Ex Parte Robbins

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Nov 6, 2009

11169054 (B.P.A.I. Nov. 6, 2009)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________________

Ex parte JAMES E. ROBBINS
____________________

Appeal 2009-004320
Application 11/169,054
Technology Center 3600
____________________

Decided: November 6, 2009
____________________

Before JENNIFER D. BAHR, KEN B. BARRETT, and
FRED A. SILVERBERG, Administrative Patent Judges.

SILVERBERG, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
James E. Robbins (Appellant) seeks our review under 35 U.S.C. § 134
of the final rejection of claims 1-17. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C.
§ 6(b) (2002).

Appeal 2009-004320
Application 11/169,054

2
SUMMARY OF DECISION
We REVERSE.

THE INVENTION
The Appellant’s claimed invention is directed to a network of Global
Positioning System (GPS) stations to enhance the accuracy of location
information over a wide area (Spec. 1:3-8).
Claim 1, reproduced below, is representative of the subject matter on
appeal.
1. A method of providing GPS pseudorange
correction information for navigation over a
selected geographic region of arbitrary size, the
method comprising:
receiving GPS signals from at least three
GPS satellites at each of three or more spaced
apart GPS reference stations whose location
coordinates in a selected coordinate system are
known, within the selected geographic region,
where each reference station transmits GPS
information signals, including reformation
obtained from the GPS signals received;
receiving the GPS information signals
transmitted by each reference station at a central
station, obtaining ephemeris information for each
of the satellites, estimating a satellite location error
vector for each satellite from the information
obtained from the GPS signals and from the
ephemeris information, determining for each
satellite a component of range error at a selected
location due to satellite location error, and
making available the component of range
error for each satellite to compensate for satellite
location error when computing a position estimate
Appeal 2009-004320
Application 11/169,054

3
from GPS signals received at a mobile station
location.

THE REJECTION
The Examiner relies upon the following as evidence of
unpatentability:
Mueller US 5,323,322 Jun. 21, 1994

The following rejection by the Examiner is before us for review:
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being
anticipated by Mueller.

ISSUE
The issue before us is whether the Examiner erred in finding that
Mueller describes “estimating a satellite location error vector for each
satellite from the information obtained from the GPS signals and from the
ephemeris information” as called for in independent claim 1 (Reply Br. 6;
App. Br. 11).

ANALYSIS
Claim 1 calls for, inter alia, the step of “estimating a satellite location
error vector for each satellite from the information obtained from the GPS
signals and from the ephemeris information”.
Appellant contends that Mueller does not describe the step of
estimating a satellite location error vector called for in claim 1 (Reply Br. 6;
App. Br. 11).
Appeal 2009-004320
Application 11/169,054

4
The Examiner found that “[a]s interpreted broadly from applicant’s
specification and drawings, the prior art anticipates the limitations because
the prior art shows ephemerides, satellite location error vector and other
information from satellite signals received at the CPF.” (Ans. 9). In support
of the finding, the Examiner references in Mueller, column 4, line 65-
column 5, line 2 and column 6, lines 29-55; and column 30, lines 17-19
(Ans. 4).
We find that the Examiner has not shown that Mueller explicitly
describes the step of estimating a satellite location error vector as called for
in claim 1. Further, upon review of the sections of Mueller referenced by
the Examiner, we cannot locate any description of estimating a satellite
location error vector as called for in claim 1.
Accordingly, Mueller does not anticipate claim 1. For the same
reasons, Mueller does not anticipate claims 2-17, which depend from claim
1.

CONCLUSION
Appellant has established that the Examiner erred in finding that
Mueller describes “estimating a satellite location error vector for each
satellite from the information obtained from the GPS signals and from the
ephemeris information” as called for in independent claim 1.

DECISION
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1-17 is reversed.

REVERSED

Appeal 2009-004320
Application 11/169,054

5

mls

BRUCE D. RITER
101 FIRST STREET
PMB 208
LOS ALTOS, CA 94022