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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 22, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
PLEASE NOTE: Examiner reviewed Applicants’ disclosure in order to find subject matter that would place claims in condition for allowance but was unsuccessful. Additionally, Applicants’ representatives and examiner discussed claim limitations wherein the satellite derives timing information from optical pulses. Examiner conducted a further search and found the following prior art: Bushnell (US 2018/0317184) Sections 0014, 0019 teaches a satellite system wherein the timing information or clock information is derived from optical pulses and Puzey (US 2003/0108280) Figure 5B, Sections 0028, 0029, 0040 teaches a satellite receiving optical pulses on the uplink from a ground transmitter.
Cobb further teaches a system comprising a satellite of a constellation of satellites, wherein the satellite comprises: a receiver (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction thus there will be a receiver, constellation (See Section 0052)); 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 from a ground station (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction from ground station/ground segment); 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 cause updating timing information for the constellation of satellites, comprising propagating the satellite time from the satellite to one or more other satellites in the constellation using the transmitter (Section 0052, timing correction is passed to other satellites throughout the constellation via crosslinks).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 – 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the communication link" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 4 – 13, which depend from Claim 3, are rejected for the same reasons set forth above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 16 – 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cobb et al. (US 2023/0194727).
Regarding Claim 1, Cobb further teaches a system comprising a satellite of a constellation of satellites, wherein the satellite comprises: a receiver (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction thus there will be a receiver, constellation (See Section 0052)); 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 from a ground station (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction from ground station/ground segment); 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 cause updating timing information for the constellation of satellites, comprising propagating the satellite time from the satellite to one or more other satellites in the constellation using the transmitter (Section 0052, timing correction is passed to other satellites throughout the constellation via crosslinks).
Regarding Claim 17, Cobb teaches a method, comprising: receiving data, using a receiver of a satellite of a constellation of satellites, wherein the data is received from a ground station (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction from ground station/ground segment, constellation (See Section 0052)); 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 causing updating timing information for the constellation of satellites, comprising propagating the satellite time from the satellite to one or more other satellites in the constellation using a transmitter of the satellite (Section 0052, timing correction is passed to other satellites throughout the constellation via crosslinks).
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 of a constellation of satellites, wherein the data is received from a ground station (Figure 1, Section 0052, satellite receives timing correction, from ground station/ground segment, constellation (See Section 0052), 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 causing updating timing information for the constellation of satellites, comprising propagating the satellite time from the satellite to one or more other satellites in the constellation using a transmitter of the satellite (Section 0052, timing correction is passed to other satellites throughout the constellation via crosslinks).
Regarding Claim 16, Cobb teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 1. Cobb further teaches wherein propagating the satellite time uses an optical link (Section 0028, laser ranging forms the crosslink, laser comprises optical characteristics).
Regarding Claim 19, Cobb 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) 2 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 2, Cobb teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 1. Cobb does not teach acquiring a communication link.
Wehner, which also teaches the use of satellites, teaches acquiring 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.
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 Wu (US 7,260,026).
Regarding Claim 3, Cobb teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 1.
Cobb does not teach receiving a time-of-day using a communication link.
Wu, which also teaches use of satellites, teaches receiving a time-of-day using a communication link (Col. 8 lines 58 – 60, time-of-day generator produces a time-of-day information for transmission, which is reads on a 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 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 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 in view of Wu teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 3. Cobb in view of Wu 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 in view of Wu 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 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 in view of Wu teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 3. Cobb in view of Wu 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 in view of Wu with the above features of Dowla for the purpose of jamming undesired signals as taught by Dowla.
Regarding Claim 6, Cobb in view of Wu in view of Dowla teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 5. Cobb in view of Wu 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 in view of Wu with the above features of Dowla for the purpose of jamming undesired signals as taught by Dowla.
Regarding Claim 7, Cobb in view of Wu in view of Dowla teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 5. Cobb in view of Wu 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 in view of Wu with the above features of Dowla for the purpose of jamming undesired signals as taught by Dowla.
Regarding Claim 8, Cobb in view of Wu teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 5. Cobb in view of Wu 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 in view of Wu with the above features of Dowla for the purpose of jamming undesired signals as taught by Dowla.
Regarding Claim 9, Cobb in view of Wu teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 8. Cobb in view of Wu 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 in view of Wu 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 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 in view of Wu in view of Dowla 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 in view of Wu in view of Dowla 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 in view of Wu in view of Dowla 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 in view of Wu in view of Dowla in view of Meador teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claim 10. Cobb in view of Wu in view of Dowla 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 in view of Wu in view of Dowla 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 in view of Wu in view of Dowla in view of Meador 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 in view of Wu in view of Dowla in view of Meador 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
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
May 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights