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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Information Disclosure Statement filed on 05/29/2026 has been fully considered by the Office.
Status of claims
Claims 1, 10, 13 and 16 are amended.
Claim 11 is canceled.
Claim 21 is newly added.
Claims 1-10 and 12-21 are pending.
Response to arguments
With respect to Applicant’s remarks filed on 07/23/2026; Applicant's “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
Applicant remarks:
Yitzhak does not teach “a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS).
Office Response:
Please see new mapping based on (secondary prior art)
The Office has supplied new grounds for rejection (secondary prior art) attached below in the FINAL office action and therefore the prior arguments are considered moot.
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 1-5,7-8, 12, 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over WO2023126925 A1 to Yitzhak et al. (herein after “Yitzhak”) in view of US20210286086 A1 to Savoy et al. (herein after “Savoy”).
Regarding claim 1, Yitzhak teaches A vehicle comprising(see Yitzhak [page 15, lines 3-6], [page 16, line 22] position and altitude of a vehicle..,): a user interface (UI) (See Yitzhak [page 11,lines 9-19] The system shown and described herein may include user interface/s e.g. as described herein, which may, for example, include all or any subset of: an interactive voice response interface, automated response tool) a global positioning system (GPS) (See Yitzhak[page 15 lines 8-11]); an inertial reference system (IRS) (See Yitzhak [page 15,lines 8-11] In Fig 1, all or any subset of the hardware devices providing inputs to the processor (GNSS, INS, anchoring system, ... DTM, radar), may be provided. The processor may perform all or any subset of the operations shown and described herein, and may generate all or any subset of the outputs shown);
GPS data from the GPS or IRS data from the IRS (See Yitzhak [page 15, line 12-15] As shown, the GNSS typically provides time and /or position and /or altitude of the platform which is running the method of Figs 3a-3b. The INS and anchoring system provided position of the platform which is running the method of Figs. 3a-3b); determine, based at least in part on the received at least one of the GPS data or the IRS data, whether the vehicle is receiving one or more of a GPS spoofing signal or a GPS jamming signal (See Yitzhak[page 15, lines 3-6],[page 16,lines 1-13], [page 2, lines 19-28] GNSS Spoofing - intended to include any "intentional interference technique, computes an incorrect position or an erroneous time variable" e.g. as described in https://www.incibe-cert.es/en/blog/spoofing-and-jamming-over-gnss); and in response to a determination that the vehicle is receiving the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal (see Yitzhak [page 20,lines 28-page24 ,lines 21], figures 1 and 3a), cause the UI to output a notification indicating that the vehicle is receiving the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal (See Yitzhak [page 3, lines 30-32]Certain embodiments seek to provide a system which gives an operator e.g. pilot, of a platform P* and /or other platforms networked to platform P* and /or to operators thereof, an alert, in real time, of detected spoofing; claims 5 and 21).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 2, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 1. Yitzhak teaches further comprising a navigation system configured to receive the GPS data from the GPS and navigate the vehicle based at least in part on the received GPS data(See Yitzhak GPS receivers may use the corrections while computing their positions to improve accuracy of these computations)
, and wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: in response to a determination that the vehicle is receiving the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal, cause the navigation system to cease receiving the GPS data from the GPS and to navigate the vehicle without use of the received GPS data. (See Yitzhak claim 5 time-specific spoof indication includes reporting time-specific spoof indication via an aerial network to other platforms, and/or reporting said time-specific spoof indication to an operator e.g. a pilot of a platform performing the method.)
Regarding claim 3, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 1. Yitzhak teaches determine, based at least in part on the received at least one of the GPS data or the IRS data, that the vehicle is no longer receiving the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal; and in response to a determination that the vehicle is no longer receiving the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal, cause the navigation system to being receiving the GPS data from the GPS and to navigate the vehicle based at least in part on the received GPS data. (See Yitzhak [page 14, lines 18-24] Spoofer detection solutions are now described which may generate, in real time, a time-specific indication that a platform is currently being spoofed (indication with value 1 e.g.), and may then estimate the platform's correct, non-spoofed current position using (only) the platform's own built-in system/s, and may continue using only the platform's own built-in system/s until the time-specific indication that platform is currently being spoofed has turned off (has been superseded with a time- specific indication of value 0 e.g.).)
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 4, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 1. Yitzhak teaches whether the vehicle is receiving the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal and cause the UI to output a notification indicating that the vehicle is receiving the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal without requiring any modification of the TAWS. (See Yitzhak [page 20, line28-page 24,line 21] A possible Spoof alert is now computed…operation 1-operation 70)
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 5, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 1. Yitzhak teaches determine, based at least in part on the received at least one of the GPS data or the IRS data, that the vehicle is no longer receiving the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal; and in response to a determination that the vehicle is no longer receiving the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal, cause the UI to output a second notification indicating that the vehicle is no longer receiving the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal. (See Yitzhak [para 14 lines 18-24] a platform is currently being spoofed (indication with value 1 e.g.), spoofed has turned off (has been superseded with a time- specific indication of value 0 e.g.).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 7, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 1. Yitzhak teaches wherein the second notification comprises an indication to an operator of the vehicle to enable updates from the GPS to a navigation system of the vehicle. (See Yitzhak 1. Read the most updated T1pps value, 2. Read the most updated Tgnss value).
Regarding claim 8, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 1. Yitzhak teaches wherein to determine whether the vehicle is receiving one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal,
receive the GPS data from the GPS, wherein the GPS data comprises GPS positions (See Yitzhak [page 16, lines 1-10] GNSS-computed quantities); receive the IRS data from the IRS, wherein the IRS data comprises IRS positions; compare the GPS positions to the IRS positions to determine whether there are changes in the GPS positions without a corresponding changes in the IRS position (See Yitzhak [page 16 lines 1-13] a gap or difference between various GNSS-computed quantities, such as but not limited to Time, Altitude and Position (Latitude and/or Longitude ) on the one hand, and estimates of the same quantities provided by other, non-GNSS based sources on the other hand, may be computed and compared to a threshold value)
and based on a determination of a presence of changes in the GPS positions without corresponding changes in the IRS positions, determine that the vehicle is receiving one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal. (See Yitzhak [page 23 lines28-page 24 lines 6], [para 16 lines 1-10] computed and compared to a threshold value).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 12, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 1. Yitzhak teaches receive, via the communications circuitry and from a computing system, positions and sizes of one or more zones with one or more of the GPS jamming signal or the GPS spoofing signal (See Yitzhak operation 40: Identify a GNSS barometric altitude drift and compute a Possible Spoof alert indicating that the platform may be within the range of a spoofer and/or that); determine, for each zone of the one or more zones and based on the position and size of the respective zone, a distance and orientation of the zone relative to the vehicle; and cause the UI (See Yitzhak a communication interface ) to output the distance and orientation (See Yitzhak Altitude - distance between platform and a reference altitude e.g. sea level
Attitude - orientation of platform relative to a reference orientation e.g. the horizon, typically including pitch (relative to reference Y-axis) and/or roll (relative to reference X-axis), and/or yaw (relative to reference Z-axis)) of each zone of the one or more zones relative to the vehicle. (See Yitzhak receivers may enable their users to compute their positions with accuracy and integrity, based on data signals received via a compatible receiver, based on the position with accuracy and integrity based on the data signal(jamming signal) received).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 16, Yitzhak teaches A method comprising:
data from one or more of a global positioning system (GPS) or an initial reference system (IRS) (Yitzhak does not expressly teaches TAWS system but the system mentioned in page 15 configured to perform the same actions such as determining whether the vehicle is receiving one or more of a GPS spoofing/jamming signal, and accordingly causing the UI to output a notification, see Yitzhak [page 15 lines 3-4] A system and process of operation, which may measure or estimate the actual time,..)
determining, by the TAWS and based at least in part on the received data, whether the vehicle is receiving one or more of a GPS spoofing signal or a GPS jamming signal(See Yitzhak[page 15, lines 3-6],[page 16,lines 1-13], [page 2, lines 19-28] GNSS Spoofing - intended to include any "intentional interference technique, computes an incorrect position or an erroneous time variable" e.g. as described in https://www.incibe-cert.es/en/blog/spoofing-and-jamming-over-gnss); and in response to determining that the vehicle is receiving the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal(see Yitzhak [page 20,lines 28-page24 ,lines 21], figures 1 and 3a), causing, by the TAWS, an user interface (UI) of the vehicle to output a notification indicating that the vehicle is receiving the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal(See Yitzhak [page 3, lines 30-32]Certain embodiments seek to provide a system which gives an operator e.g. pilot, of a platform P* and /or other platforms networked to platform P* and /or to operators thereof, an alert, in real time, of detected spoofing; claims 5 and 21).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 17, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 16. Yitzhak teaches whether the vehicle is receiving the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal and outputs the notification without requiring any physical modification to the TAWS. (See Yitzhak [page 20, line28-page 24,line 21] A possible Spoof alert is now computed…operation 1-operation 70).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 18, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 16. Yitzhak teaches further comprising: in response to determining that the vehicle is receiving the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal,
a navigation system of the vehicle to cease receiving GPS data from the GPS and to navigate the vehicle without use of the GPS data. (See Yitzhak claim 5 time-specific spoof indication includes reporting time-specific spoof indication via an aerial network to other platforms, and/or reporting said time-specific spoof indication to an operator e.g. a pilot of a platform performing the method.).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 19, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 16. Yitzhak teaches further comprising: based at least in part on the received data, that the vehicle is no longer receiving the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal; and in response to determining that the vehicle is no longer receiving the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal, causing, by the TAWS, the navigation system to begin receiving GPS data from the GPS and to navigate the vehicle based at least in part on the received GPS data. (See Yitzhak [page 14, lines 18-24] Spoofer detection solutions are now described which may generate, in real time, a time-specific indication that a platform is currently being spoofed (indication with value 1 e.g.), and may then estimate the platform's correct, non-spoofed current position using (only) the platform's own built-in system/s, and may continue using only the platform's own built-in system/s until the time-specific indication that platform is currently being spoofed has turned off (has been superseded with a time- specific indication of value 0 e.g.).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 20, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 16. Yitzhak teaches wherein the notification comprises a first notification, and wherein the method further comprises:
based at least in part on the received data, that the vehicle is no longer receiving the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal; and in response to determining that the vehicle is no longer receiving the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal, causing, by the TAWS, the UI to output a second notification indicating that the vehicle is no longer receiving the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal. (See Yitzhak [para 14 lines 18-24] a platform is currently being spoofed (indication with value 1 e.g.), spoofed has turned off (has been superseded with a time- specific indication of value 0 e.g.).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Regarding claim 21, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 1. Yitzhak teaches wherein the processing circuitry is configured to cause the UI to output a zone corresponding to the one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal in conjunction with one or more of weather information (See Yitzhak GNSS data which can be used to derive and output weather related information) or terrain information (See Yitzhak Input9. Altitude of the terrain (in refer to the platform's Latitude, Longitude) on which the platform is travelling e.g., flying from a DTM.).
Claims 6, 9-10,13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over Yitzhak in view of Savoy and US20220082704 A1 to Lemke et al. (herein after “Lemke”).
Regarding claim 6, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 5. However, Yitzhak does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach wherein the first notification comprises an indication to an operator of the vehicle to disable updates from the GPS to a navigation system of the vehicle. Nevertheless, Lemke same field of endeavor teaches wherein the first notification comprises an indication to an operator of the vehicle to disable updates from the GPS to a navigation system of the vehicle. (See Lemke para[0063] Method 600 can also disable use of GNSS navigational aids and switch to an alternative positioning system if available, Lemke does not expressly mentioned the first notification but it is obvious to a skilled person to understand a notification may generate to disable GPS navigation to switch to an alternative positioning system)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) Lemke’s comparison of GPS time, altitude and position based on the threshold value which is greater than or equal threshold value in order to allow to guide the aircraft safely to its destination (see Lemke para[0001]) and to decrease the risk to aircraft integrity and the safety of its passengers and crew (see Lemke para[0002]).
Regarding claim 9, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 1. Yitzhak teaches wherein to determine whether the vehicle is receiving one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal,
receive the GPS data from the GPS, wherein the GPS data comprises a GPS time; (See Yitzhak time-specific spoof indication.)
receive the IRS data from the IRS, wherein the IRS data comprises an IRS time; (See Yitzhak non-GNSS based sources. For example, a gap or difference between various GNSS-computed quantities, such as but not limited to Time, Altitude and Position (Latitude and/orLongitude ) on the one hand, and estimates of the same quantities provided by other, non-GNSS based sources on the other hand, may be computed and compared to a threshold value)
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach receive determine whether a difference between the GPS time and the IRS time is greater than or equal to a threshold value; and based on a determination that the difference between the GPS time and the IRS time is greater than or equal to the threshold value, determine that the vehicle is receiving one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal. Nevertheless, Lemke same field of endeavor teaches determine whether a difference between the GPS time and the IRS time is greater than or equal to a threshold value; and based on a determination that the difference between the GPS time and the IRS time is greater than or equal to the threshold value, determine that the vehicle is receiving one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal(See Lemke para[0045] At block 308, the combined differential value is compared against a threshold value to determine whether GNSS spoofing is present. Thus, the threshold value should be set where a combined differential value that is greater than the threshold value indicates that the GNSS measurements have been spoofed. A variety of factors can be considered both in determining the format of the differential value and in determining the threshold value.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system and Savoy’s TAWS with Lemke’s comparison of GPS time, altitude and position based on the threshold value which is greater than or equal threshold value in order to allow to guide the aircraft safely to its destination (see Lemke para[0001]) and to decrease the risk to aircraft integrity and the safety of its passengers and crew (see Lemke para[0002]).
Regarding claim 10, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 1. wherein to determine whether the vehicle is receiving one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal,
receive the GPS data from the GPS, wherein the GPS data comprises a GPS altitude; receive the IRS data from the IRS; (See Yitzhak For example, a gap or difference between various GNSS-computed quantities, such as but not limited to Time, Altitude and Position (Latitude and/orLongitude ) on the one hand, and estimates of the same quantities provided by other, non-GNSS based sources on the other hand, may be computed and compared to a threshold value.)
However, Yitzhak does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach compute, based at least in part on the received IRS data, an altitude of the vehicle; determine, a difference between the GPS altitude and the computed altitude; and based on a determination that the difference between the GPS altitude and the computer altitude is greater than or equal to a threshold value, determine that the vehicle is receiving one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal. Nevertheless, Lemke same field of endeavor teaches compute, based at least in part on the received IRS data, an altitude of the vehicle; determine, a difference between the GPS altitude and the computed altitude; and based on a determination that the difference between the GPS altitude and the computer altitude is greater than or equal to a threshold value, determine that the vehicle is receiving one or more of the GPS spoofing signal or the GPS jamming signal. (see Lemke does not expressly teaches about altitude, however, Lemke teaches in para[0017] the navigation parameters, defined below, can include any one of velocity, groundspeed, position, track angle, or flight path angle measurements., Abstract the difference(s) between the compared navigation parameters are further compared to generate at least one differential value. A system can detect GNSS spoofing by comparing the at least one differential value to a suitable threshold.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Lemke’s comparison of GPS time, altitude and position based on the threshold value which is greater than or equal threshold value in order to allow to guide the aircraft safely to its destination (see Lemke para[0001]) and to decrease the risk to aircraft integrity and the safety of its passengers and crew (see Lemke para[0002]).
Regarding claim 13, Yitzhak teaches A system comprising: communications circuitry; determine, based at least in part on the first time, first position, second time, and second position, a position and a size of the zone(See Yitzhak para[0003] identifying a first location associated with a location determined based on the first set of GNSS signals prior to the likely spoofing of the at least one GNSS signal; , determining a second location based on one or more locations determined after determining the spoofing has ceased; and determining a spoofing region based on the first and second locations) ; and
transmit, via the communications circuitry (See Yitzhak para[0064] The GNSS receiver 322 then transmits GNSS information to the spoof detection software 310.), a notification indicating the position and the size of the zone to the TAWS of a second vehicle. (See Yitzhak para[0028] he Earth's surface simultaneously from multiple SVs in the constellation. A SV which is a member of a particular GNSS constellation typically transmits navigation signals in a format that is unique to the particular GNSS format, para[0034] a GNSS receiver may operate in a spoofed state when it is receiving GNSS information subject to at least one signal discrepancy caused by a spoofing transmitter, or “spoofer, para[0039] For example, the spoof detection software may adjust the configuration of the GPS receiver when it detects the vehicle enters a spoofing regions, such as by changing the frequency the GPS receiver uses to receive GPS signals. GPS SVs transmit GPS signals on multiple frequencies,).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly mention or otherwise teach a terrain awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive. Nevertheless, Savoy awareness and warning system (TAWS), the TAWS comprising processing circuitry configured to receive (See Savoy para[0020] the terrain database 114 may be stored in a Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) (or terrain awareness and warning circuitry), which is used to warn flight crew if a vehicle is in imminent danger of impacting the ground or another obstacle; the other system, e.g., TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
However, Yitzhak does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach a first indication that the first vehicle has entered a zone with a GPS jamming signal or a GPS spoofing signal, the first indication comprising a first time and first position of the first vehicle when a communications management unit (CMU) , receive, via the communications circuitry and from the TAWS of the first vehicle, a second indication that the first vehicle has exited the zone, the second indication comprising a second time and a second position of the first vehicle when the CMU . Nevertheless, Lemke same field of endeavor teaches A system comprising: communications circuitry; and processing circuitry configured (See Lemke 11, processing circuity)
a first indication that the first vehicle has entered a zone with a GPS jamming signal or a GPS spoofing signal, the first indication comprising a first time and first position of the first vehicle when a communications management unit (CMU) (See Lemke para[0034] For example, IRS 104 d can be configured to send an output to a flight management system (FMS) located in the cockpit of the vehicle, CMU is similar as FMS ) outputted the first indication;
receive, via the communications circuitry and from the TAWS of the first vehicle, a second indication that the first vehicle has exited the zone, the second indication comprising a second time and a second position of the first vehicle when the CMU (CMU) (See Lemke para[0034] For example, IRS 104 d can be configured to send an output to a flight management system (FMS) located in the cockpit of the vehicle, CMU is similar as FMS ) outputted the second indication;
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Lemke’s comparison of GPS time, altitude and position based on the threshold value which is greater than or equal threshold value in order to allow to guide the aircraft safely to its destination (see Lemke para[0001]) and to decrease the risk to aircraft integrity and the safety of its passengers and crew (see Lemke para[0002]).
Regarding claim 14, Yitzhak and Savoy remain applied as claim 13. However, Yitzhak does not teach or otherwise teach wherein the notification comprises a first notification, and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: receive, via the communications circuitry and from TAWS of a third vehicle, a third indication that the third vehicle has traveled through the zone and did not detect the GPS jamming signal or the GPS spoofing signal; and based on the third indication, transmit, via the communications circuitry, a second notification indicating the absence of the GPS jamming signal or the GPS spoofing signal in the zone to the TAWS of the second vehicle. Nevertheless, Savoy same field of endeavor teaches wherein the notification comprises a first notification (see Savoy para[0026] an electrical signal that notifies other systems or circuitry that GNSS spoofing has been detected.) , and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to:
receive, via the communications circuitry and from TAWS of a third vehicle, a third indication that the third vehicle has traveled through the zone and did not detect the GPS jamming signal or the GPS spoofing signal (see Savoy para[0020] TAWS, is configured to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system.) ; and
based on the third indication, transmit, via the communications circuitry, a second notification indicating the absence of the GPS jamming signal or the GPS spoofing signal in the zone to the TAWS of the second vehicle. (See Savoy para[0031] If no GNSS spoofing has been determined to occur, then optionally proceed back to block 202. In the case where no GNSS spoofing has been determined to occur, the position data received by a GNSS receiver is deemed to be sufficiently reliable and is continued to be sent to and/or used by, e.g. vehicle crew, other vehicle system(s), external entit(ies), and/or other vehicle(s)—for example for vehicle navigation., para[00004] The method further comprises detecting GNSS spoofing based upon a difference between the first vehicle HAT and the second vehicle HAT; and upon detecting GNSS spoofing, issuing an alert.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Savoy’s Terrain Awareness and Warning System (TAWS) in order to allow to be communicatively coupled to the GNSS spoofing detection system (see Savoy para[0020]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over Yitzhak in view of Savoy , Lemke and JP 2016095834 A to Jeffrey et al. (herein after “Jeffrey”).
Regarding claim 15, Yitzhak, Savoy and Lemke remain applied as claim 13. However, Yitzhak does not teach or otherwise teach wherein the communications circuitry is configured to receive and transmit Aircraft Communication Address and Reporting System (ACARS) messages to the TAWS of the first vehicle and to the TAWS of the second vehicle, and wherein the first indication, the second indication, and the notification comprises ACARS messages. Nevertheless, Jeffrey same field of endeavor teaches wherein the communications circuitry is configured to receive and transmit Aircraft Communication Address and Reporting System (ACARS) messages to the TAWS of the first vehicle and to the TAWS of the second vehicle, and wherein the first indication, the second indication, and the notification comprises ACARS messages. (See Jeffrey para[0048] For example, communication system 130 may include a system for receiving information by aircraft 102 from a location on the ground and for sending information from aircraft 102 to a location on the ground while the aircraft is in flight. For example, without limitation, communication system 130 may include the Aircraft Communications Address Reporting System (ACARS).This system is a digital data link system for the transmission of messages between aircraft and ground stations via airband radio or satellite.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine Yitzhak’s GNSS spoofer detection system with Jeffrey’s receive and transmit Aircraft Communication Address and Reporting System (ACARS) messages in order to allow to improve aircraft operational performance by transforming available aircraft data into useful, actionable information (See Jeffrey para[0004]).
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 NAZIA AFRIN whose telephone number is (703)756-1175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-6.
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, Scott A Browne can be reached at 5712700151. 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.
/NAZIA AFRIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/JESS WHITTINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666c
Prosecution Insights