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 Amendments
The amendment filed 11/21/2025 is entered.
Claims 1, 15, and 20 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, filed 11/21/2025, with respect to Claim Objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections to Claim 1 has been overcome.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10-12, with respect to Claim Rejections under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the specific combination of references being used in the current rejection. However, for clarity of record, some of the arguments are addressed below.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 10-12, with respect to the prior art not teaching the first and second angles being associated with first and second objects, respectively, have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Li teaches determining first and second angles, but does not explicitly teach that they are associated with first and second objects. However, there is nothing to suggest that the angle estimation algorithm of Li would be unable to determine first and second angles corresponding to first and second objects. Distinguishing the angles of two or more closely spaced objects is a well-known problem in radar, and one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the angle estimation algorithm of Li offers a solution to this problem. Paragraph [0002] of Wu is cited to show that associating directional characteristics (angles) with respective objects is well-known, and that distinguishing the angles of two or more closely spaced objects is a well-known problem. As further evidence, Schoor also teaches the idea of angles being associated with two closely spaced objects and distinguishing said angles from each other (Schoor [Sections I, II, III, and IV]).
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (J. Li, Dunmin Zheng and P. Stoica, “Angle and Waveform Estimation Via RELAX,” in IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 1077-1087, July 1997) in view of Wu (US 2022/0268911) and Schoor (Michael Schoor and Bin Yang, “High-Resolution Angle Estimation for an Automotive FMCW Radar Sensor,” University of Stuttgart, Germany, 2007).
Regarding Claim 1, Li teaches:
A method ([pg. 1078, left column]: “RELAX algorithm”) comprising:
determining, based on an electromagnetic signal received by an electromagnetic sensor, an initial first angle estimate … relative to the electromagnetic sensor ([pg. 1077, right column]: “relative to the array normal”; [pg. 1078, right column]: “Obtain θ1 and ŝ1(n) from y1(n)”);
determining, based on the initial first angle estimate, an initial second angle estimate for an initial iteration, … relative to an electromagnetic sensor ([pg. 1077, right column]: “relative to the array normal”; [pg. 1078, right column]: “Compute y2(n) with (6) by using θ1 and ŝ1(n)… Obtain θ2 and ŝ2(n) from y2(n)”);
… a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is applied to the scattered signals ([pg. 1079, left column]: “All array output vectors are zero padded to 213 before using them with FFT in the RELAX and ANPA algorithms.”);
determining, based on the initial second angle estimate, an updated first angle estimate for the initial iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]: “Next, compute y1(n) with (6) by using θ2 and ŝ2(n) and redetermine θ1 and ŝ1(n) from y1(n)”);
determining, based on the updated first angle estimate, an updated second angle estimate for a subsequent iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]: “Iterate the previous two substeps until “practical convergence” is achieved”);
determining, based on the updated second angle estimate, the updated first angle estimate for the subsequent iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]: “Iterate the previous two substeps until “practical convergence” is achieved”);
selectively determining that an iterative-loop condition is satisfied ([pg. 1078, right column]: “Iterate the previous two substeps until “practical convergence” is achieved”); and
in response to the determination that the iterative-loop condition is satisfied, outputting, …, the updated first angle estimate and the updated second angle estimate… ([pg. 1078, right column]: “Iterate the previous two substeps until “practical convergence” is achieved”).
Li does not explicitly teach – but Wu teaches:
an initial first angle estimate associated with a location of a first object relative to the electromagnetic sensor (Wu [0002]: “it may be useful to discern directional characteristics of radar reflections from two or more objects that are closely space”; [0028]: “Directional characteristics of the object relative to the antennas are determined”);
an initial second angle estimate associated with a location of a second object relative to the electromagnetic sensor (Wu [0002]: “it may be useful to discern directional characteristics of radar reflections from two or more objects that are closely space”; [0028]: “Directional characteristics of the object relative to the antennas are determined”); and
… outputting, to an object tracking system, the updated first angle estimate and the updated second angle estimate for tracking the first object and the second object, respectively (Wu [0006]: “angle-of-arrival”; [0032]: “tracking”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Li and associate the first and second angle estimates with first and second objects, respectively, and to output, to an object tracking system, the updated first angle estimate and the updated second angle estimate for tracking the first object and the second object as taught by Wu. Associating a first angle with a first object and a second angle with a second object is considered ordinary and well-known in the art. Associating the angles with respective objects is beneficial for distinguishing closely spaced objects and for identifying information such as location and velocity of the objects (Wu [0002]). Using data from electromagnetic sensors for object tracking is well-known in the art, and object tracking is beneficial for applications such as autonomous driving (Wu [0002]).
Li does not explicitly teach – but Schoor teaches:
wherein scattered signals from the first and second objects are in the same Doppler-range bin after a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is applied to the scattered signals (Schoor [pg. 1, Section I]: “In present automotive radar systems only targets in different range and velocity cells can be resolved. Increasing demand on safety functionality leads to efforts increasing the performance of angle estimation to allow resolution of targets in the same distance-velocity cell, for example two standing cars at the end of a traffic jam or other standing obstacles on the road.”; [pg. 2, Section II.B]: “Using a FFT the baseband signals are transformed to frequency domain.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Li and have signals from first and second objects be in the same Doppler-range bin after an FFT, as taught by Schoor. The signals from the first and second objects being in the same Doppler-range bin is merely a result of the first and second objects having a similar velocity and range relative to the sensor. Resolving targets in the same Doppler-range bin is beneficial for improving the safety of target tracking systems, such as those used in automotive radar systems (Schoor [pg. 1]).
Regarding Claim 15, Li teaches:
A system comprising:
at least one processor ([pg. 1079, right column]: “apply the algorithms to the experimental data”; “Multi-parameter Adaptive Radar System (MARS)”) configured to;
determine, based on an electromagnetic signal received by an electromagnetic sensor, an initial first angle estimate … relative to the electromagnetic sensor ([pg. 1077, right column]; [pg. 1078, right column]);
determine, based on the initial first angle estimate, an initial second angle estimate for an initial iteration, … relative to the electromagnetic sensor ([pg. 1077, right column]; [pg. 1078, right column]);
… a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is applied to the scattered signals ([pg. 1079, left column]);
determine, based on the initial second angle estimate, an updated first angle estimate for the initial iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]);
determine, based on the updated first angle estimate, an updated second angle estimate for a subsequent iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]);
determine, for the subsequent iteration and based on the updated second angle estimate, the updated first angle estimate ([pg. 1078, right column]);
in response to determining an iterative-loop condition is satisfied, output, …, the updated first angle estimate and the updated second angle estimate… ([pg. 1078, right column]); and
in response to determining the iterative-loop condition is not satisfied ([pg. 1078, right column]: “until ‘practical convergence’ ”):
determine, based on the updated first angle estimate, the updated second angle estimate for an additional iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]); and
determine, based on the updated second angle estimate, the updated first angle estimate for an additional iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]).
Li does not explicitly teach – but Wu teaches:
an initial first angle estimate associated with a location of a first object relative to the electromagnetic sensor (Wu [0002]: “it may be useful to discern directional characteristics of radar reflections from two or more objects that are closely space”; [0028]);
an initial second angle estimate associated with a location of a second object relative to the electromagnetic sensor (Wu [0002]: “it may be useful to discern directional characteristics of radar reflections from two or more objects that are closely space”; [0028]); and
… output, to an object tracking system, the updated first angle estimate and the updated second angle estimate for tracking the first object and the second object, respectively (Wu [0006]: “angle-of-arrival”; [0032]: “tracking”).
The rationale to modify Li with the teachings of Wu would persist from Claim 1.
Li does not explicitly teach – but Schoor teaches:
wherein scattered signals from the first and second objects are in the same Doppler-range bin after a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is applied to the scattered signals (Schoor [pg. 1, Section I]; [pg. 2, Section II.B]).
The rationale to modify Li with the teachings of Schoor would persist from Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 20, Li teaches:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage media comprising instructions that, when executed ([pg. 1079, right column]: “apply the algorithms to the experimental data”; “Multi-parameter Adaptive Radar System (MARS)”), configure a processor to:
determine, based on an electromagnetic signal received by an electromagnetic sensor, an initial first angle estimate … relative to the electromagnetic sensor ([pg. 1077, right column]; [pg. 1078, right column]);
determine, based on the initial first angle estimate, an initial second angle estimate for an initial iteration, … relative to the electromagnetic sensor ([pg. 1077, right column]; [pg. 1078, right column]);
… a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is applied to the scattered signals ([pg. 1079, left column]);
determine, based on the initial second angle estimate, an updated first angle estimate for the initial iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]);
determine, based on the updated first angle estimate, an updated second angle estimate for a subsequent iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]);
determine, based on the updated second angle estimate, the updated first angle estimate for the subsequent iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]);
in response to determining an iterative-loop condition is satisfied, output, …, the updated first angle estimate and the updated second angle estimate… ([pg. 1078, right column]); and
in response to determining the iterative-loop condition is not satisfied ([pg. 1078, right column]: “until ‘practical convergence’ ”):
determine, based on the updated first angle estimate, the updated second angle estimate for an additional iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]); and
determine, based on the updated second angle estimate, the updated first angle estimate for the additional iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]).
Li does not explicitly teach – but Wu teaches:
an initial first angle estimate associated with a location of a first object relative to the electromagnetic sensor (Wu [0002]: “it may be useful to discern directional characteristics of radar reflections from two or more objects that are closely space”; [0028]);
an initial second angle estimate associated with a location of a second object relative to the electromagnetic sensor (Wu [0002]: “it may be useful to discern directional characteristics of radar reflections from two or more objects that are closely space”; [0028]); and
… output, to an object tracking system, the updated first angle estimate and the updated second angle estimate for tracking the first object and the second object, respectively (Wu [0006]: “angle-of-arrival”; [0032]: “tracking”).
The rationale to modify Li with the teachings of Wu would persist from Claim 1.
Li does not explicitly teach – but Schoor teaches:
wherein scattered signals from the first and second objects are in the same Doppler-range bin after a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is applied to the scattered signals (Schoor [pg. 1, Section I]; [pg. 2, Section II.B]).
The rationale to modify Li with the teachings of Schoor would persist from Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, Li teaches: the method further comprising: in response to determining the iterative-loop condition is not satisfied ([pg. 1078, right column]: “until ‘practical convergence’ ”):
determining, based on the updated first angle estimate, the updated second angle estimate for an additional iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]); and
determining, based on the updated second angle estimate, a third updated first angle estimate for the additional iteration ([pg. 1078, right column]).
Regarding Claims 3 and 16, Li teaches: wherein the iterative-loop condition comprises a convergence of the updated first angle estimate and the updated second angle estimate ([pg. 1079, left column]: “practical convergence”).
Regarding Claim 4, Li teaches: wherein the convergence of the updated first angle estimate and the updated second angle estimate comprises:
a difference between the updated first angle estimate of a current iteration and the updated first angle estimate of a previous iteration is under a threshold value or a threshold percentage ([pg. 1079, left column]: “checking the relative change of the cost function in (5) between two consecutive iterations”); and
a difference between the updated second angle estimate of a current iteration and the updated second angle estimate of a previous iteration is under the threshold value or the threshold percentage ([pg. 1079, left column]: “checking the relative change of the cost function in (5) between two consecutive iterations”).
Regarding Claims 5, Li does not explicitly teach – but Wu teaches: wherein the iterative-loop condition comprises a minimum number of the subsequent iterations (Wu [0066]: “minimum residual threshold”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Li to use a minimum number of subsequent iterations as an iterative-loop condition, as taught by Wu. Setting a minimum number of iterations is well-known in the art and is beneficial for improving estimation accuracy.
Regarding Claims 6 and 17, Li teaches: wherein:
determining the initial first angle estimate comprises calculating a fast Fourier transform on the electromagnetic signal ([pg. 1078, right column]: “θk is obtained as the location of the dominant peak of the sum of the periodograms…, which can be efficiently computed by using FFT”); and
determining, based on the fast Fourier transform, a peak of the electromagnetic signal, the maximum value corresponding to the initial first angle estimate ([pg. 1078, right column]: “location of the dominant peak”).
Regarding Claim 7, Li teaches: wherein:
the electromagnetic signal comprises a beam vector ([pg. 1077, left column]; [pg. 1078, left column]: “kth direction vector”); and
the beam vector includes information related to the first object and the second object ([pg. 1077, left column]; [pg. 1078, left column]: “kth direction vector”).
Regarding Claims 8 and 18, Li teaches: wherein the electromagnetic sensor comprises a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) radar sensor including at least one sparse array of antenna channels ([pg. 1079, right column]: “Multi-parameter Adaptive Radar System (MARS)”; “MARS is a vertical uniform linear array consisting of M =32 horizontally polarized horn antennas. The spacing between adjacent antenna sensors is 5.715 cm. The four sets of data we use below were collected when the array system was operated at frequencies 9.76, 9.79, 11.32, and 12.34 GHz.”; [pg. 1084, right column]: “The ULA consists of 8 sensors. The spacing between adjacent sensors is about 2.1 times the wavelength”).
Regarding Claims 9 and 18, Li teaches: wherein determining the initial second angle estimate, the updated first angle estimate, and the updated second angle estimate is based on reducing phase ambiguity caused by the at least one sparse array of antenna channels ([pg. 1084, right column]: “The spacing between adjacent sensors is about 2.1 times the wavelength”; “The data … was decomposed into L = 5 frequency bins”).
Regarding Claim 10, Li teaches: wherein the at least one sparse array is a uniform linear array and the antenna channels of the uniform linear array are each separated by a same distance that is equal to or greater than a wavelength of an operable frequency of the electromagnetic signal ([pg. 1084, right column]: “ULA”; “The spacing between adjacent sensors is about 2.1 times the wavelength”).
Regarding Claim 11, Li teaches: Li does not explicitly teach – but Wu teaches: wherein the at least one sparse array is a non-uniform linear array including at least a first pair of the antenna channels of the non-uniform linear array being separated by a first distance and at least a second pair of the antenna channels of the non-uniform linear array being separated by a second distance that is different than the first distance (Wu [0028]: “uniform antenna arrays that are used together in a non-uniform arrangement”; “co-prime antenna-element spacings”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Li and use a non-uniform linear array with different antenna spacings, as taught by Wu. Non-uniform arrays are well-known in the art and are beneficial for suppressing spurious sidelobes (Wu [0038]).
Regarding Claim 12, Li teaches: Li does not explicitly teach – but Wu teaches: wherein a beam vector of the non-uniform linear array is normalized to approximate a beam vector of a uniform linear array (Wu [0053]: “a steering vector of the array steered to a support spatial frequency (f.sub.1, f.sub.1, . . . f.sub.M) in normalized unit”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Li and normalize a beam vector of the non-uniform linear array to approximate a beam vector of a uniform linear array, as taught by Wu. Normalizing beam vectors is well-known in the art and is beneficial for mitigating spurious sidelobes (Wu [0052]).
Regarding Claims 13 and 19, Li teaches: wherein determining the initial second angle estimate, the updated first angle estimate, and the updated second angle estimate includes approximating noise in the electromagnetic signal to be Gaussian random noise having a zero mean ([pg. 1084, right column]: “zero-mean complex white Gaussian random process”).
Regarding Claim 14, Li teaches: wherein determining the initial second angle estimate, the updated first angle estimate, and the updated second angle estimate comprises determining an expected value of the initial second angle estimate, an expected value of the updated first angle estimate, and an expected value of the updated second angle estimate ([pg. 1078, right column]; [pg. 1079]: “RMSEs of the angle and waveform estimates”; “The estimator performances are also compared to the corresponding Cramer—Rao bound (CRB).”).
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 NOAH Y. ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-0170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8AM-4PM.
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, William J. Kelleher can be reached on (571) 272-7753. 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.
/NOAH YI MIN ZHU/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/William Kelleher/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights