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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 9, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dai et al (US 7961143) in view of Rapoport et al (US 20040130485).
Regarding claim 1 and 9 and 17, Dai teaches a method of global navigation satellite system positioning of a GNSS device (abstract, “method for performing integer ambiguity resolution in a global navigation satellite system is disclosed. A set of ambiguities, which are associated with carrier phase measurements of at least some of the signals received from the satellites in an identified set of satellites”), the method comprising: determining that preliminary conditions are met for a set of epochs comprising a plurality of successive epochs having float ambiguity values for carrier phase measurements taken by the GNSS device (col 4, lines 56-66, “ the present discussion is the inclusion of ambiguity values in the Kalman filter state, and the status of those values. During the process of attempting to lock onto the signals from a set of GPS (or GNSS) satellites, the ambiguity values for the carrier phase measurements from each satellite are called "floating ambiguity values." After lock has been achieved, the ambiguity values have been resolved, they are called integer ambiguity values, or fixed ambiguity values, because the resolved ambiguity values are fixed in value, and are integers. From another viewpoint, the Kalman filter procedures, or other procedures in the computer system 100, detect when the floating ambiguity values have stabilized, at which point the stabilized ambiguity values become integer ambiguity values.” And col 6, lines 55-67), a single reference satellite is used by the GNSS device to determine the float ambiguity values of the set of epochs (col 3, lines 31-47) determining a first set of rounded values comprising one or more first rounded values for the float ambiguity values; and determining final integer ambiguity values for the set of epochs based at least in part on an analysis of the first set of rounded values for the set of epochs (col 13, line 55 to col 14, line 8).
Regarding claim 1 and 9, and 17, Rapoport teaches the set of epochs is a continuous series of epochs for which one or more time increments between epochs occur at an expected interval, and responsive to determining the preliminary conditions are met (para 42). It would have been obvious to modify Dai to include the set of epochs is a continuous series of epochs for which one or more time increments between epochs occur at an expected interval, and responsive to determining the preliminary conditions are met because it would indicate the signals came from the same satellite.
Claim(s) 6-7, 14, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dai in view of Rapoport as applied to claim 1, 9, and 17 above, and further in view of Hatch (US 20080122688).
Regarding claim 6, 14, and 20, Hatch teaches the analysis of the first set of rounded values for the set of epochs comprises: determining a most common rounding value for the float ambiguity values; and determining whether one or more float ambiguity values have a corresponding rounding value other than the most common rounding value (para 56 and 58). It would have been obvious to modify Dai in view of Rapoport to include the analysis of the first set of rounded values for the set of epochs comprises: determining a most common rounding value for the float ambiguity values; and determining whether one or more float ambiguity values have a corresponding rounding value other than the most common rounding value because it would allow the satellite to compensate for the ambiguity factors.
Regarding claim 7, since ambiguity values for the set of epochs comprises setting the final integer ambiguity values for the set of epochs as the most common rounding value is contingent on a number of the one or more float ambiguity values with a corresponding rounding value other than the most common rounding value is less than a threshold, this feature does not need to be taught to read on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim.
Regarding claim 19, Hatch teaches the final integer ambiguity values for all epochs in the set of epochs comprise the first set of rounded values or the second set of rounded values (para 58 and 61). It would have been obvious to modify Dai in view of Rapoport to include the final integer ambiguity values for all epochs in the set of epochs comprise the first set of rounded values or the second set of rounded values because it would allow the satellite to compensate for the ambiguity factors.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, 8, 10-13, 15-16 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY A BRAINARD whose telephone number is (571)272-2132. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.
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.
TIMOTHY A. BRAINARD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3648
/TIMOTHY A BRAINARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights