DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 14, 16 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application filed in DE 102021110820.9 on 04/28/2021 under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
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 1-20 are 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.
Claims 1, 2 recite “a radar antenna for emitting radio electromagnetic waves, which is configured to transmit an electromagnetic transmission signal from a transmission signal, which is based on the optical transfer signal”. It is unclear how a transmission signal can emit radar waves but be based on an optical transfer signal since these signals operate on entirely different frequencies. The instant specification [Pg. 11] describes “the transformation device is a converter unit for converting optical signals into electrical signals” but does not explain how the electromagnetic transmission signal is based on the optical transfer signal or how any conversion is being performed. The examiner has interpreted “transmission signal” as any electromagnetic signal in the optical/radar frequency range and the examiner has interpreted “radar” as radar, lidar, or ladar.
Claims 3-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to their dependency on claim 1.
Claim 3 recites “wherein the amplifier is configured to increase a frequency of the transmission signal generated by the optical photodiode”. It is unclear how an amplifier can be “configured to increase a frequency”. An amplifier is typically used to increase a transmission power as claimed in claim 5. Further, an interpretation that included a radar transmission would require a decrease in frequency to modulate a signal from the optical frequency range to the radio frequency range. The examiner has interpreted this limitation as any device to perform frequency modulation.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) due to its dependency on claim 3.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stettner (US 20150202939) in view of Breed (US 20090066065).
Regarding Claim 1, Stettner teaches the following limitations:
A radar sensor device, comprising: (Stettner – [0030] The present invention is an impact mitigation system enabled by a vehicle mounted ladar imaging system. The impact mitigation can be an airbag deployment, or a maneuver designed to reduce peak forces between vehicles, or to crash as safely as possible. The system may also adapt the suspension of the vehicle so as to maintain traction on an irregular road surface, or to avoid dangerous obstacles in the roadway. Each ladar imaging system typically consists of multiple vehicle mounted ladar sensors. Each ladar sensor may have a system control processor with frequency reference and inertial reference, a system memory, a pulsed laser transmitter, transmit optics, receive optics, an array of light detecting elements positioned at a focal plane of the receive optics, a detector bias converter for supplying bias voltage to the light detecting focal plane array, a readout integrated circuit, analog-to-digital converter circuits for producing digital image data from the analog readout IC outputs, a data reduction processor for adjusting and correcting the image data, and an object tracking processor for segregating, isolating, identifying, and tracking features and objects in the corrected image database.)
a transmission path; (Stettner – [0030])
a reception path different from the transmission path; (Stettner – [0030])
an optical input, which is a part of the transmission path and which is formed for receiving an optical transfer signal; (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0030])
an optical output, which is a part of the reception path and which is formed for providing an optical output signal; (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0030])
a radar antenna, for emitting radio electromagnetic waves, which is configured to transmit an electromagnetic transmission signal from a transmission signal, which is based on the optical transfer signal, and to receive an electromagnetic reception signal to provide a reception signal; (Stettner – [0031] The forward radiation pattern 6 of a long range ladar sensor embedded in a headlight assembly of first vehicle Stettner does not explicitly teach “a radar antenna, for emitting radio electromagnetic waves”)
a digital interface, which is configured to switch between the transmission path for transmitting the transmission signal and the reception path for receiving the reception signal; (Stettner – [0047] the transmitters and receivers of sensor interface 126. Sensor interface 126 receives digital logic levels from scene processor 128 and control processor 132 and conditions these signals for transmission over fiber cable and wire harness 124 to the various ladar sensors installed on the vehicle 2. Sensor interface 126 may provide amplification, level adjustment, digital-to-analog conversion, and electrical-to-optical signal conversion for outbound signals from control processor 132)
wherein the radar sensor device is formed as a system on a chip; and (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0030] Stettner does not explicitly teach “system on a chip”.)
the transmission path, the reception path, the optical input, the optical output, the antenna and the digital interface unit are arranged on the system on a chip. (Stettner – [0030], [0047])
Stettner does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Breed, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
a radar antenna, for emitting radio electromagnetic waves (Breed – [0096] Other types of transducers can be used along with the transducers 6, 8, 10 or separately and all are contemplated by at least one of the inventions disclosed herein. Such transducers include other wave devices such as radar or electronic field sensing systems [0636] The same system can also be used for the detection of objects in the blind spots and other areas surrounding the vehicle. This aspect is discussed in the '996 application, section 13.12 with reference to FIGS. 52 and 56-58 therein.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the circuitry of Stettner with the system on a chip of Breed in order to detect objects in the blind spots and other areas surrounding the vehicle (Breed – [0636]).
system on a chip (Breed – [0265] a microprocessor, an application specific integrated circuit system (ASIC), a system on a chip and/or an FPGA or DSP.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the sensors of Stettner with the radar of Breed in order to integrate selected circuitry (Breed – [0265]).
Regarding Claim 2, Stettner further teaches:
comprising a transformation device, which is arranged on the system on a chip and configured to generate the transmission signal depending on the received optical transfer signal. (Stettner – [0030] Stettner does not explicitly teach “system on a chip”.)
Stettner does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Breed, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
system on a chip (Breed – [0265] a microprocessor, an application specific integrated circuit system (ASIC), a system on a chip and/or an FPGA or DSP.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the circuitry of Stettner with the system on a chip of Breed in order to integrate selected circuitry (Breed – [0265]).
Regarding Claim 3, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the transformation device comprises an amplifier, wherein the amplifier unit is configured to increase a frequency of the transmission signal generated by the optical photodiode depending on a preset carrier frequency. (Stettner – [0030], [0049] In operation, the control processor 136 initiates a laser illuminating pulse by sending a logic command or modulation signal to pulsed laser transmitter 146,)
Regarding Claim 4, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the antenna and the digital interface are components of the transmission path and of the reception path. (Stettner – [Fig. 17], [0030], [0031], [0047])
Regarding Claim 5, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the transmission path between the digital interface and the antenna comprises at least one transmission amplifier, wherein the transmission amplifier is configured to increase a transmission power of the antenna for transmitting the electrical transmission signal. (Stettner – [0031], [0047])
Regarding Claim 6, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the reception path between the digital interface and the antenna comprises a demodulation circuit, wherein the demodulation circuit is configured to mix the received reception signal with the transmission signal. (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [Fig. 19], [0007] The electrical response signals are connected to a readout integrated circuit with a corresponding array of unit cell electrical circuits. Each of the unit cell electrical circuits has an input connected to one of the light sensitive detector outputs, an electrical response signal demodulator, and a range measuring circuit connected to an output of the electrical response signal demodulator. The demodulator may be a voltage sampler and analog shift register for storing sequential samples of the electrical response signals, or it may comprise a mixer, integrator, or matched filter. The demodulation may also take place external to the readout integrated circuit, by a fast digital processor operating on a sequence of digitized samples from each pixel.)
Regarding Claim 7, Stettner further teaches:
comprising a modulation circuit, which is arranged on the system on a chip and configured to generate the optical output signal depending on the reception signal. (Stettner – [0030], [0049] Stettner does not explicitly teach “system on a chip”.)
Stettner does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Breed, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
system on a chip (Breed – [0265] a microprocessor, an application specific integrated circuit system (ASIC), a system on a chip and/or an FPGA or DSP.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the circuitry of Stettner with the system on a chip of Breed in order to integrate selected circuitry (Breed – [0265]).
Regarding Claim 8, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the digital interface comprises an analog-digital converter, wherein the analog- digital converter is configured to digitally convert the received reception signal. (Stettner – [0047], [0052] Data reduction processor 164 refines the nominal range data and adjusts each pixel intensity data developed from the digitized analog samples received from A/D converters 160,)
Regarding Claim 9, Stettner further teaches:
comprising: at least one electrical output different from the optical output, which is arranged on the system on a chip and formed to output the reception signal of the reception path, and (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0030] Stettner does not explicitly teach “system on a chip”.)
a data pre-processing circuit, which is arranged on the system on a chip and by which the received reception signal can be conditioned. (Stettner – [0007])
Stettner does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Breed, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
system on a chip (Breed – [0265] a microprocessor, an application specific integrated circuit system (ASIC), a system on a chip and/or an FPGA or DSP.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the circuitry of Stettner with the system on a chip of Breed in order to integrate selected circuitry (Breed – [0265]).
Regarding Claim 10, Stettner further teaches:
comprising a control device, which is arranged on the system on a chip and which is configured to drive the digital interface of the radar sensor device such that the radar sensor device is switched either to the transmission path or to the reception path. (Stettner – [0047] Stettner does not explicitly teach “system on a chip”.)
Stettner does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Breed, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
system on a chip (Breed – [0265] a microprocessor, an application specific integrated circuit system (ASIC), a system on a chip and/or an FPGA or DSP.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the circuitry of Stettner with the system on a chip of Breed in order to integrate selected circuitry (Breed – [0265]).
Regarding Claim 11, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the central electronic computing circuit is configured to generate the optical transfer signal for the radar sensor device and to receive the optical output signal; and (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0049] In operation, the control processor 136 initiates a laser illuminating pulse by sending a logic command or modulation signal to pulsed laser transmitter 146, which responds by transmitting an intense pulse of laser light through transmit optics 150. In the case of a solid state laser based on erbium glass, neodymium-YAG, or other solid-state gain medium, a simple bi-level logic command may start the pump laser diodes emitting into the gain medium for a period of time which will eventually result in a single flash of the pulsed laser transmitter 146… Pulsed laser light reflected from a feature in the scene in the field of view of receive optics 152 is collected and focused onto an individual detector element of the detector array 154. This reflected laser light optical signal is then detected by the affected detector element and converted into an electrical current pulse which is then amplified by an associated unit cell electrical circuit of the readout integrated circuit 156, and the time of flight measured.)
the central electronic computing circuit is respectively coupled to the optical input and to the optical output of the radar sensor device via at least one glass fiber. (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0049])
Regarding Claim 12, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the central electronic computing circuit comprises an optical transmission unit, which is configured to generate the optical transfer signal and to couple it into the at least one glass fiber, which is coupled to the optical input of the radar sensor device; and (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0049])
the central electronic computing circuit comprises an optical reception unit, which is configured to receive the optical output signal via the at least one glass fiber, which is coupled to the optical output of the radar sensor device, and to determine radar information derived from it. (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0049])
Regarding Claim 13, Stettner further teaches:
A motor vehicle with a radar system of claim 11. (Stettner – [0030])
Regarding Claim 14, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the radar sensor device is switched between the transmission path and the reception path by the digital interface unit, and (Stettner – [0047])
the reception path is enabled for receiving the reception signal from the antenna by the digital interface, or (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0030])
the transmission path is enabled for transmitting the transmission signal by the antenna to the digital interface. (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0030])
Regarding Claim 15, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the radar sensor device is produced as a system on a chip, and the electrical transmission path, the electrical reception path, the optical input, the optical output, the antenna and the digital interface unit are generated on the system on a chip. (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0030] Stettner does not explicitly teach “system on a chip”.)
Stettner does not explicitly teach the following limitations, however Breed, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
system on a chip (Breed – [0265] a microprocessor, an application specific integrated circuit system (ASIC), a system on a chip and/or an FPGA or DSP.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the circuitry of Stettner with the system on a chip of Breed in order to integrate selected circuitry (Breed – [0265]).
Regarding Claim 16, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the transformation device comprises an optical photodiode for generating the transmission signal depending on the optical transfer signal. (Stettner – 0050] The detector array 154 may be an array of avalanche photodiodes, capable of photoelectron amplification,)
Regarding Claims 17-18 Stettner further teaches:
wherein the antenna and the digital interface are components of the transmission path and of the reception path. (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0030])
Regarding Claim 19, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the modulation circuit is configured to modulate the mixed signal onto the optical transfer signal and to provide it as an optical output signal at the optical output. (Stettner – [Fig. 18], [0007], [0030])
Regarding Claim 20, Stettner further teaches:
wherein the control device comprises a data transfer bus system, wherein the control device is communicatively linked to the digital interface unit by the data transfer bus system. (Stettner – [Fig. 17], [Fig. 18], [0052] All slice data, range and intensity data, control, and communications then pass between communications port 138 and a centralized ladar system controller 104, (FIG. 17) through bidirectional connections 98.)
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 7, filed 02/09/2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues “Radar uses electromagnetic/radio signals for object detection, while a lidar uses a laser”. The examiner disagrees, while lidar uses lasers, lasers operate using light at the optical frequency range. Claim 1 seems to use an optical input/output to provide a radar transmission/reception path. Though Claim 3 attempts to explain this change in frequency, it improperly explains an increase in frequency provided by an amplifier. An amplifier is used to change the amplitude of a signal, not the frequency.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 8-9, filed 02/09/2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the combination of Stettner and Breed “fail to teach or to fairly suggest a radar sensor device as claimed”. The examiner disagrees, Breed is now cited for teaching various uses of a radar signal. Though Breed primarily teaches the use of sensors in a vehicle interior, the office action cites Breed for teaching interchangeable use of radar and lidar as well as the use of these sensors in a vehicle’s interior and exterior environment. Breed also cites several references for supporting this interchangeable use.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 7, filed 02/09/2026, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the dependent claims are allowable due to the dependency on the independent claims. As noted above, the examiner maintains Stettner in view of Breed teaches the independent claims and therefore the dependent claims remain rejected.
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 is understandable and distinguishable from other inventions.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON JAMES HENSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1841. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 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 at (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.
/BRANDON JAMES HENSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648