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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/14/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks, see pages 8-11 concerning claims 1-5 and 7-21.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5 and 7-20 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and deemed persuasive.
Applicant’s remarks concerning the interpretation of claim 21 under 35 USC 103 has been fully considered and deemed persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
10. Claims 1-5, 7-20 and 22are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al (US 20210173042 A1), hereinafter Wu in view of Tamir et al (US 9619203B2), hereinafter Tamir
Regarding claim 1, Wu discloses:
a method comprising (Wu, Abstract, A radar system, apparatus, architecture, and method are provided for generating a transmit reference or chirp signal to produce a plurality of transmit signals having different frequency offsets from the transmit reference signal for encoding and transmission as N radio frequency encoded transmit signals which are reflected from a target and received at a receive antenna as a target return signal that is down-converted to an intermediate frequency signal and converted by a high-speed analog-to-digital converter to a digital signal that is processed by a radar control processing unit which performs fast time processing steps to generate a range spectrum comprising N segments which correspond, respectively, to the N radio frequency encoded transmit signals transmitted over the N transmit antennas):
transmitting a set of radar pulses using a radar device to determine an initial velocity estimate associated with an object (Wu, para [0037], The radar system 100 also includes a radar controller processing unit 20 that is connected to supply input control signals to the radar device 10 and to receive therefrom digital output signals generated by the receiver modules 12. In selected embodiments, the radar controller processing unit 20 may be embodied as a micro-controller unit (MCU) or other processing unit that is configured and arranged for signal processing tasks such as, but not limited to, target identification, computation of target distance, target velocity, and target direction, and generating control signals. The radar controller processing unit 20 may, for example, be configured to generate calibration signals, receive data signals, receive sensor signals, generate frequency spectrum shaping signals (such as ramp generation in the case of FMCW radar) and/or register programming or state machine signals for RF (radio frequency) circuit enablement sequences. In addition, the radar controller processor 20 may be configured to program the modules 11 to operate in a time-division fashion by sequentially transmitting LFM chirps for coordinated communication between the transmit antennas TX.sub.1,i, RX.sub.1,j. The result of the digital processing at the radar controller processing unit 20 is that the digital domain signals D1 are processed for the subsequent fast-time range FFT 21, slow-time Doppler FFT 22, constant false alarm rate (CFAR) target detection 23, spatial angle estimation 24, and target tracking processes 25, with the result being output 26 to other automotive computing or user interfacing devices for further process or display) and (para [0118, lines 1-7: In yet another form, there is provided a computer program product stored in non-transitory machine-readable storage medium comprising instructions for execution by one or more processors in a radar system having N transmit antennas and a receive antenna for detecting an object. As disclosed, the computer program product includes instructions for configuring a reference signal generator to produce a transmit reference signal;
calculating a first peak energy return value corresponding with the initial velocity estimate (Wu, para [0032, lines 1-29], A frequency offset modulation range and time division MIMO radar system, hardware circuit, system, architecture, and methodology are described for combining linear frequency modulation (LFM) time-division (TD) MIMO with frequency offset modulation (FOM) range division MIMO to construct very large MIMO arrays for use with frequency modulation continuous wave (FMCW) radars. In selected embodiments, a signal processing methodology and apparatus are disclosed for mixing the LFM waveform (transmit chirp) at each transmit channel with different frequency offset signals (e.g., Δf, 2Δf, etc.) using a frequency offset mixer with increased ADC sampling rate to allow the separation of transmitters' signals on receive in the range spectrum, thereby enabling very large MIMO array formation at the receiver. With each transmit channel transmitting a different frequency offset modulation LFM signal, the receiver can process and separate the transmit channel signals in the fast-time Fourier or the range domain, thereby defining an LFM range-division (RD) MIMO approach for differentiating between transmit channel signals. In selected embodiments, the frequency offset mixer may be implemented with an I/Q channel modulation mixer, an I-channel only modulation mixer, or a Q-channel only modulation mixer to implement a spectrum-coherent integration approach. In embodiments where the FOM mixer is implemented with an I-channel only modulation mixer or a Q-channel only modulation mixer with a spectrum domain coherent integration approach, the complexity of the hardware implementations is greatly reduced);
calculating a second peak energy return value corresponding with the alias velocity (Wu, para [0032, lines 1-29]) and (para [0067], To prevent spectrum aliasing interactions between the images of the delta component (e.g., 1204) of a first I-channel only mixer and an adjacent channel's sum component (e.g., 1201), the amount of offset frequency f.sub.Δ should be doubled or increased by at least 100 percent, with a corresponding increase in the ADC sampling rate at the receiver module 320 in order to maintain number of supported transmitters. As a result of these adjustments to the amount of frequency offset and ADC sampling rate, the final range spectrum may be derived from the sum and delta components by means of coherently integrating the range spectrums. By at least doubling the offset frequency f.sub.Δ, much of the aliasing effect is eliminated. With the up-shifted sum component and down-shifted delta component range spectrum both available, they can be combined to achieve better signal-to-noise ratio (SNR)) Examiner notes that aliasing within FMCW is due to low chirp repetitions and regarding coherent systems is due to low pulse repetition;
and comparing the first peak energy return value with the second peak energy return value to determine an actual velocity of the object (Wu, para [0032, lines 1-29]).
Tami discloses:
selecting an alias velocity based on the first velocity estimate and based on a speed limit of an environment in which the radar device is located (Tamir, col. 2, lines 54-59: In some embodiments of the invention, the monitoring includes collecting information on the speed of the vehicle. The dynamic threshold compares the speed of the vehicle to the speed limit or to the prevailing speed at the specific road segment. Alternatively or additionally, the dynamic threshold is adjusted according to the curvature of the road, the weather conditions and/or other information that affects the proper speed of the vehicle)
It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wu with Tamir to incorporate the features of: selecting an alias velocity based on the first velocity estimate and based on a speed limit of an environment in which the radar device is located. Wu discloses a vehicular radar system wherein there is alias velocity; however, not disclosed based on the speed limit of an environment of which the radar device is located as within Tamir. The modification would render the predictable results of the radar’s ability to determine the vehicle’s actual speed more accurately when a radar reading could be misleading.
Regarding claim 2, Wu discloses:
the method of claim 1 (Wu, Abstract),
wherein calculating the first peak energy return value further comprises (Wu, para [0032, lines 1-29]):
identifying a first set of selected range spans that correspond to the initial velocity estimate (Wu, para [0033], In the context of the present disclosure, it will be appreciated that radar systems may be used as sensors in a variety of different applications, including but not limited to automotive radar sensors for road safety systems, such as advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) and autonomous driving (AD) systems. In such applications, the radar systems are used to measure the radial distance to a reflecting object, its relative radial velocity, and angle information, and are characterized by performance criteria, such as the angular resolution (the minimum distance between two equal large targets at the same range and range rate (or radial velocity) resolution cell which a radar is able to distinguish and separate to each other), sensitivity, false detection rate, and the like. Typically, frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) modulation radars are used to identify the distance, velocity, and/or angle of a radar target, such as a car or pedestrian, by transmitting Linear Frequency Modulation (LFM) waveforms from multiple transmit antennas so that reflected signals from the radar target are received at multiple receive antennas and processed to determine the radial distance, relative radial velocity, and angle (or direction) for the radar target. However, with current automotive designs, a vehicle can include multiple radar transmitters which can operate independently from one another. As a result, the LFM waveform transceivers may be configured to implement time-division (TD) MIMO operations to temporally separate signals originated from distinct transmitters so that a receiving channel can distinctly detect each signal and thereby construct a virtual MIMO array);
and calculating the first peak energy return value based on an energy value associated with each respective range span of the first set of range spans that correspond to the initial velocity estimate (Wu, para [0037], The radar system 100 also includes a radar controller processing unit 20 that is connected to supply input control signals to the radar device 10 and to receive therefrom digital output signals generated by the receiver modules 12. In selected embodiments, the radar controller processing unit 20 may be embodied as a micro-controller unit (MCU) or other processing unit that is configured and arranged for signal processing tasks such as, but not limited to, target identification, computation of target distance, target velocity, and target direction, and generating control signals. The radar controller processing unit 20 may, for example, be configured to generate calibration signals, receive data signals, receive sensor signals, generate frequency spectrum shaping signals (such as ramp generation in the case of FMCW radar) and/or register programming or state machine signals for RF (radio frequency) circuit enablement sequences. In addition, the radar controller processor 20 may be configured to program the modules 11 to operate in a time-division fashion by sequentially transmitting LFM chirps for coordinated communication between the transmit antennas TX.sub.1,i, RX.sub.1,j. The result of the digital processing at the radar controller processing unit 20 is that the digital domain signals D1 are processed for the subsequent fast-time range FFT 21, slow-time Doppler FFT 22, constant false alarm rate (CFAR) target detection 23, spatial angle estimation 24, and target tracking processes 25, with the result being output 26 to other automotive computing or user interfacing devices for further process or display).
Regarding claim 3, Wu discloses:
the method of claim 1 (Wu, Abstract),
wherein comparing the first peak energy return value with the second peak energy return value further comprises determining that the alias velocity is the actual velocity of the object based on the second peak energy return value being greater than the first peak energy return value (Wu, para [0092], In principle, a K-bit phase shifter can support up to 2.sup.(K-1) transmitters. In addition, a frequency offset of f.sub.Δ Hz is equivalent to imposing a progressive phase shift in time by a rate of 2πf.sub.Δ radians per second. At a sampling rate of f.sub.Δ Hz (or sampling interval of T.sub.s which equals to 1/f.sub.s), the amount of progressive (or additive) phase shift per T.sub.s interval is then 2πf.sub.Δ/f.sub.s radians. To comply with the Nyquist sampling theorem, the phase shifter switched at fast-time sampling rate can support a maximum frequency offset of 1/(2T.sub.s) Hz.
[0093] In one example, the transmitter module 1710 may be programmed with phase shift control signals 1716 so that the phase shifters 1713, 1716 provide a progressive phase shift of 45 degrees (e.g., {0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, 180°, 225°, 270°, 315°, 0°, 45°, . . . }) at intervals of T.sub.sw seconds. With this arrangement, a complete a phase shift is imposed on the reference chirp every 8 intervals such that an effective frequency offset of ⅛T.sub.s Hz is imposed on the chirp signal. For another example, the transmitter module 1710 may be programmed with a 337.5° progress phase shift per switching interval, resulting in the application of the following progressive phase shift: {0°, 337.5°, 315°, 292.5°, 270°,247.5°,225°, 202.5°, 180°, 157.5°, 135°, 112.5°, 90°, 67.5°, 45°, 22.5°,0°, . . . }. The resulting progressive phase shift has a step size of −22.5° to effectively apply a negative frequency offset. Based on Nyquist criteria, a progressive phase shift with a step size no more than 180° may be applied without incurring ambiguity. As a result, 4-bit phase shifters can be used to support up to 8 frequency offsets (including the zero offset) Examiner notes that Nyquist criteria is an essential aspect to anti-aliasing.
Regarding claim 4, Wu discloses:
the method of claim 1 (Wu, Abstract),
wherein comparing the first peak energy return value with the second peak energy return value further comprises determining that the alias velocity is not the actual velocity of the object based on the second peak energy return value being greater than the first peak energy return value (Wu, para 0065], To illustrate this issue, reference is now made to FIG. 12A which depicts a fast-time range FFT spectrum 1200 of a frequency offset modulation LFM range division MIMO automotive radar system such as shown in FIG. 3A which uses I-branch only FOM mixers with insufficient frequency offset in combination with I-channel only analog-to-digital converter in the receiver. In this example, the transmitter uses I-channel only FOM mixers connected to all but the first transmit channel circuit to provide integer multiples of a frequency offset f.sub.Δ=20 Mhz to generate transmit channel offsets at 0 MHz, 20 MHz, 40 MHz, 60 MHz, 80 MHz, 100 MHz, 120 MHz, and 140 MHz. At the receiver, the I-channel only ADC having a sampling rate of 320 MHz creates, for each transmitter (Txi), a sum component 1201 (shown with the black solid line and normal font), a delta component 1202 (shown with the black dotted line and bold-faced font), a sum component's complex-conjugate image 1203 (shown with the gray solid line and italic font), and a delta component's complex-conjugate image 1204 (shown with the gray dotted line and bold-faced italic font). In an example scenario where a 20 MHz IF spectrum is assumed to be sufficient to cover the maximum range, the I-only FOM mixing results in the delta components whose spectral image aliases with the sum component, causing significant interference. In particular, this is illustrated with the images of the delta component 1204 (shown with gray dotted line) for each transmitter (e.g., Tx2) which alias into the designated range spectrum for detecting the sum component 1201 (shown with black solid line) of a different transmitter (e.g., Tx1), thereby causing severe ambiguity in terms of what is being detected in the range spectrum segments for each transmit channel. In addition, the downshifted delta component 1202 (shown with black dotted line) for each transmitter (e.g., Tx2) aliases into the image of the sum component 1203 (shown with gray solid line) of a different transmitter (e.g., Tx1), thereby impairing correct detection. This happens when the transmit channel offset is no greater than twice of the instrumented range spectrum extent of an individual transmitter's instrumented range-spectrum bandwidth) Examiner notes aliasing and ambiguity when the alias velocity is not the actual velocity.
Regarding claim 5, Wu discloses:
the method of claim 1, further comprising (Wu, Abstract and (para [0118, lines 1-7]):
receiving reflections of the transmitted set of radar pulses (Wu, para [0035], Each radar device 10 includes one or more transmitting antenna elements TX.sub.i and receiving antenna elements RX.sub.j connected, respectively, to one or more radio-frequency (RF) transmitter (TX) units 11 and receiver (RX) units 12. For example, each radar device (e.g., 10) is shown as including individual antenna elements (e.g., TX.sub.1,i, RX.sub.1,j) connected, respectively, to three transmitter modules (e.g., 11) and four receiver modules (e.g., 12), but these numbers are not limiting and other numbers are also possible, such as four transmitter modules 11 and six receiver modules 12, or a single transmitter module 11 and/or a single receiver modules 12. Each radar device 10 also includes a chirp generator 112 which is configured and connected to supply a chirp input signal to the transmitter modules 11. To this end, the chirp generator 112 is connected to receive a separate and independent local oscillator (LO) signal 110 and a chirp start trigger signal 111, though delays are likely to be different due to the signal path differences and programmable digital delay elements in the signal paths. Chirp signals 113 are generated and transmitted to multiple transmitters 11, usually following a pre-defined transmission schedule, where they are filtered at the RF conditioning module 114 and amplified at the power amplifier 115 before being fed to the corresponding transmit antenna TX.sub.1,i and radiated. By sequentially using each transmit antenna TX.sub.1,i to transmit successive pulses in the chirp signal 113, each transmitter element 11 operates in a time-multiplexed fashion in relation to other transmitter elements because they are programmed to transmit identical waveforms on a temporally separated schedule);
generating a baseband signal for each of the set of radar pulses (Wu, para [0032, lines 1-29]);
and sampling the baseband signals generated for each of the set of radar pulses (Wu, para [0032, lines 1-29]) Examiner notes sampling by analog-to-digital converter (ADC);
performing a first fast Fourier transform (FFT) on data associated with the sampled baseband signals (Wu, para [0037]);
performing a second FFT on results of the first FFT (Wu, para [0037]);
and identifying a Doppler shift based on results of the second FFT, wherein the initial velocity estimate is identified based on the identified Doppler shift (Wu, para [0004], Existing radar systems have attempted to address these challenges by using time-division (TD) multiplexing techniques to separate LFM waveforms from different transmitters in time, thereby separating signals originated from distinct transmitters at each receiving channel for constructing a virtual MIMO array. In particular, existing TD MIMO implementations are configured to schedule a sequence of transmit chirps (LFM waveforms) by individual transmit antennas one element or subarray at a time, meaning that the amount of time required to transmit all chirps is increased as the number of transmit antennas is increased. Unfortunately, because the coherent dwell time (i.e., the time duration an echo signal of a target can be coherently integrated on a moving target) is usually limited, the number of transmitters that can be used with TD-MIMO systems is limited. Another drawback with convention al TD-MIMO systems is that longer frame or chirp sequence durations may lead to multiple-times decrease in the maximum Doppler shift (or effectively, radial velocity of a target) that can be measured without ambiguity, again limiting the number of transmitters that may be used for TD-MIMO systems. As a result, TD-MIMO systems are typically confined to using a small number of transmitters (e.g., 3) to construct a relatively small MIMO virtual array. As seen from the foregoing, the existing radar system solutions are extremely difficult at a practical level by virtue of the challenges with achieving the performance benefits of larger size radars within the performance, design, complexity and cost constraints of existing radar system applications) and (para [0040], Another drawback with conventional TD-MIMO approaches is the increase in the duration of the pulse repetition intervals (PRI) between adjacent pulses of the same transmitter. In particular, with each transmitter (e.g., TX.sub.1-TX.sub.N) being scheduled to take its turn to transmit their first pulses (e.g., 201-202) before beginning the sequential transmission of the second pulses (e.g., 203-204), and so on until the last pulses (e.g., 205-206) are transmitted, the pulse repetition interval (PRI) 202 between two adjacent pulses of the same transmitter is also prolonged. Because the maximum unambiguous Doppler shift measurable by the chirp sequence is inversely related to the PRI, a lengthened PRI results in reduced maximum unambiguous Doppler performance. As a result, the maximum number of transmitters that can be used for TD-MIMO operation is limited. For typical road use, up to 3 transmitters may be used for TD MIMO without unacceptable performance degradation) Examiner interprets the velocity estimation via Doppler shift as a resultant of Doppler estimation across chirps as it relates to a second FFT of which is essential for FMCW.
Regarding claim 7, Wu discloses:
the method of claim 1 (Wu, Abstract),
wherein the actual velocity of the object is determined in a single radar processing frame (Wu, para [0039], Since the TD-MIMO approach provides a relatively straightforward way to separate transmitters with little or no leakage, it is routinely used in automotive radar applications. However, the requirement of dividing time between resources means that a much longer frame duration is required to complete the transmission of all chirps for each transmitter. If the prolonged frame duration is longer than the duration a target stays within a single range resolution cell, any range migration by the target can degrade the subsequent digital Doppler coherent integration processing and angle estimation, thereby adversely impacting measurement performance).
Claim 8 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 1.
Claim 9 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 2.
Claim 10 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 3.
Claim 11 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 4.
Claim 12 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 5.
Claim 14 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 7.
Regarding claim 15, Wu discloses:
an apparatus comprising (Wu, Abstract):
a memory (Wu, para [0102], To provide additional details for an improved understanding of selected embodiments of the present disclosure, reference is now made to FIG. 19 which depicts a simplified flow chart 1900 showing the logic for using frequency offset modulation techniques to form virtually large MIMO radar arrays. In an example embodiment, the control logic and methodology shown in FIG. 19 may be implemented as hardware and/or software on a host computing system, processor, or microcontroller unit that includes processor and memory for storing programming control code for constructing and operating a large virtual MIMO radar arrays by introducing frequency offset modulations signals to reference chirp signals to enable separation of the transmitter signals in the fast-time Fourier or the range domain);
and one or more processors that execute instructions out of the memory to (Wu, para [0118, lines 1-7):
initiate transmission of a set of radar pulses using a radar device to determine an initial velocity estimate associated with an object (Wu, para [0037]);
calculate a first peak energy return value corresponding with the initial velocity estimate (Wu, para [0032, lines 1-29]);
wherein the environment in which the radar device is located includes at least one feature external to the radar device (Wu, para [0033], In the context of the present disclosure, it will be appreciated that radar systems may be used as sensors in a variety of different applications, including but not limited to automotive radar sensors for road safety systems, such as advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) and autonomous driving (AD) systems. In such applications, the radar systems are used to measure the radial distance to a reflecting object, its relative radial velocity, and angle information, and are characterized by performance criteria, such as the angular resolution (the minimum distance between two equal large targets at the same range and range rate (or radial velocity) resolution cell which a radar is able to distinguish and separate to each other), sensitivity, false detection rate, and the like. Typically, frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) modulation radars are used to identify the distance, velocity, and/or angle of a radar target, such as a car or pedestrian, by transmitting Linear Frequency Modulation (LFM) waveforms from multiple transmit antennas so that reflected signals from the radar target are received at multiple receive antennas and processed to determine the radial distance, relative radial velocity, and angle (or direction) for the radar target. However, with current automotive designs, a vehicle can include multiple radar transmitters which can operate independently from one another. As a result, the LFM waveform transceivers may be configured to implement time-division (TD) MIMO operations to temporally separate signals originated from distinct transmitters so that a receiving channel can distinctly detect each signal and thereby construct a virtual MIMO array) Examiner interprets the detection of objects such as a car or pedestrian as a feature external to the radar device;
calculate a second peak energy return value corresponding with the alias velocity (Wu, para [0032, lines 1-29]);
and compare the first peak energy return value with the second peak energy return value to determine an actual velocity of the object (Wu, para [0032, lines 1-29]).
Tamir discloses:
select an alias velocity based on the first velocity estimate and based on a speed limit of an environment in which the radar device is located (Tamir, col. 18, lines 42-67: In some embodiments of the invention, memory unit 116 does not store a complete description of the geographical areas it describes. Optionally, memory unit 116 does not even describe details of the roads it traverses. Rather, memory unit 116 optionally stores a minimal or close to minimal amount of data on the roads, required for generating warnings and/or performing analysis by processor 114. Optionally, memory unit 116 stores coordinates of signs, junctions, road hazards (e.g., curves, holes, bumps) and/or other safety related points. A single coordinate is optionally used for traffic signs (e.g., stop and yield directives, traffic lights), entry points to a curve and speed limit signs. The speed limit is optionally determined for the vehicle each time the vehicle passes near a speed limit sign, based on the coordinate of the vehicle as compared to the coordinate of the speed limit sign in memory 116. Alternatively or additionally, when it is required to know the speed limit at a specific location, processor 114 traces back from the location to the previous point having a speed limit sign. The back tracing is optionally performed by finding a vehicle that is driving in the opposite direction from the point for which the speed limit is to be determined and tracing the vehicle to a closest speed limit sign. Alternatively, vehicles are traced from speed limit signs in the vicinity of the point to see which one leads to the point for which the speed limit is to be determined.),
It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wu with Tamir to incorporate the features of: select an alias velocity based on the first velocity estimate and based on a speed limit of an environment in which the radar device is located. Wu discloses a vehicular radar system wherein there is alias velocity; however, not disclosed based on the speed limit of an environment of which the radar device is located as within Tamir. The modification would render the predictable results of the radar’s ability to determine the actual speed more accurately when a radar reading could be misleading.
Claim 16 is rejected under the same analysis as claim2.
Claim 17 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 3.
Claim 18 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 4.
Claim 19 is rejected under the analysis as claim 5
Claim 20 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 1.
Regarding claim 22, Wu discloses:
the method of claim 1 (Wu, Abstract),
Tamir discloses:
wherein selecting the alias velocity based on the first velocity estimate and based on the speed limit of the environment in which the radar device is located comprises excluding velocity estimates exceeding twice the speed limit (Tamir, col. 27, lines 27-38: Alternatively or additionally to determining the absolute average speed, the average difference between the driving speed and the speed limit and/or the prevailing speed, is determined. Further alternatively or additionally, the possible speeds are divided into bins, e.g., 50-60, 60-70, 70-80 km/h, and a speed profile is determined based on the time in each speed bin. In some embodiments of the invention, the speed profile is determined only for speeds above the speed limit and/or above the prevailing speed, i.e., leaving all speeds below the speed limit in a single bin. In some embodiments of the invention, the minimal and maximal speeds are registered)
It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wu with Tamir to incorporate the features of: wherein selecting the alias velocity based on the first velocity estimate and based on the speed limit of the environment in which the radar device is located comprises excluding velocity estimates exceeding twice the speed limit. Wu discloses a vehicular radar system wherein there is alias velocity; however, not disclosed based on the speed limit of an environment of which the radar device is located comprising excluding estimates exceed twice the speed limit as within Tamir. The modification would render the predictable results of ignoring/excluding readings that may be extremely high speeds.
References Cited But Not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as thus:
Foster et al US20230264713A1 discloses a vehicular radar system that detects environment speed limits
Konrardy et al US 12104912 B2 discloses a coordinated autonomous vehicle automation area scanning with an onboard computer that detects and determines environmental conditions, such as speed limit
McKitterick US-20180172815-A1 discloses a moving target identification system and method wherein aliasing is avoided
Han et al US-20190011547-A1 discloses system and method for resolving velocity ambiguity in an automotive radar system wherein targets of different speeds may be grouped together on account of velocity aliasing (para [0002])
Takayama US-20190120953-A1 discloses a velocity detection apparatus wherein relative aliasing occurs and causes relative velocity ambiguities (para [0003])
Cullinane et al US-20210129857-A1 discloses the engagement and disengagement for autonomous driving based on environmental data around a vehicle including speed limits (para [0048])
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY JENKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-0404. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8a-5p EST.
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 517.270.5144. 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.
/KIMBERLY JENKINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights