DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed April 29, 2026 has been entered.
Claim 1-4, 6, 9-10, 12-14, and 16 are amended.
Claims 1-16 are pending this application.
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 1-4, 6, 8, and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2020/0408892 A1) in view of Peele et al (US 5,990,823 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Choi teaches a method for processing radar signals, the method comprising [0071 for antenna with a radar sensor]:
receiving a plurality of radio waves reflected from at least one object and received by an antenna array [0072, and 0074];
processing each of the plurality of reflected radio waves to determine a range from the antenna array to the at least one object and an angle of incidence of the plurality of reflected radio waves [0083-0086 for using the beat frequency and range determination with beat frequency];
adjusting a frequency of each of the plurality of processed radio waves based on a motion of the antenna array [0070-0075 for using steering vectors with DOA (angle), 0090-0096]
Choi fails to explicitly teach and filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchical filter bank including a plurality of filters to receive a plurality of output images representing the motion of the object.
Peele has apparatus for developing high range resolution radar target profiles (abstract) and teaches and filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchical filter bank including a plurality of filters to receive a plurality of output images representing the motion of the object [col 1, lines 35-50 for waveforms are decoded using an inverse wavelet transform process and claim 5 for Subset of coefficients corresponding to a coarse Scene profile and then finer].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the wavelet calculations as taught by Peele for the purpose to reduced computational complexity (Peele, col 1, lines 40-50).
Regarding Claim 2, Choi teaches the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves is filtered to identify a plurality of adjusted processed radio waves associated with one or more detected objects [0055-0057, 0113 for using CFAR].
Choi fails to explicitly teach and filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a hierarchical filter bank includes filtering the identified plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through the hierarchical filter bank.
Peele has apparatus for developing high range resolution radar target profiles (abstract) and teaches and filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchical filter bank includes filtering the identified plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through the cascading hierarchical filter bank [col 1, lines 35-50 for waveforms are decoded using an inverse wavelet transform process and claim 5 for Subset of coefficients corresponding to a coarse Scene profile and then finer].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the wavelet calculations as taught by Peele for the purpose to reduced computational complexity (Peele, col 1, lines 40-50).
Regarding Claim 3, Choi fails to explicitly teach filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchical filter bank includes passing the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchy of band-pass filters of decreasing frequency and decreasing bandwidth.
Peele has apparatus for developing high range resolution radar target profiles (abstract) and teaches filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchical filter bank includes passing the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchy of band-pass filters of decreasing frequency and decreasing bandwidth [col 3, lines 35-50 for second-order Daubechies wavelet transform matrix and claim 5 for Subset of coefficients corresponding to a coarse Scene profile and then finer].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the wavelet calculations as taught by Peele for the purpose to reduced computational complexity (Peele, col 1, lines 40-50).
Regarding Claim 4 Choi fails to explicitly teach filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchical filter bank includes applying a discrete wavelet transform to each of the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves.
Peele has apparatus for developing high range resolution radar target profiles (abstract) and teaches filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a hierarchical filter bank includes applying a discrete wavelet transform to each of the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves [col 3, lines 35-50].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the wavelet calculations as taught by Peele for the purpose to produce HRR target profiles (Peele, col 3, lines 25-35).
Regarding Claim 6 and 12, Choi fails to explicitly teach the cascading hierarchical filter bank is applied to the adjusted processed radio waves for a temporal portion of the adjusted processed radio wave.
Peele has apparatus for developing high range resolution radar target profiles (abstract) and teaches the cascading hierarchical filter bank is applied to the adjusted processed radio waves for a temporal portion of the adjusted processed radio wave [claim 5 for Subset of coefficients corresponding to a coarse Scene profile and then finer and claim 8 for adjusting a duration of phase states in the finite-duration pulses].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the wavelet calculations as taught by Peele for the purpose to reduced computational complexity (Peele, col 1, lines 40-50).
Regarding Claim 8, Choi teaches adjusting each of the plurality of reflected radio waves based on the angle of incidence includes [0061-0064 for angle or radar signals and 0092 for decomposing samples].
Choi fails to explicitly teach decorrelating transmitters of the antenna array to derive a representation of a virtual array of the antenna array, and applying a second Fourier transform to each of the processed radio waves.
Peele has apparatus for developing high range resolution radar target profiles (abstract) and teaches the cascading hierarchical filter bank is applied to the adjusted processed radio waves for a temporal portion of the adjusted processed radio wave [claim 5 for Subset of coefficients corresponding to a coarse Scene profile and then finer and claim 8 for adjusting a duration of phase states in the finite-duration pulses].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the wavelet calculations as taught by Peele for the purpose to reduced computational complexity (Peele, col 1, lines 40-50).
Regarding Claim 13, Choi teaches applying the cascading hierarchical filter bank to one of the adjusted reflected radio waves and storing a corresponding output image as a data array [0115-00117],
and applying the cascading hierarchical filter bank to a subsequent adjusted reflected radio wave and adding the corresponding output image to the data array [0016-0017 for creating radar images using intensity and probabilities (filtering means)].
Regarding Claim 14, Choi teaches an electronic control unit comprising: [0058 for having functions performed by and ECU such as cruise control and autonomous braking]
a processor configured to carry out operations including [0058-0059]:
receiving a plurality of radio waves reflected from at least one object and received by an antenna array [0072, and 0074];
processing each of the plurality of reflected radio waves to determine a range from the antenna array to the at least one object and an angle of incidence of the plurality reflected radio waves [0083-0086 for using the beat frequency and range determination with beat frequency];
adjusting each of the plurality of processed radio waves based on a motion of the antenna array [0070-0075 for using steering vectors with DOA (angle), 0090-0096].
Choi fails to explicitly teach and filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchical filter bank comprising a plurality of filters to receive a plurality of output images representing the motion of the object.
Peele has apparatus for developing high range resolution radar target profiles (abstract) and teaches and filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchical filter bank including a plurality of filters to receive a plurality of output images representing the motion of the object [col 1, lines 35-50 for waveforms are decoded using an inverse wavelet transform process and claim 5 for Subset of coefficients corresponding to a coarse Scene profile and then finer].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the wavelet calculations as taught by Peele for the purpose to reduced computational complexity (Peele, col 1, lines 40-50).
Regarding Claim 15, Choi teaches a vehicle comprising: the electronic control unit [0058 for having functions performed by and ECU such as cruise control and autonomous braking].
Regarding Claim 16, Choi teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions including [0058-0059]:
receiving a plurality of radio waves reflected from at least one object and received by an antenna array [0072, and 0074];
processing each of the plurality of reflected radio waves to determine a range from the antenna array to the at least one object and an angle of incidence of the plurality of reflected radio waves [0083-0086 for using the beat frequency and range determination with beat frequency];
adjusting each of the plurality of processed radio waves based on a motion of the antenna array [0070-0075 for using steering vectors with DOA (angle), 0090-0096];
Choi fails to explicitly teach and filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchical filter bank comprising a plurality of filters to receive a plurality of output images representing the motion of the object.
Peele has apparatus for developing high range resolution radar target profiles (abstract) and teaches and filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves through a cascading hierarchical filter bank including a plurality of filters to receive a plurality of output images representing the motion of the object [col 1, lines 35-50 for waveforms are decoded using an inverse wavelet transform process and claim 5 for Subset of coefficients corresponding to a coarse Scene profile and then finer].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the wavelet calculations as taught by Peele for the purpose to reduced computational complexity (Peele, col 1, lines 40-50).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2020/0408892 A1) in view of Peele et al (US 5,990,823 A), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bomberg et al (Georgia Tech, 2019).
Regarding Claim 5, Choi fails to explicitly teach the discrete wavelet transform is applied using a Haar wavelet.
Bomberg has a Haar wavelet filterbank (page 126, first paragraph) and teaches discrete wavelet transform is applied using a Haar wavelet (page 126, first and second paragraphs).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the wavelet calculations as taught by Peele for the purpose to use scaling coefficients to down sample the wavelet coefficients (Bomberg, page 1, second paragraph).
Claims 7 and 9-11, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2020/0408892 A1) in view of Peele et al (US 5,990,823 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mohamed et al (US 9,194,947 Bl).
Regarding Claim 7, Choi fails to explicitly teach processing each of the plurality of reflected radio waves to determine a range value includes applying a Fourier transform to the reflected radio waves.
Mohamed has a radar receiver includes a bank of matched filters for use in processing return signals received from a remote target (abstract) and teaches processing each of the plurality of reflected radio waves to determine a range value includes applying a Fourier transform to the reflected radio waves [col 1, lines 45-62 with col 6, lines 1-20 for Fourier transform].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the filtering calculations as taught by Mohamed for the purpose to detect target returns either adaptive or non-adaptive (Mohamed, col 1, lines 55-65).
Regarding Claim 9, Choi teaches each of the images includes the output of a filter of the cascading hierarchical filter bank, and each filter of the cascading hierarchical filter bank corresponds to a particular interval of doppler values.
Mohamed has a radar receiver includes a bank of matched filters for use in processing return signals received from a remote target (abstract) and teaches ach of the images includes the output of a filter of the cascading hierarchical filter bank, and each filter of the cascading hierarchical filter bank corresponds to a particular interval of doppler values [col 4, lines 1-25].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the filtering calculations as taught by Mohamed for the purpose to derives information about remote moving objects. (Mohamed, col 4, lines 1-25).
Regarding Claim 10, Choi teaches determining a velocity of the object by determining which of the filter outputs yields a highest response value for a particular time window of each of the plurality of adjusted processed radio wave [0141-0142].
Regarding Claim 11 Choi fails to explicitly teach reconstructing at least a portion of the processed adjusted radio waves from one or more determined filter outputs and performing a frequency analysis on the reconstructed processed adjusted radio waves.
Peele has apparatus for developing high range resolution radar target profiles (abstract) and teaches reconstructing at least a portion of the processed adjusted radio waves from one or more determined filter outputs and performing a frequency analysis on the reconstructed processed adjusted radio waves [col 4, lines 25-55].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the radar data techniques, as disclosed by Choi, further including the wavelet calculations as taught by Peele for the purpose to produce HRR target profiles (Peele, col 3, lines 25-35).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In applicant’s arguments page 7, first paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Choi uses classical radar processing and does not teach the applicant’s method. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Choi teaches the radar data processing device decreases locally a radar data processing resolving power by focusing on the predicted ROI [Choi, 0120], using sequential angular, range and Doppler filter adjustments, a multi-level filtering structure that preserves the overall resolving power directly paralleling the claimed filter bank.
In applicant’s arguments page 7, second paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Mohamad uses classical radar processing and does not teach the applicant’s method. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Mohamed teaches a matched filter bank [Mohamad, figure 3, and col 6, lines 1-18], processes that return signals through multiple Doppler tuned filters simultaneously, retaining filter outputs as discrete amplitude data arrays, similar to the current claims.
In applicant’s arguments page 7, fourth paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that neither applied reference teaches the cascading hierarchical filter. The examiner appreciates the applicant’s amendments for clarity to the claims, new reference Peele addressing the cascading hierarchical filer [Peele, col 1, lines 35-50 for waveforms are decoded using an inverse wavelet transform process and claim 5 for Subset of coefficients corresponding to a coarse Scene profile and then finer].
In applicant’s arguments page 8, fourth paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Choi is silent on adjusting the frequency of each of the plurality of processed radio waves based on the motion of the antenna. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Choi teaches local resolving power of the Doppler velocity information based on an ROI predicted based on the radar image map [Choi, 0141] therefore adjusting frequency content of processed radar returns based on predicted motion.
In applicant’s arguments page 9, second paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Mohamed does not teach the filtering the plurality of adjusted processed radio waves with a cascading filter. The examiner appreciates the applicant’s amendments for clarity to the claims, new reference Peele addressing the cascading hierarchical filer [Peele, col 1, lines 35-50 for waveforms are decoded using an inverse wavelet transform process and claim 5 for Subset of coefficients corresponding to a coarse Scene profile and then finer].
In applicant’s arguments page 9, third paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that the temporal resolution would be lost if Mohamed and Choi were combined. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Choi teaches thus a processing time used to process radar data may not increase [Choi, 0109] because only local resolving power is adjusted combined with Mohamed’s retention of all matched filter outputs as discrete amplitude data arrays across sequential pulses [Mohamed, col 10, lines 1-15], collectively teaches maintain full temporal resolution of the processed radar signals.
The examiner acknowledges that this is a broader interpretation than Applicant’s. However, examiners are not only allowed to apply broad interpretations, but are required to do so, as it reduces the possibility that the claims, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified. MPEP §2111. Patentability is determined by the “broadest reasonable interpretation
consistent with the specification” (MPEP §2111), not the narrowest reasonable interpretation. And Applicant does not have an explicit lexicographical statement in line with MPEP §2111.01
subsection IV requiring a specific interpretation of the relevant phrases which forces the examiner to interpret them only one way.
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
For applicant’s benefit, portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, including disclosures that teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
“The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain.” In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including non-preferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v.Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005) See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMARINA MAKHDOOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Thursdays from 8:30 to 5:30 pm eastern time.
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, William Kelleher can be reached on 571-272-7753 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.
/SAMARINA MAKHDOOM/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights