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 .
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.
Claims 1-3 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crouch et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20190310372 A1), hereinafter Crouch.
Regarding claim 1, Crouch teaches a method for detection using a frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) ([0104] FIG. 9A through 9C are images that illustrates an example output on a display device based on Doppler corrected ranges and improvement over non-corrected ranges, according to embodiments. The image of FIG. 9A was collected using a wide field of view (FOV), three dimensional (3D) FM chirped waveform (FMCW) LIDAR system), comprising:
transmitting a detection wave consistent with a frequency sweep waveform to detect a target object ([0039] FIG. 1A is a set of graphs 110, 120, 130, 140 that illustrates an example optical chirp measurement of range, according to an embodiment...Graph 120 indicates the frequency of the transmitted signal.);
receiving an echo of the detection wave reflected from the target object ([0040] The value of ƒ.sub.R is measured by the frequency difference between the transmitted signal 126 and returned signal 136a in a time domain mixing operation referred to as de-chirping.); and
obtaining at least one of a distance to the target object or a speed of the target object based on the echo and the detection wave ([0060] target distance can be directly obtained by a frequency analysis in an FFT component 345), wherein
a cycle of the frequency sweep waveform comprises a rising edge, a horizontal region, and a falling edge ([0069] FIG. 5A is a graph that illustrates an example serial (also called sequential) up and down chirp transmitted optical signal for a LIDAR system, according to an embodiment...A first pulse of duration 515a is an up chirp and a second pulse of duration 515b is a down chirp.).
Regarding claim 2, Crouch teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the horizontal region is connected to the rising edge and the falling edge during the cycle of the frequency sweep waveform ([Fig. 5A]).
Regarding claim 3, Crouch teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the horizontal region is separated from the rising edge and the falling edge during the cycle of the frequency sweep waveform ([Fig. 5B]; [0072] FIG. 5B is a graph that illustrates an example simultaneous up and down chirp transmitted optical signal for a LIDAR system, according to an embodiment.).
Regarding claim 11, Crouch teaches a lidar, comprising:
a light-emitter, configured to transmit a detection wave consistent with a frequency sweep waveform, wherein a cycle of the frequency sweep waveform comprises a rising edge, a horizontal region, and a falling edge ([0104] FIG. 9A through 9C are images that illustrates an example output on a display device based on Doppler corrected ranges and improvement over non-corrected ranges, according to embodiments. The image of FIG. 9A was collected using a wide field of view (FOV), three dimensional (3D) FM chirped waveform (FMCW) LIDAR system; [0069] FIG. 5A is a graph that illustrates an example serial (also called sequential) up and down chirp transmitted optical signal for a LIDAR system, according to an embodiment...A first pulse of duration 515a is an up chirp and a second pulse of duration 515b is a down chirp.);
a mirror unit, configured to receive and reflect and transmit the detection wave to detect a target object ([Fig. 2A-2B]; [0047] In some embodiments, the transmitted beam is scanned over multiple angles to profile any object in its path using scanning optics 218.);
a sensor unit, wherein an echo of the detection wave reflected from the target object is reflected by the mirror unit and then incident onto the sensor unit ([0040] The value of ƒ.sub.R is measured by the frequency difference between the transmitted signal 126 and returned signal 136a in a time domain mixing operation referred to as de-chirping.); and
a processor unit, coupled to the light-emitter and the sensor unit and configured to obtain at least one of a distance to the target object or a speed of the target object based on the echo and the detection wave ([0060] target distance can be directly obtained by a frequency analysis in an FFT component 345).
Regarding claim 12, Crouch teaches the lidar of claim 11, wherein the horizontal region is connected to the rising edge and the falling edge during the cycle of the frequency sweep waveform ([Fig. 5A]).
Regarding claim 13, Crouch teaches the lidar of claim 11, wherein the horizontal region is separated from the rising edge and the falling edge during the cycle of the frequency sweep waveform ([Fig. 5B]. [0072] FIG. 5B is a graph that illustrates an example simultaneous up and down chirp transmitted optical signal for a LIDAR system, according to an embodiment.).
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.
Claims 4, 6-10, 14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crouch in view of Buddendick (United States Patent Application Publication 20180356511 A1), hereinafter Buddendick.
Regarding claim 4, Crouch teaches the method of claim 1, wherein obtaining at least one of the distance to the target object or the speed of the target object based on the echo and the detection wave comprises:
determining whether an amplitude corresponding to a frequency fd of a beating signal is greater than or equal to an amplitude threshold, wherein the beating signal is between the detection wave and the echo in the horizontal region ([0089] The set (S.sub.up) of range returns R.sub.i up from the up-chirp range profiles and the set (S.sub.down) of range returns R.sub.j down from the down-chirp range profiles are determined using Equation 1b and frequencies of peaks selected via a standard thresholding and peak fitting procedure (e.g., peak finding based on height and width of the peak) of the FFT spectrum of the electrical output of the photodetectors.);
Crouch fails to teach the method comprising determining a distance frequency shift component fz and a speed frequency shift component fv depending on whether the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal is greater than or equal to the amplitude threshold; and determining at least one of the distance to the target object or the speed of the target object based on the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv.
However, Buddendick teaches the method comprising determining a distance frequency shift component fz and a speed frequency shift component fv depending on whether the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal is greater than or equal to the amplitude threshold; and determining at least one of the distance to the target object or the speed of the target object based on the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv ([0026] If the same object is now located once at edge 28 and then, slightly later, at edge 32 again, the frequencies of these two peaks may be added up. Since edges 28 and 32 have an opposite gradient, the distance-dependent components cancel each other out and only the Doppler component that is a function of the relative velocity is left. Conversely, if the frequencies of the two peaks are subtracted, the velocity-dependent components cancel each other out, and a pure distance component is obtained, which makes it possible to determine the distance of the object.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the determination of distance frequency shift and speed frequency shift similar to Buddendick, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of classifying the frequency shift best suited for an environment based on the threshold limit.
Regarding claim 6, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the method of claim 4, further comprising:
determining a presence of multiple echoes based on a determination that at least one of a number of absolute values f1 of frequency differences in the rising edge or a number of absolute values f2 of frequency differences in the falling edge is greater than 1 ([0080] Overall this gives rise to an up-chirp beat frequency band for ƒ.sub.R from 0 to 2*ƒo and a non-overlapping down-chirp beat frequency band for ƒ.sub.R from 2*ƒo to a system cutoff frequency (probably digitizer limited)); and
performing echo matching for the multiple echoes, and retaining one of the absolute values f1 in the rising edge and one of the absolute values f2 in the falling edge ([0087] Here is demonstrated an approach to automatically pair up-chirp ranges and down-chirp ranges for calculating Doppler effects and Doppler corrected ranges. This approach uses a bi-partite graph matching formulation to achieve correct up/down return parings with high probability. FIG. 7A is a block diagram that illustrates example pairs of up-chirp and down-chirp ranges, according to an embodiment.).
Regarding claim 7, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the method of claim 6, wherein performing echo matching for the multiple echoes comprises: selecting a pair of the absolute values f1 and f2 consistent with fd=❘|f2+f1|/2❘ or fd=❘|f2-f1|/2❘, and discarding remaining absolute values f1 and f2 ([0087] Here is demonstrated an approach to automatically pair up-chirp ranges and down-chirp ranges for calculating Doppler effects and Doppler corrected ranges. This approach uses a bi-partite graph matching formulation to achieve correct up/down return parings with high probability. FIG. 7A is a block diagram that illustrates example pairs of up-chirp and down-chirp ranges, according to an embodiment; [0090] Extra peaks on either side when one side “ran out of peaks” were discarded.).
Regarding claim 8, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the method of claim 4, wherein determining the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv
Crouch fails to teach the method comprises in response to the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal being less than the amplitude threshold, determining the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv according to: fz=|f2+f1|/2, and fv=|f2+f1|/2.
However, Buddendick teaches the method in response to the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal being less than the amplitude threshold, determining the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv according to: fz=|f2+f1|/2, and fv=|f2+f1|/2 ([0026] If the same object is now located once at edge 28 and then, slightly later, at edge 32 again, the frequencies of these two peaks may be added up. Since edges 28 and 32 have an opposite gradient, the distance-dependent components cancel each other out and only the Doppler component that is a function of the relative velocity is left. Conversely, if the frequencies of the two peaks are subtracted, the velocity-dependent components cancel each other out, and a pure distance component is obtained, which makes it possible to determine the distance of the object.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the below threshold configuration similar to Buddendick, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of adapting the signal processing to handle low level return signals.
Regarding claim 9, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the method of claim 8, further comprising:
determining a presence of multiple echoes based on a determination that at least one of a number of absolute values f1 of frequency differences in the rising edge or a number of absolute values f2 of frequency differences in the falling edge is greater than 1 ([0080] Overall this gives rise to an up-chirp beat frequency band for ƒ.sub.R from 0 to 2*ƒo and a non-overlapping down-chirp beat frequency band for ƒ.sub.R from 2*ƒo to a system cutoff frequency (probably digitizer limited)); and
performing echo matching for the multiple echoes, and retaining one of the absolute values f1 in the rising edge and one of the absolute values f2 in the falling edge ([0087] Here is demonstrated an approach to automatically pair up-chirp ranges and down-chirp ranges for calculating Doppler effects and Doppler corrected ranges. This approach uses a bi-partite graph matching formulation to achieve correct up/down return parings with high probability. FIG. 7A is a block diagram that illustrates example pairs of up-chirp and down-chirp ranges, according to an embodiment.).
Regarding claim 10, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the method of claim 9, wherein performing echo matching for the multiple echoes comprises:
determining a generated frequency shift F based on a moving speed of a device transmitting the detection wave; and selecting a pair of the absolute values f1 and f2 such that f2-f12 is closest to F, and discarding remaining absolute values f1 and f2 ([0104] Post-processing eliminated unwanted intensity speckle on hard target surfaces. In the example embodiment, the threshold was picked empirically. In other embodiments several thresholds ae selected with some measure of goodness of result; and the threshold that gives the best result is selected; [0090] Extra peaks on either side when one side “ran out of peaks” were discarded.).
Regarding claim 14, Buddendick, as modified above, teaches the lidar of claim 11, wherein the processor unit is configured to:
determining whether an amplitude corresponding to a frequency fd of a beating signal is greater than or equal to an amplitude threshold, wherein the beating signal is between the detection wave and the echo in the horizontal region ([0089] The set (S.sub.up) of range returns R.sub.i up from the up-chirp range profiles and the set (S.sub.down) of range returns R.sub.j down from the down-chirp range profiles are determined using Equation 1b and frequencies of peaks selected via a standard thresholding and peak fitting procedure (e.g., peak finding based on height and width of the peak) of the FFT spectrum of the electrical output of the photodetectors.);
Crouch fails to teach the system comprising determining a distance frequency shift component fz and a speed frequency shift component fv depending on whether the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal is greater than or equal to the amplitude threshold; and determining at least one of the distance to the target object or the speed of the target object based on the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv.
However, Buddendick teaches the system comprising determining a distance frequency shift component fz and a speed frequency shift component fv depending on whether the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal is greater than or equal to the amplitude threshold; and determining at least one of the distance to the target object or the speed of the target object based on the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv ([0026] If the same object is now located once at edge 28 and then, slightly later, at edge 32 again, the frequencies of these two peaks may be added up. Since edges 28 and 32 have an opposite gradient, the distance-dependent components cancel each other out and only the Doppler component that is a function of the relative velocity is left. Conversely, if the frequencies of the two peaks are subtracted, the velocity-dependent components cancel each other out, and a pure distance component is obtained, which makes it possible to determine the distance of the object.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the determination of distance frequency shift and speed frequency shift similar to Buddendick, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of classifying the frequency shift best suited for an environment based on the threshold limit.
Regarding claim 16, Crouch, as modified, teaches the lidar of claim 14, wherein the processor unit is configured to:
determine a presence of multiple echoes based on a determination that at least one of a number of absolute values f1 of frequency differences in the rising edge or a number of absolute values f2 of frequency differences in the falling edge is greater than 1 ([0080] Overall this gives rise to an up-chirp beat frequency band for ƒ.sub.R from 0 to 2*ƒo and a non-overlapping down-chirp beat frequency band for ƒ.sub.R from 2*ƒo to a system cutoff frequency (probably digitizer limited)); and
perform echo matching for the multiple echoes, and retain one of the absolute values f1 in the rising edge and one of the absolute values f2 in the falling edge ([0087] Here is demonstrated an approach to automatically pair up-chirp ranges and down-chirp ranges for calculating Doppler effects and Doppler corrected ranges. This approach uses a bi-partite graph matching formulation to achieve correct up/down return parings with high probability. FIG. 7A is a block diagram that illustrates example pairs of up-chirp and down-chirp ranges, according to an embodiment.).
Regarding claim 17, Crouch, as modified, teaches the lidar of claim 16, wherein the processor unit configured to perform the echo matching for the multiple echoes is further configured to selecting a pair of the absolute values f1 and f2 consistent with fd=❘|f2+f1|/2❘ or fd=❘|f2+f1|/2❘, and discarding remaining absolute values f1 and f2 ([0087] Here is demonstrated an approach to automatically pair up-chirp ranges and down-chirp ranges for calculating Doppler effects and Doppler corrected ranges. This approach uses a bi-partite graph matching formulation to achieve correct up/down return parings with high probability. FIG. 7A is a block diagram that illustrates example pairs of up-chirp and down-chirp ranges, according to an embodiment; [0090] Extra peaks on either side when one side “ran out of peaks” were discarded.).
Regarding claim 18, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the lidar of claim 14,
Crouch fails to teach the system comprises in response to the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal being less than the amplitude threshold, determining the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv according to: fz=|f2+f1|/2, and fv=|f2+f1|/2.
However, Buddendick teaches the system in response to the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal being less than the amplitude threshold, determining the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv according to: fz=|f2+f1|/2, and fv=|f2+f1|/2 ([0026] If the same object is now located once at edge 28 and then, slightly later, at edge 32 again, the frequencies of these two peaks may be added up. Since edges 28 and 32 have an opposite gradient, the distance-dependent components cancel each other out and only the Doppler component that is a function of the relative velocity is left. Conversely, if the frequencies of the two peaks are subtracted, the velocity-dependent components cancel each other out, and a pure distance component is obtained, which makes it possible to determine the distance of the object.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the below threshold configuration similar to Buddendick, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of adapting the signal processing to handle low level return signals.
Regarding claim 19, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the lidar of claim 18, wherein the processor unit is configured to:
determine a presence of multiple echoes based on a determination that at least one of a number of absolute values f1 of frequency differences in the rising edge or a number of absolute values f2 of frequency differences in the falling edge is greater than 1 ([0080] Overall this gives rise to an up-chirp beat frequency band for ƒ.sub.R from 0 to 2*ƒo and a non-overlapping down-chirp beat frequency band for ƒ.sub.R from 2*ƒo to a system cutoff frequency (probably digitizer limited)); and
perform echo matching for the multiple echoes, and retain one of the absolute values f1 in the rising edge and one of the absolute values f2 in the falling edge ([0087] Here is demonstrated an approach to automatically pair up-chirp ranges and down-chirp ranges for calculating Doppler effects and Doppler corrected ranges. This approach uses a bi-partite graph matching formulation to achieve correct up/down return parings with high probability. FIG. 7A is a block diagram that illustrates example pairs of up-chirp and down-chirp ranges, according to an embodiment.).
Regarding claim 20, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the lidar of claim 19, wherein the processor unit configured to perform the echo matching for the multiple echoes is further configured to determining a generated frequency shift F based on a moving speed of a device transmitting the detection wave; and selecting a pair of the absolute values f1 and f2 such that f2-f12 is closest to F, and discarding remaining absolute values f1 and f2 ([0104] Post-processing eliminated unwanted intensity speckle on hard target surfaces. In the example embodiment, the threshold was picked empirically. In other embodiments several thresholds ae selected with some measure of goodness of result; and the threshold that gives the best result is selected; [0090] Extra peaks on either side when one side “ran out of peaks” were discarded.).
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crouch in view of Buddendick, further in view of Oshima et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20150338505), hereinafter Oshima.
Regarding claim 5, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the method of claim 4, wherein determining the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv comprises:
determining the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv: fz=|f2+f1|/2,and fv=|f2−f1|/2; and determining the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv according to: if f1>f2, fz=❘|f2−f1|/2 ❘, and fv=-|f2+f1|/2; and if f1<f2, fz=❘|f2−f1|/2❘, and fv=|f2+f1|/2 ([0077] For example, if the blue shift causing range effects 415 and 425 of FIG. 4A and FIG. 4B, respectively, is ƒ.sub.B, then the beat frequency of the up chirp will be increased by the offset and occur at ƒ.sub.B+Δfs and the beat frequency of the down chirp will be decreased by the offset to ƒ.sub.B−Δfs. Thus, the up chirps will be in a higher frequency band than the down chirps, thereby separating them. If Δfs is greater than any expected Doppler effect, there will be no ambiguity in the ranges associated with up chirps and down chirps. The measured beats can then be corrected with the correctly signed value of the known Δfs to get the proper up-chirp and down-chirp ranges.).
Crouch fails to teach the method comprising determining which of |f2+f1|/2 and |f2−f1|/2 is closer to fd when the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal is greater than or equal to the amplitude threshold, wherein f1 is an absolute value of a frequency difference between the detection wave and the echo in the rising edge, and f2 is an absolute value of a frequency difference between the detection wave and the echo in the falling edge;
However, Oshima teaches the method comprising determining which of |f2+f1|/2 and |f2−f1|/2 is closer to fd when the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal is greater than or equal to the amplitude threshold, wherein f1 is an absolute value of a frequency difference between the detection wave and the echo in the rising edge, and f2 is an absolute value of a frequency difference between the detection wave and the echo in the falling edge ([0207] Although the stationary object decision processing unit 44 computes the incident angle φ.sub.n of the scattered wave using Expression (12), it can also use a method of computing the beat frequencies f.sub.up and f.sub.down and the incident angle φ by varying y step by step (such as varying it using the inverse of the sweep bandwidth B as a step, for example), and of employing as φ.sub.n the incident angle φ corresponding to the beat frequencies f.sub.up and f.sub.down closest to the beat frequency of the peaks detected by the peak detection processing units 42-1 and 42-2 among the beat frequencies f.sub.up and f.sub.down computed while varying y.);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch, as modified, to comprise the threshold proximity and best fit similar to Oshima, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of ensuring the best detection signal is being used in the environmental processing and processing the data based on that information.
Regarding claim 15, Crouch, as modified, teaches the lidar of claim 14, wherein the processor unit is configured to:
determining the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv: fz=|f2+f1|/2,and fv=|f2−f1|/2; and determining the distance frequency shift component fz and the speed frequency shift component fv according to: if f1>f2, fz=❘|f2−f1|/2 ❘, and fv=-|f2+f1|/2; and if f1<f2, fz=❘|f2−f1|/2❘, and fv=|f2+f1|/2 ([0077] For example, if the blue shift causing range effects 415 and 425 of FIG. 4A and FIG. 4B, respectively, is ƒ.sub.B, then the beat frequency of the up chirp will be increased by the offset and occur at ƒ.sub.B+Δfs and the beat frequency of the down chirp will be decreased by the offset to ƒ.sub.B−Δfs. Thus, the up chirps will be in a higher frequency band than the down chirps, thereby separating them. If Δfs is greater than any expected Doppler effect, there will be no ambiguity in the ranges associated with up chirps and down chirps. The measured beats can then be corrected with the correctly signed value of the known Δfs to get the proper up-chirp and down-chirp ranges.).
Crouch fails to teach the method comprising determining which of |f2+f1|/2 and |f2−f1|/2 is closer to fd when the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal is greater than or equal to the amplitude threshold, wherein f1 is an absolute value of a frequency difference between the detection wave and the echo in the rising edge, and f2 is an absolute value of a frequency difference between the detection wave and the echo in the falling edge;
However, Oshima teaches the method comprising determining which of |f2+f1|/2 and |f2−f1|/2 is closer to fd when the amplitude corresponding to the frequency fd of the beating signal is greater than or equal to the amplitude threshold, wherein f1 is an absolute value of a frequency difference between the detection wave and the echo in the rising edge, and f2 is an absolute value of a frequency difference between the detection wave and the echo in the falling edge ([0207] Although the stationary object decision processing unit 44 computes the incident angle φ.sub.n of the scattered wave using Expression (12), it can also use a method of computing the beat frequencies f.sub.up and f.sub.down and the incident angle φ by varying y step by step (such as varying it using the inverse of the sweep bandwidth B as a step, for example), and of employing as φ.sub.n the incident angle φ corresponding to the beat frequencies f.sub.up and f.sub.down closest to the beat frequency of the peaks detected by the peak detection processing units 42-1 and 42-2 among the beat frequencies f.sub.up and f.sub.down computed while varying y.);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch, as modified, to comprise the threshold proximity and best fit similar to Oshima, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of ensuring the best detection signal is being used in the environmental processing and processing the data based on that information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT WILLIAM VASQUEZ JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, Flex Friday, 8:00-5:00 PST.
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, HELAL ALGAHAIM can be reached at (571)270-5227. 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.
/ROBERT W VASQUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights