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 . The rejections from the Office Action of 5/29/2025 are hereby withdrawn. New grounds for rejection are presented below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) the abstract idea of a mathematical algorithm for estimating a space/spatial spectrum of a super-resolution coprime planar array; the recited “determining wave arrival directions” being an extension of the abstract idea in that it is a further mathematical algorithm step.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because no underlying device or process is improved by the determination of the space/spatial spectrum or wave arrival directions.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the entirety of all claims is directed to merely the mathematical algorithm itself.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image1.png
453
739
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The corresponding rejections are hereby withdrawn.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image2.png
123
735
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
429
737
media_image3.png
Greyscale
…
PNG
media_image4.png
124
735
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The recited “determining wave arrival directions” is an extension of the abstract idea in that it is a further mathematical algorithm step. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because no underlying device or process is improved by the determination of the space/spatial spectrum or wave arrival directions.
Applicant argues:
PNG
media_image5.png
124
735
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Response:
The instant Claims are not rejected for being directed to mental activity. Rather, the instant Claims are rejected for being directed to a mathematical algorithm.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
WO 2021068494 A1 (US 20210364591 A1 taken as English translation)
WO 2021068495 A1 (US 20210364564 A1 taken as English translation)
WO 2021068496 A1 (US 20210373113 A1 taken as English translation)
Amin et al., Co-Prime Frequency and Aperture Design for HF Surveillance, Wideband Radar Imaging, and Nonstationary Array Processing, Villanova University, 2018
Guo et al., An Improved Trilinear Model-Based Angle Estimation Method for Co-Prime Planar Arrays, MDPI, 2018
Liu et al., Cramér–Rao bounds for coprime and other sparse arrays, which find more sources than sensors, Elsevier, 2016
Qin et al., Two-Dimensional DOA Estimation Using Parallel Coprime Subarrays, IEEE, 2019
Meng et al., Direction-of-Arrival Estimation in Coprime Array Using the ESPRIT-Based Method, MDPI, 2019
Zheng et al., Generalized Coprime Planar Array Geometry for 2-D DOA Estimation, IEEE, 2017
Zheng et al., TWO-DIMENSIONAL DOA ESTIMATION FOR COPRIME PLANAR ARRAY: A COARRAY TENSOR-BASED SOLUTION, IEEE, 2020
Zhou et al., A Robust and Efficient Algorithm for Coprime Array Adaptive Beamforming, IEEE, 2018
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 KYLE ROBERT QUIGLEY whose telephone number is (313)446-4879. The examiner can normally be reached 11AM-9PM 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, Arleen Vazquez can be reached at (571) 272-2619. 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.
/KYLE R QUIGLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857