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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 9 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9 and 19 recites, “second reliabilities for the respective pieces of radar data”. Claim 9 depends from claim 1, and claim 9 depends from claim 12. However, neither claim 1 nor claim 12 does not recite a first reliability. Therefore, it appears the term limitation “second reliabilities” is a typographical error of “first reliabilities.”
Claim 9 and 19 recite, “a second threshold value”. Claim 9 depends on claim 1; and claim 19 depends from claim 12. However, neither claim 1 nor claim 12 recite a first reliability. Therefore, it appears the limitation “a second reliability” is a typographical error of “a first reliability.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, apparatus, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Step 1:
In the instant case, claims 1-11 are directed to a method, which is a process; claims 12-20 are directed to an electronic device, which is a machine. Therefore, the claims fall in one of the four statutory classes.
Step 2a, Prong 1:
Representative claim 12 recites;
obtaining pieces of radar data obtained by detecting the target object;
based on the pieces of radar data, extracting velocity vectors for respective points that correspond to the detected target object; and
calculate the velocity vector of the target object based on the velocity vectors.
Therefore, the limitations recited above are directed to “calculating the velocity vector” which is an abstract idea because it is a mathematical calculation. Mathematical calculations fall within the mathematical concepts grouping and is therefore considered to be abstract.
Step 2a, Prong 2:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, claim 12 recites the following element(s): one or more processors; and memory storing instructions. These additional elements individually or in combination do not integrate the exception into a practical application because they do no more than apply the abstract idea on a computer (see MPEP 2106.05(f)). Accordingly, these additional element(s) do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Claim 12 is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2b:
Claim 12 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into practical application, the additional element(s) individually or in combination do no more than apply the abstract idea on a computer, which does not render a claim as being significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly claim 12 is ineligible.
Dependent claim(s) and 13-20 further limit the abstract idea recited in claim 12 and are thereby considered to be ineligible.
Claim(s) 1-10 are parallel in nature to claim(s) 12-20. Accordingly claim(s) 1-10 are rejected as being directed towards ineligible subject matter based upon the same analysis above. Examiner notes no additional elements are recited in claim 1. Therefore, the abstract idea is not integrated into an abstract idea and is not considered to be significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent claim 11 further limits the abstract idea recited in claim 1 and is thereby considered ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1,2,11,12,13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. (US. 2019/0187267 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Li et al. discloses,
A method of determining a velocity vector of a target, the method comprising:
obtaining pieces of radar data obtained by detecting the target object; (Paragraph [0023], “radar detection of a target object 204 by a single radar sensor 102)
based on the pieces of radar data, extracting velocity vectors for respective points that correspond to the detected target object; (Paragraph [0024], “Radar sensor 102 (in combination with a local radar processor 104) is configured to make an instantaneous measurement of the radial velocity component VR, which is measured in a radial direction toward or away from the radar sensor 102. As shown in FIG. 2, the radial direction is aligned with a radius R measured from the radar sensor 102 to the object 204”)
and calculating the velocity vector of the target object based on the velocity vectors. velocities (Paragraph [0027], “radar sensor 102(1) measures a radial velocity component VR1 along radial axis R1 at a theta angle θ1, and radar sensor 102(2) measures a radial velocity component VR2 along radial axis R2 at a theta angle θ2. These measurements are made at a same point in time T by the radar sensors 102(1) and 102(2). The relationships among the radial velocity components VR1 and VR2 and the true velocity vector Vactual”; and Paragraph 0013, “A true velocity vector calculator uses a trigonometric relationship established between the radial velocity components and the unknown true velocity vector to determine an angle of the true velocity vector relative to the radial velocity components and a magnitude of the true velocity vector”)
Regarding Claim 2, Li et al. discloses, the method of Claim 1. Li further discloses:
wherein calculating the velocity vector comprises arranging starting points of the velocity vectors (Fig. 4) to a same reference point. (Paragraph [0029], “FIG. 4 shows true velocity vector Vactual, radial velocity component VR1 measured by radar sensor 102(1), and reference vectors Vx and Vy.”)
Regarding Claim 11, Li et al. discloses, the method of Claim 1. Li further discloses:
wherein the velocity vector of the target object represents an actual velocity of the target object (Fig. 4 and further paragraph 0028) includes a vector component other than a line-of-sight vector component. (Paragraph [0029], “FIG. 4 shows true velocity vector Vactual, radial velocity component VR1 measured by radar sensor 102(1), and reference vectors Vx and Vy.”)
Regarding Claim 12, Li et al. discloses,
An electronic device comprising:
one or more processors (Paragraph [0042] “Processor 902” of Li); and memory storing instructions configured to cause the one or more processors to
(“Stored in memory 906” in paragraph [0043]):
obtain pieces of radar data obtained by detecting a target object
(Paragraph [0023], “radar detection of a target object 204 by a single radar sensor 102);
based on the pieces of radar data, extract velocity vectors for respective points that correspond to the detected target object (Paragraph [0024], “Radar sensor 102 (in combination with a local radar processor 104) is configured to make an instantaneous measurement of the radial velocity component VR, which is measured in a radial direction toward or away from the radar sensor 102. As shown in FIG. 2, the radial direction is aligned with a radius R measured from the radar sensor 102 to the object 204”);
and calculate a velocity vector of the target object based on the velocity vectors. (Paragraph 0027, “radar sensor 102(1) measures a radial velocity component VR1 along radial axis R1 at a theta angle θ1, and radar sensor 102(2) measures a radial velocity component VR2 along radial axis R2 at a theta angle θ2. These measurements are made at a same point in time T by the radar sensors 102(1) and 102(2). The relationships among the radial velocity components VR1 and VR2 and the true velocity vector Vactual”; and Paragraph 0013, “A true velocity vector calculator uses a trigonometric relationship established between the radial velocity components and the unknown true velocity vector to determine an angle of the true velocity vector relative to the radial velocity components and a magnitude of the true velocity vector”)
Regarding Claim 13, Li et al. discloses, the method of Claim 2. Li further discloses:
The electronic device of claim 12, wherein calculating the velocity vector comprises
arranging starting points of the velocity vectors (Fig. 4) to be at a same reference point. (Paragraph [0029], “FIG. 4 shows true velocity vector Vactual, radial velocity component VR1 measured by radar sensor 102(1), and reference vectors Vx and Vy.”
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness
Claim(s) 6, 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US. 2019/0187267 A1) in view of Longman et al (US. 2020/0049810 A1) and further in view of Fu et al. (US. 2022/0066021 A1)
Regarding Claim 6, Li discloses the method of claim 1.
Li does not disclose the limitations below. However, Longman teaches a method further comprising:
performing a Fourier transformation on the pieces of radar data to obtain, for each of the pieces of radar data, (Paragraph [0033] “The radon transform generates a range-Doppler-Beam-Range Rate-DOA Rate energy map.” of Longman)
for each of the pieces of radar data, a distance value, a radial velocity value, and an angle value; (Fig. 5, Paragraph [0035] “FIG. 5 shows a Range-Doppler energy map 500 that is obtained using FFT. This figure shows an integration line which is obtained using the radon transform of Eqs. (3)-(5). The energy map 500 shows a different range values at different chirps.” of Longman) and further see (Paragraph [0035] “The Doppler Solver receives two representations of radial velocity: The Doppler measurement and the range walk rate, illustrated in FIG. 5 as the integration line 502 slope.” of Longman)
Li and Longman are analogous art as both disclose a radar method that determines the velocity of a target object. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the process of extracting vectors as disclosed by Li to include performing a Fourier transform on radar data as taught by Longman. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to decrease computation time for values on the target object. (See Paragraph [004] of Longman)
Li in view of Longman does not teach the limitation below. However, Fu teaches:
generating a data cube by (Paragraph [0043] “instead of determining a heading based in part on measuring a distance from a subset of the points 301 to 314 to a nearest boundary of a 2-D bounding box or bounding rectangle, a distance from the subset of the points 301 to 314 and 321 to 325 may be measured with respect to a nearest plane or surface of a 3-D boundary region, in order to determine the minimum 3-D bounding region...” of Fu)
and labeling and clustering, as pieces of data about the target object,
(Paragraph [0042] “The deep neural network may output a binary classification, which may be a prediction of whether or not each of the points 301 to 314 belongs to a particular classification,” of Fu)
pieces of data extracted by applying the data cube to a target detector. (Paragraph [0067] “one or more radar sensors and/or processors may obtain a three-dimensional (3D) snapshot of radar data including Doppler velocities and spatial positions of a plurality of detection points of a target.” of Fu)
Li, Fu, and Longman are analogous art as all disclose a radar method that determines the velocity of a target object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of performing a Fourier transform as disclosed by the combination of Li in view of Longman to include generating a data cube as taught by Fu. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the combination of Li in view of Longman in order to prevent outliers and irrelevant data points for radar detection. (See Paragraph [0005] of Fu)
Regarding Claim 16, Li discloses the machine of claim 12 and further discloses:
wherein the instructions are further configured to cause the one or more processors to (Paragraph [0042] “Processor 902” of Li):
Li does not disclose the limitations below. However, Longman teaches,
generate a data cube by performing Fourier transformation on the pieces of radar data to obtain, (Paragraph [0033] “The radon transform generates a range-Doppler-Beam-Range Rate-DOA Rate energy map.” of Longman)
for each piece of radar data, a distance value, a radial velocity value, and an angle value; (Fig. 5, Paragraph [0035] “FIG. 5 shows a Range-Doppler energy map 500 that is obtained using FFT. This figure shows an integration line which is obtained using the radon transform of Eqs. (3)-(5). The energy map 500 shows a different range values at different chirps.” of Longman) and further see (Paragraph [0035] “The Doppler Solver receives two representations of radial velocity: The Doppler measurement and the range walk rate, illustrated in FIG. 5 as the integration line 502 slope.” of Longman)
Li and Longman are analogous art as both disclose a radar method that determines the velocity of a target object. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the process of extracting vectors as disclosed by Li to include performing a Fourier transform on radar data as taught by Longman. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to decrease computation time for values on the target object. (See Paragraph [004] of Longman)
Li in view of Longman does not teach the limitation below. However, Fu teaches:
and label, as pieces of data about the target object, and cluster, (Paragraph [0041] “The deep neural network may output a binary classification, which may be a prediction of whether or not each of the points 301 to 314 belongs to a particular classification,” of Fu)
pieces of data extracted by applying the data cube to a target detector. (Paragraph [0067] “one or more radar sensors and/or processors may obtain a three-dimensional (3D) snapshot of radar data including Doppler velocities and spatial positions of a plurality of detection points of a target.” of Fu)
Li, Fu, and Longman are analogous art as all disclose a radar method that determines the velocity of a target object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the process of obtaining radar data as disclosed by Li to include generating a cube, labeling and clustering the data, and applying a data cube to extract the data as taught by Fu. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to prevent outliers and irrelevant data points for radar detection. (see paragraph [0005] of Fu)
Claim(s) 7,8,9,10,17,18,19,20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US. 2019/0187267 A1) in view of Fu et al. (US. 2022/0066021 A1)
Regarding Claim 7, Li discloses the method of claim 1. Li does not disclose the method below, but Fu teaches,
wherein the extracting of the velocity vectors comprises:
determining first reliabilities of a set of velocity vectors, (Paragraph [004], “Conducting a first estimation of the 3D heading of the target based on the spatial positions;” …. of Fu) and
selecting the velocity vectors from among the set of velocity vectors based on the velocity vectors (Paragraph [004], conducting a second estimation of the 3D heading of the target based on the Doppler velocities; .... of Fu)
having first reliabilities that satisfy a first reliability threshold. (Paragraph [004] “obtaining a combined estimation of the 3D heading of the target based on a weighted sum of the first estimation and the second estimation.” of Fu)
Li and Fu are analogous art as both disclose a radar method that tracks the velocity of a target object
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of extracting vectors as disclosed by Li to include selecting the velocity vectors having reliabilities that satisfy a threshold as taught by Fu. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to decrease computation time of the estimate for the target object (see paragraph [0030] of Fu)
Regarding Claim 8, Li discloses the method of claim 1, Li does not disclose the method below, but Fu teaches,
wherein the velocity vectors are extracted based at least in part on determining that they correspond to a surface of the target vector. (Paragraph [0017], “In some embodiments, each of the detection points contacts a surface of the bounding region or is located in an interior of the bounding region.” of Fu)
Li and Fu are analogous art as both disclose a radar method that tracks the velocity of a target object.
It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of extracting vectors as disclosed by Li to include correspondence to a surface of a bounded region as taught by Fu. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to determine a point of direction on the radar data for extracting vectors of target object (See Paragraph [0042] of Fu).
Regarding Claim 9, Li discloses the method of claim 1. Li does not disclose the method below, but Fu teaches,
wherein the obtaining the pieces of radar data comprises:
measuring second reliabilities for the respective pieces of radar data; (Paragraph [0057], “From the obtained radar data, a geometric approach may be used to obtain a first estimate of a heading” of Fu)
and selecting, from among the pieces of radar data, pieces of the radar data whose second reliability is greater than a second threshold value, (Paragraph [0035], “the concentration of data points must satisfy a threshold concentration” of Fu)
wherein the velocity vectors are extracted based on the selected pieces of radar. (Paragraph[0035], “If the threshold concentration of data points is present in the region, all the data points within the region or within a threshold distance of the region may be selected, extracted, or obtained.” of Fu)
Li and Fu are analogous art as both disclose a radar method that tracks the velocity of a target object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of extracting vectors as disclosed by Li to include selecting the velocity vectors having reliabilities that satisfy a threshold as taught by Fu. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to decrease computation time of the estimate for the target object (see paragraph [0030] of Fu)
Regarding Claim 10, Li discloses the method of claim 1. Li does not disclose the method below, but Fu teaches,
wherein the pieces of radar data are obtained from a bounding box (Fig. 3) provided by a radar device. (Cl. 6, “The computer implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, based on the first estimation, a 3D bounding region enclosing the detection points, the 3D bounding region indicating an orientation and a dimension of the target.” of Fu)
Li and Fu are analogous art as both disclose a radar method that tracks the velocity of a target object
It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of obtaining radar data as disclosed by Li to include radar data collection from a bounded box as taught by Fu. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to prevent outliers and irrelevant data points for radar detection (See Paragraph [0005] of Fu).
Regarding Claim 17, Li discloses the device of claim 12. Li further discloses:
wherein the instructions are further configured to cause the one or more processors to (Paragraph [0042] “Processor 902” of Li):
Li does not disclose the limitations below. However, Fu teaches,
determine first reliabilities of a set of velocity vectors, (Paragraph [004], “Conducting a first estimation of the 3D heading of the target based on the spatial positions;” …. of Fu) and
select the velocity vectors from among the set of velocity vectors based on the velocity vectors (Paragraph [004], “conducting a second estimation of the 3D heading of the target based on the Doppler velocities;” .... of Fu)
having first reliabilities that satisfy a first reliability threshold. (Paragraph [004], “obtaining a combined estimation of the 3D heading of the target based on a weighted sum of the first estimation and the second estimation.” of Fu)
Li and Fu are analogous art as both disclose a radar method that tracks the velocity of a target object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify executing instructions stored in memory to extract vectors as disclosed by Li to include selecting the velocity vectors having reliabilities that satisfy a threshold as taught by Fu. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to decrease computation time of the estimate for the target object (see paragraph [0030] of Fu).
Regarding Claim 18, Li discloses the machine of claim 17. Li does not disclose the method below, but Fu teaches,
wherein the velocity vector for the target object is determined based on pieces of radar data determined to correspond to a surface of the target object. (Paragraph [0017], “In some embodiments, each of the detection points contacts a surface of the bounding region or is located in an interior of the bounding region.” of Fu)
Li and Fu are analogous art as both disclose a radar method that tracks the velocity of a target object
It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of extracting vectors as disclosed by Li to include correspondence to a surface of a bounded region as taught by Fu. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to determine a point of direction on the radar data for extracting vectors of target object (See Paragraph [0042] of Fu).
Regarding Claim 19, Li discloses the machine of claim 12. Li does not disclose the method below, but Fu teaches,
wherein the processor is further configured to
measure a second reliability for each of the plurality of pieces of radar data and (Paragraph [0057], “From the obtained radar data, a geometric approach may be used to obtain a first estimate of a heading” of Fu)
detect and cluster pieces of radar data, from among the plurality of pieces of radar data, (Paragraph [0035], “The selected, extracted, or obtained data points may correspond or belong to a target” of Fu)
in which the second reliability is greater than or equal to a second threshold value. (Paragraph [0035], “If the threshold concentration of data points is present in the region, all the data points within the region or within a threshold distance of the region may be selected, extracted, or obtained.” of Fu)
Li and Fu are analogous art as both disclose a radar method that tracks the velocity of a target object
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to modify executing instructions stored in memory to extract vectors as disclosed by Li to include selecting the velocity vectors having reliabilities that satisfy a threshold as taught by Fu. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to decrease computation time of the estimate for the target object (see paragraph [0030] of Fu).
Regarding Claim 20, Li discloses the machine of claim 12. Li further discloses a device:
wherein the instructions are further configured to
cause the one or more processors (Paragraph [0042] “Processor 902” of Li):
Li does not disclose the limitations below. However, Fu teaches,
to obtain pieces of data about the target object in the form of a bounding box provided with the radar data from a radar device. (Cl. 6, “The computer implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, based on the first estimation, a 3D bounding region enclosing the detection points, the 3D bounding region indicating an orientation and a dimension of the target.” of Fu)
Li and Fu are analogous art as both disclose a radar method that tracks the velocity of a target object
It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of obtaining radar data as disclosed by Li to include radar data collection from a bounded box as taught by Fu. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to prevent outliers and irrelevant data points for radar detection (See Paragraph [0005]).
Claim 3,4,5,14,15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US. 2019/0187267 A1) in view of Hellsten et al. (WO. 2010/056159 A1).
Li discloses the method of claim 2. Li further discloses:
wherein the calculating the velocity vector further comprises:
calculating the velocity vector of the target object based on the reference point (Fig. 4, Paragraph [0028] “FIG. 4 shows true velocity vector Vactual, radial velocity component VR1 measured by radar sensor 102(1), and reference vectors Vx and Vy.” of Li)
Li does not disclose the limitation below; however, Hellsten teaches,
generating an approximation circle based on endpoints of the velocity vectors as arranged to the reference point; and (Pg. 13, ll.31-32, Fig 1b, “Figure 1 b schematically shows the moving target velocity vector positioned on a circle” of Hellsten)
Li and Hellsten are analogous art as by both disclose a radar method that detects the positioning of a target object based on radar data.
It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of calculating velocity vectors as disclosed by Li to include an approximation circle based on endpoints as taught by Hellsten. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to identify and check the validity of radar points (See Pg 1, ll. [9-17] of Hellsten)
Li discloses the method of claim 4. Li further discloses:
generating line segments that are orthogonal to the velocity vectors, respectively, wherein the line segments originate at the endpoints of the respective velocity vectors as arranged to the reference point; (Fig.4, Paragraph [0029], “FIG. 4 shows true velocity vector Vactual, radial velocity component VR1 measured by radar sensor 102(1), and reference vectors Vx and Vy.” of Li)
Li does not disclose the limitation below; however, Hellsten teaches,
and calculating the velocity vector of the target object based on intersections of the orthogonal line segments and based on the reference point. (See Pg. 6, line [15], “The non-noticeable states of motion have velocity vectors lying on a circle in the χ,y - plane with centre at x = V, y = 0” and further See pg. 32, ll.15-27 “∑. # is then calculated as the product of velocity and acceleration assumptions in order to have all combinations of velocity and acceleration. The assumptions thus represent all conceivable combinations of velocity and accelerations for a moving target.” of Hellsten)
Li and Hellsten are analogous art as by both disclose a radar method that detects the positioning of a target object based on radar data.
It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of calculating velocity vectors as disclosed by Li to include an approximation circle based on endpoints as taught by Hellsten. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to identify and check the validity of radar points (See Pg 1, ll. [9-17] of Hellsten)
Li discloses the method of claim 5. Li further discloses:
wherein the start point of the velocity vector of the target object corresponds to the reference point (Paragraph [0029], “FIG. 4 shows true velocity vector Vactual, radial velocity component VR1 measured by radar sensor 102(1), and reference vectors Vx and Vy.” of Li)
Li does not disclose the limitation below; however, Hellsten teaches,
and the end point of the velocity vector corresponds to a point that is based on the intersections. (Pg.3 ll.1-2, “A moving target velocity vector 117, with velocity in relation to the SAR platform, will have its end point on a circle 113” of Hellsten);
Li and Hellsten are analogous art as by both disclose a radar method that detects the positioning of a target object based on radar data.
It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of calculating velocity vectors as disclosed by Li to include an approximation circle based on endpoints as taught by Hellsten. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to identify and check the validity of radar points (See Pg 1, ll. [9-17] of Hellsten)
Regarding Claim 14, Li discloses the machine of claim 13, Li does not disclose the method below, but Hellsten teaches,
wherein the calculating the velocity vector further comprises:
generating an approximation circle based on endpoints of the velocity vectors as arranged at the reference point, (Pg. 13, ll.31-32, Fig 1b, “schematically shows the moving target velocity vector positioned on a circle” Hellsten)
wherein the circle is fitted to the endpoints; and (Fig 1b)
calculating the velocity vector of the target object based on the reference point and a feature of the approximation circle. (See Pg. 6, ll. 14-18, “The non-noticeable states of motion have velocity vectors lying on a circle in the χ,y - plane with centre at x = V, y = 0”) and further see (See pg. 32, ll.15-27, “∑.# is then calculated as the product of velocity and acceleration assumptions in order to have all combinations of velocity and acceleration. The assumptions thus represent all conceivable combinations of velocity and accelerations for a moving target.” of Hellsten)
Li and Hellsten are analogous art as by both disclose a radar method that detects the positioning of a target object based on radar data.
It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of calculating velocity vectors as disclosed by Li to include an approximation circle based on endpoints as taught by Hellsten. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to identify and check the validity of radar points (See Pg 1, ll. [9-17] of Hellsten)
Regarding Claim 15, Li discloses the machine of claim 13, Li does not disclose the method below, but Hellsten teaches,
wherein calculating the velocity vector further comprises:
finding intersections between lines normal to endpoints of the velocity vectors as arranged at the reference point (Pg. 2, ll.13-15; Fig. 1a, “The two trajectories differ by a rigid rotation φ around a z-axis in the rest frame of the SAR platform being located at the origin 105.” of Hellsten) and further see (Pg. 2, ll.19-20; “A moving target being located at a true position 106 with polar coordinates” of Hellsten);
and calculating the velocity vector of the target object based on the intersections.
(See pg. 32, ll.15-27, “∑. # is then calculated as the product of velocity and acceleration assumptions in order to have all combinations of velocity and acceleration. The assumptions thus represent all conceivable combinations of velocity and accelerations for a moving target.” of Hellsten)
Li and Hellsten are analogous art as by both disclose a radar method that detects the positioning of a target object based on radar data.
It would have been obvious for someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the process of calculating velocity vectors as disclosed by Li to include an approximation circle based on endpoints as taught by Hellsten. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Li in order to identify and check the validity of radar points (See Pg 1, ll. [9-17] of Hellsten)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR OLEKANMA whose telephone number is 571-272-8978. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH between 7:00 AM and 3:00 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 this 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.
/V.I.O./Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights