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 filed 6/6/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the Ma reference publication date is at best 6/8/2020.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Ma reference was publicly available in a preprint version April 202 (see image below), therefore Ma constitutes as prior art. Applicant has made no further arguments.
PNG
media_image1.png
860
1366
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 10-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ma (Microwave Photonic Imaging Radar with a Millimeter-level Resolution).
Regarding claim 1, Ma discloses a radar system (page 2, left column, paragraph 3: “Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of the proposed microwave photonic radar system”) comprising: a stepped-frequency optical signal generator configured for converting an optical signal into a stepped-frequency optical signal (figure 1a, OFSL, and figure 1c, items B and E); an optical-to-electrical converter for converting the stepped-frequency optical signal into a stepped-frequency electrical signal (figure 1a, PD, and figure 1c, item F); and a transmitter for transmitting a microwave signal based on the stepped-frequency electrical signal (figure 1a, TA).
Regarding claim 2, Ma discloses the stepped-frequency optical signal generator comprises: an optical switch for modulating the optical signal into a pulse-shaped optical signal, the pulse-shaped optical signal having a pulse; and an optical frequency shifting loop for converting the pulse-shaped optical signal into the stepped-frequency optical signal (figures 1a and 1c, switch and OFSL).
Regarding claim 3, Ma discloses the optical frequency shifting loop comprises a frequency shifter to shift a frequency of the pulse (figure 1a, RF(Δf), and page 2, left column, last line – right column line 2: “Assuming that the frequency of the RF signal is Δf, the optical signal in the loop will frequency shift from the previous one by Δf in each cycle.”).
Regarding claim 4, Ma discloses the pulse-shaped optical signal iteratively travels through the optical frequency shifting loop, wherein each iteration through the optical frequency shifting loop shifts the frequency of the pulse by a frequency shift (figure 1a, RF(Δf), and page 2, left column, last line – right column line 2: “Assuming that the frequency of the RF signal is Δf, the optical signal in the loop will frequency shift from the previous one by Δf in each cycle.”).
Regarding claim 5, Ma discloses a first light source for generating the optical signal (figure 1a, LD).
Regarding claim 6, Ma discloses a receiver for receiving the transmitted microwave signal that is reflected by an object (figure 1a, RA); an electro-optic modulator for modulating the stepped-frequency optical signal with the received microwave signal to generate a demodulated optical signal (figure 1a, LNA and DOMZM); and an optical-to-electrical converter for converting the demodulated optical signal into an electrical signal, wherein the electrical signal is used to extract information regarding the object (figure 1a, BPD).
Regarding claim 7, Ma discloses a filter for filtering the received optical signal (figure 1a, BPD).
Regarding claim 10, Ma discloses the pulse-shaped optical signal iteratively travels through the optical frequency shifting loop, wherein each iteration through the optical frequency shifting loop shifts the frequency of the pulse by a frequency shift (figure 1a, RF(Δf), and page 2, left column, last line – right column line 2: “Assuming that the frequency of the RF signal is Δf, the optical signal in the loop will frequency shift from the previous one by Δf in each cycle.”).
Regarding claim 11, Ma discloses a first light source for generating the optical signal (figure 1a, LD).
Regarding claim 12, Ma discloses a first light source for generating the optical signal (figure 1a, LD).
Regarding claim 13, Ma discloses a first light source for generating the optical signal (figure 1a, LD).
Regarding claim 14, Ma discloses a receiver for receiving the transmitted microwave signal that is reflected by an object (figure 1a, RA); an electro-optic modulator for modulating the stepped-frequency optical signal with the received microwave signal to generate a demodulated optical signal (figure 1a, LNA and DOMZM); and an optical-to-electrical converter for converting the demodulated optical signal into an electrical signal, wherein the electrical signal is used to extract information regarding the object (figure 1a, BPD).
Regarding claim 15, Ma discloses a receiver for receiving the transmitted microwave signal that is reflected by an object (figure 1a, RA); an electro-optic modulator for modulating the stepped-frequency optical signal with the received microwave signal to generate a demodulated optical signal (figure 1a, LNA and DOMZM); and an optical-to-electrical converter for converting the demodulated optical signal into an electrical signal, wherein the electrical signal is used to extract information regarding the object (figure 1a, BPD).
Regarding claim 16, Ma discloses a receiver for receiving the transmitted microwave signal that is reflected by an object (figure 1a, RA); an electro-optic modulator for modulating the stepped-frequency optical signal with the received microwave signal to generate a demodulated optical signal (figure 1a, LNA and DOMZM); and an optical-to-electrical converter for converting the demodulated optical signal into an electrical signal, wherein the electrical signal is used to extract information regarding the object (figure 1a, BPD).
Regarding claim 17, Ma discloses a receiver for receiving the transmitted microwave signal that is reflected by an object (figure 1a, RA); an electro-optic modulator for modulating the stepped-frequency optical signal with the received microwave signal to generate a demodulated optical signal (figure 1a, LNA and DOMZM); and an optical-to-electrical converter for converting the demodulated optical signal into an electrical signal, wherein the electrical signal is used to extract information regarding the object (figure 1a, BPD).
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.
Claim(s) 8 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma as applied to claims 6 and 7 above, and further in view of Roberts (US 20150016824).
Regarding claim 8, Ma does not teach a second light source for generating a second optical signal, wherein the second optical signal in combination with the optical signal modify a carrier frequency of the radar system. However, Roberts teaches a second light source for generating a second optical signal, wherein the second optical signal in combination with the optical signal modify a carrier frequency of the radar system (paragraph 0123: “In some demonstrative embodiments, one or more sub-carrier signals may be added to each of the signals 218A, 218B and/or 218C, and the sub-carrier signal(s) may be phase modulated or frequency modulated.” and paragraph 0124: “In some demonstrative embodiments, the sub-carrier signals may be modulated with orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM). In one example, controller 111 (FIG. 1) may control signal sources 201A, 201B and 201C to operate in a pulsed manner, e.g., to generate high frequency ON and OFF keyed waveforms.”).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ma’s system with Roberts’ second light source as Ma and Robert maintain the same field of endeavor, and to modify a carrier frequency to set a carrier frequency to an advantageous value.
Regarding claim 18, Ma does not teach a second light source for generating a second optical signal, wherein the second optical signal in combination with the optical signal modify a carrier frequency of the radar system. However, Roberts teaches a second light source for generating a second optical signal, wherein the second optical signal in combination with the optical signal modify a carrier frequency of the radar system (paragraph 0123: “In some demonstrative embodiments, one or more sub-carrier signals may be added to each of the signals 218A, 218B and/or 218C, and the sub-carrier signal(s) may be phase modulated or frequency modulated.” and paragraph 0124: “In some demonstrative embodiments, the sub-carrier signals may be modulated with orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM). In one example, controller 111 (FIG. 1) may control signal sources 201A, 201B and 201C to operate in a pulsed manner, e.g., to generate high frequency ON and OFF keyed waveforms.”).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ma’s system with Roberts’ second light source as Ma and Robert maintain the same field of endeavor, and to modify a carrier frequency to set a carrier frequency to an advantageous value.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Leabman (US 20200191945).
Regarding claim 9, Ma does not teach the radar system detects vital signs of a target, wherein the vital signals comprise respiration rate, heart rate, and blood pressure. However, Leabman teaches the radar system detects vital signs of a target, wherein the vital signals comprise respiration rate, heart rate, and blood pressure (paragraph 0002: “A stepped frequency radar system is disclosed.” and paragraph 0115: “In an embodiment, the techniques described herein are application to monitoring a health parameter of a person, for example, monitoring the blood glucose level in a person, or to monitoring other parameters of a person's health such as, for example, blood pressure and heart rate.”).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ma’s system with Leabman’s detection of vital signs as Ma and Robert maintain the same field of endeavor, and to apply the system to an appropriate usage.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE whose telephone number is (571)270-5144. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 PM M-F.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at (571) 272-8105. 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.
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648