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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 27 October, 2025 has been entered.
Examiner’s Note
For applicant’s benefit, portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, including disclosures that teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
“The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain.” In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including non-preferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v.Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005) See MPEP 2123.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 14 October, 2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s request for continued examination filed 27 October, 2025 is acknowledged and has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-9 and 13-19 have been considered but are moot in view of a new ground of rejection.
Additionally, the Examiner would like to note the following arguments:
With respect to Applicant’s argument that “Katabi describes an RF-based pose-estimation system employing Wi-Fi-band radio signals (2.4-5 GHz) to generate two- and three-dimensional skeletal keypoint maps using deep neural networks. As explained at paragraphs [0027]-[0031], the system's sensor subsystem transmits low-power RF signals and generates sequences of horizontal and vertical heatmaps, which are processed to estimate keypoints (e.g., legs, arms, hands, feet) via neural-network modules (11 [0040]-[0053]). Paragraph [0031] specifies that the radio operates by "using an extension of the FMCW technique," but only for spatial separation of reflections within a single RF frequency range; there is no disclosure of emitting or processing multi-chirp FMCW signals comprising high- and low-bandwidth chirps. Nowhere in Katabi is there any teaching or suggestion of (i) determining separate first and second object-pose datasets* corresponding to different body regions based on different bandwidths, or (ii) fusing such datasets "to determine a composite user pose." The neural-network fusion described in Katabi-for example, associating detected keypoints into a skeletal representation (11 [0052]-[0053])- is an internal data-association process within a single RF modality, not fusion of data from multiple radar chirps of differing bandwidths”, the Examiner would like to note that the Applicant's argument is against the references individually, and one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In this case, Katabi cures the deficiency by teaching determination of reflected RF signals and combine them to output pose estimate. Evidently, Katabi teaches that the keypoint estimation module 102 therefore aggregates information from multiple frames of RF heatmaps so that it can capture different limbs [0047].
Furthermore, Applicant asserts that “Skeoch fails to teach or suggest performing "feature extraction on imagery captured via one or more image sensors to obtain object-tracking data," nor any processing that analyzes image content to derive object tracking data, particularly "in response to determining that the pose of the object" indicated by "radar-based object pose data" "satisfies one or more conditions", as recited in independent claim 16 as currently amended. The imagery in Skeoch is stored or streamed, not computationally processed to generate object tracking data”. However, the Examiner would like to note that the camera taught in Skeoch is activated in response to the object’s position/ motion data. The Applicant’s disclosure further recites that “object pose data 230 indicates position and/or motion attributes for one or more objects in the scene” [0042]. Skeoch evidently teaches that a processor 262 may transition the radar sensor 202 to higher operational modes in response to detecting possible motion of an object within a threshold distance and whether, once detected within the threshold distance, the object is determined to be within a region of interest within a monitored area 201 [col. 2, lines 7-13]. Additionally, the system of Skeoch utilizes the camera to obtain object data for further processing. Specifically, Skeoch teaches that the video security device 300 may use the camera 204 to recognize a face (e.g., the face of an authorized user) [col. 17, lines 51-53]
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) 1-4, 9, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeSalvo et al. (US 11,221,404 B1 “DESALVO”), in view of Katabi et al. (US 2019/0188533 A1 “KATABI”).
Regarding claim 1, DESALVO discloses (Examiner’s note: What DESALVO does not disclose is ) a radar system for pose detection, the radar system (a radar system may include (1) a wearable device dimensioned to be worn by a user of an artificial reality system, (2) at least one radar device that (A) is secured to the wearable device [col. 4, lines 4-7]) comprising: one or more processors; and one or more hardware storage devices that store instructions that are executable by the one or more processors (computing device(s) may each include at least one memory device and at least one physical processor [col. 23, line 52]) to configure the radar system to:
emit a multi-chirp frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) radar signal (an FMCW radar system may transmit a signal that is swept over time having a varying frequency (e.g., increasing over time). As shown in FIG. 6 the transmitted radar signal may be swept from an initial frequency to a final frequency over time [col. 17, lines 42-47]) comprising a high-bandwidth chirp (601(1), 601(3), and 601(n) [FIG. 6]) and a low-bandwidth chirp (601(2) and 601(4) [FIG. 6])
detect a reflected multi-chirp FMCW radar signal comprising a reflected high-bandwidth chirp and a reflected low-bandwidth chirp (transmitted radar signal 101 may be reflected by objects (e.g., targets) in the path of the transmitted signal. The targets may reflect transmitted radar signal 101 and the reflected signal may be received by a radar receiver [col. 13, lines 57-63])
determine a first object pose data using the reflected high-bandwidth chirp, wherein the first object pose data comprises object pose data associated with one or more shoulders, elbows, or hands of a user (targets close to the radar device may have a lower beat frequency and therefore may require a longer observation time (e.g., utilizing a larger fraction of the time duration of the sweep) [col. 7, lines 45-48]); (sweep time periods 601(1), 601(3), and 601(n) may be associated with measurements of successive zero crossings of target transducers that are closer to the radar device [col. 18, lines 23-28]). The Examiner further noted that DESALVO does not explicitly disclose that “the first object pose data comprises object pose data associated with one or more shoulders, elbows, or hands of a user”. However, DESALVO discloses that a radar system may include a headset worn on a user's head [col. 3, lines 29-30]. It is implicit for a typical human stance with the radar system worn on the user’s head, that the one or more shoulders, elbows, or hands of the user, would be closer to the radar system.
determine a second object pose data using the reflected low-bandwidth chirp, wherein the second object pose data comprises object pose data associated with one or more legs or feet of the user (targets further away from the radar device may have a higher beat frequency and therefore time spent performing a sweep may be reduced (e.g., a shorter observation time window by stopping the sweep before the full sweep range) [col. 7, lines 48-52]); (sweep time periods 601(2) and 601(4) may be associated with measurements of successive zero crossings of targets that are farther away from the radar device [col. 18, lines 23-28]). The Examiner further noted that DESALVO does not explicitly disclose that “the second object pose data comprises object pose data associated with one or more legs or feet of the user”. However, DESALVO discloses that a radar system may include a headset worn on a user's head [col. 3, lines 29-30]. It is implicit for a typical human stance with the radar system worn on the user’s head, that the one or more legs or feet of the user, would be further away from the radar system.
In a same or similar field of endeavor, KATABI relates to pose recognition. Specifically, KATABI teaches that a 3-D pose estimation system 500 is configured to sense an environment using a radio frequency (RF) localization technique and to estimate a three-dimensional pose of one or more subjects (who may be partially or fully occluded) in the environment based on the sensing. The 3-D pose estimation system 500 includes a sensor subsystem 501 and a pose estimation module 502 [0066]. The pose estimation module 502 is configured to extract 3-D poses 518 of a single subject in the environment from the 4-D RF tensors 512 using a single-person pose estimation network 520. In some examples, the single-person pose estimation network 520 is a convolutional neural network (CNN) model configured to identify the 3-D locations of 14 anatomical keypoints on a subject's body (head, neck, shoulders, elbows, wrists, hips, knees and ankles) from 4-D RF tensor data 512 [0072]. Furthermore, KATABI teaches that the keypoint estimation module 102 therefore aggregates information from multiple frames of RF heatmaps so that it can capture different limbs [0047].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of DESALVO to include the teachings of KATABI, because doing so would aid in estimating the human pose which is an important task in computer vision with applications in surveillance, tracking, activity recognition, gaming, etc., as recognized by KATABI. In addition, both of the prior art references, DESALVO and KATABI, teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, that is, RF signals for localization.
Regarding claim 2, DESALVO/ KATABI discloses the radar system of claim 1, wherein the high-bandwidth chirp and the low-bandwidth chirp are interleaved to form the multi-chirp FMCW radar signal (Examiner’s note: See FIG. 6 of DESALVO showing interleaving (i.e., alternating) of different chirps).
Regarding claim 3, DESALVO/ KATABI discloses the radar system of claim 1, wherein the multi-chirp FMCW radar signal is emitted by a single radar transmitter (an FMCW radar system may transmit a signal that is swept over time having a varying frequency (e.g., increasing over time). As shown in FIG. 6 the transmitted radar signal may be swept from an initial frequency to a final frequency over time [DESALVO col. 17, lines 42-47], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 4, DESALVO/ KATABI discloses the radar system of claim 1, further comprising a radar transmitter, wherein the instructions comprise firmware instructions configured to cause the radar transmitter to emit the multi-chirp FMCW radar signal (an FMCW radar system may transmit a signal that is swept over time having a varying frequency (e.g., increasing over time). As shown in FIG. 6 the transmitted radar signal may be swept from an initial frequency to a final frequency over time [DESALVO col. 17, lines 42-47], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 9, DESALVO/ KATABI discloses the radar system of claim 1, wherein the radar system is connected to a head mounted display (HMD) configured for operation by a user (a radar system may include (1) a wearable device dimensioned to be worn by a user of an artificial reality system, (2) at least one radar device that (A) is secured to the wearable device [DESALVO col. 4, lines 4-7], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 13, DESALVO/ KATABI discloses the radar system of claim 9, wherein the instructions are executable by the one or more processors to configure the radar system to: obtain additional pose data, wherein the additional pose data is obtained using one or more image-based pose detection systems associated with the HMD; and fuse the additional pose data with the first object pose data and the second object pose data to determine the composite user pose (augmented-reality system 1000, augmented-reality system 1100, and/or virtual-reality system 1200 may include one or more optical sensors, such as two-dimensional (2D) or three-dimensional (3D) cameras, time-of-flight depth sensors, single-beam or sweeping laser rangefinders, 3D LiDAR sensors, and/or any other suitable type or form of optical sensor. An artificial reality system may process data from one or more of these sensors to identify a location of a user, to map the real world, to provide a user with context about real-world surroundings, and/or to perform a variety of other functions [DESALVO col. 29, lines 1-11]).
Regarding claim 14, DESALVO/ KATABI discloses the radar system of claim 13, wherein the additional pose data is obtained using one or more inertial tracking systems associated with the HMD (augmented-reality system 1100 may include one or more sensors, such as sensor 1140. Sensor 1140 may generate measurement signals in response to motion of augmented-reality system 1100 and may be located on substantially any portion of frame 1110. Sensor 1140 may represent a position sensor, an inertial measurement unit (IMU), a depth camera assembly, or any combination thereof [DESALVO col. 25, lines 27-34]).
Claim(s) 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DESALVO, in view of KATABI, and further in view of Hayashi et al. (US 2022/0091658 A1 “HAYASHI”).
Regarding claim 5, DESALVO/ KATABI discloses the radar system of claim 4,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, HAYASHI relates to techniques and systems that enable a radar system for applying different power modes. Specifically, HAYASHI teaches that the low-power mode, for example, may use a low duty cycle on the order of a few hertz (e.g., approximately 1 Hz or less than 5 Hz), which reduces power consumption to a few milliwatts (mW) (e.g., between approximately 2 mW and 5 mW). The high-power mode, on the other hand, may use a high duty cycle on the order of tens of hertz (Hz) (e.g., approximately 20 Hz or greater than 10 Hz), which causes the radar system 104 to consume power on the order of several milliwatts (e.g., between approximately 8 mW and 20 mW) [0072].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of DESALVO to include the teachings of HAYASHI, because doing so would reduce power consumption, as recognized by HAYASHI. In addition, both of the prior art references, DESALVO and HAYASHI, teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, that is, movement detection using radar system. It is further noted that it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Regarding claim 6, DESALVO/ KATABI/ HAYASHI discloses the radar system of claim 5, wherein the radar transmitter consumes less than 5 milliwatts to emit the multi-chirp FMCW radar signal (the low-power mode, for example, may use a low duty cycle on the order of a few hertz (e.g., approximately 1 Hz or less than 5 Hz), which reduces power consumption to a few milliwatts (mW) (e.g., between approximately 2 mW and 5 mW) [HAYASHI 0072], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 5).
Regarding claim 7, DESALVO/ KATABI discloses the radar system of claim 1,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, HAYASHI teaches that the radar-power state 704 can also be associated with a transmit power, which can vary based on a range or distance that the radar system 104 is monitoring. If the user 112 is farther from the computing device 102, for example, a higher transmit power may be used to detect the user 112. Alternatively, if the user 112 is closer to the computing device 102, a lower transmit power may be used [0092].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of DESALVO to include the teachings of HAYASHI, because doing so would conserve power during operation, as recognized by HAYASHI.
Regarding claim 8, DESALVO/ KATABI discloses the radar system of claim 1,
The Examiner noted that per disclosure, the term “about”, when used to modify a numerical value or range, refers to any value within 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, or 25% of the numerical value modified by the term “about” [0076]. In a same or similar field of endeavor, HAYASHI teaches that the transceiver 306 can generate radar signals within a range of frequencies (e.g., a frequency spectrum), such as between 1 gigahertz (GHz) and 400 GHz, between 4 GHz and 100 GHz, or between 57 GHz and 63 GHz. The frequency spectrum can be divided into multiple sub-spectra that have a similar bandwidth or different bandwidths. The bandwidths can be on the order of 500 megahertz (MHz), 1 GHz, 2 GHz, and so forth. As an example, different frequency sub-spectra may include frequencies between approximately 57 GHz and 59 GHz, 59 GHz and 61 GHz, or 61 GHz and 63 GHz. Multiple frequency sub-spectra that have a same bandwidth and may be contiguous or non-contiguous may also be chosen for coherence. The multiple frequency sub-spectra can be transmitted simultaneously or separated in time using a single radar signal or multiple radar signals [0070].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of DESALVO to include the teachings of HAYASHI, because doing so would conserve power while allowing for dynamic system operation, as recognized by HAYASHI. It is further noted that it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DESALVO, in view of KATABI, and further in view of Skeoch et al. (US 11,703,583 B1 “SKEOCH”).
Regarding claim 15, DESALVO/ KATABI discloses the radar system of claim 1,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, SKEOCH teaches that a processor 262 may transition the radar sensor 202 to higher operational modes in response to detecting possible motion of an object within a threshold distance [col. 2, lines 7-13]. With additional reference to FIG. 1, in response to transitioning the radar sensor 202 from the second operational mode 105 to the third operational mode 111, the processor 262, at operation 109, may trigger a first action. The action 109 may be, for example, to activate a camera 204 (FIG. 2) [col. 6, lines 47-52].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of DESALVO to include the teachings of SKEOCH, because doing so would conserve power and enable dynamic mode switching, as recognized by SKEOCH. In addition, both of the prior art references, DESALVO and SKEOCH, teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, that is, object identification by radar systems.
Claim(s) 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DESALVO, in view of SKEOCH.
Regarding claim 16, DESALVO discloses a system for object tracking, comprising: one or more processors; and one or more hardware storage devices that store instructions that are executable by the one or more processors (computing device(s) may each include at least one memory device and at least one physical processor [col. 23, line 52]) to configure the system to:
obtain, via a radar system, radar-based object pose data indicating a pose of an object (transmitted radar signal 101 may be reflected by objects (e.g., targets) in the path of the transmitted signal. The targets may reflect transmitted radar signal 101 and the reflected signal may be received by a radar receiver [col. 13, lines 57-63])
In a same or similar field of endeavor, SKEOCH teaches that a processor 262 may transition the radar sensor 202 to higher operational modes in response to detecting possible motion of an object within a threshold distance [col. 2, lines 7-13]. With additional reference to FIG. 1, in response to transitioning the radar sensor 202 from the second operational mode 105 to the third operational mode 111, the processor 262, at operation 109, may trigger a first action. The action 109 may be, for example, to activate a camera 204 (FIG. 2) [col. 6, lines 47-52]. Furthermore, SKEOCH teaches that once the camera 204 is activated, the camera 204 may record video and store the video in the buffer 248 located in the memory 240. The video stored in the buffer 248 may be added to video sent to the server 218 and/or the client device 214 in response to confirming that the object is of interest [col. 6, lines 62-68]. Further still, SKEOCH teaches that the video security device 300 may use the camera 204 to recognize a face (e.g., the face of an authorized user) [col. 17, lines 51-53].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of DESALVO to include the teachings of SKEOCH, because doing so would conserve power and enable dynamic mode switching, as recognized by SKEOCH.
Regarding claim 17, DESALVO/ SKEOCH discloses the system of claim 16, wherein the one or more conditions comprise the pose of the object being within, in proximity to, or approaching a range of perception of the image-based pose detection system (a processor 262 may transition the radar sensor 202 to higher operational modes in response to detecting possible motion of an object within a threshold distance and whether, once detected within the threshold distance, the object is determined to be within a region of interest within a monitored area 201 [SKEOCH col. 2, lines 7-13], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 16).
Regarding claim 18, DESALVO/ SKEOCH discloses the system of claim 16, wherein the radar system is configured to emit a multi-chirp frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) radar signal (an FMCW radar system may transmit a signal that is swept over time having a varying frequency (e.g., increasing over time). As shown in FIG. 6 the transmitted radar signal may be swept from an initial frequency to a final frequency over time [DESALVO col. 17, lines 42-47]) comprising a high-bandwidth chirp (601(1), 601(3), and 601(n) [DESALVO FIG. 6]) and a low-bandwidth chirp (601(2) and 601(4) [DESALVO FIG. 6]) to obtain the radar-based object pose data (transmitted radar signal 101 may be reflected by objects (e.g., targets) in the path of the transmitted signal. The targets may reflect transmitted radar signal 101 and the reflected signal may be received by a radar receiver [DESALVO col. 13, lines 57-63], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 16).
Regarding claim 19, DESALVO, as modified, discloses the system of claim 16,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, SKEOCH teaches that the identifying mode 111 consumes more power than the observational mode 105 [col. 6, lines 6-8].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of DESALVO to include the teachings of SKEOCH, because doing so would conserve power and enable dynamic mode switching, as recognized by SKEOCH.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Gupta et al. (US 2017/0285140 A1) is considered pertinent art for the disclosure overall, and in particular the details of in FMCW radar, the frequency of the transmit signal is varied linearly with time. For example, the frequency of the transmit signal may increase at a constant linear ramp rate from 77 GHz to 81 GHz in a period of about 100 microseconds. This transmit signal is referred as a ramp signal or a chirp signal. One or more obstacles scatters (or reflects) the transmit signal which is received by one or more receive units in the FMCW radar system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAILEY R LE whose telephone number is (571)272-4910. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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, WILLIAM J KELLEHER can be reached at (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.
/Hailey R Le/Examiner, Art Unit 3648 January 29, 2026