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 on pages 5-8 filed 8/11/2026 have been fully considered but the following arguments are not persuasive as the Applicant asserts the following: Claim 1 recites:
wherein the image sensor is activated by the millimeter-wave radar only when the object enters a predetermined range within which focal length of the image sensor and a distance between the object and the image sensor are matched to capture a clear image, and the predetermined range prevents unwanted image from being captured in consideration of privacy
Applicant asserts that Amir does not disclose radar-determined distance; however, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Amir et al (WO 2022224248 A2), hereinafter Amir discloses: (Amir, p. 9, lines 20-22: For example, the motion sensor 204 may be a radar based motion sensor which detects motion based on the Doppler component of a radar signal) and further reference (p. 10, lines 9-15: In some implementations, the active reflected wave detector 206 may provide both a ranging based output and a Doppler-based output based on measuring wave reflections from the environment. In these implementations, the active reflected wave detector 206 is configured to detect motion in a motion detection monitoring region in the environment, and a dedicated motion sensor 204 is not required. Preferably, the active reflected wave detector 206 is a radar sensor.)
Applicant asserts that Amir does not disclose predetermined range tied to focal-length matching; however, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Amir discloses: wherein the image sensor is activated by the millimeter-wave radar only when the object enters a predetermined range within which focal length of the image sensor and a distance between the object and the image sensor are matched to capture a clear image (Amir, p. 11, lines 26-27: The radar region of interest may correspond to a region defined by a virtual fence within the field of view of the active reflected wave detector 206); (p. 20, lines 23-30: the predetermined condition comprises that an object is located in, or has moved towards, a predetermined area within the field of view of the active reflected wave detector 206. As discussed above, such location information may be provided by the tracking module referred to above, or by other means. The predetermined area within the field of view of the active reflected wave detector 206 may correspond to a region of interest defined by a virtual fence within the field of view of the active reflected wave detector 206); (p. 26, lines 25-29: This condition monitoring region may be the “radar monitoring region” described above. That is, in these implementations the measured wave reflection data used by the CPU 202 to perform steps S410 and S506 is output by the active reflected wave detector 206 in response to the active reflected wave detector 206 measuring wave reflections from the maximum region that the active reflected wave detector is configured to monitor of the active reflected wave detector 206 ): (p. 32, lines 19-20: The CPU 202 controls the camera 208 to be in a deactivated state in response to an object leaving the radar monitoring region 606); (p. 38, lines 12-13: The viewable region limits of the camera 208 is the camera viewable region. The predefined limits of the camera 208 may be the same as the camera viewable region)
Applicant asserts that Amir does not disclose activation only when the object enters the predetermined range; however, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Amir discloses: wherein the image sensor is activated by the millimeter-wave radar only when the object enters a predetermined range within which focal length of the image sensor and a distance between the object and the image sensor are matched to capture a clear image (Amir, p. 13, lines 5-17: The camera 208 is also associated with a “camera viewable region” which is the region in the environment that the camera sees and can capture one or more images of the environment.
The lateral field of view of the camera viewable region may have a field of view of 140°, it will be appreciated that this is merely an example and other angles are possible. The camera viewable region has a depth of field which is the distance between a minimum distance of the depth of field and a maximum distance of the depth of field. If an object is present beyond the maximum distance of the depth of field of the camera viewable region, the object will be out of focus in a captured image. Similarly, if an object is present between the camera 208 and the minimum distance of the depth of field the camera 208 the object will be out of focus in a captured image.
The depth of field of the active reflected wave detector 206 and the camera viewable region may be much greater than that of the motion sensor 204, especially in embodiments in which the motion sensor is a PIR sensor)
Applicant asserts that Amir does not disclose” and the predetermined range prevents unwanted image from being captured in consideration of privacy” ; however, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Amir discloses: and the predetermined range prevents unwanted image from being captured in consideration of privacy (Amir, p. 13, lines 8-13: The camera viewable region has a depth of field which is the distance between a minimum distance of the depth of field and a maximum distance of the depth of field. If an object is present beyond the maximum distance of the depth of field of the camera viewable region, the object will be out of focus in a captured image. Similarly, if an object is present between the camera 208 and the minimum distance of the depth of field the camera 208 the object will be out of focus in a captured image) and (further reference p. 20, lines 23-25 regarding an object located in a given region of interest of the radar field of view; and lines 26-27 regarding region of interest may be a virtual fence region) Examiner interprets the byproduct of a the range or viewable range and anything beyond is an automatic consideration of privacy and prevention of unwanted image; therefore, the field of view (or region of interest) prevents unwanted images/objects
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Amir et al (WO 2022224248 A2), hereinafter Amir
Note a strike through is indicative that the reference does not disclose the limitation(s)
Regarding claim 1, Amir discloses:
an intruder detection system, comprising (Amir, p. 1, lines 4-8: Motion sensors are designed to monitor a defined area, which may be outdoors (e.g., entrance to a building, a yard, and the like), and/or indoors (e.g., within a room, in proximity of a door or window, and the like). Motion sensors may be used for security purposes, to detect intruders based on motion in areas in which no motion is expected, for example, an entrance to a home at night):
a millimeter-wave (mmWave) radar that detects an object and determines a property comprising a size of the object (Amir, p. 10, lines 14-24: Preferably, the active reflected wave detector 206 is a radar sensor. The radar sensor 206 may use millimeter wave (mmWave) sensing technology. The radar is, in some embodiments, a continuous-wave radar, such as frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) technology. Such a chip with such technology may be, for example, Texas Instruments Inc. part number iwr6843AOP. The radar may operate in microwave frequencies, e.g. in some embodiments a carrier wave in the range of l-lOOGHz (76-8 lGhz or 57-64GHz in some embodiments), and/or radio waves in the 300MHz to 300GHz range, and/or millimeter waves in the 30GHz to 300GHz range. In some embodiments, the radar has a bandwidth of at least 1 GHz. The active reflected wave detector 206 may comprise antennas for both emitting waves and for receiving reflections of the emitted waves, and in some embodiment different antennas may be used for the emitting compared with the receiving);
an image capture device, comprising an image sensor, that generates a captured image representing a scene under monitoring (Amir, p. 32, lines 5-6: The camera control monitoring region may correspond to the condition monitoring region referred to above);
a processor that determines whether the object is a human according to an output signal of the mmWave radar (Amir, p. 24, lines 15-17: In the process 500, before the CPU 202 controls the camera 208 to capture an image, the process 500 proceeds to step S506 where the CPU 202 processes accrued measured wave reflection data to determine whether a predetermined condition is met) and (p. 31, lines 21-26: the CPU 202 may be configured to process measured wave reflection data that is output by the active reflected wave detector 206 in response to the active reflected wave detector 206 measuring wave reflections from a "camera control monitoring region" in the environment. The CPU 202 is configured to control the camera 208, in particular its operating mode, based on measured wave reflection data associated with wave reflections from the camera control monitoring region in the environment);
and a motion sensor that detects motion of the object (Amir, p. 9, lines 20-22: For example, the motion sensor 204 may be a radar based motion sensor which detects motion based on the Doppler component of a radar signal) and further reference (p. 10, lines 9-15: In some implementations, the active reflected wave detector 206 may provide both a ranging based output and a Doppler-based output based on measuring wave reflections from the environment. In these implementations, the active reflected wave detector 206 is configured to detect motion in a motion detection monitoring region in the environment, and a dedicated motion sensor 204 is not required. Preferably, the active reflected wave detector 206 is a radar sensor);
wherein the image sensor is activated by the millimeter-wave radar only when the object enters a predetermined range within which focal length of the image sensor and a distance between the object and the image sensor are matched to capture a clear image (Amir, p. 11, lines 26-27: The radar region of interest may correspond to a region defined by a virtual fence within the field of view of the active reflected wave detector 206); (p. 20, lines 23-30: the predetermined condition comprises that an object is located in, or has moved towards, a predetermined area within the field of view of the active reflected wave detector 206. As discussed above, such location information may be provided by the tracking module referred to above, or by other means. The predetermined area within the field of view of the active reflected wave detector 206 may correspond to a region of interest defined by a virtual fence within the field of view of the active reflected wave detector 206); and further reference
(p. 26, lines 25-29: This condition monitoring region may be the “radar monitoring region” described above. That is, in these implementations the measured wave reflection data used by the CPU 202 to perform steps S410 and S506 is output by the active reflected wave detector 206 in response to the active reflected wave detector 206 measuring wave reflections from the maximum region that the active reflected wave detector is configured to monitor of the active reflected wave detector 206);
and further reference (p. 38, lines 12-13: The viewable region limits of the camera 208 is the camera viewable region. The predefined limits of the camera 208 may be the same as the camera viewable region)
and the predetermined range prevents unwanted image from being captured in consideration of privacy (Amir, p. 13, lines 8-13: The camera viewable region has a depth of field which is the distance between a minimum distance of the depth of field and a maximum distance of the depth of field. If an object is present beyond the maximum distance of the depth of field of the camera viewable region, the object will be out of focus in a captured image. Similarly, if an object is present between the camera 208 and the minimum distance of the depth of field the camera 208 the object will be out of focus in a captured image) and (further reference p. 20, lines 23-25 regarding an object located in a given region of interest of the radar field of view; and lines 26-27 regarding region of interest may be a virtual fence region) Examiner interprets the byproduct of a the range or viewable range and anything beyond is an automatic consideration of privacy and prevention of unwanted image; therefore, the field of view (or region of interest) prevents unwanted images/objects)
wherein the motion sensor activates the mmWave radar only when motion of the object is detected by the motion sensor (Amir, p. 24 line 3-17: Preferably, the active reflected wave detector 206 is a radar sensor. The radar sensor 206 may use millimeter wave (mmWave) sensing technology. The radar is, in some embodiments, a continuous-wave radar, such as frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) technology. Such a chip with such technology may be, for example, Texas Instruments Inc. part number iwr6843AOP. The radar may operate in microwave frequencies, e.g. in some embodiments a carrier wave in the range of l-lOOGHz (76-8 lGhz or 57-64GHz in some embodiments), and/or radio waves in the 300MHz to 300GHz range, and/or millimeter waves in the 30GHz to 300GHz range. In some embodiments, the radar has a bandwidth of a least 1 GHz. The active reflected wave detector 206 may comprise antennas for both emitting waves and for receiving reflections of the emitted waves, and in some embodiment different antennas may be used for the emitting compared with the receiving) and further reference (p. 32, lines 19-20: The CPU 202 controls the camera 208 to be in a deactivated state in response to an object leaving the radar monitoring region 606) Examiner highlights activated and deactivated states
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amir et al (WO 2022224248 A2), hereinafter Amir in view of Pezeshk et al (US 20210231775 A1), hereinafter Pezeshk
Regarding claim 10, Amir discloses:
the system of claim 9 (Amir, p. 1, lines 4-8),
Pezeshk discloses:
wherein the image processing is performed based on artificial intelligent (Al) filtering (Pezeshk, para [0055], A neural network, sometimes referred to as an artificial neural network, is a computing system/apparatus based on consideration of biological neural networks of animal brains. Such systems/apparatus progressively improve performance, which is referred to as learning, to perform tasks, typically without task-specific programming. For example, in image recognition, a neural network may be taught to identify images that contain an object by analyzing example images that have been tagged with a name for the object and, having learnt the object and name, may use the analytic results to identify the object in untagged images. A neural network is based on a collection of connected units called neurons, where each connection, called a synapse, between neurons can transmit a unidirectional signal with an activating strength that varies with the strength of the connection. The receiving neuron can activate and propagate a signal to downstream neurons connected to it, typically based on whether the combined incoming signals, which are from potentially many transmitting neurons, are of sufficient strength, where strength is a parameter)
It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Amir with Pezeshk to incorporate the features of: wherein the image processing is performed based on artificial intelligent (AI) filtering. Both arts disclose systems and methods that comprise millimeter wave antenna array and image processing of objects such as humans; however, Amir fails to disclose: wherein the image processing is performed based on artificial intelligent (AI) filtering as disclosed by Pezeshk. The modification would render the predictable results of improved detection accuracy, real-time object recognition, and improved behavioral analysis and threat prioritization.
References Cited But Not Relied Upon
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as thus:
Velipasalar et al US 20200089967 A1 privacy preserving sensor and low power (Abstract, A low-cost, low-power, stand-alone sensor platform having a visible-range camera sensor, a thermopile array, a microphone, a motion sensor, and a microprocessor that is configured to perform occupancy detection and counting while preserving the privacy of occupants. The platform is programmed to extract shape/texture from images in spatial domain; motion from video in time domain; and audio features in frequency domain. Embedded binarized neural networks are used for efficient object of interest detection. The platform is also programmed with advanced fusion algorithms for multiple sensor modalities addressing dependent sensor observations. The platform may be deployed for (i) residential use in detecting occupants for autonomously controlling building systems, such as HVAC and lighting systems, to provide energy savings, (ii) security and surveillance, such as to detect loitering and surveil places of interest, (iii) analyzing customer behavior and flows, (iv) identifying high performing stores by retailers.)
Russel US 20190035128 A1 (para [0005], It would therefore be desirable to provide a UAV that allows for enhanced privacy and/or security and/or the like.) and (para [0012], In examples described herein, an image processor is provided (for example in the UAV) that receives the captured image data output by the camera. The image processor generates image data corresponding to a second, different representation of the scene. A part of the scene that is visible through the window in the first representation of the scene is represented differently in the first and second representations of the scene, for example to enhance privacy. The image processor may generate the image data corresponding to the second representation of the scene by modifying the captured image data corresponding to the first representation of the scene (for example using a pixilation technique) and/or by combining data (for example overlay data) with the captured image data corresponding to the first representation of the scene
Trundle et al US 9153111 B2 discloses an intrusion security system
Kempshall et al US 20210149047 A1 discloses a detection system that uses mmWave wherein sensors are activated upon detection, [0019] Metal and ceramic objects scatter millimeter wave energy more strongly than most clothing and human body surfaces, so the system 100 will identify areas of interest based on intensity of scattering. The short wavelength of the source signals 110 allows high-resolution imaging so that an automated detection algorithm can use the size and the shape of the highly reflective regions of the image to identify potential weapons. Other sensors (e.g., visible or infrared cameras) can also be accurately directed to further examine target regions to aid in identification. For example, when a suspicious object 114 is detected based on the three-dimensional image generated using the detected signal data from the receivers 108, additional sensors may be activated and directed to the location of the suspicious object 114 for further image detection
Tilkin et al US10937290B2 discloses PIR detection, perimeter intrusion detector, microwave, privacy protection via pixilation/blurring (36) The non-photorealistic representation of the scene can be generated from the received video, generated from an earlier image of the scene, or in some other manner. Generating the non-photorealistic representation of the scene from the received video can include processing the received video to adulterate or obscure the realism of the video, e.g. by performing one or a combination of the following image processing steps: blurring, pixelating, modifying one or more attributes of each of the one or more video frames, e.g. resolution, gradient, brightness, contrast, saturation, sharpness, hue or similar thereof, masking, image distortion, merging frames, temporal or spatial averaging, compressing, replacing at least a portion or an entire video frame with another predetermined or a randomly generated image, and so on. The aim being to generate a ‘non-photorealistic’ image in which there is less correlation between the scene being monitored and the second video generated (in comparison to the amount of correlation between an original video received and the real scene) in order to prevent at least some details of the scene being visually identifiable by a person looking at the second video. The details may include characteristics of one or more objects contained in the video, for example, an animal, a person, a building structure, a vehicle, or similar thereof.
Zhang et al US 20220381898 A1 discloses mmWave sensing of humans wherein privacy is considered from image capturing devices
Goldstein et al US 20220057519 A1 discloses an automate threat detection and deterrence apparatus wherein privacy is preserved from the imaging devices
Kempshall et al US 20210149047 A1 discloses a standoff detection system that comprises object detection, mmWave energy, target discrimination and obfuscation for privacy preservation
Watanabe et al US 20200185804 A1 discloses subject monitoring via mmWave radar with image sensors i.e. cameras and sensing abilities to protect privacy
Zhang et al US 20220381898 A1 discloses image sensors (cameras) with mmWave wherein size, shape, and position are reflected within the signal [0059]
Goldstein et al US 20220057519 A1 discloses an automated threat detection and deterrent measures
Yoda US 8305448 B2 selective privacy protection for imaged matter via privacy mask processing
Salgar et al US 8576282 B2 security system with operator side privacy zones and a privacy mask generator
Langhammer et al US11049377B2 discloses an alarm dependent video survelliance wherein actuation until object enters area privacy filter, making objects irrecognizable (17) The step of “making objects in the area of surveillance irrecognizable or invisible in the captured video images” functions as a “privacy filter”. No personal data are obtained from objects in the area of surveillance, if the objects are irrecognizable or invisible in the captured video images. In particular, as the objects are not visible and/or recognizable in the captured video images, no personal data of an individual are captured, if one or more of the objects are individuals. Hence, an identification of the individuals is not possible. The right of privacy is preserved although the video camera is operating.
Regani et al US 11953618 B2 discloses wireless motion recognition wherein characteristics include location, position, state, size, length, width, height, shape, curve, gesture, limbs, posture, etc.
Goldstein et al US 11747480 B2 discloses an automated threat detection and deterrence apparatus that analyze the size of objects
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 KIMBERLY JENKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-0404. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8a-5p 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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at 517.270.5144. 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.
/KIMBERLY JENKINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
