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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/25/2025 has been entered.
Claims 1-2, 7-8, and 13-14 are amended.
Claims 1-24 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 7-9, 13-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lucken (US 20180276987 A1) in view of Derom (US 20160044394 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lucken [Abstract; Figs 1-6]discloses an ultrasonic transducer configured to emit an ultrasonic pulse and receive returned signals corresponding to the emitted ultrasonic pulse and associated with a distance range of interest in a field of view of the ultrasonic transducer[Fig 4-#401;];
and a processor coupled with the ultrasonic transducer and configured to[#11 in Fig 1]:
remove a low frequency component from the returned signals ..... to achieve modified returned signals for the distance range of interest[0052, 0053, 0125 teach use of band pass filters to get only the signals of interest];
select a first subset of the modified returned signals corresponding to a first subrange from a plurality of subranges of the distance range of interest with respect to the emitted ultrasonic pulse [0073 of Lucken has consecutive time periods of identical length with respect to ultrasonic pulses meaning it is subdivided the data into various blocks namely subranges with respect to ultrasonic pulses. Also Fig 7 Xaxis corresponds to time which also corresponds to distance and range. Amplitude corresponding to specific distance shows normalized variation for that subrange; Also 403 in Fig 4; #64-#66 in Fig 6 has dividing the data into various blocks namely subranges]
calculate, from the modified returned signals, a variation in amplitude of the modified returned signals for the first subset of the modified returned signals[0085, 0091-0092 has use of change in amplitude for finding a moving object];
determine a quantification of the variation in amplitude[Claim 1, Fig 7 has normalized amplitude is indication of quantifying variation of amplitude; 0158 has formula for normalization] for the first subset of the modified returned signals,[ 0073 of Lucken has consecutive time periods of identical length with respect to ultrasonic pulses meaning it is subdivided the data into various blocks namely subranges with respect to ultrasonic pulses. Also Fig 7 Xaxis corresponds to time which also corresponds to distance and range. Amplitude corresponding to specific distance shows normalized variation for that subrange; Also 403 in Fig 4; #64-#66 in Fig 6 has dividing the data into various blocks namely subranges 0085, 0091-0092 has use of change in amplitude for finding a moving object];
employ the quantification to correct for changes in the first subset of the modified returned signals to achieve first normalized sensor data for the first subrange, wherein the first normalized sensor data is sensitive to occurrence of change over time in the first subrange of the plurality of subranges of the distance range of interest with respect to the emitted ultrasonic pulse [ Abstract; 0162 - 0164; Claim 1; Fig 4- #404- #406 has normalization of data in signal blocks to find moving object]
and detect a moving object in the first subrange using the first normalized sensor data[Abstract; Claim 1; Fig 4- #404- #406 ; 0162-0164 has normalization of data in signal blocks to find moving objects].
Lucken does not explicitly teach using high pass filtering [Though a person of ordinary skill would understand the use of high pass filtering vs band pass filtering to select the desired ranges].....
Derom teaches remove a low frequency component from the returned signals using high pass filtering to achieve modified returned signals for the distance range of interest[Fig 6; 0047- 0048 has high pass filtering to get the frequency of interest above certain frequencies]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the ultrasonic device in Lucken with the high pass filtering of Derom to remove low frequency component and only get the frequencies of interest.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use high pass filtering to only remove low frequency components, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Inre Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 7, Lucken[Abstract; Figs 1-6] discloses an ultrasonic transducer configured to emit an ultrasonic pulse and receive returned signals corresponding to the emitted ultrasonic pulse and associated with a distance range of interest in a field of view of the ultrasonic transducer[Fig 4-#40 1];
and a sensor processor coupled with the ultrasonic transducer and configured to[#11 in Fig 1]
remove a low frequency component ..... from the returned signals to achieve modified returned signals for the distance range of interest{0052, 0053, 0125 teach use of band pass filters to get only the signals of interest];
select a first subset of the modified returned signals corresponding to a first subrange from a plurality of subranges of the distance range of interest with respect to the emitted ultrasonic pulse [0073 of Lucken has consecutive time periods of identical length with respect to ultrasonic pulses meaning it is subdivided the data into various blocks namely subranges with respect to ultrasonic pulses. Also Fig 7 Xaxis corresponds to time which also corresponds to distance and range. Amplitude corresponding to specific distance shows normalized variation for that subrange; Also 403 in Fig 4; #64-#66 in Fig 6 has dividing the data into various blocks namely subranges]
calculate, from the modified returned signals, a variation in amplitude of the modified returned signals for the first subset of the modified returned signals[0085, 0091-0092 has use of change in amplitude for finding a moving object];
determine a quantification of the variation in amplitude[Claim 1, Fig 7 has normalized amplitude is indication of quantifying variation of amplitude; 0158 has formula for normalization] for the first subset of the modified returned signals,[ 0073 of Lucken has consecutive time periods of identical length with respect to ultrasonic pulses meaning it is subdivided the data into various blocks namely subranges with respect to ultrasonic pulses. Also Fig 7 Xaxis corresponds to time which also corresponds to distance and range. Amplitude corresponding to specific distance shows normalized variation for that subrange; Also 403 in Fig 4; #64-#66 in Fig 6 has dividing the data into various blocks namely subranges 0085, 0091-0092 has use of change in amplitude for finding a moving object];
employ the quantification to correct for changes in the first subset of the modified returned signals to achieve first normalized sensor data for the first subrange, wherein the first normalized sensor data is sensitive to occurrence of change over time in the first subrange of the plurality of subranges of the distance range of interest with respect to the emitted ultrasonic pulse [ Abstract; 0162 - 0164; Claim 1; Fig 4- #404- #406 has normalization of data in signal blocks to find moving object]
and detect a moving object in the first subrange using the first normalized sensor data[Abstract; Claim 1; Fig 4- #404- #406 ; 0162-0164 has normalization of data in signal blocks to find moving objects].
Lucken does not explicitly teach using high pass filtering [Though a person of ordinary skill would understand the use of high pass filtering vs band pass filtering to select the desired ranges]..... wherein the first subrange is one of a plurality of subranges of the distance range with respect to the emitted ultrasonic pulse[0073 has consecutive time periods of identical length with respect to ultrasonic pulses though each is not explicitly subdivided]
Derom teaches remove a low frequency component from the returned signals using high pass filtering to achieve modified returned signals for the distance range of interest[Fig 6; 0047- 0048 has high pass filtering to get the frequency of interest above certain frequencies]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the ultrasonic device in Lucken with the high pass filtering of Derom to remove low frequency component and only get the frequencies of interest.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use high pass filtering to only remove low frequency components, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Inre Aller, 105 USPQ 233.)
Regarding claim 13, Lucken [Abstract; Figs 1-6]discloses accessing, by a processor coupled with an ultrasonic transducer, returned signals received by the ultrasonic transducer and corresponding to a pulse emitted by the ultrasonic transducer, wherein the returned signals are associated with a distance range of interest in a field of view of the ultrasonic transducer [#11 in Fig 1 is a processor for carrying out #404 in Fig 4];
removing, by the processor, a low frequency component from the returned signals ..... to achieve modified returned signals for the distance range of interest {0052, 0053, 0125 teach use of band pass filters to get only the signals of interest];
calculating, by the processor from the modified returned signals, a variation in amplitude of the modified returned signals[0085, 0091-0092 has use of change in amplitude for finding a moving object];
selecting a first subset of the modified returned signals corresponding to a first subrange from a plurality of subranges of the distance range of interest with respect to the emitted ultrasonic pulse [0073 of Lucken has consecutive time periods of identical length with respect to ultrasonic pulses meaning it is subdivided the data into various blocks namely subranges with respect to ultrasonic pulses. Also Fig 7 Xaxis corresponds to time which also corresponds to distance and range. Amplitude corresponding to specific distance shows normalized variation for that subrange; Also 403 in Fig 4; #64-#66 in Fig 6 has dividing the data into various blocks namely subranges]
calculating, from the modified returned signals, a variation in amplitude of the modified returned signals for the first subset of the modified returned signals[0085, 0091-0092 has use of change in amplitude for finding a moving object];
determining a quantification of the variation in amplitude[Claim 1, Fig 7 has normalized amplitude is indication of quantifying variation of amplitude; 0158 has formula for normalization] for the first subset of the modified returned signals,[0073 of Lucken has consecutive time periods of identical length with respect to ultrasonic pulses meaning it is subdivided the data into various blocks namely subranges with respect to ultrasonic pulses. Also Fig 7 Xaxis corresponds to time which also corresponds to distance and range. Amplitude corresponding to specific distance shows normalized variation for that subrange; Also 403 in Fig 4; #64-#66 in Fig 6 has dividing the data into various blocks namely subranges 0085, 0091-0092 has use of change in amplitude for finding a moving object];
employing the quantification to correct for changes in the first subset of the modified returned signals to achieve first normalized sensor data for the first subrange, wherein the first normalized sensor data is sensitive to occurrence of change over time in the first subrange of the plurality of subranges of the distance range of interest with respect to the emitted ultrasonic pulse [ Abstract; 0162 - 0164; Claim 1; Fig 4- #404- #406 has normalization of data in signal blocks to find moving object]
and detecting, by the processor, the moving object in the first subrange using the first normalized sensor data[Abstract; Claim 1; Fig 4- #404- #406 ; 0162-0164 has normalization of data in signal blocks to find moving object].
Lucken does not explicitly teach using high pass filtering [Though a person of ordinary skill would understand the use of high pass filtering vs band pass filtering to select the desired ranges] ..... wherein the first subrange is one of a plurality of subranges of the distance range with respect to the emitted ultrasonic pulse[0073 has consecutive time periods of identical length with respect to ultrasonic pulses though each is not explicitly subdivided]
Derom teaches remove a low frequency component from the returned signals using high pass filtering to achieve modified returned signals for the distance range of interest[Fig 6; 0047- 0048 has high pass filtering to get the frequency of interest above certain frequencies]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the ultrasonic device in Lucken with the high pass filtering of Derom to remove low frequency component and only get the frequencies of interest.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use high pass filtering to only remove low frequency components, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claims 2, 8 and 14, Lucken, as modified, select a second first subset of the modified returned signals corresponding to a second subrange from a plurality of subranges of the distance range of interest with respect to the emitted ultrasonic pulse [0073 of Lucken has consecutive time periods of identical length with respect to ultrasonic pulses meaning it is subdivided the data into various blocks namely subranges with respect to ultrasonic pulses. Also Fig 7 Xaxis corresponds to time which also corresponds to distance and range. Amplitude corresponding to specific distance shows normalized variation for that subrange; Also 403 in Fig 4; #64-#66 in Fig 6 has dividing the data into various blocks namely subranges]
determine a quantification of the variation in amplitude for the second subset of the modified returned signals associated with the second subrange of the distance range of interest[0085, 0091-0092 has use of change in amplitude for finding a moving object; #403 in Fig 4; #64-#66 in Fig 6 has dividing the data into various blocks namely subranges];
and employ the quantification to correct for changes in the second subset of the modified returned signals to achieve second normalized sensor data for the second subrange of the plurality of subranges of the distance range of interest with respect to the emitted ultrasonic pulse[ Abstract; 0162 - 0164; Claim 1; Fig 4- #404- #406 has normalization of data in signal blocks to find moving object].
Regarding claims 3, 9 and 15, Lucken, as modified, teaches wherein the processor configured to detect the moving object in the first subrange using the first normalized sensor data further comprises the processor being configured to: detect the moving object in one of the first subrange using the first normalized sensor data and the second subrange using the second normalized sensor data.[Abstract; 0136, 0155, 0162-0164; Claim 1; Fig 4- #404- #406 has normalization of data in signal blocks to find moving object; See also #54 and #55 in Fig 5 and #67 and #68 in Fig 6].
Regarding claim 18, Lucken, as modified, teaches determining, by the processor, a variance of the modified returned signals. [0062, 0067, 0158; Claim 4, 17 all teach determining signal variance].
Regarding claim 19, Lucken teaches comparing, by the processor, the variance with a previously determined variance, and if the variance is larger than the previously determined variance, increase the variance by a predetermined amount.[0062, 0067, 0158; Claim 4, 17 all teach determining signal variance]
Derom teaches ..... increasing the variance [0012, 0051-0055, Fig 8; Claim 15 has automatic dynamic adaptive threshold calculation]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the ultrasonic device in Lucken with the adaptive thresholds of Derom automatically adapt to changes in the output.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use a threshold monitoring on the variance to respond to changes, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Inre Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 20, Lucken, as modified, teaches wherein the employing, by the processor, the quantification to correct for changes in the first subset of the modified returned signals to achieve first normalized sensor data for the first subrange, wherein the first normalized sensor data is sensitive to occurrence of change in the first subrange comprises Abstract; 0162 - 0164; Claim 1; Fig 4- #404- #406 has normalization of data in signal blocks to find moving object]: normalizing, by the processor, the modified returned signals using the variance of the modified returned signals to obtain the first normalized sensor data for the first subrange. [0062, 0067, 158; Claim 4, 17 all disclose determining signal variance and its use in normalizing the data point].
Claims 4, 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lucken (US 20180276987 A1) in view of Derom (US 20160044394 A1) as applied to claims 1, 7 and 13 above, and further in view of of Rawashdeh (US 20200320339 A1).
Regarding claim 4, 10 and 16, Lucken implies, but does not explicitly teach estimate a minimum distance and a maximum distance of the from the ultrasonic transducer of the moving object. [0173-178 teaches determining an object based on the cluster of signals that are together and determining a maximum amplitude and minimum amplitude meaning the cluster distance uses an average]
Rawashdeh teaches estimate a minimum distance and a maximum distance of the from the ultrasonic transducer of the moving object. [0029 has the distance between clusters being the average distance meaning it estimates the maximum and minimum distances]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use known methods to estimate the maximum and minimum distances in order to calculate average distances to an object in order have different ways to determine distance.
Claims 5, 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lucken (US 20180276987 A1) in view of Derom (US 20160044394 A1) as applied to claims and 1,7, and 13 above, and further in view of w of Halder (US 20210263152 Al).
Regarding claims 5, 11 and 17, Lucken does not explicitly teach determine a confidence of detection associated with the detection of the moving object.
Halder teaches determine a confidence of detection associated with the detection of the moving object. [0096 and 0104 teaches outputting the confidence level associated with the object]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to determine confidence in detection of the moving object improve the system’s accuracy.
Claims 6, 12 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lucken (US 20180276987 A1) in view of Derom (US 20160044394 A1) as applied to claims 1, 7 and 13 above, and further in view of Sussman (US 20130286783 Al).
Regarding claim 6, 12 and 21, Lucken does not explicitly teach deteriorate the variation in amplitude over time to by gradually increasing the variation to increase sensitivity to change of the first normalized sensor data. [though 0091-0092 teaches the use of the difference in amplitude and the normalized data to identify moving objects]
Sussman teaches deteriorate the variation in amplitude over time to by gradually increasing the variation to increase sensitivity to change of the first normalized sensor data. [Fig 6-8; 0046- 0051 teaches changing or tracking changes in amplitude to adjust sensitivity and finding moving objects;]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to adjust the amplitude in the system to alter the sensitivity of a sensor. Moreover, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the current to adjust for sensitivity, since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. See, Inre Aller, 105 USPQ 233.)
Claims 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lucken (US 20180276987 A1) in view of Derom (US 20160044394 Al) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Sussman (US 20130286783 Al).
Regarding claim 22, Lucken teaches, comparing, by the processor, a magnitude of the first normalized sensor data ... [0092 has comparison of normalized data with the echo data which could serve as a threshold];
and detecting, by the processor, the moving object when the magnitude of the first normalized sensor data is larger ....[0092 has detection of moving object using the comparison of normalized data with the echo data]
Lucken does not explicitly teach the use of a threshold.
Sussman teaches comparing, by the processor, a magnitude of the first normalized sensor data to a threshold[0040-004 1, 0047-0052 has comparison of processed amplitudes to detect peaks above or below a threshold];
and detecting, by the processor, the moving object when the magnitude of the first normalized sensor data is larger than the threshold. [0040-0041, 0047-0052 has detection of moving objects using thresholds]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the method of Lucken with the threshold of Sussman in order to set thresholds enable peak detection.
Regarding claim 23, Lucken teaches detecting, by the processor the moving object when the magnitude of the first normalized sensor data is larger ..... fora plurality of first normalized sensor data.[ 0092 has comparison of normalized data with the echo data which could serve asa threshold; Lucken also has multiple sensors-002 1]
Lucken does not explicitly teach the use of a threshold.
Sussman teaches detecting, by the processor the moving object when the magnitude of the first normalized sensor data is larger than the threshold for a plurality of first normalized sensor data. [0040-0041, 0047-0052 has comparison of processed amplitudes to detect peaks above or below a threshold]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the method of Lucken with the threshold of Sussman in order to set thresholds enable peak detection for one or many sensors.
Regarding claim 24, Lucken teaches calculating, by the processor, a variance of the first normalized sensor data in the distance range of interest[0062, 0067, 158; Claim 4, 17 all disclose determining signal variance];
and responsive to the variance exceeding ....., detecting, by the processor, the moving object. [0092 has comparison of normalized data with the echo data which could serve as a threshold and has detection of moving object]
Lucken does not explicitly teach the use of a threshold.
Sussman teaches .....and responsive to the variance exceeding a threshold, detecting, by the processor, the moving object. [0040-0041 , 0047-0052 has comparison of processed amplitudes to detect peaks above or below a threshold]
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the method of Lucken with the threshold of Sussman in order to set thresholds enable peak detection for the sensors.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant is reading the prior art overly narrowly with respect to the arguments on page 10 of the claim amendments. As previously stated in the prior rejections found in the PTAB decision affirming the examiner, the prior art reads on the claim language of having a plura.
Applicant's remaining arguments amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Rejections are maintained – and no allowable subject matter can be identified at this time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIKAS NMN ATMAKURI whose telephone number is (571)272-5080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at (571)272-6970. 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.
/VIKAS ATMAKURI/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ISAM A ALSOMIRI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645