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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 01/12/2026 has been entered.
Claim 7 is cancelled.
Claims 1-6, 8-15 are amended.
Claims 1-6, 8-15 are pending.
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.
Claims 1-6, and 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stokes (US 11,624,822 B2) in view of Yang (US 2007/0083114 A1)..
Regarding claim 1, Stokes teaches A method of pre-processing acoustic signals received
from an ensonified region of an underwater environment for detecting a passive emission of non-reverberant acoustic energy by an object in the underwater environment, despite the underwater environment being ensonified for active acoustic detection, the method comprising [Title and Col 7, Lines 1-5 have object detection in water]:
generating an acoustic B-scan in respect of a time frame[Abstract has returns being processed to generate sonar data; Col 31; Lines 25-40 has selection of amplitude signals over certain time meaning this is processing of certain strength/brightness namely B-scan at certain time; See also Fig 13 and Col 31 Lines 10-25];
selecting a temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan in accordance with a selection criterion [Col 31; Lines 25-40 has selection of amplitude signals over certain time meaning this is processing of certain strength/brightness namely B-scan at certain time; See also Fig 13 and Col 31 Lines 10-25];…..
generating a spatial reference map of the ensonified region of the underwater environment based upon a B-scan spatial history, the spatial reference map serving as a B-scan background spatial mask. [Abstract; Col 32; Lines 5-20 have mask and filter; Abstract concerns underwater mapping].
applying a B-scan background spatial mask to the first compressed acoustic B-scan to suppress any historic reflectivity samples of the first compressed acoustic B-scan and to provide a second compressed acoustic B-scan [Abstract; Col 32; Lines 5-20 have mask and filter]
Stokes does not explicitly teach compressing the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan to provide a compressed acoustic B-scan; ….. and suppressing a dynamic range of the second compressed acoustic B-scan.
Yang teaches that compressing the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan to provide a compressed acoustic B-scan[0088, 0094, 0274 have compression of B-scan];
generating a spatial reference map of the ensonified region of the underwater environment based upon a B-scan spatial history, the spatial reference map serving as a B-scan background spatial mask [0011-0014; See also claim 11 for masks and B-scans].
applying a B-scan background spatial mask to the first compressed acoustic B-scan to suppress any historic reflectivity samples of the first compressed acoustic B-scan and to provide a second compressed acoustic B-scan [0011-0014; See also claim 11 for masks and B-scans];
suppressing a dynamic range of the second compressed acoustic B-scan. [0088, 0094, 0274 have compression of B-scan and dynamic range compression; See also claims 11-13 for filtering]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the signal pre-processing in Stokes with the compression and suppression of Yang in order to filter the scans to improve the data.
Regarding claim 2, Stokes, as modified, teaches The method according to claim 1 wherein selecting the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan further comprises: selecting the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan in respect of a proportion of the time frame. [Col 31; Lines 25-40 has selection of amplitude signals over certain time meaning this is processing of certain strength/brightness namely B-scan at certain time; See also Fig 13 and Col 31 Lines 10-25].
Regarding claim 3, Stokes, as modified, teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein the time frame extends between a temporally soonest time and a temporally latest time; and the proportion of the time frame extends from an intermediate time to the temporally latest time, the intermediate time being located between the temporally soonest time and the temporally latest time. [Col 31; Lines 25-40 has selection of amplitude signals over certain time meaning this is processing of certain strength/brightness namely B-scan at certain time; See also Fig 13 and Col 31 Lines 10-25; Moreover the selection of any time that is not the very start or end would read on this claim limitation]
Regarding claim 4, Stokes docs not explicitly teach The method according to claim 1 wherein the acoustic B-scan is a measure reverberant energy and non-reverberant energy, the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan corresponding to a range in space proximal an end of a maximum reporting range in respect of the reverberant energy.
Yang teaches that The method according to claim 1 wherein the acoustic B-scan is a measure of reverberant energy and non-reverberant energy, the temporal portion of the acoustic B- scan corresponding to a range in space proximal an end of a maximum reporting range in respect of the reverberant energy. [0095-0096 have maximum brightness and compression meaning data processing based on maximum brightness].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the signal pre-processing in Stokes with the use of brightness scans and filtering to maximize brightness of Yang in order to filter the scans to improve the data.
Regarding claim 5, Stokes, as modified, The method according to claim 1 wherein the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan comprises a number of sequentially latter samples with respect to a duration of the time frame. [Col 27; Lines 15-25 have sequential time slices]
Regarding claim 6, Stokes does not explicitly teach The method according to claim 1 wherein compressing the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan further comprises: selecting sets of samples in respect of each bearing of the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan and respectively averaging each set of the selected sets of samples.
Yang teaches that The method according to claim 1 wherein compressing the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan further comprises: selecting sets of samples in respect of each bearing of the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan and respectively averaging each set of the selected sets of samples. [0112-0113 and 0129 has averaging and sets].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the signal pre-processing in Stokes with the averaging of sets of Yang in order to filter the scans to use know mathematical processes to process the data.
Regarding claim 8, Stokes, as modified, teaches The method according to claim 1 further comprising: repeatedly updating the B-scan background spatial mask from historic temporally filtered acoustic B-scans relating to the ensonified region of the underwater environment. [Abstract; Col 32; Lines 5-20 have mask and filter; Claim 1 has updating data]
Yang teaches that The method according to claim 1 further comprising: repeatedly updating the B-scan background spatial mask from historic temporally filtered acoustic B-scans relating to the ensonified region of the underwater environment. [0011-0014 also has updating; See also claim 11 for masks and B-scans].
Regarding claim 9, Stokes does not explicitly teach The method according to claim 1, wherein the B-scan background spatial mask is a record of an exponentially integrated acoustic B-scan spatial history, and the method further includes: constructing the B-scan background spatial mask using consecutively windowed and compressed acoustic B-scans accumulated over an integration period of time.
Yang teaches that The method according to claim 1, wherein the B-scan background spatial mask is a record of an exponentially integrated acoustic B-scan spatial history, and the method further includes constructing the B-scan background spatial mask using consecutively windowed and compressed acoustic B-scans accumulated over an integration period of time. [0011-0014 also has updating; See also claim 11 for masks and B-scans]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date to have modified the signal pre-processing in Stokes with the updating of data in Yang in order to improve accuracy based on the data.
Regarding claim 10, Stokes does not explicitly teach The method according to claim 1, wherein compressing the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan further comprises compressing the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan according to a compression ratio, the compression ratio being configurable.
Yang teaches that The method according to claim 1, wherein compressing the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan further comprises compressing the temporal portion of the acoustic B-scan according to a compression ratio, the compression ratio being configurable. [0088, 0094, 0274 have compression of B-scan meaning there is inherently a chosen ratio].
Regarding claim 11, Stokes does not explicitly teach The method according to claim 1 wherein suppressing the dynamic range of the second compressed acoustic B-scan further comprises:clipping the second compressed acoustic B-scan with respect to a clipping level.
Yang teaches that The method according to claim 1 wherein suppressing the dynamic range of the second compressed acoustic B-scan further comprises: clipping the second compressed acoustic B-scan with respect to a predetermined clipping level. [0074 has deconvolution levels].
Regarding claim 12, Stokes does not explicitly teach The method as claimed in Claim 11, further comprising: setting the clipping level above a detection level for passive detection of an object in the ensonified region of the underwater environment;
Yang teaches that The method as claimed in Claim 11, further comprising: setting the clipping level above a detection level for passive detection of an object in the ensonified region of the underwater environment. [0074 has deconvolution levels].
Regarding claim 13, Stokes, as modified, teaches wherein applying the B-scan background spatial mask to the first compressed acoustic B-scan further comprises: applying a ratio function to the first compressed acoustic B-scan and corresponding reflectivity data of the B-scan background spatial mask. [Abstract; Col 32; Lines 5-20 and lines 55-60 have mask and filter and signal to noise ratio]
Yang teaches wherein applying the B-scan background spatial mask to the first compressed acoustic B-scan further comprises: applying a ratio function to the first compressed acoustic B-scan and corresponding reflectivity data of the B-scan background spatial mask. [0127 has ratio when dealing with masks].
Regarding claim 14, Stokes, as modified, teaches A method of passive acoustic detection of an object in an ensonified region of an underwater environment, the method comprising: pre-processing acoustic signals received from the ensonified region of the underwater environment using the method of pre-processing according to claim 1[See claim 1 rejection above];
and analysing an A-scan in respect of a beam of the second compressed acoustic B-scan of suppressed dynamic range to determine whether the A-scan relates to a source of non-reverberant energy of interest. [Col 35; Lines 1-10 have amplitude meaning A-scan].
Yang teaches that A method of passive acoustic detection of an object in an ensonified region of an underwater environment, the method comprising: pre-processing acoustic signals received from the ensonified region of the underwater environment using the method of pre-processing according to claim 1[See claim 1 rejection above];
and analysing an A-scan in respect of a beam of the second compressed acoustic B-scan of suppressed dynamic range to determine whether the A-scan relates to a source of non-reverberant energy of interest..[0090 and 0097 have amplitude meaning A-scan].
Regarding claim 15, Stokes, as modified, teaches A method of performing active and passive acoustic detection substantially contemporaneously in time in respect of a region of an underwater environment, the method comprising: ensonifying the region of the underwater environment performing the method of passive acoustic detection according to claim 14 to detect the source of non-reverberant energy in the underwater environment[See claim 14 rejection above]; and performing active detection processing in respect of the second compressed acoustic B-scan generated for detecting a source of reverberant energy in the underwater environment of a category. [Title and Col 7, Lines 1-5 have object detection in water].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show non-obviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In response to applicant’s arguments on pages 16-21, it appears the applicant is reading the prior art overly narrowly. Regarding the emphasis on ‘spatial’ it is pointed out that the word spatial occurs in Stokes 8 times and it is basic concept in sonar that the return beams involve spatial dimensions. [See Col 26 lines 60-65 and Col 20 Lines 10-30]. Regarding applicant’s argument that the ‘mask’ in stokes is not for building a background picture of the underwater environment, it is pointed out that the fact that applicant concedes on page 19 of the remarks that it is used for correlating a signal with a transmission means it is being used to conduct mapping as pointed out in claim 1 of Stokes shows that using returns to build a map of the underwater environment is a basic premise of underwater sonar. The argument with regards to Yang also reads it individually and not with Stokes as Yang clearly has processing of B-Scans and masks and dynamic range compression which would read on applicant’s claims.
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
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 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