DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on October 24, 2024. Claims 1-12 have been cancelled. Claims 13-24 have been newly added. Thus, claims 13-24 are pending. Claims 13, 22, 23 and 24 are independent.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on October 24, 2024 has been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. The Forms PTO-1449 are signed and attached hereto.
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 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. 2021/0109229 to Söderholm et al. (hereinafter “Söderholm”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2017/0280416 to Zalewski et al. (hereinafter “Zalewski”).
With respect to independent claims 13, 22, 23 and 24, Söderholm discloses providing a first timestamp to the received first position information based on a vehicle time at the time of receiving the first position information (see paragraphs [0008] and [0017]: ]: receiving at least one global navigation satellite system, GNSS, signal related to a first GNSS system time; determining at least one system time difference between the first GNSS system time and a reference time). The clock data may include or represent or contain clock correction parameters. The clock data may further include a time stamp indicative of the satellite system time and may thus (e.g. in combination with the clock correction data) enable determining a traveling time of the respective GNSS signal (from the GNSS satellite from which the at least one GNSS signal is received to the position of the mobile device).);
receiving a second position information at the receiving unit of the vehicle, wherein the received second position information includes a second time information; providing a second timestamp to the received second position information based on the vehicle time at the time of receiving the second position information (see paragraph [0038] and [0119]: a system time difference may be determined based on one or more GNSS signals (e.g. calculated based on a positioning solution) and a corresponding reference system time difference may be obtained e.g. from a trusted server via a wireless connection. Processor 300 executes a computer program code (e.g. computer program code causing server 3 to store reference system time differences e.g. as part of GNSS assistance data and optionally reference times such as said second GNSS system time different from said first GNSS system time for determining the at least one system time difference to provide stored reference system time differences and optionally said reference times to mobile device 2 of system 1) stored in program memory 301, and interfaces with a main memory 302);
determining if a difference between the first and the second time information and a difference between the first and the second timestamp are the same and/or if a deviation between the two differences is below a predefined threshold (see paragraphs [0028] and [0054]: Determining at least one system time difference between the first GNSS system time and a reference time may be understood to mean that one or more system time differences are determined at a single or at different (e.g. sequential) point(s) in time. comparing a difference between said at least one system time difference and said at least one reference system time difference to a first predetermined threshold and/or to a second predetermined threshold).
Zalewski receiving a first position information at a receiving unit of the vehicle, wherein the received first position information includes a first time information (see abstract: associating, by giving out the time stamp, an event, which is transmitted in a message, with a clock time. Generating the clock time based on a local time base if an insufficient number of global satellite navigation signals for deriving the global time base.).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the timestamp received signals of Zalewski with the GNSS system in which the GNSS time difference against a reference time different to detect positional signal manipulation of Söderholm to provide efficient availability of the manipulation-detection scheme where network connectivity is unavailable.
With respect to dependent claim 14, Söderholm does not explicitly teach wherein the receiving unit provides the first timestamp to the received first position information and/or the second timestamp to the received second position information.
Zalewski teaches vehicle uses the time stamp to assign to an event sent in a message a time which is generated by updating a global timebase derivable from a global navigation satellite signal, referred to as a GNSS signal, comprises verifying whether a GNSS signal can be received, and generating the time on the basis of a local timebase (see paragraph [0006]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the co-location receive and timestamp architecture of Zalewski with the GNSS signal receiving architecture at the mobile/vehicle device level of Söderholm to reduce latency and communication overhead and provide a reliable self-generated timestamp.
With respect to dependent 17, the combination of Söderholm and Zalewski does not explicitly teach wherein the method further comprises synchronizing a local time of the receiving unit to the vehicle time.
Zalewski teaches a vehicle clock 68 of the vehicle 4 can also be read in order to determine the global timebase 38. The vehicle clock 68 outputs a local timebase 50 for the vehicle, which then is converted, again in the correction unit 64, for example from the Central European Time into the global timebase 38 (see paragraph [0032]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the deriving/adjusting a global timebase from GNSS signals while maintaining a periodically updating a local timebase so the two remain consistent of Zalewski with the GNSS derived time values of Söderholm in order to synchronized the local clock and provide reliability, accuracy and drift-prevention.
With respect to dependent 18, the combination of Söderholm and Zalewski does not explicitly teach wherein the receiving unit provides the first timestamp to the received first position information and/or the second timestamp to the received second position information based on its synchronized local time.
Zalewski teaches a tamper detection unit 70 is provided, which retrieves modification information 72 from the vehicle clock 68. If the modification information 72 shows that the vehicle clock 68 has been tampered with since the GNSS signal(s) 20 were last received, the conversion from the local timebase 50 into the global timebase 50 is inhibited by an inhibit signal 74.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the timestamp generation function linked to synchronized local/global timebase of Zalewski with the GNSS derived time values of Söderholm to provide trustworthy reference time values.
With respect to dependent claim 19, Söderholm discloses wherein the first position information is received from a first global navigation satellite system and the second position information is received from a second global navigation satellite system, and wherein the first and the second global navigation satellite system are different from each other (see paragraph [0005]: respective pairs of GNSS system times are mutually synchronized and time-varying differences exist between system times of pairs of GNSS systems.).
With respect to dependent claim 20, Söderholm discloses wherein the first and the second position information are received from one global navigation satellite system (see abstract: at least one global navigation satellite system, GNSS, signal related to a first GNSS system time is received.).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Söderholm and Zalewski as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2019/0302272 to Balog et al. (hereinafter “Balog”).
With respect to dependent 15, the combination of Söderholm and Zalewski, do not explicitly teach sending the first and the second time information and the first and the second timestamp from the receiving unit to the control unit, and determining if the difference between the first and the second time information and the difference between the first and the second timestamp are the same and/or if the deviation between the two differences is below the predefined threshold at the control unit.
Balog teaches transmitting (i) the information from the INS without GNSS input, and (ii) the information from the INS with GNSS input, to an off-board control subsystem. Determining the first vehicle state and the second vehicle state, comparing the first vehicle state and the second vehicle state, and when a difference between the first vehicle state and the second vehicle state exceeds a predetermined threshold).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the distributing GNSS data collection and threshold comparison across two distinct on-board components providing a data-generating/forwarding component and a data evaluating/decision making component of Balog with the GNSS time manipulation detection comparison method of Söderholm to provide known system-partitioning technique in order to provide predicable result of a vehicle time validation system in which a receiving unit forwards time information and time stamps to a separate control unit that performs the actual threshold determination.
With respect to dependent 16 the combination of Söderholm and Zalewski does not explicitly teach wherein the control unit has a higher automotive safety level than the receiving unit.
Balog teaches the INS component may comprise various INS sensors (e.g., accelerometers, gyroscopes, odometer, among others). The GNSS-based vehicle state information 158 and the INS-based vehicle state information 160 are transmitted 162 to a receiver 164 on an off-board host 166 (See paragraph [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the off-board control subsystem that performs safety-consequential function of determining whether GNSS data is trustworthy of Balog with the GNSS derived time values of Söderholm in order to provide safety-critical decision making and control gating functions for direct downstream safety implications for vehicle navigation and control.
Claims 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Söderholm and Zalewski as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0317312 to Sharma et al. (hereinafter “Sharma”).
With respect to dependent claim 21, the combination of Söderholm and Zalewski does not explicitly teach wherein the vehicle is an automated vehicle, and wherein the method further comprises controlling an automated driving function of the vehicle based on the received first and/or second position information only when the difference between the first and the second time information and the difference between the first and the second timestamp are the same and/or if the deviation between the two differences is below the predefined threshold.
Sharma discloses that if GNSS spoofing is undetected by a vehicle, it can have significant negative impact because the actual vehicle location may not match the location determined using the spoofing signals. While GNSS jamming attacks may be handled by Level 4 (and higher) automation systems (at least for a short period of time), proper mitigation of GNSS spoofing attacks is currently not supported by most automotive autonomy software, thus posing a serious security and safety threat. GNSS spoofing may be detected by tracking the changes in the position and/or time derived from the mobile device. When spoofing occurs, the difference between the local time (e.g., derived from the local clock of the mobile device) and the GPS time may experience a sudden change, and the calculated location may also change suddenly. (See paragraphs [0031] and [0033]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the level 4 or higher automatic on its sensor system which recognizes the proper mitigation of GNSS spoofing attaches with the GNSS derived time values of Söderholm to prevent compromised GNSS signals and accurate position information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEMETRA R SMITH-STEWART whose telephone number is (571)270-3965. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6pm.
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, Peter Nolan can be reached at 571-270-7016. 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.
/DEMETRA R SMITH-STEWART/Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/PETER D NOLAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Prosecution Insights