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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicants’ remarks, filed February 9, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 17, 18 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of newly cited prior art Wehner (6,142,423).
Cobb further teaches receive data at a satellite; data using the receiver, wherein the data comprises timing information received using a time transfer link (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction, Applicants’ have provided no further detail as to what a time transfer link is thus the timing correction signal of Cobb, upon applying the broadest reasonable interpretation, reads on the claimed time transfer link).
Wehner teaches receiving satellite position information received using a communication link (Col. 6 lines 18 – 23, lines 53 – 55, ephemeris data, which provides position information, can received on the uplink by the satellite, which is the communication link).
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, 14 – 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cobb et al. (US 2023/0194727) in view of Wehner (6,142,423)
Regarding Claim 1, Cobb teaches a system comprising a satellite, wherein the satellite comprises: a receiver (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction thus there will be a receiver); a transmitter (Figure 1, Section 0052, the satellite can communicate with other satellites via crosslinks thus there will be a transmitter to facilitate said crosslinks); and a processor configured to: receive data using the receiver, wherein the data comprises timing information received using a time transfer link (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction, Applicants’ have provided no further detail as to what a time transfer link is thus the timing correction signal of Cobb, upon applying the broadest reasonable interpretation, reads on the claimed time transfer link, typical satellites comprise processors to conduct the functions of said satellites); determine a satellite time for the satellite based at least in part on the data (Section 0052, satellite’s timing or clock is adjusted based on the received timing correction); adjust a local time reference of the satellite (Section 0052, satellite’s timing or clock is adjusted based on the received timing correction); and provide the satellite time from the satellite to another satellite in a constellation using the transmitter (Section 0052, timing correction is passed to other satellites via crosslinks).
Cobb does not teach satellite position information received using a communication link.
Wehner, which also teaches the use of satellites, teaches receiving satellite position information received using a communication link (Col. 6 lines 18 – 23, lines 53 – 55, ephemeris data, which provides position information, can received on the uplink by the satellite, which is the communication link).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb with the above features of Wehner for the purpose of improving satellite attitude and ephemeris determination as taught by Wehner.
Regarding Claim 17, Cobb teaches a method, comprising: receiving data, using a receiver of a satellite, wherein the data comprises timing information received using a time transfer link (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction, Applicants’ have provided no further detail as to what a time transfer link is thus the timing correction signal of Cobb, upon applying the broadest reasonable interpretation, reads on the claimed time transfer link); determining, using a processor of the satellite, a satellite time for the satellite based at least in part on the data (Section 0052, satellite’s timing or clock is adjusted based on the received timing correction, typical satellites comprise processors to conduct the functions of said satellites); adjusting a local time reference of the satellite (Section 0052, satellite’s timing or clock is adjusted based on the received timing correction); and providing the satellite time from the satellite to another satellite in a constellation using a transmitter of the satellite (Section 0052, timing correction is passed to other satellites via crosslinks thus there will be a transmitter that facilitates said crosslinks).
Cobb does not teach satellite position information received using a communication link.
Wehner, which also teaches the use of satellites, teaches receiving satellite position information received using a communication link (Col. 6 lines 18 – 23, lines 53 – 55, ephemeris data, which provides position information, can received on the uplink by the satellite, which is the communication link).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb with the above features of Wehner for the purpose of improving satellite attitude and ephemeris determination as taught by Wehner.
Regarding Claim 18, Cobb teaches a computer program product embodied in a non-transitory computer readable medium and comprising computer instructions for: receiving data, using a receiver of a satellite, wherein the data comprises timing information received using a time transfer link (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction, Applicants’ have provided no further detail as to what a time transfer link is thus the timing correction signal of Cobb, upon applying the broadest reasonable interpretation, reads on the claimed time transfer link, typical satellites comprise processors to conduct the functions of said satellites, said processors run executable code stored in memory); determining, using a processor of the satellite, a satellite time for the satellite based at least in part on the data (Section 0052, satellite’s timing or clock is adjusted based on the received timing correction); adjusting a local time reference of the satellite (Section 0052, satellite’s timing or clock is adjusted based on the received timing correction); and providing the satellite time from the satellite to another satellite in a constellation using a transmitter of the satellite (Section 0052, timing correction is passed to other satellites via crosslinks thus there will be a transmitter that facilitates said crosslinks).
Cobb does not teach satellite position information received using a communication link.
Wehner, which also teaches the use of satellites, teaches receiving satellite position information received using a communication link (Col. 6 lines 18 – 23, lines 53 – 55, ephemeris data, which provides position information, can received on the uplink by the satellite, which is the communication link).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb with the above features of Wehner for the purpose of improving satellite attitude and ephemeris determination as taught by Wehner.
Regarding Claim 2, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 1. Cobb further teaches wherein receiving the data comprises acquiring the time transfer link (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite acquires the timing correction signal).
Cobb does not teach acquiring the communication link.
Wehner, which also teaches the use of satellites, teaches acquiring the communication link (Col. 6 lines 18 – 23, lines 53 – 55, ephemeris data, which provides position information, can received on the uplink by the satellite, which is the communication link).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb with the above features of Wehner for the purpose of improving satellite attitude and ephemeris determination as taught by Wehner.
Regarding Claim 14, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 1. Cobb further teaches wherein receiving the data at the satellite is from a ground station (Section 0052, uplink facility).
Regarding Claim 15, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 1. Cobb further teaches wherein receiving the data at the satellite is from the other satellite (Section 0052 timing correction can be distributed via crosslinks).
Regarding Claim 16, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 1. Cobb further teaches wherein providing the satellite time uses an optical link (Section 0028, laser ranging forms the crosslink, laser comprises optical characteristics).
Regarding Claim 19, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 1. Cobb further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to determine one or more of the following: an update for clocks, an update for a distance between satellites, inter-satellite distances/positions, advanced satellite motion models, an update for orbit elements, and an update for a satellite almanac (Section 0052, the clocks are updated via the timing correction information).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cobb et al. (US 2023/0194727) in view of Wehner (6,142,423), as applied to Claim 1 set forth above, and further in view of Wu (US 7,260,026).
Regarding Claim 3, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 2. Cobb further teaches wherein the receiving data comprises time correction data using the time transfer link (Section 0052).
Cobb combination does not teach receiving the data comprises receiving a time-of-day using the time transfer link.
Wu, which also teaches use of satellites, teaches receiving a time-of-day using the time transfer link (Col. 8 lines 58 – 60, time-of-day generator produces a time-of-day information for transmission, which is reads on a time transfer link).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb combination with the above features of Wu for the purpose of synchronizing a satellite with a moveable platform thus providing reliable communication between both the satellite and the moveable platform as taught by Wu.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cobb et al. (US 2023/0194727) in view of Wehner (6,142,423) in view of Wu (US 7,260,026), as applied to Claim 3 set forth above, and further in view of Agrawala et al. (US 2005/0020275)
Regarding Claim 4, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 3. Cobb combination does not teach wherein the time-of-day has a resolution of 1 ps or less and an 1s accuracy of 100 ps or less.
Agrawala, which also teaches time-of-day information, teaches wherein the time-of-day has a resolution of 1 ps or less and an 1s accuracy of 100 ps or less (Section 0045, nanosecond resolution which renders nanosecond accuracy, which is less than picoseconds (ps)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of the Cobb combination with the above features of Agrawala for the purpose of determining the precise location of a collection of nodes in a three-dimensional space as taught by Agrawala.
Claim(s) 5 – 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cobb et al. (US 2023/0194727) in view of Wehner (6,142,423) in view of Wu (US 7,260,026), as applied to Claim 3 set forth above, and further in view of Dowla et al. (US 2010/0309951)
Regarding Claim 5, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 3. Cobb combination does not teach wherein receiving the time-of-day comprises receiving a first short pulse or first high bandwidth signal.
Dowla, which also teaches satellite communications, teaches receiving a first short pulse or first high bandwidth signal (Section 0040, google search using the term “uwb bandwidth” indicates UWB (ultra-wideband) has a pulse width less than 2ns (nanoseconds) and bandwidth greater than 500 MHz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb combination with the above features of Dowla for the purpose of jamming undesired signals as taught by Dowla.
Regarding Claim 6, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 5. Cobb combination does not teach wherein the short pulse is at most 100 ps.
Dowla, which also teaches satellite communications, teaches wherein the short pulse is at most 100 ps (Section 0040, google search using the term “uwb bandwidth” indicates UWB (ultra-wideband) has a pulse width less than 2ns (nanoseconds).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb combination with the above features of Dowla for the purpose of jamming undesired signals as taught by Dowla.
Regarding Claim 7, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 5. Cobb combination does not teach wherein the high bandwidth signal is at least 10 GHz.
Dowla, which also teaches satellite communications, teaches wherein the high bandwidth signal is at least 10 GHz (Section 0040, google search using the term “uwb bandwidth” indicates UWB (ultra-wideband) has a pulse width less than 2ns (nanoseconds) and bandwidth greater than 500 MHz, which would encompass at least 10 GHz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb combination with the above features of Dowla for the purpose of jamming undesired signals as taught by Dowla.
Regarding Claim 8, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 5. Cobb combination does not teach wherein receiving the time-of-day comprises transmitting a second short pulse or second high bandwidth signal after a precise time delay from a time of arrival of the first short pulse or the first high bandwidth signal.
Dowla, which also teaches satellite communications, teaches transmitting a second short pulse or second high bandwidth signal after a precise time delay from a time of arrival of the first short pulse or the first high bandwidth signal (Figures 1, 2, Section 0032, multiple pulses will have a delay (Dsubn) between pulses).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb combination with the above features of Dowla for the purpose of jamming undesired signals as taught by Dowla.
Regarding Claim 9, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 8. Cobb combination does not teach wherein the precise time delay comprises a time delay with a precision of 100 ps or less.
Dowla, which also teaches satellite communications, teaches wherein the precise time delay comprises a time delay with a precision of 100 ps or less (Figures 1, 2, Section 0032, multiple pulses will have a delay (Dsubn) between pulses, a google search of the term “uwb delay between pulses” indicates that delay between pulses can be as short as a fraction of a nanosecond (ns)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb combination with the above features of Dowla for the purpose of jamming undesired signals as taught by Dowla.
Claim(s) 10 – 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cobb et al. (US 2023/0194727) in view of Wehner (6,142,423) in view of Wu (US 7,260,026) in view of Dowla et al. (US 2010/0309951), as applied to Claim 8 set forth above, and further in view of Meador et al. (US 2014/0009340)
Regarding Claim 10, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 8. Cobb further teaches determining a propagation time (Section 0074, timing correction of satellites based on propagation of the timing thus there will be a propagation time).
Cobb combination does not teach determining a propagation time based on the second short pulse or the second high bandwidth signal.
Meador, which also teaches UWB, teaches determining a propagation time based on a short pulse (Section 0094).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb combination with the above features of Meador for the purpose of providing an improved ranging techniques that use power more effectively as taught by Meador.
Regarding Claim 11, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 10. Cobb combination does not teach wherein the propagation time is determined with an accuracy of 100 ps or less.
Meador, which also teaches UWB, teaches wherein the propagation time is determined with an accuracy of 100 ps or less (Section 0103, sub-nanosecond ranging accuracy, which is less than picoseconds (ps)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Cobb combination with the above features of Meador for the purpose of providing an improved ranging techniques that use power more effectively as taught by Meador.
Regarding Claim 12, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 10. Cobb further teaches wherein determining the satellite time is based on the propagation time (Section 0074, timing correction of satellites based on propagation of the timing thus there will be a propagation time).
Regarding Claim 13, Cobb combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 12. Cobb further teaches wherein the satellite time is adjusted for the other satellite based on the propagation time and transmitted to the other satellite (Section 0074, timing correction of other satellites occur based on propagation timing to the other satellites).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAYMOND S DEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7877. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:00-2:30, EST.
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, Anthony S Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/RAYMOND S DEAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645 Raymond S. Dean
February 23, 2026