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 amendments filed June 8, 2026 have been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in this application. Claims 8 and 12 have been amended. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome all objections set forth in the Non-Final Rejection filed March 9, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-9, filed June 8, 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 10, and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of Zhang et al. (US 12313751 B2).
Claim Objections
Claims 6 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 recites,
“The method of claim 1,
wherein the at least one satellite comprises a single-band satellite and wherein determining the delta-ionosphere error further comprises:
obtaining a geometry-clock differential indicating a difference in combined geometry range and receiver clock offset between the consecutive epochs; and
determining the delta-ionosphere error using the geometry-clock differential.”
In regard to determining delta-ionosphere error(s), claim 1 recites,
“[…] determining delta-ionosphere errors for the series of consecutive epochs, wherein each delta-ionosphere error indicates a change in ionospheric delay in carrier phase measurements taken on at consecutive epochs;
determining an ionosphere delay correction based on accumulating the delta-ionosphere errors […]”.
Because claim 1 does not specify a certain delta-ionospheric error, claim 6 should instead recite,
“The method of claim 1,
wherein the at least one satellite comprises a single-band satellite and wherein determining each delta-ionosphere error further comprises:
obtaining a geometry-clock differential indicating a difference in combined geometry range and receiver clock offset between the consecutive epochs; and
determining the delta-ionosphere error using the geometry-clock differential.”
Claim 15 which claims similar subject matter to claim 6, and for similar reasons involving claim 10 on which claim 15 depends, should instead recite,
“The GNSS device of claim 10,
wherein the at least one satellite comprises a single-band satellite, and wherein to determine each delta-ionosphere error, the one or more processors is further configured to:
obtain a geometry-clock differential indicating a difference in combined geometry range and receiver clock offset between the consecutive epochs; and
determine the delta-ionosphere error using the geometry-clock differential.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Such limitations are:
“means for receiving, from at least one satellite, a plurality of signals across a series of consecutive epochs”,
“means for determining delta-ionosphere errors for the series of consecutive epochs, wherein each delta-ionosphere error indicates a change in ionospheric delay in carrier phase measurements taken on at consecutive epochs”,
“means for determining an ionosphere delay correction based on accumulating the delta-ionosphere errors”, and
“means for obtaining a position of the apparatus based on the determined ionosphere delay correction”,
all of which are found in claim 19.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 1-5, 8-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US 12313751 B2), hereinafter Zhang.
Regarding claim 1, Zhang teaches a method for Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)-based positioning performed by a GNSS device, the method comprising:
receiving, from at least one satellite, a plurality of signals across a series of consecutive epochs (col. 23 lines 45-64, “In step S256, the rover receiver 12, electronic data processor 159, measurement module 161, or positioning filter 409 [e.g., that incorporates a dual error model], or the atmospheric modeling module 405 is configured to estimate a residual of atmospheric delay with a dual [e.g., two-stage] error model: (1) preset error model before ambiguities are fixed in step S258, and (2) an adaptive error model after ambiguities are fixed in step S258. […] For example, for each epoch or measurement interval, the rover receiver 12 decides which error model is applied to for a satellite channel, a satellite signal, a set of satellite channels, a set of satellite signals, or a given satellite.”),
determining delta-ionosphere errors for the series of consecutive epochs, wherein each delta- ionosphere error indicates a change in ionospheric delay in carrier phase measurements taken on at consecutive epochs, determining an ionosphere delay correction based on accumulating the delta-ionosphere errors (see col. 23 line 65 – col. 24 line 3 for evidence that the numbered processes cited in this rejection pertain to step S256; col. 14 lines 47-56, “Further, in certain embodiments, the measurement module 161, the baseband processing module 118, or the electronic data processor 159 may further comprise a atmospheric modeling module 405 [e.g., ionospheric modeling module] that supports one or more ionospheric or atmospheric models for estimating ionospheric error and correction data for one or more carrier phase measurements and/or code phase measurements of corresponding GNSS signals or one or more GNSS satellite channels [e.g., L1, L2 and L5].”; col. 24 lines 45-64, “Under a ninth process, the electronic data processor 159, the atmospheric modeling module 405, and/or dual error model comprises the adaptive error model, such as a system, method or software instructions storable in the data storage device 155, to predict ionospheric activity level for each measurement epoch by epoch. For example, the method, system or software instructions to predict ionosphere activity level is based on the time-differenced Geometry-Free [TDGF] for each satellite in accordance with the following equation:
PNG
media_image1.png
73
414
media_image1.png
Greyscale
where the carrier phase measurements for frequency i and j at time t and at time k are differenced, and where the dot above the
PNG
media_image2.png
38
59
media_image2.png
Greyscale
indicates a time derivative or a change rate in ionospheric delay between time t and k, which in practice may be negligible.“; determining change rate in ionospheric delay involves determining delta-ionospheric delays and a change, and thus an accumulation thereof, and Zhang performs this process epoch-by-epoch), and
obtaining a position of the GNSS device based on the determined ionosphere delay correction (see Fig. 5B for a flowchart of the steps cited in this rejection; col. 26 lines 5-16, “In step S260, the above steps S250 through S258, inclusive, can be repeated until a sufficient number of ambiguities are fixed or resolved for satellite channels or satellite signals, where the sufficient number may be based on: (a) fixed or resolved ambiguities for carrier phase signals or channels of at least four satellites and/or (b) a greater set of available satellites [e.g., than a minimum of four satellites] within view or reliable reception range. For example, the above steps are iteratively repeated until the carrier phase ambiguities are resolved for a threshold number of satellite signals, satellite channels or satellites to provide a reliable position estimate.”).
Regarding claims 2, 11, and 20, Zhang teaches the method of claim 1, the device of claim 10, and the apparatus of claim 19
wherein the position of the GNSS device is determined based on State-Space Representation (SSR) correction data and the determined ionosphere delay correction (col. 27 line 66 – col. 28 line 5, “In step S206, for each channel of any satellite, a GNSS receiver, data processor 159 or its filter is configured to filter a selected ionosphere model for ionospheric delay estimation. For example, the filter may comprise a Kalman filter, an extended Kalman filter, or another predictive filter for estimating ionospheric delay based on input parameters referenced in the equations of this disclosure.”; Kalman filters fundamentally use state-space representation, where in Zhang it is of ionospheric delay estimation data for the purpose of correction; see col. 14 lines 47-56, col. 23 lines 65 – col. 24 lines 3, and col. 26 lines 5-16 for positioning of the GNSS device based on ionosphere delay correction)
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Zhang teaches the method of claim 2 and the device of claim 11,
wherein the position of the GNSS device is determined using a precise positioning engine (PPE) (col. 11 lines 22-25, “For example, the mobile receiver 12 may employ a precise point positioning (PPP) estimate using precise clock and orbital solutions for the received signals of the satellites.”).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Zhang teaches the method of claim 1 and the device of claim 10,
wherein the at least one satellite comprises a dual-band satellite or a multi-band satellite, and wherein the plurality of signals comprise signals transmitted on at least two carrier frequencies (col. 7 lines 35-39, “The GNSS satellite 101 may broadcast signal 102 on multi-frequencies. For example, if GNSS satellite 101 is from GPS system, it can broadcast signal 102 on more than one frequency, that includes L1, L2 and L5 frequencies used in GPS system.”; a signal broadcast on multiple frequencies may be considered a plurality of signals).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Zhang teaches the method of claim 4 and the device of claim 13, wherein determining the delta-ionosphere errors further comprises:
determining an ionosphere-free combination of the carrier phase measurements from the signals transmitted on the at least two carrier frequencies (col. 17 lines 37-50, “The frequency index, fi, may comprise any of the following: […] (c) frequency index based on frequency-dependent ionospheric refraction, which is generally proportion to the inverse of the frequency index squared and which can be eliminated by conventional ionospheric-free combinations of at least two carrier phase measurements or two code phase measurements […]”).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Zhang teaches the method of claim 1 and the device of claim 10,
wherein determining the position of the GNSS device is further based on correcting a pseudo-range ionosphere error (col. 22 line 66 – col. 23 line 7, “In step S254, the rover receiver 12, the measurement module 161, or the electronic data processor 159 is configured to use the range errors (e.g., in the carrier phase measurements and/or the code phase measurements) and the aiding information from base station receiver 30 to correct the initial code pseudo-range measurements and the initial carrier phase measurements to mitigate errors in the signal, to result in corrected code pseudo-range measurements and corrected carrier phase measurements.”; see col. 26 lines 5-16 for evidence that step S254 is a part of positioning a GNSS device).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Zhang teaches the method of claim 8 and the device of claim 17,
wherein correcting the pseudo-range ionosphere error is performed using a Satellite-Based Augmentation System ionosphere model (col. 23 lines 29-40, “Alternately in step S254, the data processor 159 or measurement module 161 is configured to generate range errors [in carrier phase and/or code phase] associated with real-time-kinematic [RTK] processing and, at rover receiver, the atmospheric modeling module 405 or data processor 159 is configured to generate atmospheric [e.g., tropospheric, ionospheric or both] related aiding information are generated based on any of the following: the received raw measurements from base station receiver, the augmentation information, the known location in two or three dimensional coordinates, and atmospheric related data observations from carrier phase and/or code phase measurements.”).
Regarding claim 10, Zhang teaches a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) device for GNSS-based positioning, comprising:
one or more transceivers, one or more memories, and one or more processors communicatively coupled with the one or more transceivers and the one or more memories (see col. 10 lines 45-62), wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
receive, from at least one satellite, a plurality of signals across a series of consecutive epochs (col. 23 lines 45-64, “In step S256, the rover receiver 12, electronic data processor 159, measurement module 161, or positioning filter 409 [e.g., that incorporates a dual error model], or the atmospheric modeling module 405 is configured to estimate a residual of atmospheric delay with a dual [e.g., two-stage] error model: (1) preset error model before ambiguities are fixed in step S258, and (2) an adaptive error model after ambiguities are fixed in step S258. […] For example, for each epoch or measurement interval, the rover receiver 12 decides which error model is applied to for a satellite channel, a satellite signal, a set of satellite channels, a set of satellite signals, or a given satellite.”),
determine delta-ionosphere errors for the series of consecutive epochs, wherein each delta-ionosphere error indicates a change in ionospheric delay in carrier phase measurements taken on at consecutive epochs, determine an ionosphere delay correction based on accumulating the delta-ionosphere errors (see col. 23 line 65 – col. 24 line 3 for evidence that the numbered processes cited in this rejection pertain to step S256; col. 14 lines 47-56, “Further, in certain embodiments, the measurement module 161, the baseband processing module 118, or the electronic data processor 159 may further comprise a atmospheric modeling module 405 [e.g., ionospheric modeling module] that supports one or more ionospheric or atmospheric models for estimating ionospheric error and correction data for one or more carrier phase measurements and/or code phase measurements of corresponding GNSS signals or one or more GNSS satellite channels [e.g., L1, L2 and L5].”; col. 24 lines 45-64, “Under a ninth process, the electronic data processor 159, the atmospheric modeling module 405, and/or dual error model comprises the adaptive error model, such as a system, method or software instructions storable in the data storage device 155, to predict ionospheric activity level for each measurement epoch by epoch. For example, the method, system or software instructions to predict ionosphere activity level is based on the time-differenced Geometry-Free [TDGF] for each satellite in accordance with the following equation:
PNG
media_image1.png
73
414
media_image1.png
Greyscale
where the carrier phase measurements for frequency i and j at time t and at time k are differenced, and where the dot above the
PNG
media_image2.png
38
59
media_image2.png
Greyscale
indicates a time derivative or a change rate in ionospheric delay between time t and k, which in practice may be negligible.“; determining change rate in ionospheric delay involves determining delta-ionospheric delays and an accumulation thereof, and Zhang performs this process epoch-by-epoch), and
obtain a position of the GNSS device based on the determined ionosphere delay correction (see Fig. 5B for a flowchart of the steps cited in this rejection; col. 26 lines 5-16, “In step S260, the above steps S250 through S258, inclusive, can be repeated until a sufficient number of ambiguities are fixed or resolved for satellite channels or satellite signals, where the sufficient number may be based on: (a) fixed or resolved ambiguities for carrier phase signals or channels of at least four satellites and/or (b) a greater set of available satellites [e.g., than a minimum of four satellites] within view or reliable reception range. For example, the above steps are iteratively repeated until the carrier phase ambiguities are resolved for a threshold number of satellite signals, satellite channels or satellites to provide a reliable position estimate.”).
Regarding claim 19, Zhang teaches an apparatus for Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)-based positioning (Fig. 1B, rover 12), the apparatus comprising:
means for receiving, from at least one satellite, a plurality of signals across a series of consecutive epochs (col. 23 lines 45-64, “In step S256, the rover receiver 12, electronic data processor 159, measurement module 161, or positioning filter 409 [e.g., that incorporates a dual error model], or the atmospheric modeling module 405 is configured to estimate a residual of atmospheric delay with a dual [e.g., two-stage] error model: (1) preset error model before ambiguities are fixed in step S258, and (2) an adaptive error model after ambiguities are fixed in step S258. […] For example, for each epoch or measurement interval, the rover receiver 12 decides which error model is applied to for a satellite channel, a satellite signal, a set of satellite channels, a set of satellite signals, or a given satellite.”; the claimed means are analogous to the rover receiver 12),
means for determining delta-ionosphere errors for the series of consecutive epochs, wherein each delta-ionosphere error indicates a change in ionospheric delay in carrier phase measurements taken on at consecutive epochs, means for determining an ionosphere delay correction based on accumulating the delta- ionosphere errors (see col. 23 line 65 – col. 24 line 3 for evidence that the numbered processes cited in this rejection pertain to step S256; col. 14 lines 47-56, “Further, in certain embodiments, the measurement module 161, the baseband processing module 118, or the electronic data processor 159 may further comprise a atmospheric modeling module 405 [e.g., ionospheric modeling module] that supports one or more ionospheric or atmospheric models for estimating ionospheric error and correction data for one or more carrier phase measurements and/or code phase measurements of corresponding GNSS signals or one or more GNSS satellite channels [e.g., L1, L2 and L5].”; col. 24 lines 45-64, “Under a ninth process, the electronic data processor 159, the atmospheric modeling module 405, and/or dual error model comprises the adaptive error model, such as a system, method or software instructions storable in the data storage device 155, to predict ionospheric activity level for each measurement epoch by epoch. For example, the method, system or software instructions to predict ionosphere activity level is based on the time-differenced Geometry-Free [TDGF] for each satellite in accordance with the following equation:
PNG
media_image1.png
73
414
media_image1.png
Greyscale
where the carrier phase measurements for frequency i and j at time t and at time k are differenced, and where the dot above the
PNG
media_image2.png
38
59
media_image2.png
Greyscale
indicates a time derivative or a change rate in ionospheric delay between time t and k, which in practice may be negligible.“; determining change rate in ionospheric delay involves determining delta-ionospheric delays and an accumulation thereof, and Zhang performs this process epoch-by-epoch; the claimed means are analogous to the atmospheric modeling module 405), and
means for obtaining a position of the apparatus based on the determined ionosphere delay correction (see Fig. 5B for a flowchart of the steps cited in this rejection; col. 26 lines 5-16, “In step S260, the above steps S250 through S258, inclusive, can be repeated until a sufficient number of ambiguities are fixed or resolved for satellite channels or satellite signals, where the sufficient number may be based on: (a) fixed or resolved ambiguities for carrier phase signals or channels of at least four satellites and/or (b) a greater set of available satellites [e.g., than a minimum of four satellites] within view or reliable reception range. For example, the above steps are iteratively repeated until the carrier phase ambiguities are resolved for a threshold number of satellite signals, satellite channels or satellites to provide a reliable position estimate.”; see col. 23 lines 45-64 and Fig. 4, where the claimed means are analogous to navigation positioning estimator 57 which contains positioning filter 409 and is part of rover receiver 12).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 and 15-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure:
Henkel et al. (WO 2009125011 A1) teaches a method for Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)-based positioning performed by a GNSS device, the method comprising:
receiving, from at least one satellite, a plurality of signals across a series of consecutive epochs, determining delta-ionosphere errors for the series of consecutive epochs, wherein each delta- ionosphere error indicates a change in ionospheric delay in carrier phase measurements taken on at consecutive epochs (page 15 lines 6-13, “If the vector PLL 11 is initialized, the switches 26 are brought in the position, in which the input phase error signals are directed to the individual filters 29 and the tracking loops are run independently. The ionospheric delay is not removed and appears in the tracked phases at the outputs of the integration unit 31. Then, the joint tracking is turned on by bringing the switches 26 in a position, in which the input phase error signals are supplied to the transformation unit 28. The input phase error signal at the discriminator output are partially affected by the ionosphere, i.e. by the change in the ionospheric delay between the switching and the current epoch.”; see page 14 lines 15-20 for evidence that input phase error signals are extracted from received signals),
determining an ionosphere delay correction based on accumulating the delta-ionosphere errors (see page 29 line 6 – page 31 line 11), and
obtaining a position of the GNSS device based on the determined ionosphere delay correction (see page 29 line 6 – page 31 line 11; para. 11, “It should be noted that the position of the navigation device 5 is generally [determined] with respect to a base station 14 that receives the satellite signals 3 by an antenna 15. A base line 16 is the distance between the [navigation] device 5 and the reference station 14. The reference station 14 can also be used to [determine] various error sources since the position of the referenced station 14 is known.”).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC K HODAC whose telephone number is (571) 270-0123. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-6.
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, VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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.
/ERIC K HODAC/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/BERNARR E GREGORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights