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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/05/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 01/05/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-18 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 01/05/2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s argument (REMARKS pages 11-14) about amended claims 1, 6, and 13 is moot based on the new ground rejections.
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 1-18 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, 6, 13 recite the limitation " a phase of the second transmission antenna and a phase of the third transmission antenna" in lines 2-3 from bottom. It is indefinite because “a phase” is in a signal instead of an antenna. It is not clear whether or not the “a phase of” antenna represents “a phase of” a signal from an antenna. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as " a phase of the at least one transmission signal from the second transmission antenna and a phase of the at least one transmission signal from the third transmission antenna". Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claims 2-5, 11 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1 because each of dependent claims 2-5, 11 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 1.
Claims 7-10, 12 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 6 because each of dependent claims 7-10, 12 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 6.
Claims 14-18 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 13 because each of dependent claims 14-18 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 13.
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 1-2, 6-7, 11-14, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iida et al. (US 11,119,203, hereafter Iida) in view of Kishigami et al. (US9,664,777, hereafter Kishigami).
Regarding claim 1, Iida (‘203) discloses that A radar apparatus {title}, comprising:
a control circuitry {Fig.5 item 110 (FMCW TDMA MIMO radar signal processor) output chirp control signal} which, in operation, selects at least one of a plurality of transmission antennas in a first number of transmission periods {Fig.5 item 130 (transmission processing unit); Fig.8 TX antenna vs. Nchirp, TX1, TX2 (see the bottom part) }; and
a transmission circuitry which, in operation, transmits at least one transmission signal in every transmission period using the selected at least one of the plurality of transmission antennas { Fig.5 items 130 (transmission processing unit), 131a-b, 140a, 140b (antennas); Fig.8 TX antenna vs. Nchirp, TX1, TX2 (see the bottom part) },
wherein the control circuitry, in operation, selects a first transmission antenna of the plurality of transmission antennas once in the first number of transmission periods, selects a second transmission antenna and a third transmission antenna of the plurality of transmission antennas a plurality of times in the first number of transmission periods {Fig.12E-F},
However, Iida (‘203) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “simultaneously selects the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna in at least one transmission period among the first number of transmission periods” and “the control circuitry performs antenna combining between the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna by controlling a phase of the second transmission antenna and a phase of the third transmission antenna in the at least one transmission period in which the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna are simultaneously selected”. In the same field of endeavor, Kishigami (‘777) discloses that
simultaneously selects the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna in at least one transmission period among the first number of transmission periods {Figs.17-18 (first radar transmission signal, third radar transmission signal)}, and
the control circuitry performs antenna combining between the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna by controlling a phase of the second transmission antenna and a phase of the third transmission antenna in the at least one transmission period in which the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna are simultaneously selected {Fig.6 item 18 (code producing section), 19 (modulating
section); Figs.17-18 (first radar transmission signal, third radar transmission signal); col.12 lines 24-25 (The code producing section 18 produces a transmission code), 38-43 (The modulating section 19 performs pulse modulation on the input transmission code, The pulse modulation, the phase modulation (PSK (Phase Shift Keying)); col.36 lines15-17 (The first transmission code controlling section of the first radar unit controls the first radar transmitting section of the first radar unit belonging to the first group G1), 25-27 (The third transmission code controlling section of the third radar unit controls the third radar transmitting section of the third radar unit belonging to the first group G1); Examiner’s note: Fig.6 for “control circuitry”. “the first group G1” for “performs antenna combining”. “transmission code” and “PSK (Phase Shift Keying)” for “controlling a phase of the second transmission antenna and a phase of the third transmission antenna”}.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Iida (‘203) with the teachings of Kishigami (‘777) {use input transmission code to control transmit signals at same time period for grouped transmit antennas and use phase modulation (e.g. PSK (Phase Shift Keying)) on the input transmission code} to use input transmission code to control transmit signals at same time period for grouped transmit antennas and use phase modulation (e.g. PSK (Phase Shift Keying)) on the input transmission code. Doing so would provide a wide-angle radar device and suppress the interference signal between radar units so as to obtain accurate position estimate of a target in a wide angle range as a whole, as recognized by Kishigami (‘777) {col.1 lines 58-60 (the radar units independently measure respective predetermined measurement areas to measure a wide angle range as a whole, thereby detecting a target); col.2 lines 6-7 (a problem in that accuracy of position estimation of a target is impaired); col.34 line 19 (the wide-angle radar device); col.35 lines 33-34 (the interference signal between radar units belonging to the same group must be suppressed)}.
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Iida (‘203) and Kishigami (‘777) discloses that in the radar apparatus,
the transmission circuitry, in operation, adjusts a transmission timing of the at least one transmission signal in each of the first number of transmission periods by providing different delays in the first number of transmission periods {see Iida (‘203) Fig.5 item 131a-b in 130 (transmission processing unit); Fig.12E-F; Fig.15; col.4 lines 11-12 (timings at which transmitting antennas 140a and 140b are selected using switches 131a and 131b.)}.
Regarding claim 6, as modified above, Iida (‘203) discloses that A signal processing method used by a radar apparatus {title; Fig.5 item 110 (FMCW TDMA MIMO radar signal processor)}, the signal processing method comprising:
selecting at least one of a plurality of transmission antennas in a first number of transmission periods; and
transmitting at least one transmission signal in every transmission period using the selected at least one of the plurality of transmission antennas;
wherein a first transmission antenna, among the plurality of transmission antennas, is selected once in the first number of transmission periods,
wherein a second transmission antenna and a third transmission antenna, among the plurality of transmission antennas, are selected a plurality of times in the first number of transmission periods, and
wherein the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna are simultaneously selected in at least one transmission period among the first number of transmission periods, and
an antenna combination between the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna is performed by controlling a phase of the second transmission antenna and a phase of the third transmission antenna in the at least one transmission period in which the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna are simultaneously selected.
{The claim limitations above are the same or substantially the same scope as the corresponding claim limitations in claim 1. Therefore the claim limitations above are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as in claim 1. See the rejections of claim 1}.
Regarding claim 7, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 2. Accordingly, claim 7 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 2, shown above.
Regarding claim 11, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Iida (‘203) and Kishigami (‘777) discloses that in the radar apparatus,
in a case that the second transmission antenna or the third transmission antenna is selected, the control circuitry selects two consecutive transmission periods among the first number of transmission periods {see Iida (‘203) Fig.12C (TX2)}.
Regarding claim 12, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 11. Accordingly, claim 12 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 11, shown above.
Regarding claim 13, as modified above, Iida (‘203) discloses that A radar processing circuit {Fig.5}, comprising:
a control circuitry which, in operation, selects at least one of a plurality of transmission antennas in a first number of transmission periods; and
a transmission circuitry which, in operation, transmits at least one transmission signal in every transmission period using the selected at least one of the plurality of transmission antennas,
wherein the control circuitry, in operation, selects a first transmission antenna of the plurality of transmission antennas once in the first number of transmission periods, selects a second transmission antenna and a third transmission antenna of the plurality of transmission antennas a plurality of times in the first number of transmission periods, and simultaneously selects the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna in at least one transmission period among the first number of transmission periods, and
the control circuitry performs antenna combining between the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna by controlling a phase of the second transmission antenna and a phase of the third transmission antenna in the at least one transmission period in which the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna are simultaneously selected.
{The claim limitations above are the same or substantially the same scope as the corresponding claim limitations in claim 1. Therefore the claim limitations above are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as in claim 1. See the rejections of claim 1}.
Regarding claim 14, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 2. Accordingly, claim 14 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 2, shown above.
Regarding claim 18, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 11. Accordingly, claim 18 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 11, shown above.
Claims 3-4, 8-9, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iida (‘203) and Kishigami (‘777) as applied to claims 1, 6, and 13, respectively, above, and further in view of Oshima et al. (US 9,983,294, hereafter Oshima).
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Iida (‘203) discloses that the radar apparatus further comprising:
a receiving circuitry which, in operation, receives reflection signals in which each of the at least one transmission signal is reflected by an object, using one or more receiving antennas { Fig.5 items 160 (reception processing unit), 150a-c (RX1, RX2, RX3); col.4 lines 49-53 (emits a chirp signal whose frequency increases or decreases linearly with time as a transmission signal from a transmitting antenna, captures an echo signal reflected back from a target by a receiving antenna)};
However, Iida (‘203) and Kishigami (‘777) do not explicitly disclose “a Doppler analysis circuitry which, in operation, analyzes a Doppler frequency component of each of the received reflection signals corresponding to each of the at least one transmission signal” and “a direction estimation circuitry which, in operation, estimates a direction of the object based on the Doppler frequency component of each of the received reflection signals”. In the same field of endeavor, Oshima (‘294) discloses that
a Doppler analysis circuitry which, in operation, analyzes a Doppler frequency component of each of the received reflection signals corresponding to each of the at least one transmission signal { Fig.5 items 41-1, 41-2 (Fourier Transform Unit), 42-1, 42-2 (Peak Detection Processing Unit) for items 34-1, 34-2 (receiving antenna); col.14 lines 40-41 (applies the FFT or DFT to the received signal), 44-45 (thereby creating the range Doppler map); col.16 line 18 (Receiving antennas 34-1 and 34-2) }; and
a direction estimation circuitry which, in operation, estimates a direction of the object based on the Doppler frequency component of each of the received reflection signals {Fig.5 item 43 (Angle Measurement Processing Unit) for item 44 (Stationary Object Decision Processing Unit) based on items 41-1, 41-2 (Fourier Transform Unit), 42-1, 42-2 (Peak Detection Processing Unit) from items 34-1, 34-2 (receiving antenna); col.14 lines 40-41 (applies the FFT or DFT to the received signal), 44-45 (thereby creating the range Doppler map); col.16 line 18 (Receiving antennas 34-1 and 34-2) }.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Iida (‘203) and Kishigami (‘777) with the teachings of Oshima (‘294) {create range-doppler map for angle measurement} to create range-doppler map for angle measurement. Doing so would detect targets from radar range-doppler map so as to recognize stationary object and moving object by identifying peaks in radar range-doppler map created from different transmit antennas, as recognized by Oshima (‘294) {col.2 lines 52-58 (peak detector that detects a peak with signal power not less than a threshold in the range Doppler map created by the range Doppler map generator, wherein a stationary object deciding unit recognizes, if the Doppler frequency corresponding to the peaks detected by the peak detector equals Doppler frequency computed from distance corresponding to the peaks); col.4 lines 46-47 (deciding whether an object in a neighborhood is a moving target or a stationary object); col.6 lines 20-22 (In the range Doppler map, not only a peak associated with a moving target (a peak of the signal power), but also peaks associated with a stationary object and the like take place.)}).
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claims 1 and 3, Iida (‘203) and Kishigami (‘777) do not explicitly disclose that “a detection circuitry which, in operation, detects a Doppler frequency component having a received power greater than a threshold value as a peak Doppler frequency component in the received reflection signals corresponding to a transmission signal transmitted from the first transmission antenna”. In the same field of endeavor, Oshima (‘294) discloses that the radar apparatus further comprising:
a detection circuitry which, in operation, detects a Doppler frequency component having a received power greater than a threshold value as a peak Doppler frequency component in the received reflection signals corresponding to a transmission signal transmitted from the first transmission antenna { Fig.1 item 13 (peak detection processing unit); Fig.2 range-doppler_power (Target, Moving Target); Fig.5 and Fig.8 item 42-1 (peak detection processing unit) for item 34-1 (Receiving antennas); col.5 lines 10-12 (The peak detection processing unit 13 executes the processing of detecting a peak with signal power not less than a threshold in the range Doppler map); col.6 lines 20-22 (peak associated with a moving target (a peak of the signal power), but also peaks associated with a stationary object and the like take place); col. 16 line 18 (Receiving antennas 34-1 and 34-2)}.
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying a known technique (e.g. peaks above a threshold in a range-doppler map represent targets) to a known device (e.g. radar) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (e.g. detect targets from radar range-doppler map) and result in an improved system (e.g. recognize stationary object and moving object by identifying peaks in radar range-doppler map, as recognized by Oshima (‘294) {col.2 lines 52-58 (peak detector that detects a peak with signal power not less than a threshold in the range Doppler map created by the range Doppler map generator, wherein a stationary object deciding unit recognizes, if the Doppler frequency corresponding to the peaks detected by the peak detector equals Doppler frequency computed from distance corresponding to the peaks); col.4 lines 46-47 (deciding whether an object in a neighborhood is a moving target or a stationary object); col.6 lines 20-22 (In the range Doppler map, not only a peak associated with a moving target (a peak of the signal power), but also peaks associated with a stationary object and the like take place.)}).
Regarding claims 8-9, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claims 3-4, respectively. Accordingly, claims 8-9 are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claims 3-4, respectively, shown above.
Regarding claims 15-16, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claims 3-4, respectively. Accordingly, claims 15-16 are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claims 3-4, respectively, shown above.
Claims 5, 10, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iida (‘203), Kishigami (‘777), and Oshima (‘294) as applied to claims 4, 9, and 16, respectively, above, and further in view of Lee (US 9,057,785, hereafter Lee).
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claims 1 and 3-4, Iida (‘203) and Kishigami (‘777) do not explicitly disclose that “the detection circuitry, in operation, converts the peak Doppler frequency component into Doppler frequency components of a range of received reflection signals corresponding to transmission signals transmitted from the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna, and excludes overlapping peak frequency components among the converted peak frequency components, or excludes peak frequency components having a smaller received power than a determined value among the overlapping peak frequency components”. In the same field of endeavor, Oshima (‘294) discloses that in the radar apparatus,
the detection circuit, in operation, converts the peak Doppler frequency component into Doppler frequency components of a range of received reflection signals corresponding to transmission signals transmitted from the second transmission antenna and the third transmission antenna {Fig.4 items 13-1 and 13-2 (peak detection processing unit) input to item 12 (angle measurement processing unit); Fig.6 items ST2 (Calculate Longitudinal Distance yn Corresponding to Beat frequency of nth detected peaks); Fig.8 the combination of the output of items 42-1 and 42-2 (peak detection processing unit) for items 34-1 and 34-2 (Receiving antennas) is output to item 43 (angle measurement processing unit); col.12 lines 29-34 (The angle measurement processing unit 21 executes the processing of measuring the incident angle of a scattered wave on the antennas 6-1 and 6-2 by using phase difference between a peak detected by the peak detection processing unit 13 -1 and a peak detected by the peak detection processing unit 13-2.); Examiner’s note: phase difference for “converts” “into” }, and
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Iida (‘203) and Kishigami (‘777) with the teachings of Oshima (‘294) { create range-doppler map for angle measurement, detect target based on peaks above a threshold in a range-doppler map, and take account of phase difference caused by transmit antennas locations in the combination of peaks from different transmit antennas } to create range-doppler map for angle measurement, detect target based on peaks above a threshold in a range-doppler map, and take account of phase difference caused by transmit antennas locations in the combination of peaks from different transmit antennas. Doing so would detect targets from radar range-doppler map without error caused by transmit antennas locations so as to recognize stationary object and moving object by identifying peaks in radar range-doppler map created from different transmit antennas, as recognized by Oshima (‘294) {col.2 lines 52-58 (peak detector that detects a peak with signal power not less than a threshold in the range Doppler map created by the range Doppler map generator, wherein a stationary object deciding unit recognizes, if the Doppler frequency corresponding to the peaks detected by the peak detector equals Doppler frequency computed from distance corresponding to the peaks); col.4 lines 46-47 (deciding whether an object in a neighborhood is a moving target or a stationary object); col.6 lines 20-22 (In the range Doppler map, not only a peak associated with a moving target (a peak of the signal power), but also peaks associated with a stationary object and the like take place.)}).
However, Oshima (‘294) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “excludes overlapping peak frequency components among the converted peak frequency components, or excludes peak frequency components having a smaller received power than a determined value among the overlapping peak frequency components”. In the same field of endeavor, Lee (‘785) discloses that
excludes overlapping peak frequency components among the converted peak frequency components, or excludes peak frequency components having a smaller received power than a determined value among the overlapping peak frequency components {col.29 lines 28-29 (coincidences of peaks from all m spectra within a Doppler shift window), 34-37 (due to a chance overlap of echoes from other ranges, spectral features may be removed from the spectra) }.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Iida (‘203), Kishigami (‘777), and Oshima (‘294) with the teachings of Lee (‘785) {remove overlap spectral features (e.g. peaks) in Doppler shift window} to remove overlap spectral features (e.g. peaks) in Doppler shift window. Doing so would greatly reduce the false-alarm rate so as to reduce ambiguity as to the ranges and Doppler shifts , as recognized by Lee (‘785) {col.29 lines 39-40 (greatly reduce the false-alarm rate); col.30 lines 41-43 (Doppler-displaced echoes overlaying other echo spectra and causing ambiguity as to the ranges and Doppler shifts)}.
Regarding claim 10, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 5. Accordingly, claim 10 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 5, shown above.
Regarding claim 17, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 5. Accordingly, claim 17 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 5, shown above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONGHONG LI whose telephone number is (571)272-5946. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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.
/YONGHONG LI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648