Detailed Action
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 05/12/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-11, 13-18, and 21-23 remain pending in this application. Claims 1, 8, 11, 15, and 18 have been amended. Claims 12, 19, and 20 have been cancelled. Claims 21-23 are new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 05/12/2026 regarding prior art rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. All prior art rejections are maintained for the same or similar reasons as provided in the previous office action dated 02/12/2026.
The Applicant argues on page 11 of remarks “Volkov does not teach or suggest that a second millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprises a set of reflection characteristics comprising a second polarization”. However, the Examiner maintains that Volkov explicitly discloses handling and separation of multiple polarizations in at least [0121]-[0122] and [0153]-[0156]. Further, the supplemental teachings of Kawaji further disclose a second polarization that is orthogonal to the first polarization.
The Applicant further argues “Kawaji does not teach or suggest that the second polarization is orthogonal to the first polarization based at least in part on the cross-polarization reflector”. However, the Examiner argues that Kawaji discloses an object as a cross-polarization reflector, which by definition reflects a signal orthogonally to a transmission. See at least Kawaji [0128] “object 200 illustrated in FIG. 8 largely changes the polarization direction when reflecting the transmission wave. For example, the transmission wave transmitted from the transmission antenna 25A of the polarization direction of 0° is reflected off the peripheral portion of the object 200 such that the polarization direction is changed to 90°”. Therefore, the combination of Volkov and Kawaji disclose all elements of claim 1, including a “cross-polarization reflector”.
The same or similar reasoning is applied to all similar independent claims and all dependent claims.
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5, 7-11, 14-18, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volkov (US 20060273255 A1), hereinafter Volkov, in view of Kawaji (US 20220221554 A1), hereinafter Kawaji.
Regarding claim 1, Volkov, as shown below, discloses a radar system comprising the following limitations:
a first transmitter antenna configured for transmitting a first millimeter wave electromagnetic signal (See at least Figs. 1, 10, Item 2, [0125] “source 2 transmits MMW/SMMW radiation 6”, [0184] “Each generator has either own antenna system 67, 68, 69 for directing the generated radiation in a free space, or a common antennae system 67”), the first millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising a set of stimulation characteristics, the set of stimulation characteristics comprising a first polarization (See at least [0122] “In another preferable embodiment these controlling systems also should distinctly encode the radiation generated by every said partial constituent sources (exhibiting own particular frequency composition and polarization state)”);
a first receiver antenna configured for receiving a second millimeter wave electromagnetic signal, comprising at least a portion of the first millimeter wave electromagnetic signal reflected from a (See at least Fig. 1, [0147] “receiving device 16 (further it is designated as an "RD") on the corresponding receiving elements 17, 18, 19 (if they represent themselves a immovable multi-element receiving array)”, [0148] “Characteristics of radiation 15, reflected, dispersed or absorbed by the object, depends on differences in material, surface, texture and volume of the object 9.”), the second millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising a set of reflection characteristics, comprising a second polarization (See at least Fig. 1, [0122] “controlling systems also should distinctly encode the radiation generated by every said partial constituent sources (exhibiting own particular frequency composition and polarization state). This will allow to distinctly decode and extracted from compound radiation received by receiving apparatus of imaging system (by receiving array and correspondent receiving electronic means).”)
a processing circuitry configured to detect the object based at least in part on a relationship between the set of stimulation characteristics and the set of reflection characteristics, the object being impacted by the first millimeter wave electromagnetic signal to cause the second millimeter wave electromagnetic signal to reflect off the object (See at least Fig. 1, Item 9, [0020] “a processor in order to forming the observed object image and surrounding area of location and for its mapping”),
Volkov does not explicitly disclose that is orthogonal to the first polarization based at least in part on the cross-polarization reflector; and
that is orthogonal to the first polarization based at least in part on the cross-polarization reflector (See at least [0128] “object 200 illustrated in FIG. 8 largely changes the polarization direction when reflecting the transmission wave. For example, the transmission wave transmitted from the transmission antenna 25A of the polarization direction of 0° is reflected off the peripheral portion of the object 200 such that the polarization direction is changed to 90°” The Examiner notes that 90 degree polarization is orthogonal and therefore a cross-polarized reflection.); and
(See at least [0104] “the electronic device according to the one embodiment enables a reflecting object to be appropriately detected even if the polarization direction of the reflected wave changes” Kawaji discloses comparing the first and second polarization through filtering and calculation of object characteristics. See also [0119]-[0122] and [0128]-[0129])
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the radar system disclosed by Volkov with the polarization system disclosed by Kawaji. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously increase accuracy (See at least [0030] “An object of the present disclosure is to provide an electronic device, a method for controlling an electronic device, and a program for controlling an electronic device that contribute to improvement of the object detection accuracy”).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Volkov and Kawaji, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Volkov further discloses
the processing circuitry is further configured to generate control instructions for a synthesizer to generate a signal that, when received by the first transmitter antenna, induces the first transmitter antenna to radiate the first millimeter wave electromagnetic signal having the first polarization (See at least Fig. 1, Item 22, [0122] “controlling systems also should distinctly encode the radiation generated by every said partial constituent sources (exhibiting own particular frequency composition and polarization state)”).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Volkov and Kawaji, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Volkov further discloses
a second receiver antenna configured for receiving a third millimeter wave electromagnetic signal, the third millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising the first polarization (See at least [0147] “receiving device 16 (further it is designated as an "RD") on the corresponding receiving elements 17, 18, 19 (if they represent themselves a immovable multi-element receiving array” The Examiner notes that the broadest reasonable interpretation of ‘third millimeter wave” includes interpretation that the “third millimeter wave” is the same wave as the “first millimeter wave”); and a first switch for selecting between the first receiver antenna or the second receiver antenna. (See at least [0147] “spatial points 17, 18, 19, which are periodically scanned by one or some receiving elements of this receiving device” See also Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Volkov and Kawaji, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 3. Volkov further discloses
a second switch for selecting between the first transmitter antenna and the second transmitter antenna (See at least [0123] “In another embodiment of the invention only radiation central frequencies may be varied for part of constituent sources 3, 4, 5 of the radiation source 2 or for all of them for goal of a formation of frequency-distinctive partial constituent images.” Volkov discloses independently controlling the different antenna sources which is equivalent to switching between a first transmitter and second transmitter antenna. Further, the switch as claimed is not limited in interpretation to a binary on/off switch. See also Fig. 14).
Volkov does not explicitly disclose a second transmitter antenna configured for radiating a fourth millimeter wave electromagnetic signal, the fourth millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising the second polarization. However, Kawaji, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses:
a second transmitter antenna configured for radiating a fourth millimeter wave electromagnetic signal, the fourth millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising the second polarization (See at least [0122] “Suppose that the transmission wave is transmitted from the transmission antenna 25C′ of the polarization direction of 90° in the next time interval illustrated in FIG. 7” See also [0117]-[0122]); and
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the radar system disclosed by Volkov with the polarization system disclosed by Kawaji. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously increase accuracy (See at least [0030] “An object of the present disclosure is to provide an electronic device, a method for controlling an electronic device, and a program for controlling an electronic device that contribute to improvement of the object detection accuracy”).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Volkov and Kawaji, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Volkov further discloses
the system further comprises a second receiver antenna configured for receiving a third millimeter wave electromagnetic signal, the third millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising the first polarization, wherein the first receiver antenna is configured to transmit the second millimeter wave electromagnetic signal to a first mixer, and wherein the second receiver antenna is configured to transmit the third millimeter wave electromagnetic signal to a second mixer (See at least Fig. 56, [0457] “In FIGS. 55 to 59 there are represented block diagrams of input units of the receiving channel of the receiving device 16 (see FIG. 1), allowing to amplify, to downconvert and partially to decode antenna-received signals (including doublet signals) the later may be perform by using square-law detector or by mixer ”, [0177] “each receiving array antenna element 47, 48 of array 46 hasis fed to own said receiving channel, which together forms a corresponding receiving element 17,18 of the RD 16”).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Volkov and Kawaji, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Volkov further discloses
the object comprises a reflector configured to be impacted by the first millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising the first polarization and reflecting the second millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising the second polarization (See at least [0113] “After reflecting of the radiation from the observed object a focusing of this radiation and its transferring to a receiving means are realized.”).
Regarding claim 8, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 1. Accordingly, claim 8 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 1, shown above.
Regarding claim 9, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 2. Accordingly, claim 9 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 2, shown above.
Regarding claim 10, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 3. Accordingly, claim 10 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 3, shown above.
Regarding claim 11, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 4. Accordingly, claim 11 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 4, shown above. Further, Volkov does not explicitly disclose wherein the first polarization comprises a vertical polarization and the second polarization comprises a horizontal polarization. However, Kawaji, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses:
wherein the first polarization comprises a vertical polarization and the second polarization comprises a horizontal polarization (See at least [0100] “the reflected waves obtained as a result of the radio waves transmitted as vertically polarized waves being reflected off the object may include a horizontally polarized wave”); and
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the radar system disclosed by Volkov with the polarization system disclosed by Kawaji. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously increase accuracy (See at least [0030] “An object of the present disclosure is to provide an electronic device, a method for controlling an electronic device, and a program for controlling an electronic device that contribute to improvement of the object detection accuracy”).
Regarding claim 14, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 7. Accordingly, claim 14 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 7, shown above.
Regarding claim 15, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 1. Accordingly, claim 15 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 1, shown above.
Regarding claim 16, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 2. Accordingly, claim 16 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 2, shown above.
Regarding claim 17, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 3. Accordingly, claim 17 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 3, shown above.
Regarding claim 18, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claims 11 and 7. Accordingly, claim 18 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claims 11 and 7, shown above.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Volkov and Kawaji, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Volkov further discloses
(See at least [0148] “Characteristics of radiation 15, reflected, dispersed or absorbed by the object, depends on differences in material, surface, texture and volume of the object 9.”).
Volkov does not explicitly disclose the cross-polarization . However, Kawaji, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses:
the cross-polarization (See at least [0128] “object 200 illustrated in FIG. 8 largely changes the polarization direction when reflecting the transmission wave. For example, the transmission wave transmitted from the transmission antenna 25A of the polarization direction of 0° is reflected off the peripheral portion of the object 200 such that the polarization direction is changed to 90°” The Examiner notes that 90 degree polarization is orthogonal and therefore a cross-polarized reflection)
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the radar system disclosed by Volkov with the polarization system disclosed by Kawaji. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously increase accuracy (See at least [0030] “An object of the present disclosure is to provide an electronic device, a method for controlling an electronic device, and a program for controlling an electronic device that contribute to improvement of the object detection accuracy”).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Volkov and Kawaji, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Volkov does not explicitly disclose the cross-polarization reflector comprises materials that causes the first millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising the first polarization to shift and reflect as the second millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising the second polarization. However, Kawaji, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses:
the cross-polarization reflector comprises materials that causes the first millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising the first polarization to shift and reflect as the second millimeter wave electromagnetic signal comprising the second polarization (See at least [0128] “object 200 illustrated in FIG. 8 largely changes the polarization direction when reflecting the transmission wave. For example, the transmission wave transmitted from the transmission antenna 25A of the polarization direction of 0° is reflected off the peripheral portion of the object 200 such that the polarization direction is changed to 90°”, [0093] “Such a change in the polarization direction may vary depending on various conditions such as the inclination, the shape, and/or the material of the reflecting surface of the object” The Examiner notes that 90 degree polarization is orthogonal and therefore a cross-polarized reflection.)
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the radar system disclosed by Volkov with the polarization system disclosed by Kawaji. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously increase accuracy (See at least [0030] “An object of the present disclosure is to provide an electronic device, a method for controlling an electronic device, and a program for controlling an electronic device that contribute to improvement of the object detection accuracy”).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Volkov and Kawaji, as shown in the rejection above, discloses all of the limitations of claim 1. Volkov does not explicitly disclose the cross-polarization reflector is incorporated into the object. However, Kawaji, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses:
the cross-polarization reflector is incorporated into the object (See at least [0128] “object 200 illustrated in FIG. 8 largely changes the polarization direction when reflecting the transmission wave. For example, the transmission wave transmitted from the transmission antenna 25A of the polarization direction of 0° is reflected off the peripheral portion of the object 200 such that the polarization direction is changed to 90°”, [0093] “Such a change in the polarization direction may vary depending on various conditions such as the inclination, the shape, and/or the material of the reflecting surface of the object” The Examiner notes that 90 degree polarization is orthogonal and therefore a cross-polarized reflection)
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the radar system disclosed by Volkov with the polarization system disclosed by Kawaji. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously increase accuracy (See at least [0030] “An object of the present disclosure is to provide an electronic device, a method for controlling an electronic device, and a program for controlling an electronic device that contribute to improvement of the object detection accuracy”).
Claims 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volkov, in view of Kawaji, in further view of Zou (CN 113871900 B), hereinafter Zou.
Regarding claim 6, The combination of Volkov and Kawaji, as shown above, discloses all the limitations of claim 1. The combination of Volkov and Kawaji does not explicitly disclose the system comprises transmission lines with matching lengths configured for delay matching. However, Zou, in the same or in a similar field of endeavor, discloses
the system comprises transmission lines with matching lengths configured for delay matching (See at least “The technical solution of the invention adopts the physical length of each receiving antenna micro-strip transmission line (13) are equal, the physical length of each transmitting antenna micro-strip transmission line (14) are equal in order to realize the transmission signal, and the same time delay and the same transmission loss between the received signals so as to equivalently obtain a virtual array with equal amplitude and same phase” ).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the sensing system disclosed by Volkov with the polarization system disclosed by Kawaji with the transmission line system disclosed by Zou. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously achieve equal signal properties (See at least The technical solution of the invention adopts the physical length of each receiving antenna micro-strip transmission line (13) are equal, the physical length of each transmitting antenna micro-strip transmission line (14) are equal in order to realize the transmission signal, and the same time delay and the same transmission loss between the received signals so as to equivalently obtain a virtual array with equal amplitude and same phase ).
Regarding claim 13, applicant recites limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as claim 6. Accordingly, claim 13 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 6, shown above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH W GOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-4186. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thu 7:30 am - 5:00 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, Resha H Desai can be reached on (571)270-7792. 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.
/KENNETH W GOOD/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights