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
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/17/2026 and 05/19/2026 have been considered by the examiner and initialed copies of the IDS are hereby attached.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5,7,10,14,15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chapman et al. (US 10838070 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Chapman discloses
A satellite terminal (see Fig. 1, Vehicle 132) comprising:
a plurality of receivers operable to receive a plurality of constellation signals having position and navigation information (see Fig. 1, GNSS Receivers 122);
position and timing systems (see Col. 4, lines 31-40, “The GNSS receiver (sometimes referred to as a master GNSS receiver) can output PNT/PVT information, which is then transferred out via a data link such as a serial link (e.g., instead of via RF, in the absence of an RF interface). The PNT or PVT information (sometimes referred to a PNT or PVT solution) as obtained in the GNSS receiver can be provided to any number of systems that can use or need to use the PNT or PVT information (sometimes generally referred to as a PNT systems).”, where the “any number of systems that can use or need to use the PNT information” are the “position and timing systems”); and
an embedded position, navigation and timing (PNT) system coupled to the position and timing systems (see Fig. 1, PNT system 114 coupled to the master GNSS receiver 100), the PNT system operable to receive the constellation signals and provide a transcoder output signal to the position and timing systems (see Col. 4, lines 31-40, “The GNSS receiver (sometimes referred to as a master GNSS receiver) can output PNT/PVT information, which is then transferred out via a data link such as a serial link (e.g., instead of via RF, in the absence of an RF interface). The PNT or PVT information (sometimes referred to a PNT or PVT solution) as obtained in the GNSS receiver can be provided to any number of systems that can use or need to use the PNT or PVT information (sometimes generally referred to as a PNT systems).”, where the “any number of systems that can use or need to use the PNT information” are the “position and timing systems”).
Regarding claim 2, Chapman further discloses
The satellite terminal of claim 1 wherein the PNT includes a position and timing signal transcoder to evaluate the plurality of constellation signals and generate the transcoder output signal in response to the constellation signals based on results of evaluation of the plurality of constellation signals (see Col. 7, line 65 – Col. 8, line 15, “The assurance message can provide a receiving/destination device (e.g., a GNSS receiver 122 or PNT system 114) with an indication of assurance and integrity in the PNT/PVT information determined (or to be determined) from the master GNSS signal. In some embodiments, the assurance message provides the receiving/destination device with an indication of assurance that the PNT/PVT information is based on (or derived from) an encrypted (satellite) signal (e.g., a Y-code or M-code signal), e.g., as if the encrypted signal is received and processed at the master GNSS receiver 100 for example. For example, responsive to receiving the message, a GPS receiver 122 can indicate to a user that the source of its PNT/PVT information is based on C/A code, Y-code or M-code as appropriate, and that the PNT/PVT information meets a certain level of assurance and accuracy. To an external user, each of the GNSS receivers is acting as if it was directly receiving a satellite transmission (e.g., C/A code, Y-code or M-code) via an antenna system.”).
Regarding claim 3, Chapman further discloses
The satellite terminal of claim 2 wherein the transcoder output signal comprises a transcoder Layer 1 (L1) or Layer 5 (L5) output signal (see Col. 8, lines 8-15, “For example, responsive to receiving the message, a GPS receiver 122 can indicate to a user that the source of its PNT/PVT information is based on C/A code, Y-code or M-code as appropriate, and that the PNT/PVT information meets a certain level of assurance and accuracy. To an external user, each of the GNSS receivers is acting as if it was directly receiving a satellite transmission (e.g., C/A code, Y-code or M-code) via an antenna system.”, where a C/A code is a L1 output signal, further see Col. 10, lines 53-65, “Reception of this assurance message with the master GNSS signal at a GNSS receiver 122 can cause the GNSS receiver 122 to proceed to determine PNT/PVT information using the open/unencrypted/civilian signal (e.g., C/A code) in the master GNSS signal, even though the master GNSS signal does not have an encrypted or military signal component (e.g., a Y-code or M-code signal). The PNT generator 102 of the GNSS receiver 122 can use the master GNSS signal (e.g., C/A code) to determine the PNT/PVT information and/or output a time pulse, and provide the PNT/PVT information (and/or time pulse) to a corresponding PNT system that uses or consumes the PNT/PVT information”).
Regarding claim 4, Chapman further discloses
The satellite terminal of claim 1 wherein at least one of the receivers of the plurality of the receivers is a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver operable to receive a GNSS signal (see Fig. 1, GNSS receivers 122).
Regarding claim 5, Chapman further discloses
The satellite terminal of claim 4 wherein the plurality of receivers comprises a plurality of GNSS receivers operable to receive a plurality of GNSS position and timing signals from a plurality of position and navigation satellite constellations (see Fig. 1, where GNSS receivers receive a plurality of GNSS “position and timing signals” from a plurality of satellite constellation, further see for support Col. 3, lines 56-66, “In some aspects, embodiments of the inventive concepts disclosed herein are directed to systems and methods for managing a plurality of GNSS based receivers, while using GNSS based signals received via a single anti-jam antenna system (AJAS) for instance. GNSS can include GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, Beidou and other regional systems. As such, GNSS based signals (sometimes referred to as GNSS signals) can refer to GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, Beidou or other such satellite related signals, and GNSS based receivers (sometimes referred to as GNSS receivers) can refer to GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, Beidou or other such satellite related signal receivers.”).
Regarding claim 7, Chapman further discloses
The satellite terminal of claim 1 wherein one of the position and timing systems is coupled to an antenna control unit (ACU) that includes a GPS receiver that uses information from the transcoder output signal (see Col. 15, line 64 - Col,. 16, line 13, “The DC detector 126 and/or RF signal decoder 128 can be controlled or managed by the program 130 to detect the assurance message and to determine that the assurance message indicates that the master GNSS signal is a trusted GNSS based signal or based on a trusted source. Responsive to receiving this assurance message with the master GNSS signal, a GNSS receiver 122 can proceed to determine PNT/PVT information using the open/unencrypted/civilian signal (e.g., C/A code) in the master GNSS signal, even though the master GNSS signal does not have an encrypted or military signal component (e.g., a Y-code or M-code signal). Based on the received assurance message, the GNSS receiver 122 can indicate (e.g., via standard signaling) to the corresponding PNT system 114 or a user that the PNT/PVT information is based on an encrypted signal (e.g., a Y-code or M-code signal) or a trusted source.”, where standard signaling uses an antenna control unit, where all antennas are coupled to a control unit).
Regarding claim 10, Chapman further discloses
The satellite terminal of claim 1 wherein the PNT system includes a location input to receive location information (see Col. 6, lines 11-15, “The master GNSS receiver 100 can provide the PNT/PVT information (generated based on the received GNSS signal), and/or the time pulse, to a PNT system 114 via a data link (e.g., a serial or Ethernet link) for consumption or use.”).
Regarding claim 14, the same cited section and rationale as claims 1 and 2 are applied.
Regarding claim 15, the same cited section and rationale as claim 3 is applied.
Regarding claim 18, the same cited section and rationale as claim 7 is applied.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chapman et al. (US 10838070 B1) in view of LAWRENCE et al. (US 20230224028 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Chapman discloses [Note: what Chapman fails to disclose is strike-through]
The satellite terminal of claim 5
LAWRENCE discloses,
wherein at least one of the receivers of the plurality of the receivers is a Satellite Time and Location (STL) receiver operable to receive an STL signal (see paragraph 0057, “The satellite phone may be an authorized receiver, such as a Satellite Time and Location (STL) authorized receiver, that may be known to the system’s ground infrastructure via a serial number. The receiver 160 (e.g., satellite phone) is enabled to receive satellite transmissions from the PNT satellites (e.g., PNT satellite 110) of the system 100”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by LAWRENCE into the invention of Chapman. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose satellite receivers used to improve the accuracy of position and timing information. The combination would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to utilize a specific type of authorized receiver to transmit STL signals for effective position and timing determination.
Claim(s) 8,9,19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chapman et al. (US 10838070 B1) in view of TURPIN et al. (US 20210208286 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Chapman discloses [Note: what Chapman fails to disclose is strike-through]
The satellite terminal of claim 7
TURPIN discloses,
wherein one of the position and timing systems includes a LEO modem that requires a GNSS input (see Figs. 2-4, where the position and timing system is coupled to LEO satellites using a plurality of receivers in the antenna of 201, further see paragraph 0015, “FIG. 4 is an antenna configured to receive a signal, such as the TT&C signals, from each of LEO (Low-Earth Orbit), MEO (Medium-Earth Orbit), and GEO (Geostationary Earth Orbit) satellites.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by TURPIN into the invention of Chapman. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose a satellite terminal used to improve the accuracy of position and timing information. The satellite terminal includes a plurality of receivers coupled to a PNT system. The combination would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to utilize LEO satellite constellations as part of the PNT system for accurate position and timing determination.
Regarding claim 9, Chapman discloses [Note: what Chapman fails to disclose is strike-through]
The satellite terminal of claim 8 further comprising a splitter coupled to the PNT system and configured to provide the transcoder output signal to the GPS receiver in the ACU (Col. 6, lines 41-49, “For example, the signal generator 110 can transmit the generated GNSS signal via an interface of the master GNSS receiver 100, through a link (e.g., coaxial cable) connected to the distribution hub 118, which can be an RF splitter or signal splitter for instance. The generated GNSS signal can be referred to as a master GNSS signal, to be shared with the one or more GNSS receivers 122 via a communications network that includes the distribution hub 118 for instance.”)
TURPIN discloses,
further(see Figs. 2-4, where the position and timing system is coupled to LEO satellites using a plurality of receivers in the antenna of 201, further see paragraph 0015, “FIG. 4 is an antenna configured to receive a signal, such as the TT&C signals, from each of LEO (Low-Earth Orbit), MEO (Medium-Earth Orbit), and GEO (Geostationary Earth Orbit) satellites.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by TURPIN into the invention of Chapman. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose a satellite terminal used to improve the accuracy of position and timing information. The satellite terminal includes a plurality of receivers coupled to a PNT system. The combination would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to utilize LEO satellite constellations as part of the PNT system for accurate position and timing determination.
Regarding claim 19, the same cited section and rationale as claim 8 is applied.
Regarding claim 20, the same cited section and rationale as claim 9 is applied.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-13,16 and 17 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In reference to independent claims 11-13,16 and 17, the prior arts made of record individually or in any combination, failed to teach, render obvious, or fairly suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the combination of the claimed features of claims 11-13,16 and 17.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
LUO et al. (US 20240241263 A1) discloses a device with a known position that measures RF signals from the LEO satellite, estimates range and/or range rate, and uses those measurements to solve for the satellite’s PVT [0003]-[0007], [0036], [0040]. The resulting satellite PVT can be updated locally or crowdsourced across many devices, improving robustness and speed [0042]-[0050]. The estimated PVT can then be reused for later device positioning, including in GNSS-denied environments [0041], [0066].
COBB et al. (US 20230194727 A1) discloses a system which anchors satellite timing to an independent terrestrial precision timing source and then uses ground observations plus inter-satellite timing/ranging links to estimate each satellite’s clock variation. Those estimates can be propagated across satellites, ground stations, or even constellations, so that PNT signals remain usable without GPS [0003]-[0006], [0041]-[0045], [0061]-[0064]. In effect, the system creates a GNSS-independent timing network for satellites and receivers [0019]-[0021].
Royle et al. (US 20230130665 A1) discloses a portable test device with a GNSS receiver and tunable clock to generate and compare 1PPS signals from a DUT and a reference setup, then computes the DUT’s total propagation delay from the measured time difference and the known reference delay. The device can hold the tuned clock in standby so it remains stable while the user moves between signal sources. It also reduces re-tuning time by keeping the GNSS receiver/clock powered or by reusing stored phase information. This lets technicians measure delay in real installations and then program the result into the grandmaster clock as an offset. [0032], [0060]-[0064], [0091]-[0102].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAZRA N. WAHEED whose telephone number is (571)272-6713. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8 AM - 4:30 PM).
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.
/NAZRA NUR WAHEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights