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 .
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) 1-2, 16, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caudili et al. (hereinafter Caudili)(US 2017/0366252) in view of Lawrence et al. (hereinafter Lawrence) (US 2023/0204792) and Sorond et al. (hereinafter Sorond)(US 2025/0324319).
Regarding claim 1, Caudili teaches a receiver system, comprising: a processor configured to: receive selection data(P[0056], selectively configured; dynamically configured; also Fig. 2) determine a waveform and a set of data characteristics for receiving information based on the selection data configure the receiver system to receive the information(P[0046], determine the optimal data characteristics for the given transmission and packets may be tuned), wherein configuring the receiver system uses a programmable setting to select broadcast signal selectable parameters corresponding to the waveform and the set of data characteristics andreceive the information, wherein the information is sent using the waveform and the set of data characteristics(P[0046], various parameters associated with one or more of compression, chunk size, packet size, error correction may be tuned to optimize certain metrics; items 806 and 808 in Fig. 8; also claim 9).
Caudili did not teach specifically receiving position and information. However, Lwrence teaches in an analogous art receiving position and information(abstract; receivers in PNT(position, navigation and timing) based on the signals from the LEO satellites; terrestrial based on time and location of the receiver; the data used for the burst transmission is provided in the receiver, which may then replicate the signal; this replica signal assists in PNT based on the signals from the satellites transmitting the burst signals; also Fig. 4) . Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the receiver system receiving position and information in order to have improved navigation.
Caudili in view of Lawrence did not teach specifically data comprising a user group; access a memory storing a configuration associated with the user group; configuration associated with the user group. However, Sorond teaches in an analogous art data comprising a user group; access a memory storing a configuration associated with the user group; configuration associated with the user group(P[0107-0198], customizable environment for applications, services or user groups). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the data comprising a user group; access a memory storing a configuration associated with the user group; configuration associated with the user group in order to have improved efficiency.
Regarding claim 2, Caudili in view of Lawrence teaches the receiver system of claim 1, wherein the programmable setting selects a spreading code(Caudili: item 812 in Fig. 8; Lawrence: abstract, spreading code; also P[0070]).
Regarding claim 16, Lawrence teaches the receiver system of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to establish an initial contact with a satellite system using an other waveform and an other set of data characteristics(P[0102, 0085, 0060, 0048], assistance data may be used for initial determination; P[0048], ephemeris of the satellite may be used to initially set the time and position…for searching for time and position from the signals from the satellite).
Regarding claim 18, Lawrence teaches the e receiver system of claim 1, wherein receiving position and time information comprises receiving pseudo-ranging information from one or more satellites(P[0054], pseudo-ranges from multiple satellites).
Claims 19-20 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caudili et al. (hereinafter Caudili)(US 2017/0366252) in view of Lawrence et al. (hereinafter Lawrence) (US 2023/0204792)k Sorond et al. (hereinafter Sorond)(US 2025/0324319) and Judd(hereinafter Judd)(US 10884132).
Regarding claim 3, Caudili in view of Lawrence and Sorond teaches all the particulars of the claim except wherein the programmable setting selects a chip rate. However, Judd teaches in an analogous art wherein the programmable setting selects a chip rate(Caudili: item 812 in Fig. 8 ; Judd: col. 8, lines 5-30; coding lengths and chipping rates).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the programmable setting selects chip rate in order to have improved efficiency.
Regarding claim 4, Caudili in view of Lawrence teaches all the particulars of the claim except wherein the programmable setting selects a coding length. However, Judd teaches in an analogous art wherein the programmable setting selects a coding length(Caudili: item 812 in Fig. 8; Judd: col. 8, lines 5-30; coding lengths and chipping rates).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the programmable setting selects a coding length in order to have improved efficiency.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caudili et al. (hereinafter Caudili)(US 2017/0366252) in view of Lawrence et al. (hereinafter Lawrence) (US 2023/0204792), Sorond et al. (hereinafter Sorond)(US 2025/0324319) and Cai(hereinafter Cai)(CN 107505832 A).
Regarding claim 5, Caudili in view of Lawrence and Sorond teaches all the particulars of the claim except wherein the programmable setting selects a waveform jitter. However, Cai teaches in an analogous art wherein the programmable setting selects a waveform jitter (Caudili: item 812 in Fig. 8; Cai: abstract; PNT service; jitter).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the system wherein the programmable setting selects a waveform jitter in order to have improved efficiency.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caudili et al. (hereinafter Caudili)(US 2017/0366252) in view of Lawrence et al. (hereinafter Lawrence) (US 2023/0204792), Sorond et al. (hereinafter Sorond)(US 2025/0324319) and Matsumori et al.(hereinafter Matsumori)(US 11677469).
Regarding claim 6, Caudili in view of Lawrence and Sorond teaches all the particulars of the claim except wherein the programmable setting selects a polarization state. However, Matsumori teaches in an analogous art wherein the programmable setting selects a polarization state(Caudili: item 812 in Fig. 8; Matsumor: abstract; PNT system; polarization).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention wherein the programmable setting selects a polarization state in order to have improved efficiency.
Claim(s) 8, 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caudili et al. (hereinafter Caudili)(US 2017/0366252) in view of Lawrence et al. (hereinafter Lawrence) (US 2023/0204792), Sorond et al. (hereinafter Sorond)(US 2025/0324319) and Shearer(hereinafter Shearer)(US 2023/0027380).
Regarding claim 8, Caudili in view of Lawrence and Sorond teaches all the particulars of the claim except wherein the programmable setting selects a cryptographic key. However, Shearer teaches in an analogous art wherein the programmable setting selects a cryptographic key(P0011], cryptography PKI, which may not be known by anyone except the owner).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the programmable setting selects a cryptographic key in order to have improved efficiency.
Regarding claim 11, Shearer teaches the receiver system of claim 8, wherein the cryptographic key is a dynamically formed key(P0011], cryptography PKI, which may not be known by anyone except the owner).
Regarding claim 12, Shearer teaches in an analogous art wherein the programmable setting selects a cryptographic key is used for Diffie- Hellman PKJ public-private key encryption
(P[0029], cryptographic keys; public keys private keys).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caudili et al. (hereinafter Caudili)(US 2017/0366252) in view of Lawrence et al. (hereinafter Lawrence) (US 2023/0204792), Sorond et al. (hereinafter Sorond)(US 2025/0324319) and Shearer(hereinafter Shearer)(US 2023/0027380) and Helena et al. (hereinafter Helena)(2013/0051552).
Regarding Claim 9, Caudili in view of Lawrence, Sorond and Shearer teaches all the particulars of the claim except, wherein the cryptographic key is a pre-stored key. However, Helena teaches in an analogous art wherein the cryptographic key is a pre-stored key(abstract). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the cryptographic key is a pre-stored key use in order to have improved efficiency.
Regarding claim 10, Helena teaches the cryptographic key is used for AES -256 encryption(P[0016], AES key).
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caudili et al. (hereinafter Caudili)(US 2017/0366252) in view of Lawrence et al. (hereinafter Lawrence) (US 2023/0204792), Sorond et al. (hereinafter Sorond)(US 2025/0324319) and Parsche(hereinafter Parsche)(US 2020/0326419).
Regarding claim 13, Caudili in view of Lawrence and Sorond teaches all the particulars of the claim except wherein the programmable setting selects an ECC encoding. However, Parsche teaches in an analogous art wherein the programmable setting selects an ECC encoding (P[0056]; RF PNT system; selects FEC channel coding with interleaving). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the system wherein the programmable setting selects an ECC encoding in order to have improved efficiency.
Regarding claim 14, Caudili in view of Lawrence teaches all the particulars of the claim except wherein the programmable setting selects interleaving. However, Parsche teaches in an analogous art wherein the programmable setting selects interleaving (P[0056]; RF PNT system; selects FEC channel coding with interleaving). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the system wherein the programmable setting selects interleaving in order to have improved efficiency.
Claim(s) 15, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caudili et al. (hereinafter Caudili)(US 2017/0366252) in view of Lawrence et al. (hereinafter Lawrence) (US 2023/0204792), Sorond et al. (hereinafter Sorond)(US 2025/0324319) and Gick(hereinafter Gick)(US 2022/0350032).
Regarding Claim 15, Caudili in view of Lawrence and Sorond teaches all the particulars of the claim except wherein the set of data characteristics is based at least in part on a user group. However, Gick teaches in an analogous art wherein the set of data characteristics is based at least in part on a user group(P[0008], optimize PNT operations; transmission of NB signal; keys ; ephemeris data; seed values for code generators; messages to all users….meant for groups of users). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the set of data characteristics is based at least in part on a user group in order to have improved efficiency.
Regarding Claim 17, Caudili in view of Lawrence and Sorond teaches all the particulars of the claim except wherein the other waveform or the other set of data characteristics is based at least in part on a user group. However, Gick teaches in an analogous art wherein the other waveform or the other set of data characteristics is based at least in part on a user group (P[0008], optimize PNT operations; transmission of NB signal; keys ; ephemeris data; seed values for code generators; messages to all users….meant for groups of users). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the other waveform or the other set of data characteristics is based at least in part on a user group in order to have improved efficiency.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUTHUSWAMY GANAPATHY MANOHARAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5515. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30am-3:00pm.
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, Alison T Slater can be reached at 571-270-0375. 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.
/MUTHUSWAMY G MANOHARAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights