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
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
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 statutory basis for 35 USC § 103
“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 – 6, 9 – 11, 13 and 16 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Xie (US 11391850 B1) in view of McBurney (US 20210373179 A1).
As to claim 1, Xie discloses method of satellite signal acquisition, the method comprising:
generating a pilot correlation output based on a pilot signal of a received signal from a satellite, and a data correlation output based on a data signal of the received signal from the satellite (col. 10 ll. 56 – 63 “An integral operation is performed on each of the optimized cross-correlation result of the data channel and the optimized cross-correlation result of the pilot channel, and a differential coherent combination is performed on an integration result of the data channel and an integration result of the pilot channel through a differential coherent integrator to obtain a differential coherent combination result.” Fig. 2 shows several mixers used for correlation.);
differentially combining the integrated pilot output (Fig. 2 shows two separate integration stages, a combiner (summer) and a differential coherent integrator. Xie’s Fig. 2 is similar to Applicant’s Fig. 1);
differentially combining the integrated data output (Id.); and
applying a coherent integrator to the integrated pilot output and the integrated data output to generate an output signal (Id.).
Xie does not teach modifying, with an integration length, the pilot correlation output to generate an integrated pilot output, and the data correlation output to generate an integrated data output.
In the same field of endeavor, McBurney teaches “In operation 151 in FIG. 3, a GNSS receiver receives a first set of GNSS signals and a second set of GNSS signals that include a first secondary code that has a first length (e.g., the first secondary code has the longest length of all codes from the same GNSS SV) and a second secondary code that has a second length that is smaller than the first length (Para. 40).”
In view of the teachings of McBurney, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before filing to apply different code lengths to allow for detection of weaker signals thereby mitigating data loss.
As to claim 2, Xie and McBurney teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a phase of the output signal; and determining a Doppler frequency of the output signal (Xie Fig. 2 step 105).
As to claim 3, Xie and McBurney teaches method of claim 2, further comprising: establishing a connection to the satellite based on the phase of the output signal and the Doppler frequency of the output signal (Xie Fig. 1 step 105 see also col. 3 ll. 48 – 65).
As to claim 4, Xie and McBurney teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the received signal comprises a pilot pseudo-random noise sequence (Xie claim 1 pseudo-correlation which is known to included pseudo-random sequences. McBurney teaches pseudorandom Para. 44. Pseudorandom is useful to provide security and anti-jamming.).
As to claim 5, Xie and McBurney teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the differential combining of the integrated pilot output further comprises utilizing intermediate data of the integrated pilot output (Xie Fig. 2 shows down-conversion via removal of the Carrier NCO).
As to claim 6, Xie and McBurney teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the differential combining of the integrated data output further comprises utilizing intermediate data of the integrated data output (Xie Fig. 2).
As to claim 9, Xie in view of McBurney teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the received signal from the satellite is an L1 or L5 GPS signal specification (McBurney Para. 2. It is obvious for Xie to use L1 or L5 to expand its market to GPS because those signals are standard signals for GPS especially L1 and it would be difficult to have commercial success without L1 or L5 especially L1.).
As to claim 10, Xie discloses a multi-span method of satellite signal acquisition, the method comprising:
generating a correlation output based on a received signal from a satellite (col. 10 ll. 56 – 63 Fig. 2);
generating an output signal based on a combination of absolute values of outputs from the plurality of segment differential correlations (Id.);
determining a phase of the output signal (Fig. 1 step 105); and
determining a Doppler frequency of the output signal (Fig. 1 step 105).
Xie does not teach the limitation of performing a plurality of segment differential correlations with different code lengths.
In the same field of endeavor, McBurney teaches “In operation 151 in FIG. 3, a GNSS receiver receives a first set of GNSS signals and a second set of GNSS signals that include a first secondary code that has a first length (e.g., the first secondary code has the longest length of all codes from the same GNSS SV) and a second secondary code that has a second length that is smaller than the first length (Para. 40).”
In view of the teachings of McBurney, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to apply different code lengths to allow for detection of weaker signals thereby mitigating data loss.
As to claim 11, Xie in view of McBurney teaches the method of claim 10, further comprising: establishing a connection to the satellite based on the phase of the output signal and the Doppler frequency of the output signal (Fig. 1 step 105 see also col. 3 ll. 48 – 65).
As to claim 13, Xie in view of McBurnery teaches the method of claim 10, further comprising normalizing the integrated outputs prior to performing the combination of the absolute values of the integrated outputs (Xie col. 9 ll. 34 – 43 “absolute value operation”; McBurney Para. 40 “highest magnitude value in the combined results.”).
As to claim 16, Xie in view of McBurney teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the received signal from the satellite is an L1 or L5 GPS signal specification (McBurney Para. 2. It is obvious for Xie to use L1 or L5 to expand its market to GPS because those signals are standard signals for GPS especially L1 and it would be difficult to have commercial success without L1 or L5 especially L1.).
As to claim 17, Xie discloses a GPS receiver comprising:
an antenna (implied by fact a navigation signal is received);
a power supply (implied for electronics to function.); and
a receiver-processing unit comprising a processor and a non-volatile memory device connected to the processor (col. 15 ll. 9 “ROM” McBurney also discloses non-volatile memory. See McBurney Para. 13.), wherein the non-volatile memory device includes instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the GPS receiver to (similar features to claim 1):
generate a pilot correlation output based on a pilot signal of a received signal from a satellite (col. 10 ll. 56 – 63 Fig. 2); generate a data correlation output based on a data signal of the received signal from the satellite (col. 10 ll. 56 – 63 Fig. 2); integrate the pilot correlation output to generate an integrated pilot output (col. 10 ll. 56 – 63 Fig. 2); integrate the data correlation output to generate an integrated data output (col. 10 ll. 56 – 63 Fig. 2); perform differential combining of the integrated pilot output (col. 10 ll. 56 – 63 Fig. 2); perform differential combining of the integrated data output; sum and coherently combine the integrated pilot output and the integrated data output to generate an output signal (col. 10 ll. 56 – 63 Fig. 2); determine a phase of the output signal (Fig. 1 step 105); and determine a Doppler frequency of the output signal (Fig. 1 step 105).
As to claim 18, Xie in view of McBurney teaches the GPS receiver of claim 17, wherein: the differential combining of the integrated pilot output comprises utilizing intermediate data of the integrated pilot output, and the differential combining of the integrated data output comprises utilizing intermediate data of the integrated data output (Fig. 1 step 105).
As to claim 19, Xie in view of McBurney teaches the GPS receiver of 18, wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the GPS receiver to: establish a connection to the satellite based on the phase of the output signal and the Doppler frequency of the output signal (Fig. 1 step 105 see also col. 3 ll. 48 – 65).
Claims 8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Xie in view of McBurney and in further view of Lee (KR 20170056315 A).
As to claims 8 and 20, Xie in view of McBurney does not teach the GPS receiver of 18, wherein the determining the Doppler frequency comprises utilizing an angle estimator.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches “And the arrival angle is estimated in the region of each Doppler frequency of the path signal processed so as to have spongy properties in the Doppler frequency-arrival axis (see claims).”
In view of the teachings of Lee, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled before filing in order to determine Doppler based on or compared with angle to determine reliability of Doppler measurement given that some angles have more interference due to atmosphere and multipath than others thus improving confidence.
Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Xie in view of McBurney and in further view of Nagano (US 20140340258 A1).
As to claims 7 and 14, Xie in view of McBurney teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the determining the phase comprises performing a search of a curve of the output signal.
In same field of endeavor, Nagano teaches “Next, when the GNSS signal (direct wave signal) with higher reception intensity than the multi-path signal is received, as illustrated in FIG. 15 at (B), the correlation curve changes and the peak thereof becomes the code phase of the GNSS signal (Para. 142).”
In view of the teachings of Nagano, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled before filing to apply a curve to find phase because doing so results in millimeter accuracy thus improving system performance.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Xie in view of McBurney and in further view of Lee and Nagano.
As to claim 15, Xie in view of McBurney, Lee and Nagano teaches the GPS receiver of 18, wherein the determining the Doppler frequency comprises utilizing an angle estimator (as cited for claims 7, 8, 14 and 20).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Xie in view of McBurney and in further view of Akopian (US 6,735,243 B1).
As to claim 12, Xie in view of McBurney does not teach the method of claim 10, wherein each of the plurality of segment differential correlations has a different integration length.
In same field of endeavor, Akopian teaches “FIG. 10 illustrates one possible way of implementing the section correlations performed by either above implementation as a block of shift registers and adders. The section correlation results can then be combined to form section correlations of different lengths and even a (full) correlation output, i.e. a correlation over one entire code period, when needed. (Para. 142).”
In view of the teachings of Akopian, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled before filing to apply different code lengths to allow for detection of even weaker signals thereby mitigating even more data loss.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Justice whose telephone number is 571-270-7029. The examiner can normally be reached on during normal business hours. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at telephone number 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats see MPEP § 713.01 . To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice .
/Michael W Justice/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights