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 .
Status of Claims
Pursuant of the previously filed restriction requirement, the Applicant has elected claims 1-7 for examination. Accordingly, claims 1-14 are pending where claims 1-7 have been examined and claims 8-14 have been withdrawn.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/02/2024 and 02/24/2025 have been considered by the examiner and initialed copies of the IDS are hereby attached.
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 1-7 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the rigid board antenna" in "connected to the flexible board antenna of the first antenna module and the rigid board antenna". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 introduces a plurality of rigid board antennas when reciting “wherein each of the second antenna module and the third antenna module has an integrated circuit board that includes a radar circuit board and a rigid board antenna;” and furthermore, recites that either one or both of the rigid board antennas are connected to the flexible board antennas when reciting, “wherein one or both of the rigid board antennas of the second antenna module and the third antenna module are connected to the flexible board antenna of the first antenna module”. Therefore it is unclear which “the rigid board antenna” is being referred to in the limitation of "connected to the flexible board antenna of the first antenna module and the rigid board antenna".
Dependent claims 2-7 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to their dependency on a claim rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ay (US 20230114899 A1) in view of HAN et al. (US 20210280959 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ay discloses [Note: what Ay fails to clearly disclose is strike-through]
An ultra-wide angle radar system (see Fig. 4) comprising:
a first antenna module (see Fig. 4, portion 410 is the “a first antenna module”, further see paragraph 0035, “The frontend PCB 402 includes portions 408-412 that are offset from one another. The first portion 408 of the frontend PCB 402 includes a first antenna array 414. The second portion 410 of the frontend PCB 402 includes a second antenna array 416. The third portion 412 of the frontend PCB 402 includes a third antenna array 418.”);
a second antenna module with one side thereof adjacent to one side of the first antenna module (see Fig. 4, portion 412 is the “a second antenna module” which is adjacent to one side of portion 410); and
a third antenna module with one side thereof adjacent to another side of the first antenna module (see Fig. 4, portion 408 is the “a third antenna module” which is adjacent to another side of portion 410);
wherein each of the second antenna module and the third antenna module has(see Fig. 4, where portions 408 and 412 which include the antennas 418 and 414 are rigid board portions of the overall flexible board 402, further see for support paragraph 0024, “In exemplary embodiments, the PCB 102 is a semi-rigid PCB that, once bent into the desired shape, holds the shape without external constraint until the PCB 102 is bent again. In other exemplary embodiments, the PCB 102 is a flexible PCB that can be readily bent into a desired shape but that does not hold this shape without external constraint. In these other embodiments, the PCB 102 can be held in a desired shape/position by way of a housing (e.g., a housing 126 of the sensor 100) and/or various fasteners or other holding components. As used herein, the term “flexible PCB” is intended to encompass semi-rigid PCBs and flexible PCBs that do not hold their shape without external constraint.”).
wherein one or both of the rigid board antennas of the second antenna module and the third antenna module are connected to (see Fig. 4, where portions 408 and 412 are the “rigid boards” and connected to first antenna module 410) and the rigid board antenna and thefirst antenna module transmit signals between each other by coupling radiation or metallic connections (see paragraph 0033, “The first antenna 108 emits a first radar signal 310, the second antenna 110 emits a second radar signal 312, and the third antenna 118 emits a third radar signal 314. While the radar signals 310-314 are described herein as being emitted by the antennas 108, 110, 118, respectively, it is to be understood that these signals 310-314 can be emitted by respective arrays that include the antennas 108, 110, 118. Furthermore, it is to be understood that in some embodiments the radar sensor 100 can be configured such that not all of the antennas 108, 110, 118 operate in a transmit mode. By way of example, and not limitation, the antenna 118 can be configured to transmit the radar signal 314, and the antennas 108, 110 can be configured to receive returns of the radar signal 314 from FOVs having a same extent as the radar signals 310, 312 shown in FIG. 3.”, where each set of antennas can transmit the radar signals and different antenna sets can receive the radar returns).
Han discloses,
a first antenna module having a flexible board antenna (see Fig. 14, where board 220 coupled with flexible connections 206a and 206b is the “a first antenna module” and this has a “flexible board antenna” as the board is flexible via the flexible connections),
wherein each of the second antenna module and the third antenna module has an integrated circuit board that includes a (see Fig. 14, where boards 240a and 240b are the second antenna module and the third antenna module, respectively and each of these boards are “rigid boards” and have an integrated circuit devices (see 9, integrated circuit device 242) for processing: Note: in the application of radar system a “radar integrated circuit” would be used and therefore in Ay in view of Han, the integrated device would be a radar integrated circuit device),
wherein one or both of the rigid board antennas of the second antenna module and the third antenna module are connected to the flexible board antenna of the first antenna module (see Fig. 14, rigid boards 240a and 240b are connected to flexible board antenna (i.e. the combined structure of 220 and 206a and 206b)) and the rigid board antenna and the flexible board antenna transmit signals between each other by coupling radiation or metallic connections (see Fig. 2, flexible connection 206 has an interconnect 262 which couples signals together between the different substrates, further see paragraph 0031, “The flexible connection 206 includes at least one dielectric layer 260 and at least one interconnect 262. The at least one dielectric layer 260 may include polyimide or liquid crystal polymer. The flexible connection 206 may be configured to electrically couple the package 202 and the package 204. The flexible connection 206 may be configured to allow different currents (e.g., signal, power, ground) to travel between the package 202 and the package 204. For example, the flexible connection 206 may include (i) at least one first interconnect configured for a signal (e.g., input/output signal), (ii) at least one second interconnect configured for power, and (iii) at least one third interconnect configured for ground.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Han into the invention of Ay. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose antenna arrays on multiple boards and mounted to provide flexibility. Ay discloses three board portions that are adjacent to one another; however, fails to clearly disclose that the middle portion has the “flexible board”. There are many ways to make the middle board a “flexible board” and Han discloses one such design. Han discloses a three transceiver design where the middle board is connected with flexible connections which allow for it to bend (see Fig. 14 of Han). The middle board coupled to the flexible connections is the “a first antenna module” and comprises “the flexible board antenna”. Furthermore, Ay fails to clearly disclose that each of the second and third antenna modules include an integrated circuit device. This feature is disclosed by Han as well where each board connected adjacently to the middle board has its own integrated circuit devices on a board which are used for processing. In light of these two references, when utilizing this design of Han into the invention of Ay, a radar integrated circuit device would be used as Ay is directed to a radar system. The combination of Ay and Han would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to allow for increased field of view for detection by the radar system and protection against impact damage.
Regarding claim 2, Ay further discloses
The ultra-wide angle radar system according to claim 1, further comprising a bottom base with two sides thereof respectively connected to another side of the second antenna module and another side of the third antenna module to form a quadrilateral structure with at least three signal transceiver surfaces (see Fig. 4, bottom base 404 connected to 412 and 414 to forms a quadrilateral structure with at least three signal transceivers).
Regarding claim 3, Ay discloses
The ultra-wide angle radar system according to claim 2, wherein an included angle between the bottom base and the second antenna module has a range of 20~80 degrees (see Fig. 4, where the angle between the bottom base and the second antenna module 412 is less than 90 degrees).
It would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the ultra-wide angle radar system where the angle between the bottom base and the second antenna module has a range of 20~80 degrees. Ay discloses in Fig. 4, that the angle between the bottom base and the second antenna module is less than 90 degrees and appears to be within the range of 20~80 degrees. Ay does not specifically disclose the angle value, however, the MPEP § 2141 provides that an invention may render a claimed limitation obvious when it would be “obvious to try” to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. In such an instance it would be obvious to try to specify the design the system so that the angle between the bottom base and the second antenna module to be in a range of 20-80 degrees (i.e. where only a finite number of solutions exist for such a design and fall within in the range of 20-80 degrees). One would have been motivated to do so to increase aperture of the fields of view provided by each antenna board.
Regarding claim 4, Ay discloses
The ultra-wide angle radar system according to claim 2, wherein an included angle between the bottom base and the third antenna module has a range of 20~80 degrees (see Fig. 4, where the angle between the bottom base and the second antenna module 414 is less than 90 degrees).
It would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to design the ultra-wide angle radar system where the angle between the bottom base and the second antenna module has a range of 20~80 degrees. Ay discloses in Fig. 4, that the angle between the bottom base and the second antenna module is less than 90 degrees and appears to be within the range of 20~80 degrees. Ay does not specifically disclose the angle value, however, the MPEP § 2141 provides that an invention may render a claimed limitation obvious when it would be “obvious to try” to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. In such an instance it would be obvious to try to specify the design the system so that the angle between the bottom base and the second antenna module to be in a range of 20-80 degrees (i.e. where only a finite number of solutions exist for such a design and fall within in the range of 20-80 degrees). One would have been motivated to do so to increase aperture of the fields of view provided by each antenna board.
Regarding claim 5, Ay further discloses
The ultra-wide angle radar system according to claim 1, wherein another side of the second antenna module is connected to another side of the third antenna module to form at least three signal transceiver surfaces (see Fig. 4, where boards 412, 410 and 408 forms three signal transceiver surfaces).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ay and Han discloses [Note: what Ay fails to clearly disclose is strike-through]
The ultra-wide angle radar system according to claim 1,
Han discloses,
wherein the (see Fig. 2, integrated circuit devices 242,222 and 224 are provided on the antenna boards and provide a “system-on chip” for processing the signals transmitted by each board, further see paragraph 0037, “The antennas (e.g., 450a, 450b, 450c, 450d) may be electrically coupled to one or more of the integrated devices (e.g., 222, 224, 242) through the plurality of interconnects 243.”, further see paragraph 0030, “The integrated devices may include a die (e.g., processor die, memory die). As will be further described below, some of the plurality of interconnects 243 may be configured as one or more antennas (e.g., at least one interconnect from the plurality of interconnects 243 may define at least one antenna).”), and managing a power provided to the second antenna module or the third antenna module (see paragraph 0037, “The antennas (e.g., 450a, 450b, 450c, 450d) may be electrically coupled to one or more of the integrated devices (e.g., 222, 224, 242) through the plurality of interconnects 243.”, where electrical coupling between the integrated devices is indeed “managing a power provided to the second antenna module or the third antenna module”), and the first antenna module is controlled by the system-on-chip used for the second antenna module or the third antenna module connected to the first antenna module (see paragraph 0044, “FIG. 6 illustrates the package 604 is coupled to the package 202 through the flexible connection 206. The package 604 is similar to the package 204 of the device 200, and thus may include similar components as the package 204 of the device 200. One difference between the package 604 and the package 204 is that the package 604 does not include an integrated device. The package 604 includes the substrate 240 and antennas (e.g., 450a, 450b, 450c, 450d). The antennas (e.g., 450a, 450b, 450c, 450d) may be coupled (e.g., electrically coupled) to the package 202 through the flexible connection 206. The substrate 240 of the package 604 also includes a plurality of interconnects 650 (e.g., land pad array) that is configured as external input/output (I/O) terminals for the substrate 240. Thus, in some implementations, the antennas (e.g., (e.g., 450a, 450b, 450c, 450d) may be coupled to external components (e.g., integrated devices) through the plurality of interconnects 650. The plurality of interconnects 650 may be considered part of the plurality of interconnects 243”, where the integrated device of package 202 controls the antennas of package 604 which does not include the integrated circuit device via I/O terminals).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ay and Han discloses [Note: what Ay fails to clearly disclose is strike-through]
The ultra-wide angle radar system according to claim 1,
Han discloses,
wherein the (see Fig. 2, integrated circuit devices 242,222 and 224 are provided on the antenna boards and provide a “system-on chip” for processing the signals transmitted by each board, further see paragraph 0037, “The antennas (e.g., 450a, 450b, 450c, 450d) may be electrically coupled to one or more of the integrated devices (e.g., 222, 224, 242) through the plurality of interconnects 243.”, further see paragraph 0030, “The integrated devices may include a die (e.g., processor die, memory die). As will be further described below, some of the plurality of interconnects 243 may be configured as one or more antennas (e.g., at least one interconnect from the plurality of interconnects 243 may define at least one antenna).”), and managing a power provided to the second antenna module or the third antenna module (see paragraph 0037, “The antennas (e.g., 450a, 450b, 450c, 450d) may be electrically coupled to one or more of the integrated devices (e.g., 222, 224, 242) through the plurality of interconnects 243.”, where electrical coupling between the integrated devices is indeed “managing a power provided to the second antenna module or the third antenna module”), and the first antenna module is controlled by the system-on-chip used for the second antenna module or the third antenna module connected to the first antenna module (see paragraph 0044, “FIG. 6 illustrates the package 604 is coupled to the package 202 through the flexible connection 206. The package 604 is similar to the package 204 of the device 200, and thus may include similar components as the package 204 of the device 200. One difference between the package 604 and the package 204 is that the package 604 does not include an integrated device. The package 604 includes the substrate 240 and antennas (e.g., 450a, 450b, 450c, 450d). The antennas (e.g., 450a, 450b, 450c, 450d) may be coupled (e.g., electrically coupled) to the package 202 through the flexible connection 206. The substrate 240 of the package 604 also includes a plurality of interconnects 650 (e.g., land pad array) that is configured as external input/output (I/O) terminals for the substrate 240. Thus, in some implementations, the antennas (e.g., (e.g., 450a, 450b, 450c, 450d) may be coupled to external components (e.g., integrated devices) through the plurality of interconnects 650. The plurality of interconnects 650 may be considered part of the plurality of interconnects 243”, where the integrated device of package 202 controls the antennas of package 604 which does not include the integrated circuit device via I/O terminals).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Han into the invention of Ay. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose antenna arrays on multiple boards and mounted to provide flexibility. Ay discloses in paragraph 0055, “Alternatively, or in addition, the functionally described herein can be performed, at least in part, by one or more hardware logic components. For example, and without limitation, illustrative types of hardware logic components that can be used include FPGAs, ASICs, Application-specific Standard Products (ASSPs), System-on-a-chip systems (SOCs), Complex Programmable Logic Devices (CPLDs), etc.”). Therefore Ay discloses the feature of using SOCs on hardware components of its design; however, Ay fails to clearly disclose that two of these boards have the system on chip integrated devices. Han discloses such a design where two of the boards include integrated circuit die used for processing. Furthermore Han discloses the feature of using interconnects to couple the three boards together to manage power transfer (i.e. transferring signals between each other). Furthermore, Han discloses where when one board does not have the integrated circuit die, the other boards integrated circuit device provides I/O terminals to control that antenna board via the interconnects. In light of these two references, when utilizing this design of Han into the invention of Ay, a radar integrated circuit device would be used as Ay is directed to a radar system. The combination of Ay and Han would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to allow for increased field of view for detection by the radar system.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ay (US 20230114899 A1) in view of HAN et al. (US 20210280959 A1) further in view of YU et al. (US 20210063557 A1).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Ay and Han discloses [Note: what the combination of Ay and Han fails to clearly disclose is strike-through]
The ultra-wide angle radar system according to claim 5,
YU discloses,
wherein each of the transceiver surfaces has a detection angle of 120 degrees (see Figs. 1F and 1G where HL1 and HL2 detection angles are each at least 120 degrees).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by YU into the invention of Ay in view of Han. All three references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they all disclose antenna arrays on multiple boards and mounted to provide flexibility. Ay discloses three board portions that are adjacent to one another; however, fails to clearly disclose the detection angle of each antenna array on the specific board portions. Yu discloses that each of the boards of the radar system have antenna arrays where each board has a detection angle of at least 120 degrees. The combination of Ay and Han would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to allow for increased field of view for detection by the radar system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAZRA N. WAHEED whose telephone number is (571)272-6713. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8 AM - 4:30 PM).
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.
/NAZRA NUR WAHEED/Examiner, Art Unit 3648