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 .
Response to Amendments
The amendment files 01/02/2026 is entered.
Claims 1, 6, 10, 13, 15, and 19 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 01/02/2026, regarding Claim Objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections have been overcome.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 01/02/2026, regarding Claim Rejections under 35 USC 112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112 rejections have been overcome.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 01/02/2026, regarding Claim Rejections under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 101 rejections have been overcome.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 01/02/2026, regarding Claim Rejections under 35 USC 102 and 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant appears to argue that Nohmi does not disclose “initial signals” (plural). Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that the system/method disclosed by Nohmi includes transmitting a transmission signal in step S321 ([0155]), and that this transmission step is repeated during an observation time ([0157]). These repeated transmissions of transmission signals are tantamount to the claimed “initial signals.”
Applicant appears to argue that Nohmi does not disclose “initial reflected signals” (plural). Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that Nohmi discloses “generating a reception signal for each of the receiving antennas” and “reception signals” (plural), which is tantamount to the claimed “initial reflected signals.” Additionally, reflected signals corresponding the repeated transmission signals in paragraph [0157] would also map to the claimed “initial reflected signals.”
Applicant appears to argue that the angle of arrival information in Nohmi is not part of an initial set of measurement results because the angles are determined via signal processing. Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that the claims recite “determining … an initial set of measurement results,” and that “determining” can include signal processing. Additionally, Applicant’s specification describes determining angles of arrival using frequency sweeps ([0028]) and/or using a “processing unit” ([0044]).
Applicant appears to argue that Nohmi does not disclose “phase differences between the initial transmitted signals and the initial reflected signals.” Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that both the phase planes and phase variations of Nohmi are derived from intermediate frequency signals. The intermediate frequency signals are produced by mixing a reception signal with a transmitted signal, and the intermediate signal contains the phase difference between the transmitted and received signals ([0167]). Nohmi also explicitly mentions phase differences between transmitted and received signals ([0267]; [0268]). Additionally, determining a phase difference between a transmitted and received signal is an ordinary and well-known technique in radar.
Applicant appears to argue that Nohmi does not adequately explain what a “phase plane” is, and therefore it is unclear if “phase plane” reads on the claimed “phase map.” Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that the claimed “phase map” is very broad and merely requires phase differences between transmitted and received signals as a function of angles of arrival. For example, a “phase map” could be anything that relates phase difference information to angles, such as a mathematical function, and x-y coordinate map, or a data structure such as a table or matrix. Nohmi’s phase plane is a spatial representation of phase difference across an antenna array, from which arrival direction is identified ([0130]). Therefore, the phase plane relates phase difference information (from the intermediate frequency signal, as explained above) to angle information. Nohmi’s phase variation maps transmit/receive phase differences to multiple angles corresponding to an observation object ([0131]; [0214]; [0239]). Therefore, either of Nohmi’s phase plane or phase variation can read on the broad “phase map.”
Applicant appears to argue that Nohmi does not disclose a “vibration map” because Nohmi’s observation signals and vibration images do not depict first and second locations of a vibrating object. In response to applicant’s argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., that the vibration map does not show first and second locations) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Additionally, “vibration map” is very broad and merely requires relating vibration information to a field of view a radar based on the phase map. Nohmi’s vibration image, which is based on the phase plane and phase variation, is a spatial representation of vibration information across a field of view of the radar ([0242]). Similarly, the observation signal represents vibration information across directions observed by the radar ([0016]; [0131]), and therefore also maps to “vibration map.”
Applicant appears to argue that Nohmi does not disclose “a vibration map in the field of view of the radar,” because Nohmi does not explicitly state that the vibration image is in a field of view of the radar. Examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that the observation objects in Nohmi’s vibration images are necessarily within the field of view of the radar, because the radar can only observe and generate vibration information for objects within its field of view.
Applicant appears to argue that Nohmi does not disclose a “phase map” and therefore does not disclose a “vibration map.” As explained above, both of Nohmi’s “phase plane” and “phase variation” map to the claimed “phase map,” and the phase plane and phase variation are used to generate Nohmi’s observation signal and vibration image ([0131]; [0224]).
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Alizadeh (M. Alizadeh et al., “Remote Monitoring of Human Vital Signs Using mm-Wave FMCW Radar,” 2019), cited in the IDS filed 05/08/2024, explicitly teaches “phase maps” and “vibration maps” and could be used to reject at least the independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C.
102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the
statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a
new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection,
would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the
basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in
public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or
in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b),
in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and
was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nohmi (US 2020/0326230).
Regarding Claim 1, Nohmi discloses: A method for performing vibration measurements, comprising:
- determining, by a radar apparatus, an initial set of measurement results, wherein said initial set of measurement results comprises at least angles-of-arrivals and phases of initial reflected signals, the initial reflected signals being reflections of initial signals transmitted by a radar in a field of view of the radar ([0011]: "radar reflectors"; [0115]: "radar image"; [0016]: "phase difference between the reception signals"; " identifying an arrival direction ... of the reflection wave");
- determining, by the radar apparatus, a phase map of the field of view of the radar, wherein the phase map comprises at least phase differences between the initial transmitted signals and the initial reflected signals as a function of angles-of-arrivals of the initial reflected signals ([0016]: "phase plane"; "calculating a phase variation of the reflection wave from a certain direction"); and
- determining, by the radar apparatus, a vibration map of the field of view of the radar based at least on the phase map ([0016]: "generating an observation signal representative of a vibration of the observation object"; [0224]: "vibration images of the observation object").
Regarding Claim 13, Nohmi discloses: An apparatus comprising a processor ([0017]: “a computer”; [0071]: “a processor”), wherein the processor is configured to:
- determine an initial set of measurement results, wherein said initial set of measurement results comprises at least angles-of-arrivals and phases of initial reflected signals, the initial reflected signals being reflections of initial signals transmitted by a radar in a field of view of the radar ([0011]: "radar reflectors"; [0115]: "radar image"; [0016]: "phase difference between the reception signals"; " identifying an arrival direction ... of the reflection wave");
- determine a phase map of the field of view of the radar, wherein the phase map comprises at least phase differences between the initial transmitted signals and the initial reflected signals as a function of angles-of-arrivals of the initial reflected signals ([0016]: "phase plane"; "calculating a phase variation of the reflection wave from a certain direction"); and
- determine a vibration map of the field of view of the radar based at least on the phase map ([0016]: "generating an observation signal representative of a vibration of the observation object"; [0224]: "vibration images of the observation object").
Regarding Claim 15, Nohmi discloses: A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a set of computer readable instructions ([0017]: “a recording medium of the present invention provides a computer-readable recording medium recording a vibration observation program for driving a computer”), configured to control a processing unit to cause:
- determining, by a radar apparatus, an initial set of measurement results, wherein said initial set of measurement results comprises at least angles-of-arrivals and phases of initial reflected signals, the initial reflected signals being reflections of initial signals transmitted by a radar in a field of view of the radar ([0011]: "radar reflectors"; [0115]: "radar image"; [0016]: "phase difference between the reception signals"; " identifying an arrival direction ... of the reflection wave");
- determining, by the radar apparatus, a phase map of the field of view of the radar, wherein the phase map comprises at least phase differences between the initial transmitted signals and the initial reflected signals as a function of angles-of-arrivals of the initial reflected signals ([0016]: "phase plane"; "calculating a phase variation of the reflection wave from a certain direction"); and
- determining, by the radar apparatus, a vibration map of the field of view of the radar based at least on the phase map ([0016]: "generating an observation signal representative of a vibration of the observation object"; [0224]: "vibration images of the observation object").
Regarding Claims 2 and 14, Nohmi discloses: wherein the vibration map comprises information about a vibration frequency of at least one object in the field of view of the radar ([0016]: "vibration of the observation object"; [0219]: "vibration frequency of the targets").
Regarding Claims 3 and 16, Nohmi discloses: wherein the method and the processor is further configured to:
perform a Fourier transform to a time-domain signal comprising said initial set of measurement results ([0157]: "the output of the reference function multiplication process (S325) or the 2DFFT process (S326) is subjected to a vibration process (S329)"; [0240]: "FFT process of the phase history"); and
detect the vibration frequency of the at least one object from the Fourier transformed signal ([0240]: "FFT process of the phase history"; "vibration characteristics of the whole observation object 8 can be obtained").
Regarding Claims 4 and 17, Nohmi discloses: wherein said initial set of measurement results comprises amplitudes of the initial reflected signals ([0239]: "a signal from a target represented by an amplitude ... of a reflection signal is recorded") and the method and the processor is further configured to:
determine distance information based on said amplitudes ([0239]: "By analyzing the amplitude phase information of the targets in time series, a minute displacement... can be measured."); and
determine the phase map, wherein the phase map comprises said distance information as a function of said angles-of-arrivals of the initial reflected signals ([0219]: "the targets A, B are mapped on a two-dimensional space of azimuth and distance for each observation"; "analysis of the phase data including the vibration information of the targets A, B."; [0235]: "a phase function obtained from distance from a target position").
Regarding Claims 5 and 18, Nohmi discloses: wherein said initial set of measurement results is from a one-shot measurement performed by the radar ([0080]: "a transmission signal is transmitted"; "A reflection wave from the observation object 8 is received and a reception signal is generated").
Regarding Claims 6 and 19, Nohmi discloses: wherein the method and the processor is further configured to:
determine at least one subsequent set of measurement results, wherein the at least one subsequent set of measurement results comprises at least angles-of-arrivals and phases of subsequent reflected signals, the subsequent reflected signals being reflections of subsequent signals transmitted by the radar after the initial signals in the field of view of the radar ([0134]: "the vibration measurement can be imaged at constant time intervals"; [0135]: "reception signals fR collected in time series"); and
determine the phase map, wherein the phase map comprises at least phase differences between the initial reflected signals and the subsequent reflected signals as a function of said angles-of-arrivals ([0016]; [0239]: "analyzing the amplitude phase information of the targets in time series").
Regarding Claim 12, Nohmi discloses: the method further comprising:
- presenting the vibration map on a display as an image ([0019]: "generating an image from observation data representative of a vibration of an observation object"; [0080]: " image display").
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C.
102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the
statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a
new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection,
would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness
rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the
claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the
differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the
claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which
the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in
which the invention was made.
Claims 7-8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nohmi (US 2020/0326230), as applied to 1 and 13 above, and further in view of Santra (US 2019/0195728).
Regarding Claims 7 and 20, Nohmi does not explicitly teach – but Santra teaches: wherein the method and the processor is further configured to:
- determine a set of Doppler-frequency measurement results, wherein the set of Doppler- frequency measurement results comprises information about Doppler-frequencies as a function of said angles-of arrivals (Santra [0019]: "angle data"; [0022]: "interferometric phase is determined using a bank of Doppler filters"; [0036]: "micro-Doppler analysis"); and
- determine the vibration map of the field of view of the radar by combining the phase map and the set of Doppler-frequency measurement results (Santra [0019]: "vibration of the structural object are related to the interferometric phase"; "This interferometric phase is determined using a bank of Doppler filters").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Nohmi and determine Doppler-frequency measurement results comprising information about Doppler-frequencies as a function of said angles-of arrivals, and determine the vibration map of the field of view of the radar by combining the phase map and the set of Doppler-frequency measurement results, as taught by Santra. Doppler-frequency measurements are ordinary and well-known in radar systems, and using Doppler-frequency measurements to determine a vibration map would be beneficial for improving the accuracy of vibration measurements (Santra [0110]).
Regarding Claim 8, Nohmi does not explicitly teach – but Santra teaches: wherein the set of Doppler-frequency measurement results is from a continuous measurement, the continuous measurement comprising a transmission of a single pulse (Santra [0019]: "continuous assessment"; [0029]: "FMCW"; "pulse radar").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Nohmi and use a continuous measurement comprising a transmission of a single pulse to determine Doppler-frequency measurements, as taught by Santra. Using a continuous pulse to collect Doppler measurements is considered ordinary and well-known for use in radar systems.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nohmi (US 2020/0326230), as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Hartmann (US 2017/0038245).
Regarding Claim 9, Nohmi does not explicitly teach – but Hartmann teaches: the method further comprising:
- upon determining said initial set of measurement results, changing a measurement mode of the radar to a Doppler-frequency measurement mode (Hartmann [0068]: "if the switching threshold 34 is exceeded at each of the times t1 and t2, a digital pulse with a pulse amplitude 32 and 33 is formed therefrom"; [Claim 7]: "in the case of belt-side vibration frequencies below a threshold of 6 hertz, the Doppler radar module (3) is switched off").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Nohmi and change a measurement mode of the radar to a Doppler-frequency measurement mode upon determining said initial set of measurement results, as taught by Hartmann. Changing to a Doppler-frequency measurement mode would be beneficial for improving the accuracy of vibration measurements (Hartmann [0014]).
Regarding Claim 10, Nohmi teaches: wherein the vibration map comprises information about a vibration frequency of at least one object in the field of view of the radar ([0016]: "vibration of the observation object"; [0219]: "vibration frequency of the targets").
Nohmi does not explicitly teach – but Hartmann teaches: the method further comprising:
- detecting that the vibration frequency of the at least one object is above a threshold (Hartmann [0068]: "if the switching threshold 34 is exceeded”; [Claim 7]: "vibration frequencies below a threshold of 6 hertz"); and
- responsive to said detection, changing the measurement mode of the radar to the Doppler-frequency measurement mode (Hartmann [0068]: "if the switching threshold 34 is exceeded at each of the times t1 and t2, a digital pulse with a pulse amplitude 32 and 33 is formed therefrom"; [Claim 7]: "in the case of belt-side vibration frequencies below a threshold of 6 hertz, the Doppler radar module (3) is switched off").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Nohmi and detect that the vibration frequency is above a threshold and, responsive to said detection, change the measurement mode of the radar to the Doppler-frequency measurement mode, as taught by Hartmann. Changing the measurement mode when a vibration frequency is above a threshold would be beneficial for improving the accuracy of vibration measurements (Hartmann [0014]) and for conserving energy.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nohmi (US 2020/0326230) and Santra (US 2019/0195728), as applied to Claim 7 above, and further in view of Slater (US 9,709,671).
Regarding Claim 11, Nohmi does not explicitly teach – but Slater teaches: wherein Doppler-frequency measurements are performed using a constant frequency (Slater [col. 17, lines 29-30]: "Both passive Doppler radars used constant frequency").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Nohmi and measure the Doppler-frequencies using a constant frequency, as taught by Slater. Using a constant frequency to measure Doppler-frequencies is considered ordinary and well-known for use in radar systems.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH Y. ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-0170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8AM-4PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William J. Kelleher can be reached on (571) 272-7753. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NOAH YI MIN ZHU/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/William Kelleher/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648