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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/10/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 02/10/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 5-13, 16-20 remain pending in the application. Claims 3-4, 15 are canceled. Newly added claims 21-23 are pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 02/10/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding Applicant’s argument (REMARKS page 10) about the objection to claim 13, the objection has been overcome by the amendment.
Regarding Applicant’s argument (REMARKS page 10) about the rejections of claims 13, 15-16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), the rejections have been overcome by the amendment.
Applicant’s argument (REMARKS pages 11-15) about amended Claim 1 is moot based on the new ground rejections.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 13 objected to because of the following informalities: “the reception antenna element sets” in line 4 from bottom. It appears that there is only one “reception antenna element set”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 objected to because claim 12 is exactly the same as claim 8.
Claims 20-23 objected to because of the following informalities: 1) “second axis, and third axis” claim 20 line 9 from bottom and claim 21-23 line 2. It appears that “the” is missing. 2) “second virtual axis” in claim 20 line 7 from bottom and claim 21-23 line 4. It appears that “the” is missing. Appropriate corrections are required.
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 1, 5-13, 16-23 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.
Claims 1, 13, 17, 20 recite the limitations: 1) “the grating lobes” in line 3 from bottom. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “grating lobes” is not mentioned. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “grating lobes”. 2) “the radar signal” in line 1 from bottom. It is indefinite because it is not clear whether or not “the radar signal” in line 1 from bottom represents the “an initial radar signal” mentioned in claim 1 line 2, claim 13 line 5, claim 17 line 18, claim 20 line 5. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “the initial radar signal”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claims 5-12, 21 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1 because each of dependent claims 5-12, 21 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 1.
Claims 16, 22 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 13 because each of dependent claims 16, 22 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 13.
Claims 18-19, 23 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 17 because each of dependent claims 18-19, 23 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 17.
Claims 1, 13 recites the limitation “the reception antenna element sets” in line 4 from bottom. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because only one “a first reception antenna element set” is mentioned in claim 1 line 12 and claim 13 line 15. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “the reception antenna element set”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claims 5-12, 21 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1 because each of dependent claims 5-12, 21 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 1.
Claims 16, 22 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 13 because each of dependent claims 16, 22 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 13.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the first sub-elements of the first reception antenna element set” in lines 1-2. It is indefinite because it is not clear whether or not “the first sub-elements” in lines 1-2 belongs to both “the first transmission antenna element set” as defined in claim 1 line 14 and “the first reception antenna element set” as defined in lines 1-2. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “first sub-elements of the first reception antenna element set”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 8 recites the limitations: 1) " a second axis" in line 4. It is indefinite because it is not clear whether or not the " a second axis" in line 4 is the same as the " a second axis" mentioned in claim 1 line 10. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as " a forth axis". 2) “the first transmission antenna element set is aligned with the third axis”. It is indefinite because claim 1 defined “a first transmission antenna element set aligned with a first axis” in line 9 and “a first reception antenna element set aligned with a third axis” in line 12. It is not clear how “the first transmission antenna element set is aligned with the third axis” and “aligned with a first axis” at a same time. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “the first transmission antenna element set is aligned with the first axis”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claims 9-12 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 8 because each of dependent claims 9-12 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear claim 8.
Claim 9 recites the limitations: 1) “the first sub-elements of the first reception antenna element set” in lines 1-2. It is indefinite because it is not clear whether or not “the first sub-elements” in lines 1-2 belongs to both “the first transmission antenna element set” as defined in claim 1 line 14 and “the first reception antenna element set” as defined in lines 1-2. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “first sub-elements of the first reception antenna element set”. 2) “the second sub-elements of the second reception antenna element set” in line 4. It is indefinite because it is not clear whether or not “the second sub-elements” in line 4 belongs to both “the second transmission antenna element set” as defined in claim 1 lines 14-15 and “the second reception antenna element set” as defined in line 4. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “second sub-elements of the second reception antenna element set”. 3) “the first reception antenna sub-element, the second reception antenna sub-element, the third reception antenna sub-element, and the fourth reception antenna sub-element are arranged in the zigzag form along the first axis and the second axis” in lines 7-9. It is indefinite because “a first reception antenna element set aligned with a third axis that is parallel to the first axis and the second axis” as defined in claim 1 lines 12-13 and “the first sub-elements of the first reception antenna element set comprises a first reception antenna sub-element and a second reception antenna sub-element” as defined in lines 1-2, it is not clear how “the first reception antenna sub-element, the second reception antenna sub-element, the third reception antenna sub-element, and the fourth reception antenna sub-element are arranged in the zigzag form along the first axis and the second axis”. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “the first reception antenna sub-element, the second reception antenna sub-element, the third reception antenna sub-element, and the fourth reception antenna sub-element are arranged in the zigzag form along the third axis and the forth axis”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claim 10 is also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 9 because dependent claim 10 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear claim 9.
Claim 10 recites the limitations: “the first reception antenna sub-element arranged on the first axis” and “the second reception antenna sub-element arranged on the first axis” in lines 2-4. It is indefinite because as defined in claim 9 lines 1-3 “the first sub-elements of the first reception antenna element set comprises a first reception antenna sub-element and a second reception antenna sub-element”, “the first reception antenna sub-element” and “the second reception antenna sub-element” belong to “the first reception antenna element set”. In claim 1 lines 12-13, “a first reception antenna element set aligned with a third axis that is parallel to the first axis and the second axis”. It is not clear that which one of “third axis” and “first axis” “the first reception antenna element set” is on. That is, it is not clear that “the first reception antenna element set” is “aligned with a third axis” as defined in claim 1 line 12 or “arranged on the first axis” as mentioned in lines 3-4. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, these limitations are being interpreted as “the first reception antenna sub-element arranged on the third axis” and “the second reception antenna sub-element arranged on the third axis”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claim 12 recites the limitations: 1) " a second axis" in line 4. It is indefinite because it is not clear whether or not the " a second axis" in line 4 is the same as the " a second axis" mentioned in claim 1 line 10 and the "a second axis" in claim 8 line 4. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as " the forth axis". 2) “the first transmission antenna element set is aligned with the third axis”. It is indefinite because claim 1 defined “a first transmission antenna element set aligned with a first axis” in line 9 and “a first reception antenna element set aligned with a third axis” in line 12. It is not clear how “the first transmission antenna element set is aligned with the third axis” and “aligned with a first axis” at a same time. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “the first transmission antenna element set is aligned with the first axis”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 17 recites the limitations: “the second” in line 8. It is indefinite because it is not clear what “the second” represents. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “a forth axis”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 18 recites the limitations: 1) “the first sub-elements of the first reception antenna element set” in lines 1-2. It is indefinite because it is not clear whether or not “the first sub-elements” in lines 1-2 belongs to both “the first transmission antenna element set” as defined in claim 17 line 15 and “the first reception antenna element set” as defined in lines 1-2. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “first sub-elements of the first reception antenna element set”. 2) “the second sub-elements of the second reception antenna element set” in line 4. It is indefinite because it is not clear whether or not “the second sub-elements” in line 4 belongs to both “the second transmission antenna element set” as defined in claim 17 line 16 and “the second reception antenna element set” as defined in line 4. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “second sub-elements of the second reception antenna element set”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claim 20 recites the limitations: 1) “the transmission array” in line 27. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “transmission array” is not mentioned. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “the transmission antenna array”. 2) “the reception array” in line 27. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “reception array” is not mentioned. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “the reception antenna array”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
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, 5-8, 11-13, 16-17, 19, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kishigami et al. (US 10,141,657, hereafter Kishigami) in view of Searcy et al. (US 2016/0033632, hereafter Searcy).
Regarding claim 1, Kishigami (‘657) discloses that A processor-implemented method { Fig.2; col.2 lines 39-42 (specific embodiments may be implemented as a system, a method, an integrated circuit, a computer program, a storage medium, or any selective combination thereof.) 40 (a method)}, the method comprising:
generating an initial radar signal based on a virtual array antenna generated by an array antenna of a radar sensor { Fig.3; Fig.10; col.16 lines 6-9 (FIGS. 11A and 11B illustrate directivity patterns (Fourier beam patterns with the main beam at the direction of 0°) of the transmitting and receiving array antenna arrangements of the subarray element in the vertical direction is equal to (with De=0.5A, Dt=l.5A, and Dr=A) illustrated in FIG. 10)}, wherein the virtual array antenna generated by the array antenna comprises:
first virtual antenna element set aligned with a first virtual axis { Fig.10 (see mark below)}; and
a second virtual antenna element set aligned with a second virtual axis that is parallel to the first virtual axis { Fig.10 (see mark below)}, and
PNG
media_image1.png
600
591
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the array antenna comprises:
a first transmission antenna element set aligned with a first axis { Fig.10 Tx#1};
a second transmission antenna element set aligned with a second axis that is parallel to the first axis { Fig.10 Tx#3}; and
a first reception antenna element set aligned with a third axis that is parallel to the first axis and the second axis { Fig.10 Rx#1}, and
wherein first sub-elements of the first transmission antenna element set and second sub-elements of the second transmission antenna element set are arranged in a zigzag form along the first axis and the second axis { Fig.10 Tx#1 and Tx#3} to generate spacing equal to or less than half of a wavelength of the initial radar signal in the virtual array antenna { Fig.10 (De); col.15 lines 15-16 (predetermined antenna element spacing De is λ/2)};
determining a target azimuth angle of a target object, based on the initial radar signal being received through the array antenna {col.9 lines 33-35 (The virtual receiving array correlation vector h(k, fs, w) is used to later describe the processing of performing a direction estimation of the reflected wave signal from the target); col.10 lines 24-27 (The direction estimator 214 calculates a space profile by treating an azimuth direction θ and an elevation direction φ in a direction estimation evaluating function value P (θ, φ, k, fs, w) as variables), 29-31 (sets the azimuth and elevation directions of each local maximum peak as arrival direction estimation values)};
; and
determining an elevation angle of the target object { col.9 lines 33-35 (The virtual receiving array correlation vector h(k, fs, w) is used to later describe the processing of performing a direction estimation of the reflected wave signal from the target); col.10 lines 24-27 (The direction estimator 214 calculates a space profile by treating an azimuth direction θ and an elevation direction φ in a direction estimation evaluating function value P (θ, φ, k, fs, w) as variables), 29-31 (sets the azimuth and elevation directions of each local maximum peak as arrival direction estimation values)}, ,
wherein the virtual array antenna comprises:
a virtual reception antenna array formed by a convolution of the transmission antenna element sets and the reception antenna element sets { Fig.10; col.14 lines 63-67 (FIG. 10 illustrates the antenna arrangement of a transmitting array including Nt=6 transmitting antennas 106 (Tx#l to Tx#6), the antenna arrangement of a receiving array including Na=3 receiving antennas 202 (Rx#l, Rx#2, and Rx#3), and the antenna arrangement of a virtual receiving); col.15 lines 1-2 (array (including NtxNa=18 elements) configured in accordance with these transmitting and receiving array antennas)},
wherein the zigzag form is configured to reduce the grating lobes in the virtual array antenna by interleaving virtual receive phase centers with spacings equal to or less than half of a wavelength of the radar signal { Figs.10-11; col.3 lines 16-19 (FIG. 10 illustrates antenna arrangements of a transmitting array, a receiving array, and a virtual receiving array according to Variation 2 of the embodiment of the present disclosure;); col.16 lines 6-9 (FIGS. 11A and 11B illustrate directivity patterns (Fourier beam patterns with the main beam at the direction of 0°) of the transmitting and receiving array antenna arrangements of the subarray element in the vertical direction is equal to (with De=0.5 λ, Dt=1.5 λ , and Dr= λ) illustrated in FIG. 10), 11-13 (FIG. 11A, no grating lobe is generated in the angle range of ±90° of the main beam direction in the horizontal direction.), 25-26 (Variation 2 can prevent generation of an unnecessary grating lobe and achieve a reduced sidelobe level); col.18 lines 2-3 (This equilateral triangle lattice arrangement provides a high grating lobe preventing performance) }.
However, Kishigami (‘657) does not explicitly disclose (see word with underline) “generating a correction radar signal by correcting a phase of the initial radar signal, based on the target azimuth angle” and “determining an elevation angle of the target object, based on the correction radar signal”. In the same field of endeavor, Searcy (‘632) discloses that
generating a correction radar signal by correcting a phase of the initial radar signal, based on the target azimuth angle { Fig.3A-B; [0045] lines 5-6 (The slope of the linear phase progression is related to target azimuth.), 9-10 (Δ ϕ =2 π (d/ λ ) sin Φ ,the target elevation angle Φ can be determined by the phase offset Δ ϕ.); Examiner’s note: Δ ϕ in Fig.3A-B is based on the two dashed lines, whose slope is related to target azimuth. Therefore Δ ϕ is “based on the target azimuth angle”}; and
determining an elevation angle of the target object, based on the correction radar signal {[0045] lines 9-10 (the target elevation angle Φ can be determined by the phase offset Δ ϕ)}.
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 Kishigami (‘657) with the teachings of Searcy (‘632) {determine elevation angle by taking account of azimuth related phase offsets } to determine elevation angle by taking account of azimuth related phase offsets. Doing so would reduce the effects of grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles so as to avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle, as recognized by Searcy (‘632) {[0004] lines 13-16 (grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles, reduce the effects of grating lobes); [0045] lines 1-3 from bottom (phase offset Δ ϕ can be corrected prior to digital beam-forming in azimuth in order to eliminate grating lobes altogether.); [0049] lines 9-10 (avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle,)}.
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Kishigami (‘657) and Searcy (‘632) discloses that in the method,
the first sub-elements of the first transmission antenna element set comprises a first transmission antenna sub-element and a second transmission antenna sub-element {Fig.10 two elements in Tx#1},
wherein the second sub-elements of the second transmission antenna element set comprises a third transmission antenna sub-element and a fourth transmission antenna sub-element { Fig.10 two elements in Tx#3}, and
wherein the first transmission antenna sub-element, the second transmission antenna sub-element, the third transmission antenna sub-element, and the fourth transmission antenna sub-element are arranged in the zigzag form along the first axis and the second axis { Fig.10 Tx#1, Tx#3}.
Regarding claim 6, which depends on claims 1 and 5, Kishigami (‘657) does not explicitly disclose “the third transmission antenna sub- element is arranged on the second axis to be parallel to a portion of the first transmission antenna sub-element arranged on the first axis and a portion of the second transmission antenna sub-element arranged on the first axis”. In the same field of endeavor, Searcy (‘632) discloses that in the method,
the third transmission antenna sub- element is arranged on the second axis to be parallel to a portion of the first transmission antenna sub-element arranged on the first axis and a portion of the second transmission antenna sub-element arranged on the first axis {Fig.8A TX1, TX2 (see marks below)}.
PNG
media_image2.png
656
418
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 Kishigami (‘657) with the teachings of Searcy (‘632) {determine elevation angle by taking account of azimuth related phase offsets and arrange transmission antenna elements with offset that one part of second antenna overlaps with each of two parts of first antenna} to determine elevation angle by taking account of azimuth related phase offsets and arrange transmission antenna elements with offset that one part of second antenna overlaps with each of two parts of first antenna. Doing so would reduce the effects of grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles so as to avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle, as recognized by Searcy (‘632) {[0004] lines 13-16 (grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles, reduce the effects of grating lobes); [0045] lines 1-3 from bottom (phase offset Δ ϕ can be corrected prior to digital beam-forming in azimuth in order to eliminate grating lobes altogether.); [0049] lines 9-10 (avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle,)}.
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Kishigami (‘657) and Searcy (‘632) discloses that in the method,
the first reception antenna element set comprises a first reception antenna sub-element and a second reception antenna sub-element {see Kishigami (‘657) Fig.10 two elements in Rx#1}, and
wherein a distance between a center of the first reception antenna sub-element and a center of the second reception antenna sub-element is greater than or equal to a length of the first reception antenna sub-element {see Kishigami (‘657) Fig.10 Rx#1; Examiner’s note: distance between centers of two elements in Rx#1 is larger than the length of any element of the two elements}.
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Kishigami (‘657) discloses that in the method, the array antenna comprises:
; and
the first transmission antenna element set is aligned with the third axis {see Kishigami (‘657) Fig.10 Tx#1}.
However, Kishigami (‘657) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “a second reception antenna element set aligned with a second axis that is parallel to the first axis”. In the same field of endeavor, Searcy (‘632) discloses that
a second reception antenna element set aligned with a second axis that is parallel to the first axis {Fig.8A RX2, TX1};
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 Kishigami (‘657) with the teachings of Searcy (‘632) {determine elevation angle by taking account of azimuth related phase offsets and arrange transmission antennas and receive antennas along with parallel axis} to determine elevation angle by taking account of azimuth related phase offsets and arrange transmission antennas and receive antennas along with parallel axis. Doing so would reduce the effects of grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles so as to avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle, as recognized by Searcy (‘632) {[0004] lines 13-16 (grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles, reduce the effects of grating lobes); [0045] lines 1-3 from bottom (phase offset Δ ϕ can be corrected prior to digital beam-forming in azimuth in order to eliminate grating lobes altogether.); [0049] lines 9-10 (avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle,)}.
Regarding claim 11, which depends on claims 1 and 8, the combination of Kishigami (‘657) and Searcy (‘632) discloses that in the method,
the first sub-elements of the first transmission antenna element set comprises a first transmission antenna sub-element and a second transmission antenna sub-element {see Kishigami (‘657) Fig.10 two elements in Tx#1}, and
wherein a distance between a center of the first transmission antenna sub-element and a center of the second transmission antenna sub-element is greater than or equal to a length of the first transmission antenna sub-element {see Kishigami (‘657) Fig.10 two elements in Tx#1; Examiner’s note: distance between centers of two elements in Tx#1 is larger than the length of any element of the two elements }.
Regarding claim 12, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 8. Accordingly, claim 12 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 8, shown above.
Regarding claim 13, as modified above, Kishigami (‘657) discloses that An apparatus {Fig.2; title (radar device)}, comprising:
a processor { col.19 lines 42-43 (The radar device 10 includes, a central processing unit (CPU))} configured to execute instructions {col.19 lines 46-48 (the function of each component described above is achieved through execution of the control program by the CPU.) }; and
a memory storing the instructions, wherein an execution of the instructions configures the processor {col.2 lines 39-42 (specific embodiments may be implemented as a system, a method, an integrated circuit, a computer program, a storage medium, or any selective combination thereof.); col.19 lines 42-48 (The radar device 10 includes, although not illustrated, a central processing unit (CPU), a storage medium such as a read only memory (ROM) storing a control program, and, and a working memory such as a random access memory (RAM). the function of each component described above is achieved through execution of the control program by the CPU.)} to:
generate an initial radar signal based on a virtual array antenna generated by an array antenna of a radar sensor, wherein the virtual array antenna generated by the array antenna comprises:
a first virtual antenna element set aligned with a first virtual axis; and
a second virtual antenna element set aligned with a second virtual axis that is parallel to the first virtual axis,
wherein the array antenna comprises:
a first transmission antenna element set aligned with a first axis;
a second transmission antenna element set aligned with a second axis that is parallel to the first axis; and
a first reception antenna element set aligned with a third axis that is parallel to the first axis and tt1e second axis, and
wherein first sub-elements of the first transmission antenna element set and second sub-elements of the second transmission antenna element set are arranged in a zigzag form along the first axis and the second axis to generate spacings equal to or less than half of a wavelength of the initial radar signal in the virtual array antenna;
determine a target azimuth angle of a target object, based on the initial radar signal received through the antenna array;
generate a correction radar signal by correcting a phase of the initial radar signal, based on the target azimuth angle; and
determine an elevation angle of the target object, based on the correction radar signal,
wherein the virtual array antenna comprises:
a virtual reception antenna array formed by a convolution of the transmission antenna element sets and the reception antenna element sets, and
wherein the zigzag form is configured to reduce the grating lobes in the virtual array antenna by interleaving virtual receive phase centers with spacings equal to or less than half of a wavelength of the radar signal.
{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 16, which depends on claim 13, Kishigami (‘657) discloses that in the apparatus,
the apparatus comprises the radar sensor {title}, and
However, Kishigami (‘657) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “the apparatus is a vehicle”. In the same field of endeavor, Searcy (‘632) discloses that
wherein the apparatus is a vehicle { [0003] lines 1-2 (vehicle (e.g. automotive) radar systems)}.
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 Kishigami (‘657) with the teachings of Searcy (‘632) {determine elevation angle by taking account of azimuth related phase offsets and use radar on vehicle } to determine elevation angle by taking account of azimuth related phase offsets and use radar on vehicle. Doing so would reduce the effects of grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles so as to determine distance and a horizontal or azimuth angle to a target or object in the travel path of the vehicle and avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle, as recognized by Searcy (‘632) {[0003] lines 1-3 (vehicle (e.g. automotive) radar systems, determine distance and a horizontal or azimuth angle to a target or object, an object that is in the travel path of the vehicle.); [0004] lines 13-16 (grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles, reduce the effects of grating lobes); [0045] lines 1-3 from bottom (phase offset Δ ϕ can be corrected prior to digital beam-forming in azimuth in order to eliminate grating lobes altogether.); [0049] lines 9-10 (avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle,)}.
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 Kishigami (‘657) with the teachings of Searcy (‘632) {use radar on vehicle} to use radar on vehicle. Doing so would detect data about the surroundings of the particular vehicle (e.g. detect the position of a preceding road user to be able to calculate the distance of the vehicle to the preceding road user) so as to assist a driver when driving the vehicle, as recognized by Loesch (‘775) {col.1 lines 32-33 (assist a driver when driving the vehicle.), 41-45 (detect data about the surroundings of the particular vehicle. detect the position of a preceding road user to be able to calculate the distance of the vehicle to the preceding road user) }.
Regarding claim 17, as modified above, Kishigami (‘657) discloses that A radar array antenna {title; Fig.10}, comprising:
an antenna array comprising transmission and reception antenna arrays that generate a virtual transmission antenna array and a virtual reception antenna array {Fig.10}, the antenna array comprising:
a first transmission antenna element set aligned with a first axis { Fig.10 Tx#1};
a first reception antenna element set aligned with a second axis that is parallel to the first axis { Fig.10 Rx#1};
a second transmission antenna element set aligned with the second { Fig.10 Tx#3}; and
{ Fig.10 (see mark below)} comprises:
a first virtual antenna element set aligned with a first virtual axis{ Fig.10 (see mark below)}; and
a second virtual antenna element set aligned with a second virtual axis that is parallel to the first virtual axis { Fig.10 (see mark below)}, and
PNG
media_image1.png
600
591
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein first sub-elements of the first transmission antenna element set and second sub-elements of the second transmission antenna element set are arranged in a zigzag form alone the first axis and the second axis { Fig.10 Tx#1 and Tx#3} to generate spacings equal to or less than half of a wavelength of an initial radar signal in the virtual array antenna { Fig.10 (De); col.15 lines 15-16 (predetermined antenna element spacing De is λ/2)}; and
a processor { col.19 lines 42-43 (The radar device 10 includes, a central processing unit (CPU))} configured to execute instructions {col.19 lines 46-48 (the function of each component described above is achieved through execution of the control program by the CPU.) }; and
a memory storing the instructions, wherein an execution of the instructions configures the processor {col.2 lines 39-42 (specific embodiments may be implemented as a system, a method, an integrated circuit, a computer program, a storage medium, or any selective combination thereof.); col.19 lines 42-48 (The radar device 10 includes, although not illustrated, a central processing unit (CPU), a storage medium such as a read only memory (ROM) storing a control program, and, and a working memory such as a random access memory (RAM). the function of each component described above is achieved through execution of the control program by the CPU.)} to:
determine a target azimuth angle of a target object based on the initial radar signal received through the antenna array {col.9 lines 33-35 (The virtual receiving array correlation vector h(k, fs, w) is used to later describe the processing of performing a direction estimation of the reflected wave signal from the target); col.10 lines 24-27 (The direction estimator 214 calculates a space profile by treating an azimuth direction θ and an elevation direction φ in a direction estimation evaluating function value P (θ, φ, k, fs, w) as variables), 29-31 (sets the azimuth and elevation directions of each local maximum peak as arrival direction estimation values)}; and
generate an elevation angle of the target object, based on the target azimuth angle { col.10 lines 24-27 (The direction estimator 214 calculates a space profile by treating an azimuth direction θ and an elevation direction φ in a direction estimation evaluating function value P (θ, φ, k, fs, w) as variables), 29-31 (sets the azimuth and elevation directions of each local maximum peak as arrival direction estimation values); Examiner’s note: col.10 lines 29-31 for “based on the target azimuth angle”},
wherein the virtual array antenna comprises:
a virtual reception antenna array formed by a convolution of the transmission antenna element sets and the reception antenna element sets { Fig.10; col.14 lines 63-67 (FIG. 10 illustrates the antenna arrangement of a transmitting array including Nt=6 transmitting antennas 106 (Tx#l to Tx#6), the antenna arrangement of a receiving array including Na=3 receiving antennas 202 (Rx#l, Rx#2, and Rx#3), and the antenna arrangement of a virtual receiving); col.15 lines 1-2 (array (including NtxNa=18 elements) configured in accordance with these transmitting and receiving array antennas)},
wherein the zigzag form is configured to reduce the grating lobes in the virtual array antenna by interleaving virtual receive phase centers with spacings equal to or less than half of a wavelength of the radar signal { Figs.10-11; col.3 lines 16-19 (FIG. 10 illustrates antenna arrangements of a transmitting array, a receiving array, and a virtual receiving array according to Variation 2 of the embodiment of the present disclosure;); col.16 lines 6-9 (FIGS. 11A and 11B illustrate directivity patterns (Fourier beam patterns with the main beam at the direction of 0°) of the transmitting and receiving array antenna arrangements of the subarray element in the vertical direction is equal to (with De=0.5 λ, Dt=1.5 λ , and Dr= λ) illustrated in FIG. 10), 11-13 (FIG. 11A, no grating lobe is generated in the angle range of ±90° of the main beam direction in the horizontal direction.), 25-26 (Variation 2 can prevent generation of an unnecessary grating lobe and achieve a reduced sidelobe level); col.18 lines 2-3 (This equilateral triangle lattice arrangement provides a high grating lobe preventing performance) }.
However, Kishigami (‘657) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “a second reception antenna element set aligned with a third axis that is parallel to the first axis and the second axis”. In the same field of endeavor, Searcy (‘632) discloses that
a second reception antenna element set aligned with a third axis that is parallel to the first axis and the second axis {Fig.8A RX2, TX1}.
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 Kishigami (‘657) with the teachings of Searcy (‘632) { arrange transmission antennas and receive antennas along with parallel axis} to arrange transmission antennas and receive antennas along with parallel axis. Doing so would reduce the effects of grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles so as to avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle, as recognized by Searcy (‘632) {[0004] lines 13-16 (grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles, reduce the effects of grating lobes); [0045] lines 1-3 from bottom (phase offset Δ ϕ can be corrected prior to digital beam-forming in azimuth in order to eliminate grating lobes altogether.); [0049] lines 9-10 (avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle,)}.
Regarding claim 19, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 11. Accordingly, claim 19 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 11, shown above.
Regarding claim 21, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Kishigami (‘657) and Searcy (‘632) discloses that in the method,
the array antenna is arranged along at least three parallel axes including the first axis, second axis, and third axis {Fig.10 Tx#1, Tx#3, Rx#1}, and
wherein the virtual array antenna is arranged in only two parallel axes including the first virtual axis and second virtual axis {Fig.10 (see marks in the rejection of claim 1); Examiner’s note: Tx#1 and Tx#3 and Rx#1 form the two rows of virtual antennas }.
Regarding claims 22-23, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 21. Accordingly, claims 22-23 are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 21, shown above.
Claims (9-10), 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kishigami (‘657) and Searcy (‘632) as applied to claims 5, 17, respectively, above, and further in view of Loesch et al. (US 10,634,775, hereafter Loesch).
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claims 1 and 8, Kishigami (‘657) discloses that in the method,
the first sub-elements of the first reception antenna element set comprises a first reception antenna sub-element and a second reception antenna sub-element {Fig.10 two elements in Rx#1},
wherein the second sub-elements of the second reception antenna element set comprises a third reception antenna sub-element and a fourth reception antenna sub-element {Fig.10 two elements in Rx#2}, and
.
However, Kishigami (‘657) and Searcy (‘632) do not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “wherein the first reception antenna sub-element, the second reception antenna sub- element, the third reception antenna sub-element, and the fourth reception antenna sub- element are arranged in the zigzag form along the first axis and the second axis”. In the same field of endeavor, Loesch (‘775) discloses that
wherein the first reception antenna sub-element, the second reception antenna sub- element, the third reception antenna sub-element, and the fourth reception antenna sub- element are arranged in the zigzag form along the first axis and the second axis {Fig.2A RX1, RX2 (see marks below)}.
PNG
media_image3.png
565
617
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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 Kishigami (‘657) and Searcy (‘632) with the teachings of Loesch (‘775) {arrange receive antennas with offset with each other} to arrange receive antennas with offset with each other. Doing so would enable the formation of virtual arrays having an enlarged aperture of a high number of virtual antennas so as to achieve an azimuth angle estimation with improved accuracy and an elevation angle estimation with a quality value, as recognized by Loesch (‘775) {col.2 lines 31-32 (enables the formation of virtual arrays having an enlarged aperture of a high number of virtual antennas); col.3 lines 35-37 (an azimuth angle estimation with improved accuracy and an elevation angle estimation with a quality value may be carried out)}.
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claims 1 and 8-9, Kishigami (‘657) and Searcy (‘632) do not explicitly disclose “the third reception antenna sub-element is arranged on the second axis to be parallel to a portion of the first reception antenna sub-element arranged on the first axis and a portion of the second reception antenna sub-element arranged on the first axis”. In the same field of endeavor, Loesch (‘775) discloses that in the method,
the third reception antenna sub-element is arranged on the second axis to be parallel to a portion of the first reception antenna sub-element arranged on the first axis and a portion of the second reception antenna sub-element arranged on the first axis { Fig.2A RX1 (14 elements on top and 14 elements on bottom), RX2 (14 elements on bottom), see marks in the rejection of claim 9}.
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 Kishigami (‘657) and Searcy (‘632) with the teachings of Loesch (‘775) {arrange receive antennas with offset with each other} to arrange receive antennas with offset with each other. Doing so would enable the formation of virtual arrays having an enlarged aperture of a high number of virtual antennas so as to achieve an azimuth angle estimation with improved accuracy and an elevation angle estimation with a quality value, as recognized by Loesch (‘775) {col.2 lines 31-32 (enables the formation of virtual arrays having an enlarged aperture of a high number of virtual antennas); col.3 lines 35-37 (an azimuth angle estimation with improved accuracy and an elevation angle estimation with a quality value may be carried out)}.
Regarding claim 18, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 9. Accordingly, claim 18 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 9, shown above.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kishigami (‘657) in view of Searcy (‘632) and Loesch (US 2021/0025972, hereafter Loesch-2).
Regarding claim 20, Kishigami (‘657) discloses that An apparatus {Fig.2; title (radar device)}, comprising:
an antenna array {Fig.10} comprising transmission and reception antenna arrays that generate a virtual transmission antenna array and a virtual reception antenna array {Fig.10}; and
a processor { col.19 lines 42-43 (The radar device 10 includes, a central processing unit (CPU))} configured to:
determine an azimuth angle of a target object based on an initial radar signal transmitted by the virtual transmission antenna array and received by the virtual reception antenna array {Fig.3; Fig.10; col.9 lines 33-35 (The virtual receiving array correlation vector h(k, fs, w) is used to later describe the processing of performing a direction estimation of the reflected wave signal from the target); col.10 lines 24-27 (The direction estimator 214 calculates a space profile by treating an azimuth direction θ and an elevation direction φ in a direction estimation evaluating function value P (θ, φ, k, fs, w) as variables), 29-31 (sets the azimuth and elevation directions of each local maximum peak as arrival direction estimation values); col.16 lines 6-9 (FIGS. 11A and 11B illustrate directivity patterns (Fourier beam patterns with the main beam at the direction of 0°) of the transmitting and receiving array antenna arrangements of the subarray element in the vertical direction is equal to (with De=0.5A, Dt=l.5A, and Dr=A) illustrated in FIG. 10)};
determine an elevation angle of the target object { col.9 lines 33-35 (The virtual receiving array correlation vector h(k, fs, w) is used to later describe the processing of performing a direction estimation of the reflected wave signal from the target); col.10 lines 24-27 (The direction estimator 214 calculates a space profile by treating an azimuth direction θ and an elevation direction φ in a direction estimation evaluating function value P (θ, φ, k, fs, w) as variables), 29-31 (sets the azimuth and elevation directions of each local maximum peak as arrival direction estimation values)}
wherein the transmission and reception antenna arrays {Fig.10 Tx#1, Tx#2, Rx#1, Rx#2} comprise:
a first transmission antenna element set aligned with a first axis { Fig.10 Tx#1};
a first reception antenna element set aligned with a second axis that is parallel to the first axis { Fig.10 Rx#1};
a second transmission antenna element set and
a second reception antenna element set,
wherein the virtual transmission antenna array and a virtual reception antenna array generated by the array antenna { Fig.10 (see marks in the rejection of claim 1)} comprises:
a first virtual antenna element set aligned with a first virtual axis { Fig.10 (see marks in the rejection of claim 1)}; and
a second virtual antenna element set aligned with a second virtual axis that is parallel to the first virtual axis { Fig.10 (see marks in the rejection of claim 1)}, and
wherein first sub-elements of the first transmission antenna element set and second sub-elements of the second transmission antenna element set are arranged in a zigzag form along the first axis and the second axis { Fig.10 Tx#1 and Tx#3} to generate spacings equal to or less than half of a wavelength of the initial radar signal in the virtual array antenna { Fig.10 (De); col.15 lines 15-16 (predetermined antenna element spacing De is λ/2)},
wherein the transmission array and the reception array are arranged along at least three parallel axes including the first axis, second axis, and third axis { Fig.10 Tx#1, Tx#2, Rx#1}, and
wherein the virtual transmission antenna array and the virtual reception antenna array are arranged in only two parallel axes including the first virtual axis and second virtual axis {Fig.10 (see marks in the rejection of claim 1)},
wherein the virtual array antenna comprises:
a virtual reception antenna array formed by a convolution of the transmission antenna element sets and the reception antenna element sets { Fig.10; col.14 lines 63-67 (FIG. 10 illustrates the antenna arrangement of a transmitting array including Nt=6 transmitting antennas 106 (Tx#l to Tx#6), the antenna arrangement of a receiving array including Na=3 receiving antennas 202 (Rx#l, Rx#2, and Rx#3), and the antenna arrangement of a virtual receiving); col.15 lines 1-2 (array (including NtxNa=18 elements) configured in accordance with these transmitting and receiving array antennas)},
wherein the zigzag form is configured to reduce the grating lobes in the virtual array antenna by interleaving virtual receive phase centers with spacings equal to or less than half of a wavelength of the radar signal { Figs.10-11; col.3 lines 16-19 (FIG. 10 illustrates antenna arrangements of a transmitting array, a receiving array, and a virtual receiving array according to Variation 2 of the embodiment of the present disclosure;); col.16 lines 6-9 (FIGS. 11A and 11B illustrate directivity patterns (Fourier beam patterns with the main beam at the direction of 0°) of the transmitting and receiving array antenna arrangements of the subarray element in the vertical direction is equal to (with De=0.5 λ, Dt=1.5 λ , and Dr= λ) illustrated in FIG. 10), 11-13 (FIG. 11A, no grating lobe is generated in the angle range of ±90° of the main beam direction in the horizontal direction.), 25-26 (Variation 2 can prevent generation of an unnecessary grating lobe and achieve a reduced sidelobe level); col.18 lines 2-3 (This equilateral triangle lattice arrangement provides a high grating lobe preventing performance) }.
However, Kishigami (‘657) does not explicitly disclose (see word with underline) “calculate a phase correction based on the azimuth angle”, “determine an elevation angle of the target object based on the calculated phase correction”, “a second transmission antenna element set aligned with the second axis”, and “a second reception antenna element setaligned with a third axis that is parallel to the first axis and the second axis”. In the same field of endeavor, Searcy (‘632) discloses that
calculate a phase correction based on the azimuth angle { Fig.3A-B; [0045] lines 5-6 (The slope of the linear phase progression is related to target azimuth.), 9-10 (Δ ϕ =2 π (d/ λ ) sin Φ ,the target elevation angle Φ can be determined by the phase offset Δ ϕ.); Examiner’s note: Δ ϕ in Fig.3A-B is based on the two dashed lines, whose slope is related to target azimuth. Therefore Δ ϕ is “based on the target azimuth angle”};
determine an elevation angle of the target object based on the calculated phase correction {[0045] lines 9-10 (the target elevation angle Φ can be determined by the phase offset Δ ϕ)} ;
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 Kishigami (‘657) with the teachings of Searcy (‘632) {determine elevation angle by taking account of azimuth related phase offsets } to determine elevation angle by taking account of azimuth related phase offsets. Doing so would reduce the effects of grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles so as to avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle, as recognized by Searcy (‘632) {[0004] lines 13-16 (grating lobes that cause an undesirably large variation in receive antenna sensitivity for various azimuth angles, reduce the effects of grating lobes); [0045] lines 1-3 from bottom (phase offset Δ ϕ can be corrected prior to digital beam-forming in azimuth in order to eliminate grating lobes altogether.); [0049] lines 9-10 (avoid ambiguity in estimating target elevation angle,)}.
However, Searcy (‘632) does not explicitly disclose (see word with underline) “a second transmission antenna element set aligned with the second axis”, and “a second reception antenna element set aligned with a third axis that is parallel to the first axis and the second axis”. In the same field of endeavor, Loesch-2 (‘972) discloses that
a second transmission antenna element set aligned with the second axis {Fig.1 TX3 align with RX1 (see marks below)};
a second reception antenna element set aligned with a third axis that is parallel to the first axis and the second axis {Fig.1 RX2 (see marks below)};
PNG
media_image4.png
461
583
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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 Kishigami (‘657) and Searcy (‘632) with the teachings of Loesch-2 (‘972) {arrange transmission antennas and receive antennas in a certain pattern (e.g. transmission antennas align with receive antennas on a same axis or on parallel axis )} to arrange transmission antennas and receive antennas in a certain pattern (e.g. transmission antennas align with receive antennas on a same axis or on parallel axis ). Doing so would obtain virtual array so as to provide high - resolution estimate of the angle (e.g. azimuth), as recognized by Loesch-2 (‘972) {[0037] lines 1-2 (multicolumn transmitting subarrays allow a high - resolution estimate of the azimuth angle .), 11 (a virtual array is obtained,) }.
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/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights