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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 11-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 9/3/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 6 and 19, the scope of “wherein the location of the receiver device is determined based at least in part on the first delta value based on state space representation (SSR) information not being available for the first SV” cannot be clearly determined. The language “the location of the receiver device is determined based at least in part on the first delta value” suggests that the location can be determined based entirely on the first delta value. However this is not consistent with claim 1 lines 8-9 “determine a location of the receiver device based at least in part on the one or more first carrier phase measurements and the first delta value” (emphasis added). It is therefore unclear in claims 6 and 19 what the location of the receiver device is determined based upon.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-10 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 – Statutory Category
Claim 1 recites a receiver device and is therefore an apparatus.
Step 2A, Prong One – Recitation of a Judicial Exception
Claim 1 recites:
determine a first delta value representing a change from a first set of ephemeris data to a second set of ephemeris data for a first space vehicle (SV); and
determine a location of the receiver device based at least in part on the one or more first carrier phase measurements and the first delta value.
These steps fall within the mathematical concepts grouping of abstract ideas enumerated in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2). Claim 1 therefore recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two – Practical Application
Claim 1 further recites:
one or more memories and one or more processors; and
obtain one or more first carrier phase measurements of the first SV.
However, the one or more memories and one or more processors comprise generic computer equipment that is merely used as a tool to perform the abstract idea, and obtaining one or more first carrier phase measurements is merely insignificant extra-solution activity, i.e. data gathering. The courts have found that generic computer equipment and insignificant extra-solution activity does not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application (MPEP 2106.04(d) I. and 2106.05(f) and (g)).
These elements therefore does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application of the exception.
Step 2B – Inventive Concept
As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the additional elements recited in the claim include generic computer equipment and insignificant extra-solution activity.
The courts have found that insignificant extra-solution activity and generic computer equipment do not amount to significantly more, i.e. they do not amount to an inventive concept (MPEP 2106.05 I A). Claim 1 is therefore not patent eligible.
Claims 2-10 recite further mathematical concepts and further data gathering without integrating the abstract idea into a practical application or adding significantly more and are therefore not patent eligible.
Claims 16-20 differ from claims 1, 2, and 5-7 only in reciting a method performed by a receiver device, and are therefore not patent eligible for the same reasons discussed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7, 10, 16, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (US 20230048194 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 16, Wang teaches a receiver device (Fig. 12), comprising:
one or more memories (1260, Fig. 12); and
one or more processors communicatively coupled to the one or more memories (1210, Fig. 12), the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, configured to:
determine a first delta value (paras. [0037]-[0038] “ambiguity estimate term”) representing a change from a first set of ephemeris data to a second set of ephemeris data for a first space vehicle (SV) (para. [0036] “sudden changes in satellite orbit error values are due to Issue Of Data Ephemeris (IODE) changes”; para. [0038] “the ambiguity estimate term... may be set based on an average, mean etc. of the IODE jumps”);
obtain one or more first carrier phase measurements of the first SV (210, Fig. 2 in view of para. [0028] “At block 210, the NSS receiver obtains... carrier phase (CP) measurements of signals from each of the plurality of satellites”); and
determine a location of the receiver device based at least in part on the one or more first carrier phase measurements (225 and 240, Fig. 2 in view of para. [0031] “the PPP engine 225 uses the IF PR/CP measurement (block 220), sophisticated error modeling (block 230), and precise orbit and clock (block 235) to conduct a KF estimation to provide the PPP solution at block 240”, where “CP” stands for “carrier phase”) and the first delta value (para. [0033] “within the PPP engine (e.g., PPP engine 225), the ambiguity dynamic and/or ambiguity estimate term (e.g., of the Kalman filter of the PPP engine) can be adjusted to compensate for errors in this broadcast information”).
Regarding claims 2 and 17, Wang teaches wherein the first delta value is determined (para. [0039] “An example of an ambiguity estimate term adjustment is provided hereafter with regard to Table 1 and Table 2”) based on (1) a line-of-sight (LOS) vector between the receiver device and the first SV (Table 1 “SV position error projected to line of sight (m)” and Table 2 “SV position error projected to line of sight”) and (2) a difference (para. [0040] “The jump itself, therefore, is 0.476m (0.704 m -0.228m), which would be the amount of adjustment for the ambiguity estimate term”) between (a) a first position of the first SV at a first time at which the first set of ephemeris data is valid (Table 1 “SV position with broadcast IODE-old(m)”) and (b) a second position of the first SV at a second time at which the second set of ephemeris data is valid (Table 2 “SV position with broadcast IODE-new”).
Regarding claim 3, Wang teaches wherein: the first time at which the first set of ephemeris data is valid is indicated by a first issue of data ephemeris (IODE) value, and the second time at which the second set of ephemeris data is valid is indicated by a second IODE value (Table 1 “IODE-old”, Table 2 “IODE-new”).
Regarding claim 4, Wang teaches wherein the first delta value is further determined based on a difference between (1) a first clock error of the first SV at the first time (Table 1 “SV clock error with broadcast IODE-old (m)”) and (2) a second clock error of the first SV at the second time (Table 2 “SV clock error with broadcast IODE-new”, where the clock error difference is included in the difference “0.704m -0.228m)” in para. [0040]).
Regarding claims 7 and 20, Wang teaches wherein the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: determine a second delta value representing a change from a third set of ephemeris data to a fourth set of ephemeris data for the first SV, wherein the location of the receiver device is determined further based at least in part on the second delta value (para. [0036] teaches that Issue Of Data Ephemeris (IODE) jumps occur every two hours for GPS and more frequently for GAL; as each jump corresponds to a new set of ephemeris data, a second delta value representing a change from a third to fourth set of ephemeris will necessarily be determined in accordance with the passage of time according to Tables 1 and 2 and para. [0040]).
Regarding claim 10, Wang teaches wherein the one or more processors, either alone or in combination, are further configured to: determine a second delta value representing a change from a first set of ephemeris data to a second set of ephemeris data for a second SV (para. [0037] “the amount of adjustment in the ambiguity dynamic ... can be determined on a ... per-satellite basis by analyzing satellite clock and/or orbit error for the... satellite over a period of time”, implying at least a second delta value for a second SV); and obtain one or more second carrier phase measurements of the second SV (para. [0028] “the GNSS receiver obtains ... carrier phase (CP) measurement of signals from each of the plurality of satellites”), wherein the location of the receiver device is determined further based at least in part on the one or more second carrier phase measurements and the second delta value (inherent).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6, 8, 9, 18, and 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 35 U.S.C. 101 set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
Uchida (US 20090216447 A1) teaches determining a first delta value representing a change from a first set of ephemeris data to a second set of ephemeris data for a first space vehicle (para. [0097] “the portable telephone 2 requests the server 3 to transmit a data set of predicted differential ephemeris data corresponding to the prediction period ... the predicted differential ephemeris data being the difference between the reference ephemeris data and complete ephemeris data at each date predicted by the server”) and determining a receiver location based thereon (701, 702, Fig. 4).
Maattanen (US 12477423 B2) teaches determining a first delta value representing a change from a first set of ephemeris data to a second set of ephemeris data for a first space vehicle (616, Fig. 6A “delta ephemeris data”; 27:13-17 “the full ephemeris data is augmented with the delta ephemeris data to yield a more accurate position estimate”) and determining a receiver location based thereon (claim 1 “determining a position of the serving cell satellite based on the full ephemeris data and the delta ephemeris data”).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASSI J GALT whose telephone number is (571)270-1469. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM - 5PM EST.
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 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.
/CASSI J GALT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
