DETAILED ACTION
Response To Amendment
This action is in response to the initial filing filed on November 2, 2023
No claims are amended.
Claims 1-16 have been examined in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 7 May 2026 has been acknowledged.
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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hongyan et al (WO 2023/016350 A1) in view of Breed et al (US 2007/0135982 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Hongyan teaches an in-vehicle-object detection method for a radar device, comprising [0042 for radar in roof to sense passengers]:
a) obtaining a plurality of receiving signals corresponding to a plurality of space objects by an antenna array of the radar device [0047-0048 for using a MIMO array for receiving echo signal that are transmitted to a preset area];
b) computing a plurality of first distances between the antenna array and the plurality of space objects based on the plurality of receiving signals [0048 for transmitting to a target to determine distance and 0052 for determining seat occupancy using reflected signals];
c) filtering a background noise of the plurality of first distances to obtain a plurality of second distances between a plurality of indeterminate objects of the plurality of space objects and the antenna array [0049 for determining distance of each time-domain echo signal (multiple distances) 0061 for reducing clutter interference (filtering) to determine positions information (second distance based on a filtered echo];
d) performing a beamforming based on the plurality of second distances to compute a plurality of angle information each corresponding to each of the plurality of second distances [0063 for using beam steering to get target heading including azimuth and pitch (angles) and 0064 for determining position (distance)];
e) generating a distance-angle heatmap comprising a plurality of regions of interest (ROIs), wherein each of the plurality of ROIs corresponds to a passenger-seat position in the vehicle [0060 for determining occupied area (ROI) for a passenger inside a vehicle, and 0073];
and f) determining whether each of the plurality of ROIs in the distance-angle is associated with a human feature to decide whether each of the indeterminate objects is related to a human or an unhuman [0060-0061, 0064 for distance angle calculations for occupied area (ROI_ 0139-0142 for mean to determine a living being based on chest cavity motion (human child)].
Hongyan fails to explicitly teach using a heat map associated with a human feature.
Breed has a method for determining weight of an occupant of an automotive seat (abstract) and teaches using a heat map associated with a human feature [0221].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the passenger position techniques, as disclosed by Hongyun, further including the heat calculations as taught by Breed for the purpose to detect the presence of a human or other life form in a vehicle (Breed, 0221).
Regarding Claim 9, Hongyan teaches a radar device for detecting an object in a vehicle, comprising [0042 for radar in roof to sense passengers]:
an antenna array, configured to receive a plurality of receiving signals [0047-0048 for using a MIMO array for receiving echo signal that are transmitted to a preset area];
and a microprocessor, connected to the antenna array and configured to perform operations comprising [0041 for using a CAN and firmware]:
a) obtaining the plurality of receiving signals corresponding to a plurality of space objects [0047-0048 for using a MIMO array for receiving echo signal that are transmitted to a preset area];
b) computing a plurality of first distances between the antenna array and the plurality of space objects based on the plurality of receiving signals [0048 for transmitting to a target to determine distance and 0052 for determining seat occupancy using reflected signals];
c) filtering a background noise of the plurality of first distances to obtain a plurality of second distances between a plurality of indeterminate objects of the plurality of space objects and the antenna array [0049 for determining distance of each time-domain echo signal (multiple distances) 0061 for reducing clutter interference (filtering) to determine positions information (second distance based on a filtered echo];
d) performing a beamforming based on the plurality of second distances to compute a plurality of angle information each corresponding to each of the plurality of second distances [0063 for using beam steering to get target heading including azimuth and pitch (angles) and 0064 for determining position (distance)];
e) generating a distance-angle heatmap comprising a plurality of regions of interest (ROIs), wherein each of the plurality of ROIs corresponds to a passenger-seat position in the vehicle [0060 for determining occupied area (ROI) for a passenger inside a vehicle, and 0073];
and f) determining whether each of the plurality of ROIs in the distance-angle is associated with a human feature to decide whether each of the indeterminate objects is related to a human or an unhuman [0060-0061, 0064 for distance angle calculations for occupied area (ROI, 0139-0142 for mean to determine a living being based on chest cavity motion (human child)].
Hongyan fails to explicitly teach using a heat map associated with a human feature.
Breed has a method for determining weight of an occupant of an automotive seat (abstract) and teaches using a heat map associated with a human feature [0221].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the passenger position techniques, as disclosed by Hongyun, further including the heat calculations as taught by Breed for the purpose to detect the presence of a human or other life form in a vehicle (Breed, 0221).
Regarding Claim 2 and 10, Hongyan teaches step b) further comprises: computing a discrete Fourier transform to transform the plurality of receiving signals of the antenna array to be the plurality of first distances [0049-0050].
Regarding Claim 4 and 12, Hongyan teaches wherein step d) further comprises: computing a discrete Fourier transform to the plurality of second distances whose background noises are filtered to obtain the plurality of angle information from the plurality of second distances [0049-0050]
whose background noises are filtered and obtaining a plurality of second distance-angle information each comprising the plurality of second distances and the plurality of angle information [0053].
Regarding Claim 5 and 13, Hongyan teaches each of the plurality of ROIs comprises a plurality of distance-angle information grids, and step f) comprises [0188-0193]:
determining an energy value of each of the distance-angle information grids corresponding to each of the plurality of the ROIs according to the passenger-seat position in the vehicle [0188-0193 using seat belt reminders (determining seat positions)];
marking one of the distance-angle information grids in one of the ROIs when the energy value of the distance-angle information grid is determined to be greater than a first threshold [0173-0178];
and determining that one of the ROIs is associated with a first human feature candidate when a ratio of the distance-angle information grids being marked in the ROI is greater than a second threshold [0177-0180 for determining gestures (human features) using preset areas (regions)].
Regarding Claim 6 and 14, Hongyan teaches step f) further comprises: transforming the energy values of the distance-angle information grids in each of the plurality of the ROIs of the distance-angle into a plurality of angle-energy information [0209-0211 for using echo signal to determine occupants];
and determining that one of the ROIs is associated with a second human feature candidate when the angle-energy information of the ROI shows a shape similar to a human body [0214-0217, 0221-0223].
Hongyan fails to explicitly teach using a heat map associated with a human feature.
Breed has a method for determining weight of an occupant of an automotive seat (abstract) and teaches using a heat map associated with a human feature [0221].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the passenger position techniques, as disclosed by Hongyun, further including the heat calculations as taught by Breed for the purpose to detect the presence of a human or other life form in a vehicle (Breed, 0221).
Regarding Claim 7 and 15, Hongyan teaches step f) further comprises: computing a discrete Fourier transform according to the plurality of the second distance-angle information of each of the plurality of the ROIs to obtain a human physiological feature signal [0210-0211];
and determining that one of the pluralities of the ROIs is a third human feature candidate when the human physiological feature signal of the ROI is greater than a third threshold [0139-0142 for mean to determine a living being based on chest cavity motion (human child)].
Regarding Claim 8 and 16, Hongyan teaches wherein step f) further comprises: computing a weighting sum of a first determination result of the first human feature candidate [0060 for first determination (area occupied), a second determination result of the second human feature candidate [0067 for determining micro-motion (chest movement), and a third determination result of the third human feature candidate according to a first weight, a second weight, and a third weight for each of the plurality of ROIs [0061-0063 for weighting signals, 0126 for recognizing human movements, life form, and occupant recognition];
and determining that one of the ROIs is associated with the human feature when the weighting sum of the ROI is greater than a fourth threshold [0067-0069 for generating 3D point cloud data for each seat area].
Claims 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hongyan et al (WO 2023/016350 A1) in view of Breed et al (US 2007/0135982 A1), as applied to Claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Zhang (CN 104101878 B).
Regarding Claim 3 and 11, Hongyan fails to explicitly teach step c) further comprises: removing distances corresponding to a speed being close to zero from the plurality of first distances to obtain the plurality of second distances.
Zhang has a vehicle front target recognition system and a recognition method (abstract) and teaches removing distances corresponding to a speed being close to zero from the plurality of first distances to obtain the plurality of second distance [0008].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the passenger position techniques, as disclosed by Hongyun, further including the speed calculations as taught by Zhang for the purpose to curve radius and aerial angle in real time (Zhang, 0008).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a
general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
In applicant’s arguments page 10, last paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Hongyan fails to teach limitation e) of the independent claims. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Hongyan teaches calculating elevation and azimuth angle for positions [S1032 in 0061-0062] and then using that position to determine occupancy in main driving area and co-driving area [S0133 in 0064-0065] using 3D coordinates thereby determining the region where the passengers are seated.
In applicant’s arguments page 11, second paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Breed fails to teach limitation e) of the independent claims. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Breed teaches using pulses received at spatially separated receivers, encoding amplitude vs. distance at a distinct angle relative to a specific passenger seat, collectively forming a multiple angle distance amplitude map with per seat coverage functionally equivalent to a heat map [Breed, 0163-0166].
The examiner acknowledges that this is a broader interpretation than Applicant’s.
However, examiners are not only allowed to apply broad interpretations, but are required to do so, as it reduces the possibility that the claims, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified. MPEP §2111. Patentability is determined by the “broadest reasonable interpretation
consistent with the specification” (MPEP §2111), not the narrowest reasonable interpretation. And Applicant does not have an explicit lexicographical statement in line with MPEP §2111.01
subsection IV requiring a specific interpretation of the relevant phrases which forces the examiner to interpret them only one way.
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
For applicant’s benefit, portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, including disclosures that teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
“The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain.” In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including non-preferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v.Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005) See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMARINA MAKHDOOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Thursdays from 8:30 to 5:30 pm eastern time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Kelleher can be reached on 571-272-7753 The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAMARINA MAKHDOOM/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights