DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/29/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 05/29/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 05/29/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding Applicant’s argument (REMARKS page 7) about the objection to claim 1, the objection has been overcome by the amendment.
Applicant’s argument (REMARKS pages 7-9) about amended Claims 1 and 10 is moot based on the new ground rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3, 5, 8, 10-17, 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the radar modules, by contrast with the at least one first radar module, comprises only one transmitting antenna or only one receiving antenna" in lines 1-3. It is indefinite because: i) it is not clear whether or not “the radar modules” relates to the “a plurality of second radar modules” mentioned in claim 1 lines 3-4; ii) it is not clear how "the radar modules”, which include more than one module, “comprises only one transmitting antenna or only one receiving antenna”. One radar module is not considered as a radar module if there is no operation antenna. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as "one of the second [[the]] radar modules, by contrast with the at least one first radar module, comprises only one transmitting antenna or only one receiving antenna". Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “at least two radar modules” in lines 1-2. It is indefinite because it is not clear whether the “at least two radar modules” in lines 1-2 relates to the “at least one first radar module” mentioned in claim 1 line 2 or relates to the “a plurality of second radar modules” mentioned in claim 1 lines 2-3. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “at least two radar modules of the at least one first radar module and the plurality of second radar modules”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 8 recites the limitations: 1) “wherein the second radar modules are arranged between at least two respective first radar modules” in lines 3-4. It is indefinite because if “the at least one first radar module” mentioned in lines 1-2 has “one first radar module”, it is not clear how the “at least two respective first radar modules” is constructed. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “wherein the at least one first radar module includes at least two respective first radar modules, the second radar modules are arranged between the at least two respective first radar modules”. 2) “the second radar modules have a smaller distance from each of the at least two respective first radar modules” in lines 5-6. It is indefinite because it is not clear how “the second radar modules”, which include more than one module, “have a smaller distance from each of the at least two respective first radar modules”, which is one distance. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “one of the second radar modules have a smaller distance from each of the at least two respective first radar modules”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the second radar module” in line 9. It is indefinite because it is not clear which one of the “second radar modules” mentioned in line 4 “the second radar module” in line 9 represents. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “one of the second radar modules”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claims 11-17, 20 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 10 because each of dependent claims 11-17, 20 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1, 4, 7, 9-15, 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US11,520,030, hereafter Wu) in view of Khalid et al . (US 2019 / 0293784, hereafter Khalid).
Regarding claim 1, Wu (‘030) discloses that A radar system for detecting surroundings of an object {Fig.1; col.2 line 37 (distributed aperture radar system); col.3 lines 30-31 (a vehicle can include multiple radars); col.20 lines 1-4 (the radar controller processor may be configured to produce map data identifying paired range (r), Doppler (ṙ) and angle (θ) values for each detected/target object.) }, the radar system comprising:
at least one first radar module comprising at least one antenna and a plurality of second radar modules, the second radar modules non-coherent with the at least one first radar module, the second radar modules comprising at least one antenna { Fig.1 items 10 (distributed radar), 20 (distributed radar), TX, RX antennas; col.2 lines 31-32 (combining multiple distributed small-aperture radars to form a virtually large coherent aperture); col.3 lines 34-38 (Alternatively, the outputs from individual radars are used independently or integrated in a non-coherent fashion, Techniques for non-coherently combining multiple front-end system-on-chip devices are known in literature); Examiner’s note: “multiple distributed small-aperture radars” for “a plurality of second radar modules” },
wherein the at least one first radar module and the second radar modules are arranged in a distributed manner { Fig.1 items 10 (distributed radar), 20 (distributed radar)},
wherein the at least one first radar module is configured differently from the second radar modules {Fig.2A},
wherein the radar system comprises evaluation circuitry configured to process transmitting and receiving signals from the at least one first radar module and the second radar modules such that the at least one first radar module is virtually located to a position of the second radar modules { Fig.1 item 30 (radar controller processor); Fig.2B-C (see marks below); col.11 lines 43-46 (using both radar devices 201, 202 as "master" units to transmit radar signals from all of the transmit antennas T1,1-T1,3, T2,1-T2,3, a second MIMO virtual array aperture 200C may be formed, as shown in FIG. 2C); Examiner’s note: Fig.2C item 209 shows how “the at least one first radar module is virtually located to a position of the second radar modules” from bi-static MIMO virtual array when using both radar devices 201 and 202. “virtual array” is formed in a radar data processing method, which is performed in Fig.1 item 30. The functionality of Fig.1 item 30 is a “evaluation circuitry configured to process transmitting and receiving signals from the at least one first radar module and the second radar modules”}.
PNG
media_image1.png
517
733
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Wu (‘030) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “wherein the at least one first radar module is configured differently from the second radar modules, being larger than the second radar modules or having more transmitting antennas than the second radar modules”, “wherein the at least one first radar module comprises a first oscillator”, and “wherein the second radar modules share a different second oscillator”. In the same field of endeavor, Khalid (‘784) discloses that
wherein the at least one first radar module is configured differently from the second radar modules, being larger than the second radar modules {Fig.16C; [0066] lines 4-5 (MMIC 2 is to be configured as inactive); Examiner’s note: MMIC1 and MMIC6 are interpreted as “the second radar modules”. MMIC3-5 are interpreted as “the at least one first radar module”. MMIC2 is inoperable};
wherein the at least one first radar module comprises a first oscillator {Fig.16C SLO’(t); [0016] lines 3-4 (the local oscillator signal is generated by a master MIMIC and distributed to the slave MMICs .); [0066] lines 20-21 (the LO signal SLo ' ( t ) generated by the additional master MMIC 3 ( master B ))};
wherein the second radar modules share a different second oscillator {Fig.16C SLO(t) ; [0016] lines 3-4 (the local oscillator signal is generated by a master MIMIC and distributed to the slave MMICs .); [0066] lines 19-22 (The LO signal SLo ( t ) generated by the master MIMIC 1 ( master A ) and the LO signal SLo ' ( t ) generated by the additional master MMIC 3 ( master B ) are not coherent and can operate in different frequency ranges)}.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Wu (‘030) with the teachings of Khalid (‘784) {use MMICs with different design (e.g. one master MMIC work with different number of slave MMICs and different master MMICs work with different operational frequency ranges)} to use MMICs with different design (e.g. one master MMIC work with different number of slave MMICs and different master MMICs work with different operational frequency ranges). Doing so would provide a system comprising a plurality of MMICs to remain functional even if one or more MMICs do not operate ( any longer ) in accordance with the desired specifications so as to ensure functional reliability of a radar sensor device, as recognized by Khalid (‘784) {[0005] lines 1-5 (functional reliability ( cf . ISO standard 26262 ) of a radar sensor device it may be desirable for a system comprising a plurality of MMICs to remain functional even if one or more MMICs do not operate ( any longer ) in accordance with the desired specifications)}.
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) discloses that in the radar system,
the evaluation circuitry is configured to process transmitting and receiving signals of the at least one first radar module and the second radar modules to provide modified measurement signals that are coherent with each other { see Wu (‘030) Fig.1 item 30 (radar controller processor); col.2 lines 31-32 (combining multiple distributed small-aperture radars to form a virtually large coherent aperture); col.6 lines 26-31 (By using the frequency/phase measurement module 37 to compute or measure the frequency and phase offsets between the distributed radars 10, 20, one may compensate for the differences and the different radar signals may then be processed in a coherent fashion as if it is a single radar.)}.
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) discloses that in the radar system,
the at least one first radar module comprises at least one transmitting antenna and at least two receiving antennas {see Wu (‘030) Fig.2A radar #1 201}.
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) discloses that the radar system comprising
at most four first radar modules { Fig.1 (DISTRIBUTED RADAR 10); Examiner’s note: each pair of TX and RX is interpreted as one radar module}.
Regarding claim 10, as modified above, Wu (‘030) discloses that A method {Abstract line 1 (method) }, comprising:
generating a first signal in a first radar module { Fig.1 item TX1,1 and related circuits};
transmitting the first signal toward an object { Fig.1 signal path of item TX1,1 , target},
generating a further first signal in second radar modules { Fig.1 item TX2,1 and related circuits; col.2 lines 31-32 (combining multiple distributed small-aperture radars to form a virtually large coherent aperture); Examiner’s note: “multiple distributed small-aperture radars” for “second radar modules”},
transmitting the further first signal toward the object { Fig.1 signal path of item TX2,1 , target; col.4 lines 39-40 (Each distributed radar device 10, 20 includes one or more transmitting antenna elements TX), 61 (signal path differences); Examiner’s note: TX1,1 and TX2,1 transmit signal to object},
in a first evaluation device in the first radar module, forming a first comparison signal from the first signal of the first radar module and from a received further first signal from the second radar modules {Fig.1 items 10 (distributed radar), 121 (mixer), 30 (radar controller processor); Fig.2B (mono-static and bi-static); col.2 lines 31-32 (combining multiple distributed small-aperture radars to form a virtually large coherent aperture); col.5 line 49 (a mixer 121); col.11 lines 1-6 (FIG. 2B which illustrates a first MIMO virtual array aperture 200B formed by transmitting radar signals from the three transmitting antennas T1,1 – T1,3 of the first radar device 201 which are received at the receiving antennas R1,1,-R1,3, R2,1-R2,3 from both radar devices 201, 202.), 27-35 (selecting the second radar device 202 to operate as the master unit so that the first radar device 201 operates as the slave unit. In this arrangement where the second radar device 202 is selected as the master unit and the first radar device 201 is selected as the slave unit, the three transmitting antennas T2,1-T2,3 of the second (master) radar device 202 are sequentially used to generate target returns at the receiving antennas -R1,1-R1,3, R2,1-R2,3 from both radar devices 201, 202.); Examiner’s note: mixer for “forming a comparison signal”}, and
in a second evaluation device in the second radar module, forming a further comparison signal from the further first signal of the second radar modules and from a received first signal from the first radar module {Fig.1 items 20 (distributed radar), 141 (mixer), 30 (radar controller processor); Fig.2B (mono-static and bi-static); col.5 line 49 (a mixer, 141); col.11 lines 1-6 (FIG. 2B which illustrates a first MIMO virtual array aperture 200B formed by transmitting radar signals from the three transmitting antennas T1,1 – T1,3 of the first radar device 201 which are received at the receiving antennas R1,1,-R1,3, R2,1-R2,3 from both radar devices 201, 202.), 27-35 (selecting the second radar device 202 to operate as the master unit so that the first radar device 201 operates as the slave unit. In this arrangement where the second radar device 202 is selected as the master unit and the first radar device 201 is selected as the slave unit, the three transmitting antennas T2,1-T2,3 of the second (master) radar device 202 are sequentially used to generate target returns at the receiving antennas -R1,1-R1,3, R2,1-R2,3 from both radar devices 201, 202.); Examiner’s note: mixer for “forming a further comparison signal”},
wherein the further comparison signal is transmitted from the second radar modules to the first radar module {Fig.1 D2 send to D1 (see mark below)},
PNG
media_image2.png
585
792
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the first radar module and the second radar modules are arranged in a distributed manner, and
wherein the first radar module is configured differently from the second radar modules, being larger than the second radar modules or having more transmitting antennas than the second radar modules; and
wherein the method comprises processing transmitting and receiving signals from the first radar module and the second radar modules such that the first radar module is virtually located to a position of the second radar modules;
wherein the first radar module comprises a first oscillator;
wherein the second radar modules share a different second oscillator; and
wherein the second radar modules are non-coherent with the first radar module.
{The claim limitations above are the same or substantially the same scope as the corresponding claim limitations in claim 1. Therefore the claim limitations above are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as in claim 1. See the rejections of claim 1}.
Regarding claim 11, which depends on claim 10, the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) discloses that the method comprising
forming a comparison-comparison signal from the first comparison signal and the further comparison signal {see Wu (‘030) Fig,1 items 30 (radar controller processor), 31 (bi-static radar module); col.6 lines 15-16 (bi-static radar module 31 which is operative to combine the distributed aperture signal results), 19 (the differences), 21 (must be determined before); Examiner’s note: “differences” for “a comparison-comparison signal from the first comparison signal and the further comparison signal”}.
Regarding claim 12, which depends on claims 10-11, the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) discloses that the method comprising:
compensating for deviations of the first comparison signal and the further comparison signal which are caused by systematic deviations in the first radar modules and the second radar modules { see Wu (‘030) Fig,1 items 30 (radar controller processor), 31 (bi-static radar module); col.6 lines 15-16 (bi-static radar module 31 which is operative to combine the distributed aperture signal results), 19-21 (the differences in the starting frequency and phase for the reference LO signals must be determined), 26-31 (By using the frequency/phase measurement module 37 to compute or measure the frequency and phase offsets between the distributed radars 10, 20, one may compensate for the differences and the different radar signals may then be processed in a coherent fashion as if it is a single radar.); Examiner’s note: difference for “deviations”. “Reference LO signals” for “which are caused by systematic deviations in the first radar modules and the second radar module”}, and
using at least one complex value from the first comparison signal or from a signal which was derived from the first comparison signal, to adapt at least one complex value of the further comparison signal or a value of a signal which was derived from the further comparison signal to form an adapted signal { see Wu (‘030) Fig.1 items 32 (fast-time FFT), 33 (slow-time FFT); col.6 lines 19-23 (the differences in the starting frequency and phase for the reference LO signals must be determined before the system can function as a single radar by coordinating the distributed radar devices 10, 20 to operate in a coherent fashion), 26-31 (By using the frequency/phase measurement module 37 to compute or measure the frequency and phase offsets between the distributed radars 10, 20, one may compensate for the differences and the different radar signals may then be processed in a coherent fashion as if it is a single radar); Examiner’s note: FFT for “complex value”. “compensate for the differences” for “adapt”. “a coherent fashion” for “form an adapted signal”.},
wherein the forming the adapted signal is by a mathematical operation comprising a vectorial sum or a vectorial difference of complex values or a sum or a difference of phases of the complex values { see Wu (‘030) Fig.1 items 32 (fast-time FFT), 33 (slow-time FFT); col.6 lines 26-31 (phase offset measurement (Δ ϕ). By using the frequency/phase measurement module 37 to compute or measure the frequency and phase offsets between the distributed radars 10, 20, one may compensate for the differences and the different radar signals may then be processed in a coherent fashion as if it is a single radar); Examiner’s note: FFT for “a mathematical operation comprising a vectorial sum” “of complex values”.}.
Regarding claim 13, which depends on claims 10-12, the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) discloses that in the method,
the comparison-comparison signal corresponds to a comparison signal generated with a coherent radar system { see Wu (‘030) Fig.1 item 30 (radar controller processor); col.6 lines 30-31 (in a coherent fashion as if it is a single radar) }.
Regarding claim 14, which depends on claim 10, the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) discloses that the method comprising
enabling coherent processing, via a phase correction, on a basis of overlapping elements of at least two virtual radar arrays { see Wu (‘030) Fig.1 item 38 (MIMO virtual array module 38); Fig.2B for “overlapping elements of at least two virtual radar arrays” (see T1,1-T1,3); col.6 lines 23-31 (the bi-static radar module 31 includes a frequency/phase measurement module 37 that produces frequency offset measurements (Δf0) and phase offset measurements (Δϕ). By using the frequency/phase measurement module 37 to compute or measure the frequency and phase offsets between the distributed radars 10, 20, one may compensate for the differences and the different radar signals may then be processed in a coherent fashion as if it is a single radar) }.
Regarding claim 15, which depends on claim 10, the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) discloses that in the method,
at least two virtual radar arrays are formed, wherein each virtual radar array comprises at least one element that overlaps with at least one element of another virtual radar array { see Wu (‘030) Fig.2B; Examiner’s note: T1,1-T1,3 are in both virtual antenna arrays, one is mono-static and the other is bi-static }.
Regarding claim 18, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) discloses that in the system,
the at least one first radar module and the second radar modules are configured as respective Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave radar modules or as respective Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing radar modules {see Wu (‘030) Col.5 line 15 (FMCW radar)}.
Regarding claim 19, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) discloses that the system further comprising
the object, the object comprising a vehicle {see Wu (‘030) col.3 lines 30-31 (a vehicle can include multiple radars)}.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lang et al. (US 2020/0174098, hereafter Lang).
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) do not explicitly disclose “the radar modules, by contrast with the at least one first radar module, comprises only one transmitting antenna or only one receiving antenna”. In the same field of endeavor, Lang (‘098) discloses that in the radar system,
the radar modules, by contrast with the at least one first radar module, comprises only one transmitting antenna or only one receiving antenna { Fig.10 MMIC 200}.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) with the teachings of Lang (‘098) {use MMICs with different design (e.g. mater, slave, different transmit and receive antennas on each MMIC), including one only one transmitting or receiving antenna on one MMIC} to use MMICs with different design (e.g. mater, slave, different transmit and receive antennas on each MMIC), including one only one transmitting or receiving antenna on one MMIC. Doing so would form a virtual antenna array to implement beamforming techniques so as to localize a target more accurately using radar system, as recognized by Lang (‘098) {[0024] lines 7-8 (localize the target even more accurately , modern radar systems); [0029] lines 17-20 (From a plurality of TX antennas and RX antennas , it is possible to form so - called virtual antenna arrays , which can be used for implementing beamforming techniques)}.
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Roger et al. (US 2019/0041494, hereafter Roger).
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 1, Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) do not explicitly disclose “at least two radar modules are interconnected via a communication channel”. In the same field of endeavor, Roger (‘494) discloses that in the radar system,
at least two radar modules are interconnected via a communication channel {Fig.9 items 60 (comm. I/F), 61 (bus line), 71 (comm. I/F); [0041] lines 4-6 from bottom (communication interface 60 , which is connected to a communication bus 61); [0046] lines 13-15 (communication interface 71 for communicating with the radar ECUS via the communication link .)}.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) with the teachings of Roger (‘494) {use communication links for MMIC interconnection} to use communication links for MMIC interconnection. Doing so would communication with a superordinate control unit so as to process radar signals from different radar units in a central radar signal processing unit to achieve coherent integration of the radar signals (e.g. range-doppler map via signal process in frequency domain), as recognized by Roger (‘494) {[0006] lines 7-9 (system includes at least one communication link and a central radar signal processing unit connected to the at least one radar sensor via the communication link); [0007] lines 1-5 from bottom (receive the digital radar signal with the second data rate via the communication link , to convert the digital radar signal into the frequency domain thus providing respective frequency domain data , and to detect the at least one radar target based on the frequency domain data); [0037] lines 11-12 (A Range - Doppler map can be obtained after coherent integration of several chirps); [0041] lines 6-7 from bottom (may be digitally communicated to a superordinate control unit)}.
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) do not explicitly disclose “the at least one first radar module or the second radar modules are located in a center of an object, wherein the second radar modules are arranged between at least two respective first radar modules, and wherein the second radar modules have a smaller distance from each of the at least two respective first radar modules than a distance of the at least two respective first radar modules from each other”. In the same field of endeavor, Roger (‘494) discloses that in the radar system,
the at least one first radar module or the second radar modules are located in a center of an object,
wherein the second radar modules are arranged between at least two respective first radar modules, and
wherein the second radar modules have a smaller distance from each of the at least two respective first radar modules than a distance of the at least two respective first radar modules from each other.
{ Fig.8 items 1-7 ; [0042] lines 15-17 (FIG . 8 illustrates schematically one example of using a distributed system of radar sensors in a vehicle . Radar sensors 1 - 7 ( radar ECUs )); Examiner’s note: Fig.8 items 1, 3, 5, and 6 are interpreted as “the at least one first radar module” and items 2, 4, 7 are interpreted as “the second radar modules”}
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) with the teachings of Roger (‘494) {locate radar units around the vehicle, including a center of a side of the vehicle } to locate radar units around the vehicle, including a center of a side of the vehicle. Doing so would detect radar targets in the surrounding ( field of view ) of the radar sensors and process radar signals from different radar units in a central radar signal processing unit by using communication links so as to achieve coherent integration of the radar signals (e.g. range-doppler map via signal process in frequency domain), as recognized by Roger (‘494) {[0006] lines 7-9 (system includes at least one communication link and a central radar signal processing unit connected to the at least one radar sensor via the communication link); [0007] lines 1-5 from bottom (receive the digital radar signal with the second data rate via the communication link , to convert the digital radar signal into the frequency domain thus providing respective frequency domain data , and to detect the at least one radar target based on the frequency domain data); [0037] lines 11-12 (A Range - Doppler map can be obtained after coherent integration of several chirps); [0040] lines 4-5 (detecting radar targets in the surrounding ( field of view ) of the radar sensor); [0041] lines 6-7 from bottom (may be digitally communicated to a superordinate control unit)}.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mouri et al . (US 10,953,790, hereafter Mouri).
Regarding claim 6, which depends on claim 1, Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) do not explicitly disclose “the second radar modules are arranged in a region of an air intake of a vehicle or below a number plate mounting region of a vehicle”. In the same field of endeavor, Mouri (‘790) discloses that in the radar system,
the second radar modules are arranged in a region of an air intake of a vehicle or below a number plate mounting region of a vehicle { Fig.1 item 68 (radar); col.7 line 14 (radar 68)}.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) with the teachings of Mouri (‘790) {install radar in front of vehicle (e.g. center location)} to install radar in front of vehicle (e.g. center location). Doing so would detect surrounding situation in front of the vehicle so as to control the vehicle based on the detected information, as recognized by Mouri (‘790) { col.7 lines 15-18 (The control device 60 thereby controls the low beam unit 16 and the high beam unit 18 based on information detected by the surrounding situation detection section 70)}.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Cheung et al. (US 2018/0329031, hereafter Cheung).
Regarding claim 16, which depends on claim 10, Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) do not explicitly disclose “performing an online calibration”. In the same field of endeavor, Cheung (‘031) discloses that the method comprising
performing an online calibration { [0039] lines 1-3 (an online calibration is provided, FMCW radar) }.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) with the teachings of Cheung (‘031) {provide online calibration for radar device} to provide online calibration for radar device. Doing so would estimate and compensate frequency sweep non-linearity in FMCW radar so as to avoid severe performance degradation, as recognized by Cheung (‘031) {[0003] lines 11-13 (nonlinearity exists in the frequency sweep of the transmitted waveform . This can result in severe performance degradation); [0039] lines 1-3 (an online calibration is provided to estimate and compensate frequency sweep nonlinearity in FMCW radar)}.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Vossiek et al. (US 11,906,655, hereafter Vossiek).
Regarding claim 17, which depends on claim 10, Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) do not explicitly disclose “performing a synthetic aperture radar technique or corresponding imaging method”. In the same field of endeavor, Vossiek (‘655) discloses that the method comprising
performing a synthetic aperture radar technique or corresponding imaging method {Fig.8; col.2 lines 41-43 (the radar modules are arranged or arrangeable on the moving object in a distributed fashion); col.13 line 28 (FIG. 8 is a schematic view of an SAR imaging); col.22 lines 46-49 (SAR imaging according to the invention will be illustrated below, drawing reference to FIG. 8. Radar measurements can be performed and recorded in SAR imaging along a specific movement path.), 63 (SAR algorithm) }.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) with the teachings of Vossiek (‘655) {perform SAR imaging using distributed radars on a moving object} to perform SAR imaging using distributed radars on a moving object. Doing so would generate a high-resolution image of surroundings with low outlay by arranging radar modules in distributed fashion around a moving object (e.g. vehicle) so as to implement the method in an automobile radar application, as recognized by Vossiek (‘655) {col.2 lines 26-29 (the invention, permits a comparatively high (lateral) accuracy and resolution at a low outlay), 34-35 (the object is achieved by a radar system for capturing the surroundings of a moving object), 41-43 (the radar modules are arranged or arrangeable on the moving object in a distributed fashion,); col.4 lines 53-54 (radar modules can be arranged in distributed fashion, for example around a vehicle); col.30 lines 8-11 (As a result, SAR processing can be implemented, in particular in an automobile radar application, for generating a high-resolution image of the surroundings)}.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Rao et al. (US 2016/0146931, hereafter Rao).
Regarding claim 20, which depends on claims 10 and 15, Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) do not explicitly disclose “each virtual radar array comprises at least one outer element that overlaps with at least one outer element of another virtual radar array”. In the same field of endeavor, Rao (‘931) discloses that in the method,
each virtual radar array comprises at least one outer element that overlaps with at least one outer element of another virtual radar array {Fig.8; [0085] lines 2-4 (one antenna of virtual antenna receive array 816 overlaps with one antenna of receive antenna array 814)}.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Wu (‘030) and Khalid (‘784) with the teachings of Rao (‘931) {overlap virtual antenna elements in antenna arrangement} to overlap virtual antenna elements in antenna arrangement. Doing so would take care of the calibration of unknown phase offsets across both radar chip 804 and radar chip 806 during the transmissions on both transmit antennas and implement frequency correction to correct for larger delay mismatches so as to support one or more of the phase and frequency offset calibration techniques for obtaining high resolution measurements of arrival angle., as recognized by Rao (‘931) {[0016] lines 8-9 (require high resolution measurements of arrival angle.); [0082] lines 1-3 (can have more than one overlapping antenna position and the additional antennas positions can be used for more extensive calibration procedures); [0089] lines 1-4 (The three instances of overlapping elements can take care of the calibration of unknown phase offsets across both radar chip 804 and radar chip 806 during the transmissions on both transmit antennas), 11-12 (frequency correction to correct for larger delay mismatches.); [0137] lines 1-2 (support one or more of the phase and frequency offset calibration techniques)}.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONGHONG LI whose telephone number is (571)272-5946. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571)270-5144. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YONGHONG LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights