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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 23 March 2026 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
This office acknowledges receipt of the following item(s) from the applicant:
Information Disclosure Statement(s) (IDS) filed on 15 March 2024 and 06 May 2025. The references have been considered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hulbert (US PGPub 2007/0063889) in view of Kang et al. (Kang, US PGPub 2022/0359983).
Referring to Claim 1, Hulbert teaches a first subarray comprising a plurality of first antennas arranged along a first direction (Fig. 2 #2; [0016] see annotated Fig. 2 below for description); a second subarray comprising a plurality of second antennas arranged along the first direction (Fig. 2 #2; [0016] see annotated Fig. 2 below for description); and a third subarray comprising a plurality of third antennas arranged along a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (Fig. 2 #1; [0016] see annotated Fig. 2 below for description), the third subarray being configured to combine a first set of data received from the first subarray and a second set of data received from the second subarray into a combined set of data (Fig. 3 [0017-0019] and [0027]), generate first data indicating target azimuth information, and generate second data indicating target elevation information according to a plurality of input signals received by the third antennas; Fig. 4 and [0020-0023], but does not explicitly disclose the generated data is beamformed by applying beamforming to the data.
While the Examiner believes Hulbert may anticipate the beamforming as Hulbert teaches in [0026] that beamforming is used, it is just not explicit when or how this processing takes place.
However, Kang teaches generating beamformed data by applying beamforming to data sets; Fig. 4 #20; [0051-0053].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hulbert with beamforming processing as taught by Kang as the beamforming unit predictably allows improved control of the antennas in the subarrays.
PNG
media_image1.png
654
735
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 of Hulbert
Referring to Claim 2, Hulbert as modified by Kang teaches wherein the third subarray is configured to combine the first set of data and the second set of data according to an arrangement of the first antennas and the second antennas along the first direction; Fig. 3 [0017-0019] and [0027] of Hulbert.
Referring to Claim 3, Hulbert as modified by Kang teaches wherein the third antennas are configured to generate a plurality of electrical signals according to the input signals; the third subarray further comprises: a signal processing circuit, coupled to the first subarray, the second subarray and the third antennas, the signal processing circuit being configured to apply beamforming to the combined set of data to generate the first beamformed data, process the electrical signals to generate a third set of data, and apply beamforming to the third set of data to generate the second beamformed data; Fig. 3 #10, [0017-0019] and [0027] of Hulbert and #20 as described in Fig. 2 and associated text of Kang.
Referring to Claim 4, Hulbert as modified by Kang teaches wherein the signal processing circuit is configured to generate the first beamformed data according to the target elevation information; See both disclosures.
Claim(s) 5-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hulbert as modified by Kang as applied to claims 1-3 above, and further in view of Burghardt et al. (Burghardt, US PGPub 2022/0066015).
Referring to Claim 5, Hulbert as modified by Kang teach the combined set of data, but does not explicitly disclose nor limit the set of data is structured as a datacube represented in a range domain, a velocity domain and an angular domain; the signal processing circuit is configured to apply beamforming to cells of the datacube in the angular domain to form a range-velocity plane, and perform target detection according to data on the range-velocity plane.
However, Burghardt teaches a set of data is structured as a datacube represented in a range domain, a velocity domain and an angular domain; the signal processing circuit is configured to apply beamforming to cells of the datacube in the angular domain to form a range-velocity plane, and perform target detection according to data on the range-velocity plane; [0044] and [0056-0061].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hulbert as modified by Kang with the datacube as taught by Burghardt as the use of datacubes for processing predictably provides faster radar processing allowing for more efficient beamforming, accurate tracking and doppler processing.
Referring to Claim 6, Hulbert as modified by Kang and Burghardt teach wherein the signal processing circuit is configured to determine a set of target candidates according to the data on the range-velocity plane and a set of thresholds, and determine a set of moving targets from the set of target candidates; an azimuth angle of each moving target falls within an azimuth coverage of the radar system; [0044], [0056-0061] and [0068] of Burghardt.
Referring to Claim 7, Hulbert as modified by Kang and Burghardt teach wherein the signal processing circuit is configured to perform matched filtering and Doppler processing upon the electrical signals to generate the third set of data; [0044], [0056-0061], [0068] and [0092] of Burghardt.
Referring to Claim 8, Hulbert as modified by Kang and Burghardt teach wherein the combined set of data is a set of Doppler processed data; [0044], [0056-0061], [0068] and [0092] of Burghardt.
Referring to Claim 9, Hulbert as modified by Kang and Burghardt teach wherein the first subarray further comprises: a signal processing circuit, coupled to the first antennas, the signal processing circuit being configured to receive a plurality of electrical signals from the first antennas, and perform matched filtering and Doppler processing upon the electrical signals to generate the first set of data; see previous citations of the combined references.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hulbert as modified by Kang as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of West (US PGPub 2017/0338558).
Referring to Claim 10, Hulbert as modified by Kang teaches the limitations of Claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein the first subarray is formed on a first circuit board, the second subarray is formed on a second circuit board separated from the first circuit board, and the third subarray is formed on a third circuit board electrically connected to each of the first circuit board and the second circuit board.
However, West teaches wherein the first subarray is formed on a first circuit board, the second subarray is formed on a second circuit board separated from the first circuit board, and the third subarray is formed on a third circuit board electrically connected to each of the first circuit board and the second circuit board; [0005] and Claim 12.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hulbert as modified by Kang with the separate subarray boards as taught by West so as to provide individualized control of each separate subarray.
Claim(s) 11, 12 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hulbert in view Miller et al. (Miller, US PGPub 2003/0133524).
Referring to Claim 11, Hulbert teaches a plurality of first antennas arranged along a first direction (Fig. 2 #2; [0016] see annotated Fig. 2 above for description); and a signal processing circuit (Fig. 3 #10, [0017-0019] and [0027]), coupled to the first antennas, the signal processing circuit being configured to process a plurality of first electrical signals received from the first antennas to generate a first set of data; a second subarray comprising: a plurality of second antennas arranged along the first direction (Fig. 2 #2; [0016] see annotated Fig. 2 above for description); and a signal processing circuit (Fig. 3 #10, [0017-0019] and [0027]), coupled to the second antennas, the signal processing circuit being configured to process a plurality of second electrical signals received from the second antennas to generate a second set of data; and a third subarray comprising: a plurality of third antennas arranged along a second direction orthogonal to the first direction (Fig. 2 #1; [0016] see annotated Fig. 2 below for description); and a signal processing circuit (Fig. 3 #10, [0017-0019] and [0027]), coupled to the third antennas, the signal processing circuit being configured to generate first beamformed data indicating target azimuth information according to the first set of data and the second set of data, but does not explicitly disclose not limit the signal processing circuit being a first, second and third signal processing circuit, the third being coupled to the first signal processing circuit, the second signal processing circuit and generating beamformed data.
While the Examiner believes Hulbert may anticipate the beamforming as Hulbert teaches in [0026] that beamforming is used, it is just not explicit when or how this processing takes place.
However, Miller teaches signal processing circuit being a first, second and third signal processing circuit, the third being coupled to the first signal processing circuit, the second signal processing circuit and generating beamformed data; see abstract #800 and 900 and associated text of #800 and 900.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hulbert with the plurality of processors and beamforming as taught by Miller to adaptively control each subarray so as to predictably provide individualized optimization to each subarray.
Referring to Claim 12, Hulbert as modified by Miller teaches wherein the third signal processing circuit is configured to combine the first set of data and the second set of data into a combined set of data, and apply beamforming to the combined set of data to generate the first beamformed data; See Fig. 1 and [0023-0032] and Claim 1 of Miller.
Referring to Claim 15, Hulbert as modified by Miller teach wherein the third signal processing circuit is further configured to process a plurality of third electrical signals received from the third antennas to generate a third set of data, and generate second beamformed data indicating target elevation information according to the third set of data; see Fig. 3 and 4 of Hulbert and citations of Miller above.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hulbert as modified by Miller as applied to claim 11, and further in view of Burghardt et al. (Burghardt, US PGPub 2022/0066015).
Referring to Claim 14, Hulbert as modified by Miller teach the limitations of Claim 11, but does not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein each of the first set of data and the second set of data is a set of Doppler processed data.
However, Burghardt teaches wherein each of the first set of data and the second set of data is a set of Doppler processed data; ; [0044], [0056-0061], [0068] and [0092].
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hulbert as modified by Kang with the datacube as taught by Burghardt as the use of datacubes for processing predictably provides faster radar processing allowing for more efficient beamforming, accurate tracking and doppler processing.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hulbert as modified by Miller as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of West (US PGPub 2017/0338558).
Referring to Claim 16, Hulbert as modified by Miller teach the limitations of Claim 11, but do not explicitly disclose nor limit wherein the first signal processing circuit is formed on a first circuit board, the second signal processing circuit is formed on a second circuit board separated from the first circuit board, and the third signal processing circuit is formed on a third circuit board electrically connected to each of the first circuit board and the second circuit board.
However, West wherein the first signal processing circuit is formed on a first circuit board, the second signal processing circuit is formed on a second circuit board separated from the first circuit board, and the third signal processing circuit is formed on a third circuit board electrically connected to each of the first circuit board and the second circuit board; [0005] and Claim 12.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Hulbert as modified by Kang with the separate subarray boards as taught by West so as to provide individualized control of each separate subarray.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-24 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Referring to Claim 21, the prior art of record does not explicitly disclose nor suggest it be an obvious modification wherein each of the first datacube and the second datacube is represented in a range domain, a velocity domain and an angular domain; and a third signal processing circuit being configured to stack the first datacube and the second datacube in the angular domain to form a composite datacube, and being configured to apply beamforming to the composite datacube to generate first beamformed data indicating target azimuth information.
Claims 22-24 are dependent on Claim 21 and are allowed for the same reason.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claim 13 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WHITNEY T MOORE whose telephone number is (571)270-3338. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 7am-4pm.
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, Jack Keith can be reached at (571) 272-6878. 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.
/WHITNEY MOORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646
Prosecution Insights