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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/25/2026 has been entered.
Claims 11 and 18-19 are amended.
Claims 11-19 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11-14 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rowe (US 2003/0214880 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Rowe discloses Rowe discloses driving the ultrasonic sensor array to transmit ultrasonic pulses, and receiving reflected ultrasonic echos by the ultrasonic sensor array, to generate measurement data based on the received ultrasonic echos[Abstract, Claim 1, 31, has ultrasound array for sending and receiving acoustic beams];
and driving the ultrasonic sensor array to transmit ultrasonic pulses and receive ultrasonic echos, in such a manner, that a horizontal and/or vertical solid angle of a detecting range is changed. [Abstract, Claim 1, 31 has beam steering, See also 0020, 0044 and Figs 5A-C]
wherein the ultrasonic sensor array is mounted on a vehicle and oriented to detect at least one of objects, ground surfaces, and obstacles around the vehicle[0005-0007 and 0068 discloses use in vehicles and obstacle avoidance]
Regarding claim 18, Rowe discloses A control unit configured to operate at least one ultrasonic sensor array, the control unit configured to[Fig 1 has #112 and# 14 for controller]:
drive the ultrasonic sensor array to transmit ultrasonic pulses, and receive reflected ultrasonic echos by the ultrasonic sensor array, to generate measurement data based on the received ultrasonic echos[Abstract, Claim 1, 31 has ultrasound array for sending and receiving acoustic beams];
and drive the ultrasonic sensor array to transmit ultrasonic pulses and receive echos, in such a manner, that a horizontal and/or vertical solid angle of a detecting range is changed. [Abstract, Claim 1,31 has beam steering, See also 0020, 0044 and Figs 5A-C]
wherein the ultrasonic sensor array is mounted on a vehicle and oriented to detect at least one of objects, ground surfaces, and obstacles around the vehicle[0005-0007 and 0068 discloses use in vehicles and obstacle avoidance]
Regarding claim 19, Rowe discloses A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium on which is stored a computer program for operating at least one ultrasonic sensor array, the computer program, when executed by a computer, causing the computer to perform the following steps[Fig 1 shows the circuit meaning it would be a computer]:
driving the ultrasonic sensor array to transmit ultrasonic pulses, and receiving reflected ultrasonic echos by the ultrasonic sensor array, to generate measurement data based on the received ultrasonic echos[Abstract, Claim 1, 31 has ultrasound array for sending and receiving acoustic beams];
and driving the ultrasonic sensor array to transmit ultrasonic pulses and receive ultrasonic echos, in such a manner, that a horizontal and/or vertical solid angle of a detecting range is changed. [Abstract, Claim 1,31 has beam steering, See also 0020, 0044 and Figs 5A-C]
wherein the ultrasonic sensor array is mounted on a vehicle and oriented to detect at least one of objects, ground surfaces, and obstacles around the vehicle[0005-0007 and 0068 discloses use in vehicles and obstacle avoidance]
Regarding claim 12, Rowe discloses wherein the ultrasonic sensor array is driven to generate and receive ultrasonic echos from the detecting range, using a wide solid angle and a subsequent, reduced solid angle. [Abstract, Claim 1,31,0018, 0044, Figs 5A-C has beam steering and range of angles meaning different angles and directions]
Regarding claim 13, Rowe discloses wherein the ultrasonic sensor array is driven to transmit ultrasonic pulses and receive ultrasonic echos from the detecting range using a solid angle that varies in steps. [Abstract, Claim 1, 31, 0018, 0044, Figs 5A-C has beam steering and range of angles meaning different angles and directions]
Regarding claim 14, Rowe discloses wherein the ultrasonic sensor array is driven to transmit ultrasonic pulses and receive ultrasonic echos from the detecting range, using a solid angle that varies continuously. [Abstract, Claim 1, 31, 0018, 0044, Figs SA-C has beam steering and range of angles meaning different angles and directions]
Regarding claim 16, Rowe discloses wherein the solid angle is first changed, after the ultrasonic sensor array is driven to transmit ultrasonic pulses and receives reflected ultrasonic echos from a scanning range. [Abstract, Claim 1, 31, 0018, 0044, Figs 5A-C has beam steering and range of angles meaning different angles and directions]
Regarding claim 17, Rowe discloses wherein the solid angle of the detecting range is changed by a digitally adjustable directional characteristic of the ultrasonic sensor array. [Abstract, Claim 1, 31, 0018, 0044, Figs 5A-C has beam steering and range of angles meaning different angles and directions and this is being done by changing frequency and phase by the circuit meaning digitally adjustable directional characteristic].
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.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rowe (US 2003/0214880 A1) as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Liu (US 2009/0149757 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Rowe does not explicitly teach the detecting range is continuously varied to produce overlapping solid angles: and wherein, using the measurement data corresponding to each solid angle, distance or object information from overlapping regions is excluded according to a superposition and exclusion principle, thereby generating a refined set of measurement data for detecting objects and free space.
Liu teaches that the detecting range is continuously varied to produce overlapping solid angles: [Figs 6, 7, 8A-C and 0025 and claims 5 and 19 have overlapping];
and wherein, using the measurement data corresponding to each solid angle, distance or object information from overlapping regions is excluded according to a superposition and exclusion principle, thereby generating a refined set of measurement data for detecting objects and free space [Figs 6, 7, 8A-C and 0025 and claims 5 and 19 have overlapping and display of the overlapping subvolumes or separate subvolumes meaning repeated data is not displayed. Said another way when either section B or Cor F is displayed data from the overlapped section that is not wanted is not displayed].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the ultrasonic sensor method in Rowe with display of sections that have overlapping Liu to exclude unnecessary overlap data for displaying on the desired section data.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s amendment, it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Applicant's remaining arguments 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. Rejections are maintained – and no allowable subject matter can be identified at this time.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIKAS NMN ATMAKURI whose telephone number is (571)272-5080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at (571)272-6970. 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.
/VIKAS ATMAKURI/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/JAMES R HULKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights