DETAILED ACTION
The amendment filed May 28, 2024 has been entered.
Claim 1 are amended.
Claim 4 is cancelled
Claims 1-20 are pending this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 3/5/2026, 3/19/2026, and 5/19/2026 have been acknowledged.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taylor (US 2004/0220722 A1) in view of Park et al, (KR 2011/0022874 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Taylor teaches a system comprising [0028-0029]:
one or more processors configured to [0028-0029]:
receive, from an automatic direction finder [0030 for receive processor with a directional antenna to determine relative bearing, and 0033],
a first bearing estimate associated with a first orientation relative to a first radio source [0022-0024 for using transmitters A, B and C],
wherein the first bearing estimate is based on a first plurality of bearing measurements [0030 for interferometric antennas and using loop antennas],
and wherein a first portion of the first plurality of bearing measurements is based on a first signal from a first loop antenna [0030];
receive, from the automatic direction finder, a second bearing estimate associated with a second orientation relative to a second radio source [0020 for relative bearings, and 0033 for relative bearing to transmitter],
wherein the second bearing estimate is based on a second plurality of bearing measurements [0020, and 0024 for calculating relative bearing to different transmitters],
and determine a location based at least on the first bearing estimate and the second bearing estimate [0024 for iteratively solving navigation and positions for relative bearing, and 0033].
Taylor fails to explicitly teach and a second portion of the first plurality of bearing measurements is based on a second signal from a second loop antenna and wherein a first portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is based on the first signal from the first loop antenna and a second portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is based on the second signal from the second loop antenna.
Park has an apparatus and method for detecting a direction of a wideband signal (abstract) and teaches and a second portion of the first plurality of bearing measurements is based on a second signal from a second loop antenna [page 10, last 11 lines and page 12, second paragraph]
and wherein a first portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is based on the first signal from the first loop antenna and a second portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is based on the second signal from the second loop antenna [page 10, last 11 lines and page 12, second paragraph].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the bearing position techniques, as disclosed by Taylor, further including the loop antenna calculations as taught by Park for the purpose to reduce the amount of correction data stored (Park, page 10, lines 6-9).
Regarding Claim 11, Taylor teaches a non-transitory, computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to [0028-0029]:
receive, from an automatic direction finder [0030 for receive processor with a directional antenna to determine relative bearing, and 0033],
a first bearing estimate associated with a first orientation relative to a first radio source [0022-0024 for using transmitters A, B and C],
wherein the first bearing estimate is based on a first plurality of bearing measurements [0030 for interferometric antennas and using loop antennas],
and wherein a first portion of the first plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on a first signal from a first loop antenna [0030];
receive, from the automatic direction finder, a second bearing estimate associated with a second orientation relative to a second radio source [0020 for relative bearings, and 0033 for relative bearing to transmitter],
wherein the second bearing estimate is based on a second plurality of bearing measurements [0020, and 0024 for calculating relative bearing to different transmitters],,
and determine a location based at least on the first bearing estimate and the second bearing estimate [0024 for iteratively solving navigation and positions for relative bearing, and 0033].
Taylor fails to explicitly teach and a second portion of the first plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on a second signal from a second loop antenna, and wherein a first portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on the first signal from the first loop antenna and a second portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on the second signal from the second loop antenna.
Park has an apparatus and a second portion of the first plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on a second signal from a second loop antenna [page 10, last 11 lines and page 12, second paragraph],
and wherein a first portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on the first signal from the first loop antenna and a second portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on the second signal from the second loop antenna [page 10, last 11 lines and page 12, second paragraph].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the bearing position techniques, as disclosed by Taylor, further including the loop antenna calculations as taught by Park for the purpose to reduce the amount of correction data stored (Park, page 10, lines 6-9).
Regarding Claim 18, Taylor teaches a method comprising [0028-0029]:
receiving, from an automatic direction finder [0030 for receive processor with a directional antenna to determine relative bearing, and 0033],
a first bearing estimate associated with a first orientation relative to a first radio source [0022-0024 for using transmitters A, B and C],
the first bearing estimate based on a first plurality of bearing measurements [0030 for interferometric antennas and using loop antennas],
wherein a first portion of the first plurality of bearing measurements is generated by one or more processors based on a first signal from a first loop antenna [0030]
receiving, from the automatic direction finder, a second bearing estimate associated with a second orientation relative to a second radio source [0020 for relative bearings, and 0033 for relative bearing to transmitter],
the second bearing estimate based on a second plurality of bearing measurements [0020, and 0024 for calculating relative bearing to different transmitters],,
and determining a location based at least on the first bearing estimate and the second bearing estimate [0024 for iteratively solving navigation and positions for relative bearing, and 0033].
Taylor fails to explicitly teach and a second portion of the first plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on a second signal from a second loop antenna wherein a first portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on the first signal from the first loop antenna and a second portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on the second signal from the second loop antenna.
Park has an apparatus and method for detecting a direction of a wideband signal (abstract) and teaches and a second portion of the first plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on a second signal from a second loop antenna [page 10, last 11 lines and page 12, second paragraph]
wherein a first portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on the first signal from the first loop antenna and a second portion of the second plurality of bearing measurements is generated by the one or more processors based on the second signal from the second loop antenna [page 10, last 11 lines and page 12, second paragraph].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the bearing position techniques, as disclosed by Taylor, further including the loop antenna calculations as taught by Park for the purpose to reduce the amount of correction data stored (Park, page 10, lines 6-9).
Regarding Claim 2, Taylor teaches the one or more processors are configured to determine the location responsive to a signal indicating a failure associated with another positioning system [0006 for using RNAV, with 0027 for independent integrity verification].
Regarding Claim 3, Taylor teaches the one or more processors are configured to determine the location responsive to one or more controls of an aircraft [0028-0029 for pilot verification].
Regarding Claim 4, Taylor teaches the one or more processors are configured to determine the location based at least on a known location of the first radio source and a known location of the second radio source [0008-0009 for using know radio transmitters].
Regarding Claim 5 and 14, Taylor teaches the known location of the first radio source is a measure of a location of the first radio source relative to a center of the Earth [0022 for great circle navigation with 0029 for using longitude and latitudes].
Regarding Claim 6, Taylor teaches the one or more processors are configured to determine the location based on an iterative process [0024, 0043].
Regarding Claim 7, Taylor teaches the iterative process includes a process based at least on an initial location [0029-0031for takeoff (initial location) with 0043 for using estimated positions].
Regarding Claim 8 and 16, Taylor teaches the initial location comprises a last-known location, a starting location, an arbitrary location, or a combination thereof [0029-0031].
Regarding Claim 9 and 17, Taylor teaches at least one of the first radio source or the second radio source is a nondirectional beacon [0020 for using radio navigation transmitters (NDBs)].
Regarding Claim 10, Taylor teaches at least one of the first radio source or the second radio source is an amplitude modulation radio station [0020 for commercial radio and television also 0030 for pilot listening to commercial radio broadcasts (AM radio stations)].
Regarding Claim 12, Taylor teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to determine the location responsive to a signal indicating a failure associated with another positioning system or one or more controls of an aircraft [0006 for using RNAV, with 0027 for independent integrity verification and 0028-0029 for pilot verification].
Regarding Claim 13, Taylor teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to determine the location based at least on a known location of the first radio source and a known location of the second radio source [0008-0009 for using know radio transmitters with 0022 for great circle navigation with 0029 for using longitude and latitudes].
Regarding Claim 15, Taylor teaches the instructions, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to determine the location based on an iterative process [0024, 0033],
wherein the iterative process includes a process based at least on an initial location [0029-0031for takeoff (initial location) with 0043 for using estimated positions].
Regarding Claim 19, Taylor teaches determining the location comprises determining the location based at least on a known location of the first radio source and a known location of the second radio source [0008-0009 for using know radio transmitters],
and wherein the known location of the first radio source is a measure of a location of the first radio source relative to a center of the Earth [0022 for great circle navigation with 0029 for using longitude and latitudes].
Regarding Claim 20, Taylor teaches said determining the location comprises determining the location based on an iterative process; the iterative process includes a process based at least on an initial location [0024, 0033];
and the initial location comprises a last-known location, a starting location, an arbitrary location, or some combination thereof [0029-0031for takeoff (initial location) with 0043 for using estimated positions].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a
general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
In applicant’s arguments page 6, third paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Taylor does not teach receiving multiple bearing estimates to multiple radio sources based on the same signals from multiple antennas. The examiner respectfully disagrees, Taylor teaches determining the relative bearing to transmitters A, B, and C using directional antenna element 12, a combined loop/sense antenna [Taylor, 0024, and 0030] which inherently receives signals from multiple radio sources on the same antenna structure for generating bearing measurements.
In applicant’s arguments page 6, third paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Park does not teach receiving multiple bearing estimates to multiple radio sources based on the same signals from multiple antennas. The examiner respectfully disagrees, Park teaches a loop antenna (dipole) receiving narrowband signals extracted from a wideband signal and performing direction detection simultaneously on multiple signals, therefore teaching that the same received wideband signal yields multiple bearing estimates to multiple sources through the same antenna structure [Park, page 7].
In applicant’s arguments page 6, last paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Park does not suggest using antenna signal to generate an orientation. The examiner respectfully disagrees, Park teaches using dipoles X1 and X2 to receive the same narrowband signals at different angles generating a phase difference, similar to the claimed multiple antennas processing the same incoming signal to generate directional orientation [Park, page 10, bottom half of page].
In applicant’s arguments page 7, second paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the combination of Park and Taylor is improper. The examiner respectfully disagrees, Taylor teaches a combined loop/sense antenna for bearing based navigation but needs multiple separate antenna signal to generate bearing measurement [Taylor, 0024, and 0030] and Park address two dipoles X1 and X2 to receive the same narrowband signals at different angles generating a phase difference from the same source supplying the specific multi-antenna bearing measurement [Park, page 10, bottom half of page], making the combination values.
The examiner acknowledges that this is a broader interpretation than Applicant’s.
However, examiners are not only allowed to apply broad interpretations, but are required to do so, as it reduces the possibility that the claims, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified. MPEP §2111. Patentability is determined by the “broadest reasonable interpretation
consistent with the specification” (MPEP §2111), not the narrowest reasonable interpretation. And Applicant does not have an explicit lexicographical statement in line with MPEP §2111.01
subsection IV requiring a specific interpretation of the relevant phrases which forces the examiner to interpret them only one way.
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
For applicant’s benefit, portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, including disclosures that teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
“The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain.” In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including non-preferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v.Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005) See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SAMARINA MAKHDOOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Thursdays from 8:30 to 5:30 pm eastern time.
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 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.
/SAMARINA MAKHDOOM/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights