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, see ‘35 U.S.C 102 Rejections’, filed 11/21/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 18, 19, 20, 34, and 35 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in regards to claims 18 and 34 and Choi (US 20190155304 A1) in regards to 19, 20, and 35.
Applicant’s arguments, see 35 U.S.C 103 Rejections, filed 11/21/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 21-23, 25-33, and 36-37 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in regards to claims18, 34, and 28 in view of Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1). As all the independent claims are still rejected and the dependent claims’ allowance was dependent on the independent claims, the dependent claims also remain rejected.
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.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1).
Regarding claim 28 Brookner discloses
A system comprising: a first radar comprising a first plurality of Transmit (Tx) antennas and a first plurality of Receive (Rx) antennas (Page 5 Paragraph 1 line 9-11, "Also, although the radars 12a, 12b are described as rotating antennas, the technique described herein also applies to radars that use non-rotating phased arrays" where the individual radar transmit and receive), the first radar configured to communicate radar signals in a first radar Field Of View (FOV) (Page 3 Paragraph 1, line 3-6, "the radars 12a, 12b to be combined are positioned in fairly close proximity to each other. The phase centers of the antenna 16a and the antenna 16b (in radar 12a and radar 12b, respectively), are spaced by a distance "D". The distance D is a flexible parameter"; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously" where there are different fov of the same target so they overlap); a second radar comprising a second plurality of Tx antennas and a second plurality of Rx antennas (Page 5 Paragraph 1 line 9-11, "Also, although the radars 12a, 12b are described as rotating antennas, the technique described herein also applies to radars that use non-rotating phased arrays" where the individual radar transmit and receive), the second radar configured to communicate radar signals in a second radar FOV, wherein the first and second radar FOVs partially overlap (Page 3 Paragraph 1, line 3-6, "the radars 12a, 12b to be combined are positioned in fairly close proximity to each other. The phase centers of the antenna 16a and the antenna 16b (in radar 12a and radar 12b, respectively), are spaced by a distance "D". The distance D is a flexible parameter"; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously" where there are different fov of the same target so they overlap); and a processor configured to: determine radar synchronization information to synchronize between the first radar and the second radar (Page 4 Paragraph 2, line 10-14, "Referring now to FIG. 4, the system 10 includes a digital signal processor 70 that receives echo signals from each of the down converters 24. In the exemplary digital processing implementation of FIG. 4, the signals correspond to in-phase ("I") and quadrature ("Q") channels. The digital signal processor 70 performs digitally those functions performed by units 27, 28 and 30 of system 10 as depicted in FIG. 1. The output of the digital signal processor 70, that is, the aggregate value" where the two downconverters are for the two different radars; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously"); and generate radar information corresponding to a target based on the radar synchronization information, a Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar, a first Rx signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, and a second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal (Abstract, "A mechanism for combining signals of multiple radars to achieve increased range, radar sensitivity and angle accuracy is provided. A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars. The echo signals received at the first radar are processed to produce first radar processed echo signals and the echoes signals received at the second radar are processed to produce second radar processed echo signals. The first and second radar processed echo signals are combined to form an aggregate value").
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 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.
Claims 18, 26, 34, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in view of Wang (US 20200371228 A1)
Regarding claim 18 Brookner discloses
An apparatus comprising: a processor configured to: determine radar synchronization information to synchronize between a first radar and a second radar (Page 4 Paragraph 2, line 10-14, "Referring now to FIG. 4, the system 10 includes a digital signal processor 70 that receives echo signals from each of the down converters 24. In the exemplary digital processing implementation of FIG. 4, the signals correspond to in-phase ("I") and quadrature ("Q") channels. The digital signal processor 70 performs digitally those functions performed by units 27, 28 and 30 of system 10 as depicted in FIG. 1. The output of the digital signal processor 70, that is, the aggregate value" where the two downconverters are for the two different radars; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously"), wherein the first radar is to communicate radar signals in a first radar Field Of View (FOV), and the second radar is to communicate radar signals in a second radar FOV, wherein the first and second radar FOVs partially overlap (Page 3 Paragraph 1, line 3-6, "the radars 12a, 12b to be combined are positioned in fairly close proximity to each other. The phase centers of the antenna 16a and the antenna 16b (in radar 12a and radar 12b, respectively), are spaced by a distance "D". The distance D is a flexible parameter"; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously" where there are different fov of the same target so they overlap); and generate radar information corresponding to a target based on the radar synchronization information, a Transmit (Tx) radar signal transmitted by the first radar, a first Receive (Rx) signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, and a second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal (Abstract, "A mechanism for combining signals of multiple radars to achieve increased range, radar sensitivity and angle accuracy is provided. A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars. The echo signals received at the first radar are processed to produce first radar processed echo signals and the echoes signals received at the second radar are processed to produce second radar processed echo signals. The first and second radar processed echo signals are combined to form an aggregate value"). Brookner does not disclose a memory to store information processed by the processor.
Wang discloses
A memory to store information processed by the processor (Paragraph 0059, "The vehicle computing device(s) 404 can include one or more processors 418 and memory 420 communicatively coupled with the one or more processors 418").
Brookner discloses a signal processor that combines the signals of the two different radars but does not explicitly mention that there is a memory. As the signal processor of Brookner has instructions to follow, it would be advantageous to have a memory for the implementation of the invention. A memory would be used not only to store the instructions but also the data outputs for analysis. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Wang to add in a memory for the signal processor to facilitate the implementation of the invention and to store data outputs for analysis.
Additionally, to further explain the fov teaching, Brookner discloses two radars separated by a distance ‘D’ meaning they are in different locations and therefore have different fields of view. The two radar are observing the same target meaning their fovs will overlap.
Regarding claim 26 Brookner further discloses
The apparatus of claim 18, wherein the processor is configured to determine the radar information corresponding to the target based on shared radar information broadcasted by the first radar and received by the second radar (Abstract, "A mechanism for combining signals of multiple radars to achieve increased range, radar sensitivity and angle accuracy is provided. A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars. The echo signals received at the first radar are processed to produce first radar processed echo signals and the echoes signals received at the second radar are processed to produce second radar processed echo signals. The first and second radar processed echo signals are combined to form an aggregate value").
Regarding claim 34 Brookner discloses
A product comprising operable to, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to: determine radar synchronization information to synchronize between a first radar and a second radar (Page 4 Paragraph 2, line 10-14, "Referring now to FIG. 4, the system 10 includes a digital signal processor 70 that receives echo signals from each of the down converters 24. In the exemplary digital processing implementation of FIG. 4, the signals correspond to in-phase ("I") and quadrature ("Q") channels. The digital signal processor 70 performs digitally those functions performed by units 27, 28 and 30 of system 10 as depicted in FIG. 1. The output of the digital signal processor 70, that is, the aggregate value" where the two downconverters are for the two different radars; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously"), wherein the first radar is to communicate radar signals in a first radar Field Of View (FOV), and the second radar is to communicate radar signals in a second radar FOV, wherein the first and second radar FOVs partially overlap (Page 3 Paragraph 1, line 3-6, "the radars 12a, 12b to be combined are positioned in fairly close proximity to each other. The phase centers of the antenna 16a and the antenna 16b (in radar 12a and radar 12b, respectively), are spaced by a distance "D". The distance D is a flexible parameter"; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously" where there are different fov of the same target so they overlap); and generate radar information corresponding to a target based on the radar synchronization information, a Transmit (Tx) radar signal transmitted by the first radar, a first Receive (Rx) signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, and a second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal (Abstract, "A mechanism for combining signals of multiple radars to achieve increased range, radar sensitivity and angle accuracy is provided. A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars. The echo signals received at the first radar are processed to produce first radar processed echo signals and the echoes signals received at the second radar are processed to produce second radar processed echo signals. The first and second radar processed echo signals are combined to form an aggregate value"). Brookner does not disclose one or more tangible computer-readable non-transitory storage media comprising instructions.
Wang discloses
One or more tangible computer-readable non-transitory storage media comprising instructions (Paragraph 0059, "The vehicle computing device(s) 404 can include one or more processors 418 and memory 420 communicatively coupled with the one or more processors 418"; Paragraph 0079, “the operations represent computer-executable instructions stored on one or more computer-readable storage media”).
Brookner discloses a signal processor that combines the signals of the two different radars but does not explicitly mention that there is a memory. As the signal processor of Brookner has instructions to follow, it would be advantageous to have a memory for the implementation of the invention. A memory would be used not only to store the instructions but also the data outputs for analysis. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Wang to add in a memory for the signal processor to facilitate the implementation of the invention and to store data outputs for analysis.
Additionally, to further explain the fov teaching, Brookner discloses two radars separated by a distance ‘D’ meaning they are in different locations and therefore have different fields of view. The two radar are observing the same target meaning their fovs will overlap.
Claims 19, 20, 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in view of Wang (US 20200371228 A1) further in view of Choi (US 20190155304 A1)
Regarding claim 19 the combination of Brookner and Wang discloses
The apparatus of claim 18 including the processor. Brookner discloses 4 radar measurements of a target including radar 1 transmitting a signal and radar 1 and radar 2 receiving the signal (Abstract, "A mechanism for combining signals of multiple radars to achieve increased range, radar sensitivity and angle accuracy is provided. A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars”). Brookner does not disclose wherein the processor is configured to: determine a plurality of Radar Cross Section (RCS) estimations, the plurality of RCS estimations comprising a first RCS estimation and a second RCS estimation, wherein the first RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the first Rx signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, wherein the second RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal; and determine the radar information corresponding to the target based on the plurality of RCS estimations.
Choi discloses
Wherein the processor is configured to: determine a plurality of Radar Cross Section (RCS) estimations, the plurality of RCS estimations comprising a first RCS estimation and a second RCS estimation (Paragraph 102, "A clutter object and a target object for a predetermined ROI are detected based on the first RCS and the second RCS"), wherein the first RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the first Rx signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, wherein the second RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal (Paragraph 0100, "A first radar cross-section (RCS) of each of the detected objects 1011 through 1013 is calculated based on a signal received by each of the plurality of receivers" where the reference is capable of determining the radar cross section from multiple receivers at a time ); and determine the radar information corresponding to the target based on the plurality of RCS estimations (Paragraph 102, "A clutter object and a target object for a predetermined ROI are detected based on the first RCS and the second RCS").
Brookner discloses one radar (radar 1) sending out an initial signal and radar 1 and another radar (radar 2) receiving the echo of that initial signal but it doesn’t disclose the calculation of a rcs for the received signals. The invention having multiple rcs measurements of a target would be advantageous for calculating three dimensional data for a target. The 3D data would help with tracking and target separation in a chaotic driving environment. Additionally, multiple rcs measurements of the same target aid in the identification of more complex features of the target, which can also aid in identification/tracking. Also, as stated in Choi, multiple rcs measurements of a target can help to determine if it is an actual target or just clutter. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Choi to improve target identification and tracking.
Regarding claim 20 the combination of Brookner, Wang, and Choi discloses
The apparatus of claim 19. Brookner discloses 4 radar measurements of a target including radar 1 transmitting signal 1 and radar 1 and radar 2 receiving signal 1 and radar 2 transmitting signal 2 and radar 1 and radar 2 receiving signal 2 (Abstract, "A mechanism for combining signals of multiple radars to achieve increased range, radar sensitivity and angle accuracy is provided. A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars”). Brookner does not disclose wherein the plurality of RCS estimations comprises a third RCS estimation and a fourth RCS estimation, wherein the third RCS estimation is based on an other Tx radar signal transmitted by the second radar and a third Rx signal received by the second radar based on the other Tx radar signal, wherein the fourth RCS estimation is based on the other Tx radar signal transmitted by the second radar and a fourth Rx signal received by the first radar based on the other Tx radar signal.
Choi discloses
Wherein the plurality of RCS estimations comprises a third RCS estimation and a fourth RCS estimation, wherein the third RCS estimation is based on an other Tx radar signal transmitted by the second radar and a third Rx signal received by the second radar based on the other Tx radar signal, wherein the fourth RCS estimation is based on the other Tx radar signal transmitted by the second radar and a fourth Rx signal received by the first radar based on the other Tx radar signal (Paragraph 0101, "The objects 1011 through 1013 are detected based on an orientation angle at which each of a plurality of transmitters emits a signal of the second transmission signal, an angle at which each of a plurality of receivers receives a signal of the emitted second transmission signal").
Brookner discloses radar 1 and radar 2 transmitting a signal 1 and signal 2 which are received by both radars, but it doesn’t disclose the calculation of a rcs for the four received signals. The invention having multiple rcs measurements of a target would be advantageous for calculating three dimensional data for a target. The 3D data from 4 rcs measurements would generate a more comprehensive estimation of the targets volume with views from both sides of the target which would help with tracking and target separation in a chaotic driving environment. Additionally, multiple rcs measurements of the same target aid in the identification of more complex features of the target, which can also aid in identification/tracking. Choi states that multiple rcs measurements of a target can help to determine if it is an actual target or just clutter and with two sets of rcs measurements Brookner can validate its classification. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Choi to improve target identification and tracking and to validate its classification.
Regarding claim 35 the combination of Brookner and Wang discloses
The product of claim 34 including the processor. Brookner discloses 4 radar measurements of a target including radar 1 transmitting a signal and radar 1 and radar 2 receiving the signal (Abstract, "A mechanism for combining signals of multiple radars to achieve increased range, radar sensitivity and angle accuracy is provided. A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars”). Brookner does not disclose wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the at least one processor to: determine a plurality of Radar Cross Section (RCS) estimations, the plurality of RCS estimations comprising a first RCS estimation and a second RCS estimation, wherein the first RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the first Rx signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, wherein the second RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal; and determine the radar information corresponding to the target based on the plurality of RCS estimations.
Choi discloses
Wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the at least one processor to: determine a plurality of Radar Cross Section (RCS) estimations, the plurality of RCS estimations comprising a first RCS estimation and a second RCS estimation (Paragraph 102, "A clutter object and a target object for a predetermined ROI are detected based on the first RCS and the second RCS"), wherein the first RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the first Rx signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, wherein the second RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal (Paragraph 0100, "A first radar cross-section (RCS) of each of the detected objects 1011 through 1013 is calculated based on a signal received by each of the plurality of receivers" where the reference is capable of determining the radar cross section from multiple receivers at a time); and determine the radar information corresponding to the target based on the plurality of RCS estimations (Paragraph 102, "A clutter object and a target object for a predetermined ROI are detected based on the first RCS and the second RCS").
Brookner discloses one radar (radar 1) sending out an initial signal and radar 1 and another radar (radar 2) receiving the echo of that initial signal but it doesn’t disclose the calculation of a rcs for the received signals. The invention having multiple rcs measurements of a target would be advantageous for calculating three dimensional data for a target. The 3D data would help with tracking and target separation in a chaotic driving environment. Additionally, multiple rcs measurements of the same target aid in the identification of more complex features of the target, which can also aid in identification/tracking. Also, as stated in Choi, multiple rcs measurements of a target can help to determine if it is an actual target or just clutter. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Choi to improve target identification and tracking.
Claims 21, 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in view of Wang (US 20200371228 A1) further in view of Bialer (US 20180128913 A1).
Regarding claim 21 the combination of Brookner and Wang discloses
The apparatus of claim 18. Brookner discloses wherein the processor is configured to determine the radar information corresponding to the target, wherein the first snapshot is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the first Rx signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, wherein the second snapshot is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal (Abstract, “A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars. The echo signals received at the first radar are processed to produce first radar processed echo signals and the echoes signals received at the second radar are processed to produce second radar processed echo signals”; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously" where each received reflection is accounted for in the processing). Brookner does not disclose determining the radar information corresponding to the target by applying a super-resolution algorithm to a first snapshot and a second snapshot.
Bialer discloses
Determining the radar information corresponding to the target by applying a super-resolution algorithm to a first snapshot and a second snapshot (Paragraph 0047, "The method is then operative to transform the observation vector of each radar to a fixed focal point, e.g. the center of the vehicle 520. The method then aligns the observation vectors to the focal point by a linear transformation 530. The method is then operative to increase the angular resolution by super resolution algorithms using the multiple observation vectors 540, wherein each of the observation vectors have different reflection coefficients. Target angle estimation may be determined by super resolution algorithm utilizing vectors from multiple sensors that are associated to the same reflection point" where multiple observations can be radar 1 and 2).
Brookner and Bialer are both considered analogous art as they both concern radar devices. Brookner’s invention has multiple radar in proximity that will receive their own reflections and the reflections of other radar from simultaneous transmissions (i.e., a snapshot), but Brookner does not disclose the use of a super resolution algorithm. Using super resolution algorithms is good for improved target detection as the image quality is enhanced beyond what is physically achievable by the radar. In a chaotic environment, such as a vehicle on a road, the improved target detection and tracking would be beneficial for radar controlled safety responses, such as breaking for another car but not for clutter (interference). As Brookner already has a processor that uses data from multiple radar there would be a reasonable expectation of success for adding in a super resolution algorithm. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Bialer by adding in the use of a super resolution algorithm to improve target detection.
Regarding claim 36 Brookner discloses
The product of claim 34, wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the at least one processor to determine the radar information corresponding to the target, wherein the first snapshot is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the first Rx signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, wherein the second snapshot is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal (Abstract, “A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars. The echo signals received at the first radar are processed to produce first radar processed echo signals and the echoes signals received at the second radar are processed to produce second radar processed echo signals”; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously" where each received reflection is accounted for in the processing). Brookner does not disclose determining the radar information corresponding to the target by applying a super-resolution algorithm to a first snapshot and a second snapshot.
Bialer discloses
Determining the radar information corresponding to the target by applying a super-resolution algorithm to a first snapshot and a second snapshot (Paragraph 0047, "The method is then operative to transform the observation vector of each radar to a fixed focal point, e.g. the center of the vehicle 520. The method then aligns the observation vectors to the focal point by a linear transformation 530. The method is then operative to increase the angular resolution by super resolution algorithms using the multiple observation vectors 540, wherein each of the observation vectors have different reflection coefficients. Target angle estimation may be determined by super resolution algorithm utilizing vectors from multiple sensors that are associated to the same reflection point" where multiple observations can be radar 1 and 2).
Brookner and Bialer are both considered analogous art as they both concern radar devices. Brookner’s invention has multiple radar in proximity that will receive their own reflections and the reflections of other radar from simultaneous transmissions (i.e., a snapshot), but Brookner does not disclose the use of a super resolution algorithm. Using super resolution algorithms is good for improved target detection as the image quality is enhanced beyond what is physically achievable by the radar. In a chaotic environment, such as a vehicle on a road, the improved target detection and tracking would be beneficial for radar controlled safety responses, such as breaking for another car but not for clutter (interference). As Brookner already has a processor that uses data from multiple radar there would be a reasonable expectation of success for adding in a super resolution algorithm. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Bialer by adding in the use of a super resolution algorithm to improve target detection.
Claims 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in view of Choi (US 20190155304 A1).
Regarding claim 29 Brookner discloses
The system of claim 28. Brookner discloses 4 radar measurements of a target including radar 1 transmitting a signal and radar 1 and radar 2 receiving the signal (Abstract, "A mechanism for combining signals of multiple radars to achieve increased range, radar sensitivity and angle accuracy is provided. A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars”). Brookner does not discloses wherein the processor is configured to: determine a plurality of Radar Cross Section (RCS) estimations, the plurality of RCS estimations comprising a first RCS estimation and a second RCS estimation, wherein the first RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the first Rx signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, wherein the second RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal; and determine the radar information corresponding to the target based on the plurality of RCS estimations.
Choi discloses
Wherein the processor is configured to: determine a plurality of Radar Cross Section (RCS) estimations, the plurality of RCS estimations comprising a first RCS estimation and a second RCS estimation (Paragraph 102, "A clutter object and a target object for a predetermined ROI are detected based on the first RCS and the second RCS"), wherein the first RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the first Rx signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, wherein the second RCS estimation is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal (Paragraph 0100, "A first radar cross-section (RCS) of each of the detected objects 1011 through 1013 is calculated based on a signal received by each of the plurality of receivers" where the reference is capable of determining the radar cross section from multiple receivers at a time ); and determine the radar information corresponding to the target based on the plurality of RCS estimations (Paragraph 102, "A clutter object and a target object for a predetermined ROI are detected based on the first RCS and the second RCS").
Brookner discloses one radar (radar 1) sending out an initial signal and radar 1 and another radar (radar 2) receiving the echo of that initial signal but it doesn’t disclose the calculation of a rcs for the received signals. The invention having multiple rcs measurements of a target would be advantageous for calculating three dimensional data for a target. The 3D data would help with tracking and target separation in a chaotic driving environment. Additionally, multiple rcs measurements of the same target aid in the identification of more complex features of the target, which can also aid in identification/tracking. Also, as stated in Choi, multiple rcs measurements of a target can help to determine if it is an actual target or just clutter. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Choi to improve target identification and tracking.
Claims 30, 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in view of Bialer (US 20180128913 A1).
Regarding claim 30 the combination of Wang and Bialer discloses
The system of claim 28. Brookner discloses wherein the processor is configured to determine the radar information corresponding to the target, wherein the first snapshot is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the first Rx signal received by the first radar based on the Tx radar signal, wherein the second snapshot is based on the Tx radar signal transmitted by the first radar and the second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal (Abstract, “A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars. The echo signals received at the first radar are processed to produce first radar processed echo signals and the echoes signals received at the second radar are processed to produce second radar processed echo signals”; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously" where each received reflection is accounted for in the processing). Brookner does not disclose determining the radar information corresponding to the target by applying a super-resolution algorithm to a first snapshot and a second snapshot.
Bialer discloses
Determining the radar information corresponding to the target by applying a super-resolution algorithm to a first snapshot and a second snapshot (Paragraph 0047, "The method is then operative to transform the observation vector of each radar to a fixed focal point, e.g. the center of the vehicle 520. The method then aligns the observation vectors to the focal point by a linear transformation 530. The method is then operative to increase the angular resolution by super resolution algorithms using the multiple observation vectors 540, wherein each of the observation vectors have different reflection coefficients. Target angle estimation may be determined by super resolution algorithm utilizing vectors from multiple sensors that are associated to the same reflection point" where multiple observations can be radar 1 and 2).
Brookner and Bialer are both considered analogous art as they both concern radar devices. Brookner’s invention has multiple radar in proximity that will receive their own reflections and the reflections of other radar from simultaneous transmissions (i.e., a snapshot), but Brookner does not disclose the use of a super resolution algorithm. Using super resolution algorithms is good for improved target detection as the image quality is enhanced beyond what is physically achievable by the radar. In a chaotic environment, such as a vehicle on a road, the improved target detection and tracking would be beneficial for radar controlled safety responses, such as breaking for another car but not for clutter (interference). As Brookner already has a processor that uses data from multiple radar there would be a reasonable expectation of success for adding in a super resolution algorithm. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Bialer by adding in the use of a super resolution algorithm to improve target detection.
Regarding claim 32 the combination of Brookner and Bialer discloses
The system of claim 28. Brookner does not disclose comprising a vehicle, the vehicle comprising a system controller configured to control one or more systems of the vehicle based on the radar information.
Bialer discloses
Comprising a vehicle, the vehicle comprising a system controller configured to control one or more systems of the vehicle based on the radar information (Paragraph 0016, “the vehicle 10 includes a radar control system 12 having a radar system 103 and a controller 104 that classifies objects”; Paragraph 0045, “The joint signal processor 440 may then generate an object list which is stored to memory 405 and may further be operative to generate an object map used for autonomous driving and/or obstacle avoidance”).
Brookner discloses a radar system that can detect targets with increased range and sensitivity but does not disclose a vehicle. It would be advantageous to install the radar of Brookner into a vehicle to utilize the increased performance of the radar for safety features in the vehicle. This would help to mitigate loss of life from traffic accidents and the features could be marketed for a profit. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner to Bialer to install the radar on a vehicle to use its performance for vehicle safety features and a potential profit.
Claims 22, 23, 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in view of Wang (US 20200371228 A1) further in view of McKitterick (US 20100271255 A1).
Regarding claim 22 the combination of Brookner and Wang discloses
The apparatus of claim 18 including a processor. Brookner does not disclose wherein the processor is configured to identify a ghost target in a multipath scenario based on the second Rx signal received by the second radar, and to generate the radar information based on identification of the ghost target.
McKitterick discloses
Wherein the processor is configured to identify a ghost target in a multipath scenario based on the second Rx signal received by the second radar, and to generate the radar information based on identification of the ghost target (Paragraph 0042, "FIG. 7 shows an example of how combining two Interferometric radar measurements can easily eliminate ghost detections and determine where the target is. The ghost 282-1 are determined because they don't occupy the same location in space across the multiple radar scans. However, the target 292-2 does."; Paragraph 0024, "system 100 according to an embodiment of the invention. The system 100 includes an Interferometric radar device 102, a processing device 104, such as a computer, microprocessor or other appropriate computational device").
Brookner and McKitterick are both considered analogous art as they both concern radar devices. Brookner’s invention has multiple radar in proximity that will receive their own reflections and the reflections of other radar, but Brookner does not discuss a treatment of the inevitable ghost echo as multiple reflections occur before being received by a radar. Identifying ghost echoes is useful in differentiating between a target that is actually present in the environment and a false target that is not really there. If the radar system can make this distinction this will lead to more accurate target detection and improved safety responses (e.g., refraining from breaking for an imaginary target). Additionally, using the multiple radar to identify a ghost target may improve the identification time, as instead of using an expensive algorithm the system can simply compare the different fovs. As Brookner already uses and processes information from multiple radar there is a reasonable expectation of success in adding the ability to identify ghost targets. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with McKitterick by adding the ability to identify ghost targets to improve the target identification of the radar system.
Regarding claim 23 the combination of Brookner and Wang and McKitterick discloses
The apparatus of claim 22. Brookner discloses wherein the first radar path comprises the Tx radar signal from the first radar and the second Rx signal received by the second radar based on the Tx radar signal from the first radar, wherein the second radar path comprises an other Tx radar signal from the second radar and an other Rx signal received by the first radar based on the other Tx radar signal from the second radar (Abstract, "A mechanism for combining signals of multiple radars to achieve increased range, radar sensitivity and angle accuracy is provided. A first signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a first radar in the direction of a target. A second signal beam is radiated from an antenna of a second radar in the direction of the same target. The echo signals from the first signal beam and the second signal beam are received at both radars. The echo signals received at the first radar are processed to produce first radar processed echo signals and the echoes signals received at the second radar are processed to produce second radar processed echo signals. The first and second radar processed echo signals are combined to form an aggregate value"). Brookner does not disclose wherein the processor is configured to identify the ghost target based on detection of an appearance of the ghost target in a first radar path and detection of disappearance of the ghost target in a second radar path.
McKitterick discloses
Wherein the processor is configured to identify the ghost target based on detection of an appearance of the ghost target in a first radar path and detection of disappearance of the ghost target in a second radar path (Paragraph 0042, "FIG. 7 shows an example of how combining two Interferometric radar measurements can easily eliminate ghost detections and determine where the target is. The ghost 282-1 are determined because they don't occupy the same location in space across the multiple radar scans. However, the target 292-2 does" where it is also possible for radar 1 to receive reflections of radar 2 and vice versa).
Brookner and McKitterick are both considered analogous art as they both concern radar devices. Brookner’s invention has multiple radar in proximity that will receive their own reflections and the reflections of other radar, but Brookner does not discuss a treatment of the inevitable ghost echo as multiple reflections occurs before being received by a radar. Identifying ghost echoes is useful in differentiating between a target that is actually present in the environment and a false target that is not really there. If the radar system can make this distinction this will lead to more accurate target detection and improved safety responses (e.g., refraining from breaking for an imaginary target). Additionally, using the multiple radar to identify a ghost target may improve the identification time, as instead of using an expensive algorithm the system can simply compare the different fovs. As Brookner already uses and processes information from multiple radar there is a reasonable expectation of success in adding the ability to identify ghost targets. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with McKitterick by adding the ability to identify ghost targets to improve the target identification of the radar system.
Regarding claim 37 the combination of Brookner and Wang discloses
The product of claim 34 including a processor. Brookner does not disclose wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the at least one processor to identify a ghost target in a multipath scenario based on the second Rx signal received by the second radar, and generating the radar information based on identification of the ghost target.
McKitterick discloses
Wherein the processor is configured to identify a ghost target in a multipath scenario based on the second Rx signal received by the second radar, and to generate the radar information based on identification of the ghost target (Paragraph 0042, "FIG. 7 shows an example of how combining two Interferometric radar measurements can easily eliminate ghost detections and determine where the target is. The ghost 282-1 are determined because they don't occupy the same location in space across the multiple radar scans. However, the target 292-2 does."; Paragraph 0024, "system 100 according to an embodiment of the invention. The system 100 includes an Interferometric radar device 102, a processing device 104, such as a computer, microprocessor or other appropriate computational device").
Brookner and McKitterick are both considered analogous art as they both concern radar devices. Wang’s invention has multiple radar in proximity that will receive their own reflections and the reflections of other radar, but Brookner does not discuss a treatment of the inevitable ghost echo as multiple reflections occur before being received by a radar. Identifying ghost echoes is useful in differentiating between a target that is actually present in the environment and a false target that is not really there. If the radar system can make this distinction this will lead to more accurate target detection and improved safety responses (e.g., refraining from breaking for an imaginary target). Additionally, using the multiple radar to identify a ghost target may improve the identification time, as instead of using an expensive algorithm the system can simply compare the different fovs. As Brookner already uses and processes information from multiple radar there is a reasonable expectation of success in adding the ability to identify ghost targets. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with McKitterick by adding the ability to identify ghost targets to improve the target identification of the radar system.
Claims 25, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in view of Wang (US 20200371228 A1) further in view of McKitterick (US 20160025844 A1).
Regarding claim 25 Wang discloses
The apparatus of claim 18 including the synchronization. Brookner does not disclose wherein the processor is configured to determine the radar synchronization information based on timing information broadcasted by the first radar and received by the second radar.
McKitterick discloses
Wherein the processor is configured to determine the radar synchronization information based on timing information broadcasted by the first radar and received by the second radar (Paragraph 0046, "In this manner, when radars 2 and 8 exchange the timing offset that has determined by each radar, radars 2 and 8 may modify the clock offset based on the timing offsets of the first and second radars. For example, a first radar may determine (e.g., extract) locally a first timing offset, as expressed as Equation 13, and a second radar may determine and send a second timing offset, which may be received by the first radar, as expressed as Equation 14. In this example, the clock offset may be expressed as Equation 15, where the clock offset is the difference between the first and second timing offsets" where the first and second radar could switch designations).
Brookner and McKitterick are both considered analogous art as they both concern radar devices. Brookner’s invention has multiple radar that are synchronize with time as they transmit simultaneously, but Brookner does not discuss one radar sending timing information to another radar. Sending timing information can mitigate errors such as beam squint and coherent integration with unexpected outliers. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with McKitterick to add in one radar sending timing information to another radar so as to avoid possible errors with the data combination.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in view of Wang (US 20200371228 A1) further in view of Pokrass (US 20180113206 A1).
Regarding claim 27 Brookner discloses
The apparatus of claim 18. Brookner does not disclose wherein the processor is configured to determine the radar synchronization information to synchronize between the first and second radars at an accuracy of up to 1 nanosecond.
Pokrass discloses
Wherein the processor is configured to determine the radar synchronization information to synchronize between the first and second radars at an accuracy of up to 1 nanosecond (Paragraph 0011, "A 1 nanosecond error in synchronization of chirp transmission by two radars results in a 30 centimeter error in range estimation").
Brookner and Pokrass are both considered analogous art as they both concern radar devices. Brookner’s invention has multiple radar that transmit simultaneously, but Brookner does not discuss the synchronization being accurate up to 1 nanosecond. A nanosecond accuracy in synchronization would be an improvement and would enable a more accurate radar device. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Pokrass to improve the synchronization accuracy to 1 nanosecond to create a more accurate radar which would then lead to a more accurate autonomous driving using radar.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in view of Wang (US 20200371228 A1) in view of Bialer (US 20180128913 A1) further in view of McKitterick (US 20100271255 A1).
Regarding claim 31 the combination of Wang and Bialer discloses
The system of claim 28 including a processor. Brookner does not disclose wherein the processor is configured to identify a ghost target in a multipath scenario based on the second Rx signal received by the second radar, and to generate the radar information based on identification of the ghost target.
McKitterick discloses
Wherein the processor is configured to identify a ghost target in a multipath scenario based on the second Rx signal received by the second radar, and to generate the radar information based on identification of the ghost target (Paragraph 0042, "FIG. 7 shows an example of how combining two Interferometric radar measurements can easily eliminate ghost detections and determine where the target is. The ghost 282-1 are determined because they don't occupy the same location in space across the multiple radar scans. However, the target 292-2 does."; Paragraph 0024, "system 100 according to an embodiment of the invention. The system 100 includes an Interferometric radar device 102, a processing device 104, such as a computer, microprocessor or other appropriate computational device").
Brookner and McKitterick are both considered analogous art as they both concern radar devices. Brookner’s invention has multiple radar in proximity that will receive their own reflections and the reflections of other radar, but Brookner does not discuss a treatment of the inevitable ghost echo as multiple reflections occur before being received by a radar. Identifying ghost echoes is useful in differentiating between a target that is actually present in the environment and a false target that is not really there. If the radar system can make this distinction this will lead to more accurate target detection and improved safety responses (e.g., refraining from breaking for an imaginary target). Additionally, using the multiple radar to identify a ghost target may improve the identification time, as instead of using an expensive algorithm the system can simply compare the different fovs. As Brookner already uses and processes information from multiple radar there is a reasonable expectation of success in adding the ability to identify ghost targets. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with McKitterick by adding the ability to identify ghost targets to improve the target identification of the radar system.
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brookner (WO 2005038488 A1) in view of Madhow (US 20210124011 A1).
Regarding claim 33 the combination of Brookner discloses
The system of claim 28. Brookner discloses comprising a plurality of radars comprising the first radar and the second radar, the plurality of radars configured to cover a respective plurality of FOVs (Page 3 Paragraph 1, line 3-6, "the radars 12a, 12b to be combined are positioned in fairly close proximity to each other. The phase centers of the antenna 16a and the antenna 16b (in radar 12a and radar 12b, respectively), are spaced by a distance "D". The distance D is a flexible parameter"; Page 4 Paragraph 1 line 7-9, "This improved sensitivity is realized because of the coherent addition that can result in beams from radars 12a and 12b at the target for f.sub.1= .sub.2 when the signals from radars 12a and 12b are transmitted simultaneously" where there are different fov of the same target so they overlap). Wang does not disclose wherein a combination of the plurality of FOVs covers a FOV of substantially 360 degrees.
Madhow discloses
Wherein a combination of the plurality of FOVs covers a FOV of substantially 360 degrees (Figure 3 elements 102 with attention to the fov shown which would create 360 degrees coverage; Paragraph 0038, "FIG. 3 is an illustrative block diagram representing a top view of a second automobile platform 300 with radar sensor units 102 mounted along its sides, front, and back portions and showing an object 302 located within the radar fields of view of multiple radar sensor units 102").
Brookner and Madhow are both considered analogous art as they both concern radar devices. Wang’s invention has multiple radar in proximity that have overlapping fields of view but Wang does not discuss the fovs creating 360 degree coverage. 360 degree radar coverage would be useful in that you can track relevant targets not only from the front but also the back and sides. A radar like this could be installed on a vehicle and would improve the safety functionality of the autonomous driving system. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Brookner with Madhow to have 360 degree radar coverage to improve the tracking features of the radar and potentially a vehicle.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 24 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 24 discuses two different radar devices that each detect a different ghost target (ghost 1 and ghost 2) based on two physical targets. The two radar paths are compared and the difference in the fov confirms the ghost targets. The closest reference is McKitterick (US 20100271255 A1) which discuses two radar comparing their fov to confirm a ghost target but it is only one ghost target for the one physical target. It does not discuss two ghosts from two targets There is no discussion in the literature of two different adjacent radar seeing two different ghost targets. As such claim 24 would be allowable if it wasn’t dependent on the rejected claims 18 and 22.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER D DOZE whose telephone number is (571)272-0392. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am - 6:00pm ET.
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, Resha Desai can be reached at (571) 270-7792. 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.
/PETER DAVON DOZE/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648