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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the Amendment filed on 06/22/2026
Claims 1-10 are pending in the case. Claims 1, 9, and 10 are independent claims.
This application claims the benefit of priority from Korean Patent Application No. KR10-2023-0147737 filed on 10/31/2023.
Claim Objections
Examiner notes the amendments to claim 5, “wherein the jamming resource receives the threat signal detected from the signal detector” are not underlined according to proper formatting when adding to a claim. Appropriate action is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 3-5, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jocic, U. S. Patent Publication No. 7728755 published on 2010-06-01 (hereinafter Jocic) in view of Jo et al, U. S.
Patent Application Publication 20220034997 published on 2022-2-03 (hereinafter Jo).
As for independent claim 1, Jocic discloses an apparatus for jamming comprising
A processor and a memory having instructions configure to control:
(Jocic Col 2 Lines 42-45 and Col 9 Lines 57-62 disclose the system including a processor and memory, “and at least one channel processor module adapted to transmit a first response jam signal to temporarily neutralize the signal identified as a potential threat…That is, the address generator 215, 216, 217 will rapidly generate addresses which will move the VCO 61 in linear succession using DAC Control Bus 54 with data provided by SRAM memory 206 through tri-state buffers 200,201 and is in lock step with the addresses which access the composite threshold in TLDB 45.”)
a receiver that sequentially receives a first signal and a second signal:
(Jocic Col 2, Lines 60-64, Col 3, Lines 4-8, Col 4, Lines 42-53, discloses a system for jamming with a receiving module capable of receiving multiple signals simultaneously, “a system for jamming signals, the system comprising: at least one receiving/transmitting module; a control module for receiving data from the receiving/transmitting module and adapted to scan, from the data, an operational spectrum, and identify signals as potential threats based on the signals exceeding a threshold; and a plurality of channel processor modules instructed individually by the control module to transmit in parallel first response jam signals to temporarily neutralize the signals identified as potential threats, using the receiving/transmitting module”; “The system is a parallel processing jamming architecture which is designed to attack first and then concurrently investigate multiple signals simultaneously in the radio environment… determine whether the signal in its received bandwidth is unusual”)
a signal analyzer that analyzes the first signal and detects a threat signal in a first frequency band:
(Jocic Col 2, Lines 60-64, Col 11, Lines 1-4, Col 4 Lines 47-53 discloses a system for jamming with a control module that receives data from the receiver module and determines if there is a potential threat in the signal, “a system for jamming signals, the system comprising: at least one receiving/transmitting module; a control module for receiving data from the receiving/transmitting module and adapted to scan, from the data, an operational spectrum, and identify signals as potential threats based on the signals exceeding a threshold; and a plurality of channel processor modules instructed individually by the control module to transmit in parallel first response jam signals to temporarily neutralize the signals identified as potential threats, using the receiving/transmitting module”, “The baseband at the output of the down-converter 71 and after digitization by ADC 78 can be divided into very fine frequency bins by DSP 79 and then can examine which frequency bin (or bins) are being alarmed.”; “The system is organized such that the front-line or initial response is detected by a very fast-scanning primary receiver/processor, here forth called the Course Track and Lock Receiver (CTLR 26), which uses a composite threshold to determine whether the signal in its received bandwidth is unusual.”)
a controller that controls a jamming resource to generate a jamming signal corresponding to the threat signal in the first frequency band
(Jocic Col 13, Lines 11-19, discloses a processor controlling an oscillator to control a jamming signal (sometimes referred to as ‘noise’ in Jocic) corresponding to a specific frequency channel. “The oscillator must hop during the transmit on time during 132 to all four channel frequencies 131, 133, 134, 135 and at each channel frequency must produce the correct noise type and bandwidth for transmission. This could accomplished by the processor 124 programming the noise parameters through data bus 124 and then feeding the local oscillator 120 through switch 121 to up-convert the baseband noise generated by modules 123,126,127 through up-mixer 128 to yield the jam signal at 129”)
a transmitter that transmits the jamming signal
(Jocic Col 2, Lines 60-64 discloses a system for jamming with a transmitter module capable of transmitting the jamming signal, “a system for jamming signals, the system comprising: at least one receiving/transmitting module; a control module for receiving data from the receiving/transmitting module and adapted to scan, from the data, an operational spectrum, and identify signals as potential threats based on the signals exceeding a threshold; and a plurality of channel processor modules instructed individually by the control module to transmit in parallel first response jam signals to temporarily neutralize the signals identified as potential threats, using the receiving/transmitting module”)
a signal detector that identifies, after the jamming signal is transmitted, whether the threat signal is present in the first frequency band from the second signal while the signal analyzer identifying whether the threat signal is present in a second frequency band by analyzing the first signal or the second signal
(Jocic Col 5, Line 59 - Col 6, Line 34 discloses a signal detector (the “CPM” and “DSP in combination have the same function in Jocic), which, after the signal analyzer (the “CTLR” in Jocic), has found a threat in a first frequency band (called a “quantized step in frequency” in Jocic) and moved onto a second frequency band, continues to look for the threat signal in the first frequency band, “This is accomplished by CTLR 26 performing a fast super-heterodyne sweep of the spectrum present at the splitter output 14. The sweep is in fact a quantized step in frequency, or frequency hop, and the size of each frequency step determines the CTLR's 26 processing baseband bandwidth. … Once the CTLR 26 has chosen an available CPM 19 and handed off the target frequency and any additional information, the CTLR 26 will continue to sweep for more targets and leave the selected CPM 19 alone until the CTLR 26 retasks the CPM 19 for another target frequency … the CPM 19 initially transmits a first-response jam signal through its RF output … the selected CPM 19 continues to examine the targeted radio signal with much greater precision and detail using its Digital Signal Processor (DSP)”)
while the signal analyzer concurrently searches for a threat signal in the second frequency band without employing a look-through technique to facilitate continuous jamming and multi-band search operations
(Jocic Col 4, Lines 9-14 and Col 4, Lines 64-68 disclose a simultaneous transmission and receive system without the look-through technique and a signal analyzer (called CTLR in Jocic) searching a second (and more) frequency bands, “The new architecture is also flexible enough that it could be implemented using either toggling between transmit and receive "look-through/peek-through" methods or by transmitting and receiving simultaneously while using noise cancellation techniques with the CPM's Digital Signal Processing technology to discern the target signal.…Once the CTLR 26 assigns a task to any CPM 19, the CTLR 26 immediately leaves the selected CPM 19 alone while it continues the rapid search for more suspect signals in its receive bandwidth.”)
Jocic does not appear to disclose a system and method wherein the signal detector identifies the presence of the threat signal in the first frequency band and transmits a video signal to the controller to determine jamming effectiveness
However, Jo does disclose a system and method wherein the signal detector identifies the presence of the threat signal in the first frequency band and transmits a video signal to the controller to determine jamming effectiveness
(Jo paragraph [0028], [0042] discloses a device to measure the signal and output a video signal if a threshold is surpassed (which is a method of determining effectiveness), “and the RF source signal output device 400 outputs a video signal 910 of the radar reception signal”, “If the video signal 910 output from the RF source signal output device 400 is input to the jamming transmission signal measurement device 900 and pulse signal strength of the video signal is greater than a threshold value”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the signal jamming system of Jo adding a video signal display to the signal jamming system of Jocic in order for easy visualization of the threat signal and jamming signal by a user.
As for claim 3, the limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed. Jocic discloses instructions for the jamming system if the threat signal is detected in the first frequency band by the signal analyzer, the controller determines that the jamming signal is invalid and changes allocation of the jamming resource:
(Jocic Col 6, Lines 31-37, 46-49 discloses a system for jamming that determines if the jamming signal is invalid (Jocic does this by analyzing the threat signal in great detail), while the jamming signal is transmitted, and changes the allocation of the jamming resource (referred to as refining the jamming algorithm in Jocic), “the selected CPM 19 continues to examine the targeted radio signal with much greater precision and detail using its Digital Signal Processor (DSP) 79. The CPM 19 will first refine the frequency discrimination and target the most suspect signal within the target band of frequencies communicated to it by the CTLR 26. Once accomplished, the CPM 19 can proceed by demodulating and formulating a more effective jam signal”, “Once formulation is accomplished, the first response jam signal is replaced by the newly synthesized jam signal at the input of the up-conversion stage 82 which is then remodulated to the target's same or offset frequency.”)
As for claim 4, the limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed above. Jo discloses a jamming apparatus wherein the controller sets a threshold value for detecting the threat signal of the signal detector based on the threat signal, and wherein the signal detector outputs the video signal of a threat signal exceeding the threshold value from the first signal
(Jo et al paragraph [0028], [0042] discloses a device to measure the signal and output a video signal if a threshold is surpassed, “and the RF source signal output device 400 outputs a video signal 910 of the radar reception signal”, “If the video signal 910 output from the RF source signal output device 400 is input to the jamming transmission signal measurement device 900 and pulse signal strength of the video signal is greater than a threshold value”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the signal jamming system of Jo adding a video signal display to the signal jamming system of Jocic in order for easy visualization of the threat signal and jamming signal by a user.
As for claim 5, the limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed. Jocic discloses
a frequency down converter that down-converts frequency of the first signal and transmits the first signal to the signal detector:
(Jocic figure 3 shows a down converter between the receiver and the signal processor)
a frequency up converter that up-converts frequency of the jamming signal generated from the jamming resource
(Jocic figure 3 shows an up converter between the signal processor and the signal transmitter)
and wherein the jamming resource receives the threat signal detected from the signal detector.
(Jocic figure 3 shows a DSP between the down and up converter, which acts as the signal detector and produces the jamming resource, as previously discussed.)
As for claim 8, the limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed. Jocic discloses the jamming resource including a noise generating apparatus:
(Jocic Col 3, Lines 26-29 discloses noise generation used in the jamming signal, “strike the target frequency with a general noise algorithm jam signal”)
As for claim independent 9, claim 9 reflects a method for implementing article of manufacture in claim 1 and is rejected along the same rationale.
As for claim independent 10, claim 10 reflects article of manufacture comprising computer executable instructions for implementing article of manufacture in claim 1 and is rejected along the same rationale.
(Jocic Col 14, Lines 38-45 discloses a software to use the system of jamming with the same limitations as discussed above, “it will be understood by those skilled in the art that the preferred embodiments are provided by a combination of hardware and software components, with some components being implemented by a given function or operation of a hardware or software system, and many of the data paths illustrated being implemented by data communication within a computer application or operating system. The structure illustrated is thus provided for efficiency of teaching the present preferred embodiment”)
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jocic, in view of Jo, in further view of Gounalis, U. S. Patent Application Publication 7248203 published on 2007-07-24 (hereinafter Gounalis).
As for claim 2, the limitations of parent claim 1 have been discussed. Jocic discloses instructions for the jamming system wherein the controller determines whether the jamming signal is valid and stops generating the jamming signal by controlling the jamming resource:
(Jocic Col 11, Lines 26-34 discloses a mode for the jamming system to detect if the threat signal is detected while the jamming signal is transmitted and turning off the jamming signal if the threat is not detected, “In real-time the DSP 79 can perform analysis in conjunction with Mode 1 on signal intelligence content and use proprietary algorithms to determine whether the suspect signal is a threat or not. In the event the signal is not a threat, the DSP 79 can stop working on the target hit to conserve power”)
Jocic does not appear to disclose if the threat signal is not detected in the first frequency band by the signal analyzer for a predetermined period of time.
However, Gounalis does disclose a system and method wherein if the threat signal is not detected in the first frequency band by the signal analyzer for a predetermined period of time.
(Gounalis Col 17, Lines 26-30 discloses searching a frequency band (called a dwell in Gounalis) for a predetermined amount of time (called MDT in Gounalis which stands for minimum dwell time) and if no threat is detected, it moves on. “This signifies that the detection system executes the dwell every RVT, and "sits" there for a period of the MDT to observe one pulse. If nothing is detected, the system moves onto the next dwell in the sequence and "sits" for a period of MDT.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the signal jamming system of Gounalis adding a shut off protocol to the signal jamming system of Jocic and Jo in order for more efficient power usage.
Claim 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jocic in view of Jo in further view of Jaklitsch, U. S. Patent Application Publication 20230124074 published on 2023-04-20 (hereinafter Jaklitsch).
As for claim 6, the limitations of parent claim 5 have been discussed above. Jaklitsch discloses a digital radio frequency memory (DRFM) for generating a range gate pull-off/in (RGPO/I) signal based on the threat signal detected by the signal detector:
(Jaklitsch paragraphs [0007], [0053] discloses a DRFM to achieve range gate pull off/in effects in jamming, “Conventional digital radio frequency memory (DRFM) jammers were developed at least in part to address the complex problem of jamming radar waveforms… Also, range gate and/or velocity gate pull-off effects can be easily achieved. For example, an I-Q phasor that starts in the same range bin as the skin return, but with greater magnitude, can be slowly moved away in range and Doppler (range being the relative delay with respect to the skin return; Doppler being the pulse-to-pulse rotation of the I-Q phasor”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the signal jamming system of Jaklitsch adding a DRFM to the signal jamming system of Jo and Jocic to allow for range gate pull-off effects to allow for the ability to falsify location information of the jammer.
As for claim 7, the limitations of parent claim 5 have been discussed above. Jaklitsch discloses a doppler signal generating apparatus for generating a velocity gate pull-off/in (VGPO/I) signal based on the threat signal detected from the signal detector:
(Jaklitsch paragraphs [0007], [0053] discloses a doppler (in Jaklitsch the DRFM acts as the doppler generating apparatus) to achieve velocity gate pull off/in effects in jamming, “Conventional digital radio frequency memory (DRFM) jammers were developed at least in part to address the complex problem of jamming radar waveforms… Also, range gate and/or velocity gate pull-off effects can be easily achieved. For example, an I-Q phasor that starts in the same range bin as the skin return, but with greater magnitude, can be slowly moved away in range and Doppler (range being the relative delay with respect to the skin return; Doppler being the pulse-to-pulse rotation of the I-Q phasor”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the signal jamming system of Jaklitsch adding a doppler signal generating apparatus to the signal jamming system of Jo and Jocic to allow for velocity gate pull-off effects to allow for the ability to falsify velocity information of the jammer.
Response to Arguments
The Claims are Directed to Statutory Subject Matter
Based on the amendment rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. §101 is respectfully withdrawn.
The Dependent Claims are of Proper Dependent Form
Based on the amendment rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. §112(d) is respectfully withdrawn.
35 U.S.C. §102 Rejection
Base on the amendments, rejections of claims 1, 9, 10 under 35 U.S.C. §102 are respectfully withdrawn.
35 U.S.C. §103 Rejection
Applicant argues “the prior art fails to disclose or fairly suggest wherein the signal detector identifies the presence of the threat signal in the first frequency band and transmits a video signal to the controller to determine jamming effectiveness while the signal analyzer concurrently searches for a threat signal in the second frequency band without employing a look- through technique to facilitate continuous jamming and multi-band search operations.”, (Remarks page 7) because “the instant application maintains the analyzer and detector as parallel elements to monitor different frequency bands at the same time”, (Remarks page 8) since “the instant application explicitly describes a ‘separate signal detecting part’ that is distinct from the signal analyzer. See instant Application at [0009], [0022]”, (Remarks page 8) and because “Jocic utilizes a parallel processing architecture where the CPMs perform both the analysis and the jamming feedback for a specific target handed off by a central receive”, (Remarks page 8). Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant’s argument that the reference fails to show certain features of applicant’s invention, it is noted that "Though understanding the claim language may be aided by explanations contained in the written description, it is important not to import into a claim limitation that are not part of the claim. For example, a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment." Superguide Corp. v. DirecTV Enterprises, Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 875, 69 USPQ2d. 1865, 1868 (Fed. Cir. 2004). (MPEP 2111.01)), that a “reference is… relevant for all it contains”, In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 U.S.P.Q. 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 U.S.P.Q. 275, 277 (C.C.P.A. 1968)), and “A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art”, Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc. 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). (MPEP 2123)
Although applicant argues the specification describes the signal detecting part and signal analyzer are “separate”, nothing in the claim describes the two parts being separate. Furthermore, Jocic discloses a CTLR (which serves the same function as the signal analyzer) and a separate CPM (which serves the same function as a signal detector) which analyze different frequency bands in parallel. Jocic Col 5, Line 59 - Col 6, Line 34 discloses a signal detector (the “CPM” and “DSP” in combination have the same function in Jocic), which, after the signal analyzer (the “CTLR” in Jocic), has found a threat in a first frequency band (called a “quantized step in frequency” in Jocic) and moved onto a second frequency band, continues to look for the threat signal in the first frequency band, “This is accomplished by CTLR 26 performing a fast super-heterodyne sweep of the spectrum present at the splitter output 14. The sweep is in fact a quantized step in frequency, or frequency hop, and the size of each frequency step determines the CTLR's 26 processing baseband bandwidth. … Once the CTLR 26 has chosen an available CPM 19 and handed off the target frequency and any additional information, the CTLR 26 will continue to sweep for more targets and leave the selected CPM 19 alone until the CTLR 26 retasks the CPM 19 for another target frequency … the CPM 19 initially transmits a first-response jam signal through its RF output … the selected CPM 19 continues to examine the targeted radio signal with much greater precision and detail using its Digital Signal Processor (DSP)”.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Heller et al, U. S. Patent Publication No. 6310957 Col 7 Lines 56-62 discloses a signal jamming method and system with video signals with multiple channels and responses based on the video signals.
Thai, U. S. Patent Publication No. 20120051239 paragraph [0067] discloses several techniques to improve jamming effectiveness including jamming for a predetermined amount of time before stopping to assess effectiveness.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN C LAWRENCE whose telephone number is (571)272-9833. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5pm.
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, Jeanette Parker can be reached at (571) 270-3647. 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.
/JOHN CALEB LAWRENCE/Examiner, Art Unit 2646
/JEANETTE J PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights