gain or expected power for a respective antenna beam of the set of antenna beams at the expected location of the respective GPS or GNSS satellite, (Jones - [0035])
tracking, by the GPS or GNSS receiver, the respective signal of the set of antenna beams; measuring, by the GPS or GNSS receiver, a power of the respective signal; (Jones - [0035], [0051])
comparing the measured power to the expected gain or expected power; and (Jones - [0035])
determining whether the respective signal is falsified based on the comparison. (Jones - [0035-0036])
Jones does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Wang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
the respective antenna beam being steered to a respective steering location; (Wang – [Abstract], [claim 1])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the antenna array and processor of Jones with the beamforming and steering vectors of Wang in order to obtain consistent and strong navigational signal power (Wang – [pg. 10 para. 14]).
Regarding Claim 16, Jones teaches the following limitations:
A system, comprising a Global Positioning System (GPS) or global navigation satellite system (GNSS) antenna array configured to receive signals, (Jones - [0028], [0038])
wherein the signals comprise GPS or GNSS satellite signals received from a set of GPS or GNSS satellites and/or one or more falsified signals; (Jones - [0038])
antenna electronics configured to provide the signals comprising the GPS or GNSS satellite signals to a GPS or GNSS receiver, (Jones - [0082])
wherein to provide the signals to the receiver comprises to form a set of antenna beams based on the signals received by the antenna array, and (Jones - [0035], [0051])
a GPS or GNSS digital signal processor (DSP) configured to determine, based on an expected location of a respective GPS or GNSS satellite of the set of GPS or GNSS satellites, an expected gain or expected power for a respective signal of the signals, (Jones - [0035], [0043])
wherein the expected gain or expected power for the respective signal is based on an expected gain for the respective antenna beam of the set of antenna beams at the expected location of the respective GPS or GNSS satellite; (Jones - [0035])
the GPS or GNSS receiver, wherein the GPS or GNSS receiver is configured to: track the respective signal of the set of antenna beams; measure a power of the respective signal; (Jones - [0035], [0051])
compare the expected gain or expected power to the measured power; and (Jones - [0035])
determine whether the respective signal is falsified based on the comparison. (Jones - [0035], [0036])
Jones does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Wang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the antenna electronics are further configured to steer a respective antenna beam of the set of antenna beams to a respective steering location; (Wang – [Abstract], [claim 1])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the antenna array and processor of Jones with the beamforming and steering vectors of Wang in order to obtain consistent and strong navigational signal power (Wang – [pg. 10 para. 14]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 1, filed 07/13/2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 1-2, filed 07/13/2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the combination of Jones and Wang does not teach “tracking the respective signals on the set of antenna beams; tracking a given signal across multiple antenna beams, including beams steered to the expected location of other satellites; and measuring the power of the respective signal while tracked on the respective antenna beam”. The examiner disagrees, Jones teaches each and every limitation concerning receiving, measuring and tracking GNSS satellites using an antenna array manifold. It is obvious that the data collected with the “antenna array manifold” of Jones is analogous to the BRI of the applicants “multiple antenna beams”. This obvious interpretation is made explicit by the teachings of Wang. Applicant argues “Wang does not describe tracking a satellite signal on a set of antenna beams or measuring the power of a signal while the signal tracked on a respective antenna beam”. Wang teaches digital beam forming and steering vectors based on satellite and pseudo-satellite signals. The combination of Jones and Wang teaches the claimed tracking/steering of satellite signals using digital beam forming.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 2, filed 07/13/2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the dependent claims are allowable due to the dependency on the independent claims. As noted above, the examiner maintains Jones in view of Wang teaches the independent claims and therefore the dependent claims remain rejected.
Applicant's remaining arguments amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims is understandable and distinguishable from other inventions.
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 BRANDON JAMES HENSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1841. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 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, Resha H. Desai can be reached at (571) 270-7792. 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.
/BRANDON JAMES HENSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/BERNARR E GREGORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights