DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicants' arguments filed 01/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With respect to the Rejection under 35 U.S.C 102 based on Lee and the rejection of Dependent claims under 35 U.S.C 103, the applicant states that the prior art fails to disclose at least " The simulation parameters comprising one or more of […] a frequency shift of the object in accordance with a simulated radial velocity of the object relative to the DUT” and argues that the modification of Lee with Brokov is improper. The Examiner respectfully disagrees and maintains the art rejection.
Lee discloses “frequency shifting of the incident radar signals is effected in each of the RTSs 710 and beneficially emulates a distance of a target from the radar DUT 105, or a velocity of a target relative to the radar DUT 105, or both. In addition, the azimuth (+x direction the coordinate system of FIG. 7) and the elevation (+z direction in the coordinate system of FIG. 7) are emulated” in paragraph [0073]. Radial velocity is well known to one of ordinary skill in the art to mean: the velocity of a target relative to an observer in line of sight with the target. The emulated velocity described in paragraph [0073] is the velocity of an emulated target as detected by a radar DUT (FIG.1, Part.105). The DUT measures target velocity relative to its own position in a stationary reference frame [0087]. Lee discloses frequency shifting incident radar signals in order to emulate a radial velocity as detected by a radar DUT. The Examiner maintains that the prior art discloses the above limitation and maintains the art rejection.
The Applicant argues that the modification of Lee with Brokov is improper citing that “Lee explicitly uses frequency offset as a substitute for physical delay (see [0077], stating ‘rather than delaying transmission of the echo signal to indicate the range, the delay itself is emulated by the frequency offset transceiver’), while Bokov focuses on implementing actual delay through digital memory, as explained above. The Lee system and the Bokov system provide alternative solutions to the same problem, which is indicative of teaching away from the combination.” While Lee states “rather than delaying transmission of the echo signal to indicate the range, the delay itself is emulated by the frequency offset transceiver" on paragraph [0077], the Examiner disagrees that Lee teaches “away from the combination.” MPEP § 2141.02(VI) states “A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention.” MPEP § 2141.02(VI) is not directed to one prior art reference teaching away from another prior art reference, but prior art references teaching away from the claimed invention. MPEP § 2141.02(VI) additionally states “the prior art’s mere disclosure of more than one alternative does not constitute a teaching away from any of these alternatives because such disclosure does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed.” Lee recites an alternative to delaying transmission of the echo signal, but does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed. Lee neither teaches away from the claimed inventor nor “away from the combination.” The Examiner maintains that the modification of Lee based on the teachings of Bokov is proper.
With respect to the modification of Lee with Brokov, the applicant further argues that “One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that the modification of Lee would require substantial redesign, and thereby lacking in motivation for such combination.” The Examiner respectfully reminds the Applicant that it has been held that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of one reference may be bodily incorporated into the other to produce the claimed subject matter but simply what the combination of references makes obvious to one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art, In re Bozek, 163 USPQ 545 (CCPA 1969). As further explained in the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1 below and claim 6 of the previously filled non-final rejection, Bokov is relied upon to teach the simulation parameters including a delay and attenuation of an object in accordance with a simulated radial distance and cross-sectional area. As it is not limited by the claims, Bokov is not relied upon to teach the implementation of simulation parameters or the implementation of any other physical system or device. Lee as modified by Bokov make obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art simulation parameters including “delay of the object in accordance with a simulated radial distance of the object relative to the DUT” and “ an attenuation of the object in accordance with a simulated cross-sectional area of the object and the simulated radial distance of the object relative to the DUT.” The modification of Lee to include a generic delay would not require a substantial redesign. The Examiner maintains that the modification of Lee based on the teachings of Bokov is proper.
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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8, and 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee(US20240111023A1) in view of Bokov(NPL:Improving the Accuracy of Digital Simulation of the Radio Signal Propagation Delay).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses
A device for simulating a radio frequency (RF) reflective object, the device comprising - a receiver (“710 generally includes a receiver circuit” [0063]), configured for receiving an RF signal from a device under test (DUT) (Fig.7, Parts 105 & 708); - a signal variation parameter estimation circuit, configured for estimating, based on an analysis of the RF signal, one or more signal variation-over-time parameters of the RF signal (“RTS 710 may further include signal processing components, e.g., filters, attenuators and/or amplifiers, for processing the radar signal 801” [0082]); - one or more signal parameter adaptation circuits, configured for adapting one or more signal parameters of the RF signal in real-time as a function of one or more simulation parameters, the one or more estimated signal variation-over-time parameters of the RF signal (“the received radar signal is mixed by a frequency offset transceiver with a generated IF signal to provide an RF signal having an RF frequency shifted from a radar frequency of the radar signal” [0099]); and - a transmitter (“ each RTS (frequency offset transceiver) 710 […] a transmitter circuit “[0063]), configured for transmitting the adapted RF signal to the DUT, the adapted RF signal simulating a reflection of the RF signal by the object (FIG.10, Step S1015) the simulation parameters comprising one or more of […] a frequency shift of the object in accordance with a simulated radial velocity of the object relative to the DUT (“Frequency shifting of the incident radar signals is effected in each of the RTSs 710 and beneficially emulates a distance of a target from the radar DUT 105, or a velocity of a target” [0073]).
Lee discloses both a delay and attenuation of the object, but does not explicitly disclose preforming each operation in order to have the exact simulated effects of claim 6. Bokov discloses the device wherein, a delay of the object in accordance with a simulated radial distance of the object relative to the DUT (“A variable delay that simulates a desired variable range (altitude for a radio altimeter)”[Sec.2, Step.2]), […] an attenuation of the object in accordance with a simulated cross-sectional area of the object and the simulated radial distance of the object relative to the DUT (“A variable attenuation of the signal by coefficients Ei is aimed to simulate proper attenuation in accordance with the propagation range, RCS, type of surface, etc” [Sec.2, Step.7])
Bokov teaches in the same field of Radio signal simulation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teachings of Bokov to incorporate the features of using delay to simulate range and attenuation to simulate cross sectional area so as to gain the advantage of improving noise immunity [Sec.2, Par.2 Bokov]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 2, Lee as modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Lee discloses wherein, the RF signal and the adapted RF signal being radar signals (“radar target simulator (RTS) “ [0009]).
Regarding claim 3, Lee as modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Lee discloses wherein, the signal parameters of the RF signal comprising one or more of:- a timing of the RF signal (“conventional simulators may receive a radar signal transmitted from a radar under test, delay the radar signal” [0005]), - a frequency of the RF signal (“The delay itself is emulated by the frequency offset transceiver imparting the expected frequency shift corresponding to the desired delay “ [0077]), and - an average power of the RF signal (“ As such, the gain or attenuation provided by the gain controller 804 is selected at the gain control input 805 based on the power of the radar signal incident on the antenna 708” [0083]).
Regarding claim 4, Lee as modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Lee discloses wherein, the estimated signal variation-over-time parameters of the RF signal comprising: - an estimated frequency offset of the RF signal (“The RTS 710 may be a frequency offset transceiver “ [0063]).
Regarding claim 5, Lee as modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Lee discloses wherein, the signal parameter adaptation circuits respectively being configured for adapting one of the signal parameters of the RF signal (FIG.8, Parts 730 & 804).
Regarding claim 8, Lee modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Lee discloses the device comprising, a tunable frequency shift circuit for shifting the frequency of the RF signal in accordance with the frequency shift of the object and the estimated frequency offset of the RF signal (“ Based on input from the controller 744, frequency shifting of the incident radar signals is effected in each of the RTSs 710 “ [0073]), and - a tunable attenuation circuit for attenuating the RF signal in accordance with the attenuation of the object (“ the gain or attenuation provided by the gain controller 804 is selected at the gain control input 805 based on the power of the radar signal incident on the antenna 708” [0083])
Lee discloses signal delay, but does not explicitly a tunable delay circuit. Bokov discloses the device wherein, a tunable delay circuit for delaying the RF signal in accordance with the delay of the object(“A variable delay that simulates a desired variable range (altitude for a radio altimeter)”[Sec.2, Step.2])
Bokov teaches in the same field of Radio signal simulation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teachings of Bokov to incorporate the features of a tunable delay circuit so as to gain the advantage of improving accuracy [Sec.2, Par.2 Bokov]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 10, Lee as modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Lee discloses the device further comprising,- a user notification circuit for notifying a user of the device of the estimated signal variation- over-time parameters of the RF signal relative to corresponding user-provided signal parameters of the RF signal (“the computer 740 includes […] user and/or network interfaces (not shown) and a display (not shown)” [0069])
Regarding claim 11, Lee discloses
A measurement system, comprising - a device o for simulating a radio frequency (RF) reflective object comprising:- a receiver (“710 generally includes a receiver circuit” [0063]), configured for receiving an RF signal from a device under test (DUT) (Fig.7, Parts 105 & 708), a signal variation parameter estimation circuit, configured for estimating, based on an analysis of the RF signal (“RTS 710 may further include signal processing components, e.g., filters, attenuators and/or amplifiers, for processing the radar signal 801” [0082]), one or more signal variation-over-time parameters of the RF signal, one or more signal parameter adaptation circuits, configured for adapting one or more signal parameters of the RF signal in real-time as a function of one or more simulation parameters, and the one or more estimated signal variation parameters of the RF signal (“the received radar signal is mixed by a frequency offset transceiver with a generated IF signal to provide an RF signal having an RF frequency shifted from a radar frequency of the radar signal” [0099]), and a transmitter (“ each RTS (frequency offset transceiver) 710 […] a transmitter circuit” [0063]), configured for transmitting the adapted RF signal to the DUT, the adapted RF signal simulating a reflection of the RF signal by the object(FIG.10, Step S1015); or for simulating an RF fading comprising: an input, configured for receiving another RF signal (“conventional simulators may receive a radar signal transmitted from a radar under test, delay the radar signal” [0005]); a signal variation parameter estimation circuit, configured for estimating, based on an analysis of the another RF signal, one or more signal variation-over-time parameters of the another RF signal (“Frequency shifting of the incident radar signals is effected in each of the RTSs 710 and beneficially emulates a distance of a target from the radar DUT 105, or a velocity of a target” [0073]); one or more signal parameter adaptation circuits, configured for adapting one or more signal parameters of the another RF signal in real-time as a function of one or more simulation parameters, and the one or more estimated signal variation- over-time parameters of the another RF signal (FIG.8, Parts 730 & 804); and - a transmitter(“ each RTS(frequency offset
transceiver) 710 […] a transmitter circuit” [0063]), configured for transmitting the adapted another RF signal to the DUT (FIG.10, Step S1015), […]; and - the DUT being a radar sensor preferably for automotive applications (“a radar device under test (DUT), arranged on a vehicle under test” [0028]) the simulation parameters comprising one or more of […] a frequency shift of the object in accordance with a simulated radial velocity of the object relative to the DUT (“Frequency shifting of the incident radar signals is effected in each of the RTSs 710 and beneficially emulates a distance of a target from the radar DUT 105, or a velocity of a target” [0073]).
Lee does not explicitly disclose nor limit simulating RF fading. Bokov discloses the system wherein, the adapted another RF signal simulating the RF fading of the another RF signal (“modulation parameters (carrier frequency, spectrum width, envelope shape, time-frequency structure) are adjusted to the fading and other types of interference” [Sec.2, Par.1]) […] , a delay of the object in accordance with a simulated radial distance of the object relative to the DUT (“A variable delay that simulates a desired variable range (altitude for a radio altimeter)”[Sec.2, Step.2]), […] an attenuation of the object in accordance with a simulated cross-sectional area of the object and the simulated radial distance of the object relative to the DUT (“A variable attenuation of the signal by coefficients Ei is aimed to simulate proper attenuation in accordance with the propagation range, RCS, type of surface, etc” [Sec.2, Step.7])
Bokov teaches in the same field of Radio signal simulation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teachings of Bokov to incorporate the features of simulating the RF fading so as to gain the advantage of improving noise immunity [Sec.2, Par.2 Bokov]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses
A method for simulating radio frequency (RF) reflective object, the method comprising - receiving (“710 generally includes a receiver circuit” [0063]) an RF signal from a device under test (DUT) (Fig.7, Parts 105 & 708); estimating, based on an analysis of the RF signal, one or more signal variation-over-time parameters of the RF signal (“RTS 710 may further include signal processing components, e.g., filters, attenuators and/or amplifiers, for processing the radar signal 801” [0082]); adapting one or more signal parameters of the RF signal in real-time as a function of one or more simulation parameters and the one or more estimated signal variation-over-time parameters of the RF signal (“the received radar signal is mixed by a frequency offset transceiver with a generated IF signal to provide an RF signal having an RF frequency shifted from a radar frequency of the radar signal” [0099]); and transmitting the adapted RF signal to the DUT (“ each RTS (frequency offset transceiver) 710 […] a transmitter circuit’ [0063]), the adapted RF signal simulating a reflection of the RF signal by the object (FIG.10, Step S1015) the simulation parameters comprising one or more of a frequency shift of the object in accordance with a simulated radial velocity of the object relative to the DUT (“Frequency shifting of the incident radar signals is effected in each of the RTSs 710 and beneficially emulates a distance of a target from the radar DUT 105, or a velocity of a target” [0073]).
Lee discloses both a delay and attenuation of the object, but does not explicitly disclose preforming each operation in order to have the exact simulated effects of claim 6. Bokov discloses the device wherein, a delay of the object in accordance with a simulated radial distance of the object relative to the DUT (“A variable delay that simulates a desired variable range (altitude for a radio altimeter)”[Sec.2, Step.2]), […] an attenuation of the object in accordance with a simulated cross-sectional area of the object and the simulated radial distance of the object relative to the DUT (“A variable attenuation of the signal by coefficients Ei is aimed to simulate proper attenuation in accordance with the propagation range, RCS, type of surface, etc” [Sec.2, Step.7])
Bokov teaches in the same field of Radio signal simulation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teachings of Bokov to incorporate the features of using delay to simulate range and attenuation to simulate cross sectional area so as to gain the advantage of improving noise immunity [Sec.2, Par.2 Bokov]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 13, Lee as modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 12. Lee discloses wherein, the method being performed by a device for simulating an RF reflective object comprising: - a receiver (“710 generally includes a receiver circuit” [0063]); - a signal variation parameter estimation circuit (“RTS 710 may further include signal processing components, e.g., filters, attenuators and/or amplifiers, for processing the radar signal 801” [0082]); - one or more signal parameter adaptation circuits (FIG.8, Parts 730 & 804);; and - a transmitter (“ each RTS (frequency offset transceiver) 710 […] a transmitter circuit” [0063])
Regarding claim 14, Lee discloses
A device for simulating radio frequency (RF) […], the device comprising, an input, configured for receiving an RF signal (“710 generally includes a receiver circuit” [0063]); a signal variation parameter estimation circuit, configured for estimating, based on an analysis of the RF signal, one or more signal variation-over-time parameters of the RF signal (“RTS 710 may further include signal processing components, e.g., filters, attenuators and/or amplifiers, for processing the radar signal 801” [0082]); - one or more signal parameter adaptation circuits, configured for adapting one or more signal parameters of the RF signal in real-time as a function of one or more simulation parameters, and the one or more estimated signal variation-over-time parameters of the RF signal (“the received radar
signal is mixed by a frequency offset transceiver with a generated IF signal to provide an RF signal having an RF frequency shifted from a radar frequency of the radar signal” [0099]); and - a transmitter (“ each RTS (frequency offset transceiver) 710 […] a transmitter circuit [0063]), configured for transmitting the adapted RF signal to a Device Under Test (DUT), (FIG.10, Step S1015). the simulation parameters comprising one or more of […] a frequency shift of the object in accordance with a simulated radial velocity of the object relative to the DUT (“Frequency shifting of the incident radar signals is effected in each of the RTSs 710 and beneficially emulates a distance of a target from the radar DUT 105, or a velocity of a target” [0073]).
Lee does not explicitly disclose nor limit simulating RF fading. Bokov discloses the system wherein, the adapted RF signal simulating an RF fading of the RF signal (“modulation parameters (carrier frequency, spectrum width, envelope shape, time-frequency structure) are adjusted to the fading and other types of interference” [Sec.2, Par.1]). a delay of the object in accordance with a simulated radial distance of the object relative to the DUT (“A variable delay that simulates a desired variable range (altitude for a radio altimeter)”[Sec.2, Step.2]), […] an attenuation of the object in accordance with a simulated cross-sectional area of the object and the simulated radial distance of the object relative to the DUT (“A variable attenuation of the signal by coefficients Ei is aimed to simulate proper attenuation in accordance with the propagation range, RCS, type of surface, etc” [Sec.2, Step.7])
Bokov teaches in the same field of Radio signal simulation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee with the teachings of Bokov to incorporate the features of simulating the RF fading so as to gain the advantage of improving noise immunity [Sec.2, Par.2 Bokov]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 15, Lee discloses as modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 14. Lee discloses the device wherein, the RF signal and the adapted RF signal being radar signals (“radar target simulator (RTS) “ [0009]).
Regarding claim 16, Lee discloses as modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 14. Lee discloses the device wherein, the signal parameters of the RF signal comprising one or more of: a timing of the RF signal (“conventional simulators may receive a radar signal transmitted from a radar under test, delay the radar signal” [0005]), a frequency of the RF signal (“The delay itself is emulated by the frequency offset transceiver imparting the expected frequency shift corresponding to the desired delay “ [0077]), and an average power of the RF signal (“ As such, the gain or attenuation provided by the gain controller 804 is selected at the gain control input 805 based on the power of the radar signal incident on the antenna 708” [0083]).
Regarding claim 17, Lee discloses as modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 14. Lee discloses the device wherein, the estimated signal variation-over-time parameters of the RF signal comprising: an estimated frequency offset of the RF signal (“The RTS 710 may be a frequency offset transceiver “ [0063]).
Regarding claim 18, Lee discloses as modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 14. Lee discloses the device wherein, the signal parameter adaptation circuits respectively being configured for adapting one of the signal parameters of the RF signal (FIG.8, Parts 730 & 804).
Claims 7, 9, and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee(US20240111023A1) as modified by Bokov(NPL:Improving the Accuracy of Digital Simulation of the Radio Signal Propagation Delay), as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, and in further view of Griesing(US20110200084A1).
Regarding claim 7, Lee modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Lee modified by Bokov do not explicitly disclose zero-mean Gaussian random path attenuation or power delay profiles. Griesing discloses the device wherein, simulation parameters further comprising one of: a zero-mean Gaussian random path attenuation between the object and the DUT (“the antennas are driven individually by a plurality of independent fading processes in order to create a more Gaussian process at the DUT “ [0010]), and - a power delay profile comprising attenuation values and delay values for a plurality of taps (“the channel emulator is programmed for a specific power delay profile, with each cluster representing a tap in the mode” [0025]) of a tapped delay line fading model (“The characteristics of the fading can be programmed in the channel emulator for emulating variable speed of the DUT environment” [0025])
Griesing teaches in the same field of Radio signal simulation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee as modified by Bokov with the teachings of Griesing to incorporate the features of zero-mean Gaussian random path attenuation or power delay profiles so as to gain the advantage of improving control over the Doppler spectrum [0015 Griesing]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 9, Lee modified by Bokov and Griesing discloses all the limitations of claim 7. Lee modified by Bokov do not explicitly disclose zero-mean Gaussian random path attenuation or power delay profiles. Griesing discloses the device comprising, signal parameter adaptation circuits further comprising one of:- a fading emulation circuit for attenuating the RF signal in accordance with the zero-mean Gaussian random path attenuation (“the antennas are driven individually by a plurality of independent fading processes in order to create a more Gaussian process at the DUT “ [0010]), and - a fading emulation circuit for attenuating and delaying the RF signal in accordance with the power delay profile (“ For each path or tap of the power delay profile, a correlation can be programmed via the channel emulator “ [0025]).
Griesing teaches in the same field of Radio signal simulation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee as modified by Bokov with the teachings of Griesing to incorporate the features fading emulation circuit for attenuating and delaying the RF signal in accordance with the power delay profile and zero-mean Gaussian random path attenuation so as to gain the advantage of improving simulation capabilities [0010 Griesing]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 20, Lee modified by Bokov discloses all the limitations of claim 14. Lee modified by Bokov do not explicitly disclose zero-mean Gaussian random path attenuation or power delay profiles. Griesing discloses the device comprising, the simulation parameters further comprising one of: a zero-mean Gaussian random path attenuation between the object and the DUT (“the antennas are driven individually by a plurality of independent fading processes in order to create a more Gaussian process at the DUT “ [0010]), and a power delay profile comprising attenuation values and delay values for a plurality of taps of a tapped delay line fading model (“the channel emulator is programmed for a specific power delay profile, with each cluster representing a tap in the mode” [0025]) of a tapped delay line fading model (“The characteristics of the fading can be programmed in the channel emulator for emulating variable speed of the DUT environment” [0025])
Griesing teaches in the same field of Radio signal simulation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Lee as modified by Bokov with the teachings of Griesing to incorporate the features of zero-mean Gaussian random path attenuation or power delay profiles so as to gain the advantage of improving control over the Doppler spectrum [0015 Griesing]. Also, since it has been held that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill (MPEP 2143).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CLAYTON PAUL RIDDER whose telephone number is (571)272-2771. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday ET.
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, Jack Keith can be reached on (571) 272-6878. 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.
/C.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3646
/JACK W KEITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3646