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 .
Prosecution Reopened
In view of the Appeal Brief filed on 05/04/2026, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. New grounds of rejection are set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 12/12/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendments
The amendment filed 06/05/2025 is entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments and arguments, filed 06/05/2025, overcome the previous Claim Objections and Claim Rejections under 35 USC 112.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/05/2025, with respect to Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the specific combination of references being used in the current rejection.
The previous Claim Rejections under 35 USC 101 in the Office Action dated 08/05/2025 have been withdrawn.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or
in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b),
in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and
was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sako (US 2004/0263383).
Regarding Claim 1, Sako discloses:
An electronic device comprising:
a first antenna coupled to a transmit path and configured to transmit a radio-frequency signal ([0020]: “a transmitting antenna for transmitting sine-wave radio wave towards a target”; Fig. 8, item 22);
a second antenna coupled to a receive path ([0020]: “a receiving antenna for receiving radio wave reflected at the target”; Fig. 8, item 23);
a phase shifter disposed on the receive path ([0020]: “a shifting means for causing ¼ period phase shift in … the radio wave being received”; [0178]: “a delaying circuit 37 for delaying the radio wave received by the receiving antenna 23 by ¼ period”; Fig. 8, item 37), the phase shifter having a first state in which the phase shifter applies a first phase shift and having a second state in which the phase shifter applies a second phase shift ([0180]: “While the switches 81 and 82 are connected so as to by-pass the delaying circuit 37”; “while the switches 81 and 82 are connected to the delaying circuit 37”; Examiner note: the by-pass state applies a first phase shift of 0 degrees and the delayed state applies a second phase shift of 90 degrees (1/4 period)); and
one or more processors configured to receive, via the second antenna, a first reflected signal while the phase shifter is in the first state, receive, via the second antenna, a second reflected signal while the phase shifter is in the second state ([0171]: “computing member 29”; [0180]: “the wave-detecting circuit 75 inputs not-delayed radio wave voltage from the radio wave voltage received by the receiving antenna 23 and outputs the first detected voltage V”; “the wave-detecting circuit 25 inputs ¼ phase delayed radio wave voltage from the radio wave voltage received by the receiving antenna 23 and outputs the second detected voltage U”), and
estimate a range between the electronic device and an external object based on the first reflected signal and the second reflected signal ([0034]: “The distance L can be unambiguously calculated from the ratio of the first wave-detecting signal V to the second wave-detecting signal U”; [0181]: “it is possible to identify the distance L to the target 1 … from the first detected voltage V and the second detected voltage U”).
Regarding Claim 4, Sako teaches: wherein the second phase shift is 90-270 degrees out-of-phase with respect to the first phase shift ([0020]: “a shifting means for causing ¼ period phase shift”; [0178]: “¼ period”).
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) 2-3 and 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako (US 2004/0263383), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Iida (US 2019/0170856).
Regarding Claim 2, Sako does not explicitly teach: wherein the one or more processors is configured to recover a signal-of-interest by generating a difference value between the second reflected signal and the first reflected signal.
However, Iida is in the field of FMCW radar ranging and teaches: wherein the one or more processors is configured to recover a signal-of-interest by generating a difference value between the second reflected signal and the first reflected signal (Iida [0066-0078]; [0083]: “the signals are added by subtracting the second-time beat signal from the first-time beat signal. On the other hand, the beat signal derived from the local feedthrough is identical in phase between the first-time chirp and the second-time chirp, so it is canceled by subtracting the second-time beat signal from the first-time beat signal.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sako and recover a signal-of-interest by generating a difference value between the second reflected signal and the first reflected signal, as taught by Iida, with a reasonable expectation of success. Sako and Iida both acquire two received signals that differ in phase, and applying Iida’s known subtraction technique to Sako’s radar device yields the predictable result of canceling unwanted leakage components while preserving the signal reflected from the target (Iida [0078]).
Regarding Claim 3, Sako does not explicitly teach – but Iida teaches: wherein the one or more processors is configured to estimate the range based on the recovered signal-of-interest ([0034]: “ranging the distance to the target”; [0078]; [0089-0090]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sako and estimate the range based on the recovered signal-of-interest, as taught by Iida, with a reasonable expectation of success. Sako and Iida both acquire two received signals that differ in phase, and applying Iida’s known ranging technique to Sako’s radar device yields the predictable result of canceling unwanted leakage components and accurately measuring the distance to the target (Iida [0078]).
Regarding Claim 7, Sako does not explicitly teach – but Iida teaches: wherein the radio-frequency signal comprises a chirp signal ([0032]: “chirp signal”; Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sako and transmit a chirp signal, as taught by Iida, with a reasonable expectation of success. Substituting Sako’s sine-wave RF signal with Iida’s known chirp signal yields the predictable result of enabling ranging based on the beat frequency of a FMCW radar signal (Iida [0032-0034]).
Regarding Claim 8, Sako does not explicitly teach – but Iida teaches: the electronic device further comprising:
a de-chirp path that couples the transmit path to the receive path ([0049]: “mixer 124”; Figs. 1, 6: showing the transmit path signal being mixed with the receive path signal to generate a beat signal). Because the de-chirp path is a feature of Iida’s FMCW ranging technique, the rationale to modify Sako with the teachings of Iida persists from Claim 7.
Claim(s) 5 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako (US 2004/0263383), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Popov (US 2022/0206107).
Regarding Claim 5, Sako teaches: the electronic device, further comprising:
a control circuit configured to provide a first phase … element to the phase shifter that places the phase shifter in the first state and configured to provide a second phase … element to the phase shifter that places the phase shifter in the second state ([0180]: “switches 81, 82 and 83 that are switched simultaneously as a set”; “While the switches 81and 82 are connected so as to by-pass the delaying circuit 37”; “while the switches 81 and 82 are connected to the delaying circuit 37”).
Sako does not explicitly teach first and second phase vector elements.
However, Popov is in the field of phased array radar and teaches: a first phase vector element and a second phase vector element (Popov [0011-0013] teaching using steering vectors, with real and imaginary components, to apply a phase shift to a transmitted signal at two different time intervals).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sako and use a first phase vector element and a second phase vector element to provide first and second phase shifts, respectively, as taught by Popov, with a reasonable expectation of success. Applying Popov’s known vector-based phase shifting technique to Sako’s radar device yields the predictable result of enabling the phase shifter to apply variable, fine-tuned phase shifts (Popov [0011-0013]).
Regarding Claim 9, Sako does not explicitly teach – but Popov teaches: the electronic device further comprising:
a phased antenna array that includes the first antenna (Popov [0013]: “antenna array”; “phase shifters”; [0061]; Fig. 2A), the phased antenna array being configured to generate a signal beam in a pointing direction, the one or more processors being configured to change the phase shifter from the first state to the second state without changing the pointing direction of the signal beam (Popov [0007]: “beamforming toward specific directions”; [0013]: “first time interval”; “second time interval”; [0061]: “desired steering direction”; [0093]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sako and use a phased antenna array that includes the first antenna to generate a signal beam in a pointing direction, the one or more processors being configured to change the phase shifter from the first state to the second state without changing the pointing direction of the signal beam, as taught by Popov, with a reasonable expectation of success. Combining Sako’s radar device with Popov’s known phased antenna array yields the predictable result of steering the transmitted signal toward a desired target.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sako (US 2004/0263383) in view of Popov (US 2022/0206107), as applied to Claim 5 above, and further in view of Iida (US 2019/0170856).
Regarding Claim 6, Sako does not explicitly teach – but Iida teaches: wherein the second phase … element is an inverse of the first phase … element (Iida [0048]: “In the second-time acquisition, the phase shifter 123 shifts the phase of the local signal by 180 degrees”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sako and make the second phase shift an inverse of the first phase shift, as taught by Iida, with a reasonable expectation of success. Applying Iida’s known inverse phase shifting to Sako’s radar device yields the predictable result of canceling unwanted leakage components while preserving the signal reflected from the target (Iida [0078]).
Sako does not explicitly teach – but Popov teaches: the first phase vector element and the second phase vector element (Popov [0011-0013]).
The rationale to modify Sako with the teachings of Popov persist from Claim 5.
Claim(s) 10-13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Pavao-Moreira (US 2016/0103206) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Pavao-Moreira (US 2016/0103206) in view of Iida (US 2019/0170856).
Regarding Claim 10, Pavao-Moreira discloses:
A method of operating an electronic device, the method comprising:
transmitting, using a first antenna, a first signal burst with a first phase shift ([0024]: “The phase-shifted transmitter signal output by the phase shift unit 112 is fed … to a power amplifier (PA) 114, which amplifies the signal to a level suitable for transmitting by a transmitter antenna unit 18.”);
receiving, using a second antenna, first reflected signals corresponding to the first signal burst with the first phase shift ([0025]: “The radar signal transmitted by the antenna units 18 may by reflected by an object… Part of the reflected radar signal reaches receiver antenna units 19.”);
transmitting, using the first antenna, subsequent to transmission of the first signal burst, a second signal burst with a second phase shift that is different from the first phase shift ([0004]: “the transmitted signal may be periodically phase shifted”; [0024]: “transmitter antenna unit 18”; [0028]: “A relatively simple way of coding is reversing the phase of the signal after each time frame Tf.”);
receiving, with the second antenna, second reflected signals corresponding to the second signal burst with a second phase shift that is different from the first phase shift ([0025]: “The radar signal transmitted by the antenna units 18 may by reflected by an object… Part of the reflected radar signal reaches receiver antenna units 19.”); and
estimating, using one or more processors, a range to an external object based on the first reflected signals and the second reflected signals ([0020]: “determination of target distance”; [0037]: “This distance calculation unit 17 receives signals from both the transmitter or transmitters (11 in FIGS. 1 & 2) and the receiver or receivers (12 in FIGS. 1 & 2) to calculate a distance, based on the time delay of the received signals.”).
Alternatively, Regarding Claim 10, Pavao-Moreira teaches the elements of Claim 10 as set forth above.
To the extent that Pavao-Moreira is interpreted as not explicitly teaching estimating a range to an external object based on the first reflected signals and the second reflected signals, Iida is in the field of FMCW radar ranging and teaches:
estimating a range to an external object based on the first reflected signals and the second reflected signals (Iida [0034]: “The beat signal is sent to the FMCW radar signal processor and is used for ranging the distance to the target.”; [0083]: “first-time beat signal”; “second-time beat signal”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pavao-Moreira and estimate the range based on the first reflected signals and the second reflected signals, as taught by Iida, with a reasonable expectation of success. Pavao-Moreira and Iida both transmit and receive successive chirps that alternate in phase, and applying Iida’s known ranging technique to Pavao-Moreira’s radar device yields the predictable result of accurately measuring the distance to the target (Iida [0078]).
Regarding Claim 11, Pavao-Moreira teaches: the method further comprising:
downconverting, using mixer circuitry, the first reflected signals to produce first baseband signals ([0025]: “The received (radio frequency) antenna signal fRF1 is fed to a mixer 121, where it is mixed with the oscillator signal fLO, generated by the frequency synthesizer 15. The resulting intermediate frequency signal fIF1 is fed to a first high-pass filter (HPF1) 122.”); and
downconverting, using the mixer circuitry, the second reflected signals to produce second baseband signals ([0025]), wherein estimating the range comprises estimating the range based on the first baseband signals and the second baseband signals ([0037]: “calculate a distance, based on the time delay of the received signals”).
Regarding Claim 12, Pavao-Moreira does not explicitly teach – but Iida teaches: wherein estimating the range further comprises:
subtracting the second baseband signals from the first baseband signals to retrieve a signal-of-interest (Iida [0083]: “Thus, the signals are added by subtracting the second-time beat signal from the first-time beat signal.”); and
estimating the range based on the signal-of-interest ([0034]: “ranging the distance to the target”; [0078]; [0089-0090]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pavao-Moreira and subtract the second baseband signals from the first baseband signals to retrieve a signal-of-interest and estimate the range based on the recovered signal-of-interest, as taught by Iida, with a reasonable expectation of success. Pavao-Moreira and Iida both acquire two received signals that differ in phase, and applying Iida’s known ranging technique to Pavao-Moreira’s radar device yields the predictable result of canceling unwanted leakage components and accurately measuring the distance to the target (Iida [0078]).
Regarding Claim 13, Pavao-Moreira teaches: wherein the first signal burst comprises a first chirp signal and the second signal burst comprises a second chirp signal ([0004]: “a time frame may, for example, correspond with a “chirp” in an FMCW (frequency modulation continuous wave) signal.”; [0026]: “the frequency of an FMCW system linearly increases (or decreases) during the active time frame”), the method further comprising:
mixing, using the mixer circuitry, the first chirp signal with the first reflected signals ([0025]: “The received (radio frequency) antenna signal fRF1 is fed to a mixer 121, where it is mixed with the oscillator signal fLO”); and
mixing, using the mixer circuitry, the second chirp signal with the second reflected signals ([0025]).
Regarding Claims 15, Pavao-Moreira teaches: wherein the second phase shift is 90-270 degrees out-of-phase with respect to the first phase shift ([0028]: “in the example shown, the phase shift is 180°, although other phase shifts, such as 90°, are also possible.”).
Claim 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pavao-Moreira (US 2016/0103206), as applied to Claim 10 above, and further in view of Popov (US 2022/0206107).
Regarding Claim 14, Pavao-Moreira does not explicitly teach: wherein the electronic device comprises a phased antenna array that includes the first antenna, the method further comprising: transmitting, using the phased antenna array, a signal beam in a beam pointing direction, wherein transmitting the signal beam comprises transmitting the first signal burst in the beam pointing direction and transmitting the second signal burst in the beam pointing direction.
However, Popov is in the field of phased array radar and teaches: wherein the electronic device comprises a phased antenna array that includes the first antenna ([0013]: “antenna array”; [0061]; Fig. 2A), the method further comprising:
transmitting, using the phased antenna array, a signal beam in a beam pointing direction, wherein transmitting the signal beam comprises transmitting the first signal burst in the beam pointing direction and transmitting the second signal burst in the beam pointing direction ([0007]: “beamforming toward specific directions”; [0013]: “first time interval”; “second time interval”; [0061]: “desired steering direction”; [0093]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pavao-Moreira and use a phased antenna array, that includes the first antenna, to transmit a signal beam in a beam pointing direction, wherein transmitting the signal beam comprises transmitting the first signal burst in the beam pointing direction and transmitting the second signal burst in the beam pointing direction, as taught by Popov, with a reasonable expectation of success. Combining Pavao-Moreira’s radar device with Popov’s known phased antenna array and beam steering technique yields the predictable result of steering the transmitted signal toward a desired target.
Claims 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pavao-Moreira (US 2016/0103206) in view of Popov (US 2022/0206107) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pavao-Moreira (US 2016/0103206) in view of Popov (US 2022/0206107) and Iida (US 2019/0170856).
Regarding Claim 16, Pavao-Moreira teaches:
A method of operating wireless circuitry having a phase shifter communicatively coupled to a transmit antenna and having a receive antenna ([0024]: “phase shift unit 112”; “transmitter antenna unit 18”; [0025]: “receiver antenna units 19”), the method comprising:
transmitting, using the transmit antenna, a first radio-frequency signal having a first phase shift while the phase shifter is configured using a first phase … element shift ([0004]: “the transmitted signal may be periodically phase shifted”; [0024]: “The phase-shifted transmitter signal output by the phase shift unit 112 is fed … to a power amplifier (PA) 114, which amplifies the signal to a level suitable for transmitting by a transmitter antenna unit 18.”);
receiving, using the receive antenna, a second radio-frequency signal while the transmit antenna transmits the first radio-frequency signal ([0004]: “FMCW”; [0025]: “The radar signal transmitted by the antenna units 18 may by reflected by an object… Part of the reflected radar signal reaches receiver antenna units 19.”);
transmitting, using the transmit antenna, a third radio-frequency signal having a second phase while the phase shifter is configured using a second phase … element that is an inverse of the first phase … element, the second phase being different from the first phase ([0004]: “A phase shift of 180°”; [0024]);
receiving, using the receive antenna, a fourth radio-frequency signal while the transmit antenna transmits the third radio-frequency signal ([0004]; [0025]); and
estimating, using one or more processors, a range between the wireless circuitry and an external object based on the second radio-frequency signal and the fourth radio-frequency signal received by the receive antenna ([0020]: “determination of target distance”; [0037]: “This distance calculation unit 17 receives signals from both the transmitter or transmitters (11 in FIGS. 1 & 2) and the receiver or receivers (12 in FIGS. 1 & 2) to calculate a distance, based on the time delay of the received signals.”).
Pavao-Moreira does not explicitly teach first and second phase vector elements.
However, Popov is in the field of phased array radar and teaches: a first phase vector element and a second phase vector element (Popov [0011-0013] teaching using steering vectors, with real and imaginary components, to apply a phase shift to a transmitted signal at two different time intervals).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pavao-Moreira and use a first phase vector element and a second phase vector element to provide first and second phase shifts, respectively, as taught by Popov. Applying Popov’s known vector-based phase shifting technique to Pavao-Moreira’s radar device yields the predictable result of enabling the phase shifter to apply variable, fine-tuned phase shifts (Popov [0011-0013]).
Alternatively, Regarding Claim 16, the combined Pavao-Moreira and Popov teach the elements of Claim 16 as set forth above.
To the extent that Pavao-Moreira is interpreted as not explicitly teaching estimating a range between the wireless circuitry and an external object based on the second RF signals and the fourth RF signals, Iida is in the field of FMCW radar ranging and teaches:
estimating a range between the wireless circuitry and an external object based on the second RF signals and the fourth RF signals (Iida [0034]: “The beat signal is sent to the FMCW radar signal processor and is used for ranging the distance to the target.”; [0083]: “first-time beat signal”; “second-time beat signal”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pavao-Moreira and estimate the range based on the second RF signals and the fourth RF signals, as taught by Iida, with a reasonable expectation of success. Pavao-Moreira and Iida both transmit and receive successive chirps that alternate in phase, and applying Iida’s known ranging technique to Pavao-Moreira’s radar device yields the predictable result of accurately measuring the distance to the target (Iida [0078]).
Regarding Claim 17, Pavao-Moreira teaches: wherein the first phase … element configures the phase shifter to apply a first phase shift to the first radio-frequency signal and wherein the second phase … element configures the phase shifter to apply a second phase shift to the third radio-frequency signal that is 180 degrees out-of-phase with respect to the first phase shift ([0004]: “A phase shift of 180°”; [0028]: “In the example shown, the phase shift is 180°”).
Pavao-Moreira does not explicitly teach – but Popov teaches: a first phase vector element and a second phase vector element (Popov [0011-0013]).
The rationale to modify Pavao-Moreira with the teachings of Popov persists from Claim 16.
Regarding Claim 18, Pavao-Moreira does not explicitly teach – but Popov teaches: wherein the wireless circuitry comprises a phased antenna array having a set of antennas that includes the transmit antenna and having a set of phase shifters that include the phase shifter ([0013]: “antenna array”; “phase shifters”; [0061]; Fig. 2A), the method further comprising:
transmitting, using, the phased antenna array, a signal beam that includes the first radio-frequency signal in a first beam pointing direction while the set of phase shifters is configured using the first phase vector element ([0007]: “beamforming toward specific directions”; [0013]: “first time interval”; [0061]: “desired steering direction”; [0093]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Pavao-Moreira and use a phased antenna array, having a set of antennas that includes the transmit antenna and having a set of phase shifters that include the phase shifter, to transmit a signal beam that includes the first radio-frequency signal in a first beam pointing direction while the set of phase shifters is configured using the first phase vector element, as taught by Popov, with a reasonable expectation of success. Combining Pavao-Moreira’s radar device with Popov’s known phased antenna array and beam steering technique yields the predictable result of steering the transmitted signal toward a desired target.
Regarding Claim 19, Pavao-Moreira does not explicitly teach – but Popov teaches: the method further comprising:
transmitting, using the phased antenna array, the signal beam in the first beam pointing direction while the set of phase shifters is configured using the second phase vector element, the signal beam including the third radio-frequency signal ([0007]: “beamforming toward specific directions”; [0013]: “second time interval”; [0061]: “desired steering direction”; [0093]).
The rationale to modify Pavao-Moreira with the teachings of Popov persists from Claim 18.
Regarding Claim 20, Pavao-Moreira does not explicitly teach – but Popov teaches: the method further comprising:
transmitting, using the phased antenna array, the signal beam in a second beam pointing direction that is different from the first beam pointing direction while the set of phase shifters is configured using a third phase vector element ([0007]: “beamforming toward specific directions”; [0061]: “desired steering direction”; [0093]: “This method may be further generalized to implement any even number 2n of phases over n time-intervals.”).
The rationale to modify Pavao-Moreira with the teachings of Popov persist from Claim 18.
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 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).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vladimir Magloire, can be reached on (571) 270-5144. 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
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights