DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed September 25, 2026 has been entered.
No claims are amended.
Claims 1-21 are pending this application
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 1-3, 7-11, 15-16, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hadzic (US 2010/0158181 A1) in view of Snyder et al (US 2015/0293234 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Hadzic teaches a method in a wireless navigation system, said method comprising [0031 for wireless base stations on a network]:
measuring and storing average values of phase and frequency of a local oscillator during a normal operation of said wireless navigation system [0121 for running the oscillator drive signal through a low-pass filter with 0131 for phase error run through a low-pass filter or averaged over some finite time interval];
stopping said normal operation and calculating an accrued error in said phase and frequency of said local oscillator [0091 for detected the loop is put in a temporary holdover mode];
applying a correction to offset said accrued error [0123 for undo any phase buildup that accumulated between the jump occurrence];
resuming said normal operation of said wireless navigation system [0130 for feedback control is reestablished].
Hadzic fails to explicitly teach detecting a spoofing event in said wireless navigation system.
Snyder has method, and computer program product embodiments for a GNSS interference and spoofing fast detection and mitigation system (abstract) and teaches detecting a spoofing event in said wireless navigation system [0036 for a spoofing or jamming attack, a GPS spoofer or jammer].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the wireless techniques, as disclosed by Hadzic, further including the spoofing measurement calculations as taught by Snyder for the purpose to switch off the output of first sub-data signal (Snyder, 0036).
Regarding Claim 10, Hadzic teaches a wireless navigation system comprising [0031 for wireless base stations on a network]:
a local oscillator [0121 for oscillator];
including a microcontroller and a memory [0091 for detected the loop is put in a temporary holdover mode],
said memory having stored therein average values of phase and frequency of said local oscillator during a normal operation of said wireless navigation system [0121 for running the oscillator drive signal through a low-pass filter with 0131 for phase error run through a low-pass filter or averaged over some finite time interval]
correction module determining an accrued error in said phase and frequency of said local oscillator and generating a frequency adjustment signal to apply a correction to offset said accrued error [0123 for undo any phase buildup that accumulated between the jump occurrence, 0130].
Hadzic fails to explicitly teach a GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) receiver including a spoofer detection module; a spoofing correction module, said spoofing correction module determining an accrued error in said phase and frequency of said local oscillator and generating a frequency adjustment signal to apply a correction to offset said accrued error.
Snyder has method, and computer program product embodiments for a GNSS interference and spoofing fast detection and mitigation system (abstract) and teaches a GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) receiver including a spoofer detection module [0031 for anomaly detector and GPS receiver 104];
a spoofing correction module [0036 for a spoofing or jamming attack, a GPS spoofer or jammer].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the wireless techniques, as disclosed by Hadzic, further including the spoofing measurement calculations as taught by Snyder for the purpose to switch off the output of first sub-data signal (Snyder, 0036).
Regarding Claim 17, Hadzic teaches a receiver comprising [0031 for wireless base stations on a network]:
a local oscillator [0121 for oscillator];
a correction module including a microcontroller and a memory, said memory having stored therein average values of phase and frequency of said local oscillator during a normal operation of said receiver [0121 for running the oscillator drive signal through a low-pass filter with 0131 for phase error run through a low-pass filter or averaged over some finite time interval];
said correction module determining an accrued error by calculating an integral of deviation of a spoofed phase and frequency of said local oscillator relative to said average values over time [0124, 0129 for integral sign instead of the sum can be derived for the continuous-time];
said correction module generating a frequency adjustment signal to apply a correction to offset said accrued error [0123 for undo any phase buildup that accumulated between the jump occurrence, 0130].
Hadzic fails to explicitly teach a GPS receiver, spoofer detection module; spoofing correction module.
Snyder has method, and computer program product embodiments for a GNSS interference and spoofing fast detection and mitigation system (abstract) and teaches a GNSS receiver including a spoofer detection module [0031 for anomaly detector and GPS receiver 104];
a spoofing correction module [0036 for a spoofing or jamming attack, a GPS spoofer or jammer].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the wireless techniques, as disclosed by Hadzic, further including the spoofing measurement calculations as taught by Snyder for the purpose to switch off the output of first sub-data signal (Snyder, 0036).
Regarding Claim 2 and 11, Hadzic fails to explicitly teach said wireless navigation system is a GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) receiver comprising one of a GPS receiver, a Galileo receiver, and a GLONASS receiver.
Snyder has method, and computer program product embodiments for a GNSS interference and spoofing fast detection and mitigation system (abstract) and teaches aid wireless navigation system is a GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) receiver comprising one of a GPS receiver, a Galileo receiver, and a GLONASS receiver [0031 for using GNSS].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the wireless techniques, as disclosed by Hadzic, further including the spoofing measurement calculations as taught by Snyder for the purpose to switch off the output of first sub-data signal (Snyder, 0036).
Regarding Claim 3, Hadzic fails to explicitly teach said wireless navigation system is a GPS receiver.
Snyder has method, and computer program product embodiments for a GNSS interference and spoofing fast detection and mitigation system (abstract) and teaches said wireless navigation system is a GPS receiver [0027 for adversarial attacks by monitoring the power levels of a GPS signal with 0031 for using GNSS].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the wireless techniques, as disclosed by Hadzic, further including the spoofing measurement calculations as taught by Snyder for the purpose to switch off the output of first sub-data signal (Snyder, 0036).
Regarding Claim 7 and 15, Hadzic teaches said resuming said normal operation of said wireless navigation system comprises restoring said phase and frequency of said local oscillator to approximately said average values [0130 for phase error and the frequency error are by construction assumed to be zero].
Regarding Claim 8 and 16, Hadzic teaches said wireless navigation system executes a spoofing correction algorithm to determine said accrued error by calculating an integral of deviation of a spoofed phase and frequency of said local oscillator relative to said average values over time [0124 for shaded area under the dashed line after the jump detection point].
Regarding Claim 9, Hadzic teaches executing a spoofing correction algorithm to correct a phase and frequency error due to hardware failure in said wireless navigation system, in an IMU, in a local oscillator of said wireless navigation system, or in a secondary authentication channel that provides a synchronization message to said wireless navigation system [0043, and 0148 for associated with failures of some switches or links in the network].
Regarding Claim 21, Hadzic teaches upon detecting a spoofing event said spoofer detection module activates said spoofing correction module to execute a spoofing correction algorithm to generate said frequency adjustment signal [0123 for after some finite time the jump condition is detected].
Claims 4, 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hadzic (US 2010/0158181 A1) in view of Snyder et al (US 2015/0293234 A1) as applied to claims 1, 10, and 17 above, and further in view of Leibner et al (US 2015/0226858 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, 12, and 18, Hadzic fails to explicitly teach said detecting said spoofing event comprises detecting a substantial change in said phase and frequency of said local oscillator.
Leibner has a method for detecting spoofing of a navigation device (abstract) and teaches said detecting said spoofing event comprises detecting a substantial change in said phase and frequency of said local oscillator [0057 for abnormality or deviation from the baseline measurement or expected clock cycle value serves as a flag to the system indicating a possible threat]
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the receiver navigation techniques, as disclosed by Snyder, further including the spoofing measurement calculations as taught by Leibner for the purpose to indicate ta threat (Leibner, 0057).
Claims 5-6, 13-14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hadzic (US 2010/0158181 A1) in view of Snyder et al (US 2015/0293234 A1), as applied to Claim 1, 11, and 17 above, and further in view of Cookman et al (US 2022/0035044 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, 13, and 19, Hadic fails to explicitly teach said detecting said spoofing event comprises receiving a message from a secondary channel.
Cookman has a GNSS receiver may be operated in a reduced operational state with respect to one or more GNSS bands (abstract) and teaches said detecting said spoofing event comprises receiving a message from a secondary channel [0068 for information may be maintained by a server and distributed to various GNSS receivers].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the receiver navigation techniques, as disclosed by Hadic, further including the message channel calculations as taught by Cookman for the purpose to determine whether spoofing is occurring has exceeded a threshold (Cookman, 0068).
Regarding Claim 6, 14, and 20, Hadic fails to explicitly teach said message is received from one of a satellite providing a navigation message authentication (NMA), a cell tower adjacent to said wireless navigation system, and an inertial measurement unit (IMU) of said wireless navigation system.
Cookman has a GNSS receiver may be operated in a reduced operational state with respect to one or more GNSS bands (abstract) and teaches said message is received from one of a satellite providing a navigation message authentication (NMA), a cell tower adjacent to said wireless navigation system, and an inertial measurement unit (IMU) of said wireless navigation system [0068 for mobile device using other positioning techniques such as base stations, AP and consistency checks].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the receiver navigation techniques, as disclosed by Hadic, further including the message channel calculations as taught by Cookman for the purpose to determine whether spoofing is occurring has exceeded a threshold (Cookman, 0068).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In applicant’s arguments page 8, second paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Snyder is silent to calculating accrued error. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Hadzic now calculate accrued error [Hadzic, 0123 for undo any phase buildup that accumulated between the jump occurrence].
In applicant’s arguments page 10, first paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Liebner is silent to calculating accrued error. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Hadzic now calculate accrued error [Hadzic, 0123 for undo any phase buildup that accumulated between the jump occurrence].
In applicant’s arguments page 10, second paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Schram never calculates any error. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Hadzic now calculate accrued error [Hadzic, 0123 for undo any phase buildup that accumulated between the jump occurrence].
In applicant’s arguments page 12 first paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Snyder is silent to calculating any error. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Hadzic now calculate accrued error [Hadzic, 0123 for undo any phase buildup that accumulated between the jump occurrence].
In applicant’s arguments page 13 second paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Liebner is silent to calculating any accrued error. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Hadzic now calculate accrued error [Hadzic, 0123 for undo any phase buildup that accumulated between the jump occurrence].
In applicant’s arguments page 14 first paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Schram is silent to calculating any accrued error. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Hadzic now calculate accrued error [Hadzic, 0123 for undo any phase buildup that accumulated between the jump occurrence].
In applicant’s arguments page 15 first paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Snyder is silent to calculating any error for claim 17. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Hadzic now calculate accrued error [Hadzic, 0123 for undo any phase buildup that accumulated between the jump occurrence]. See arguments for claims 1 and 10 above for subsequent references.
The examiner acknowledges that this is a broader interpretation than Applicant’s.
However, examiners are not only allowed to apply broad interpretations, but are required to do so, as it reduces the possibility that the claims, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified. MPEP §2111. Patentability is determined by the “broadest reasonable interpretation
consistent with the specification” (MPEP §2111), not the narrowest reasonable interpretation. And Applicant does not have an explicit lexicographical statement in line with MPEP §2111.01
subsection IV requiring a specific interpretation of the relevant phrases which forces the examiner to interpret them only one way.
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
1For 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMARINA MAKHDOOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Thursdays from 8:30 to 5:30 pm eastern time.
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 on 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.
/SAMARINA MAKHDOOM/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648
