DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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
Claim 6 has been canceled.
Claim 5 has been amended.
Claims 1-5 and 7-9 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
The claim elements do not invoke 35 U.S.C. § 112(f).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 7, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive with regards to the § 102 rejection of claims 1-4 and 7-9.
Applicant argues “Chiapetta fails to disclose or suggest "detect[ing] a first reflected wave of the transmitted wave … based on a first timing when an envelope detection signal … is lower than a first threshold value" as recited in Claim 1. Indeed, Chiapetta substantially teaches away from the claimed invention.” Examiner disagrees with this argument. The claim actually states the “reverberation period in which a reverberation of the transmitted wave remains, is lower than a first threshold value” and since the threshold values are set by Chiapetta to be above the ringdown (= reverberation), thus the ringdown (= reverberation) will be lower than the threshold values (¶ 0056, Fig. 5: 55).
Also note applicant defines “the start timing of the reverberation period is a timing at which outputting of the transmission signal from the transmission signal generation unit 161 ends, that is, an end timing of the sound wave transmission period”, which is identical to Chiapetta’s ringdown (= reverberation).
References
D1: US20030039171 Chiapetta 2003-02-27
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
Claims 1-4 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D1.
With regards to claim 1, the D1 reference discloses the utilization of a signal processing device capable of detecting echoes in the presence of ringdown (= reverberation) signals (¶ 0056), comprising: a transmission signal generation unit (14), configured to generate a transmission signal (12) for a transmitted wave of sound wave (801); a reception signal output unit (16), configured to output a received signal based on a received wave (802) of sound wave; and a reflected wave detection unit, wherein the reflected wave detection unit is configured to detect a first reflected wave (802) of the transmitted wave that may be included in the received wave (54) based on a first timing when an envelope detection (¶ 0042) signal, which is a signal obtained by envelope detection (¶ 0042) of an absolute value (Fig. 5: 50, 52, 53) of the received signal during a reverberation (= ¶ 0049: ring-down) period in which a reverberation of the transmitted wave remains, is lower (¶¶ 0027-0029, 0056) than the threshold values (Fig. 5: 55).
With regards to claim 2, the D1 reference discloses the utilization of a detection unit configured to detect the first timing is later than a reference timing (Fig. 5: tpulse).
With regards to claim 3, the D1 reference discloses the utilization of a plurality of set different threshold values (Fig. 5: 55, ¶ 0056).
With regards to claim 4, the D1 reference discloses the reflected wave detection unit is configured to detect the first reflected wave, and detect a second timing at which the envelope detection signal (FIG. 5: 54) exceeds a second threshold value (FIG. 5) as a timing (tTOF) related to a distance (¶ 0052) away from a target object when the envelope detection signal exceeds the second threshold value, wherein the envelope detection signal is obtained from envelope detection of the absolute value of the received signal when the reverberation period ends (FIG. 5: tTOF).
With regards to claim 7, the D1 reference discloses the reflected wave detection unit is configured to calculate a distance (¶ 0007) away from a target object based on the first reflected wave.
With regards to claim 8, the D1 reference discloses a sound wave transmitting/receiving device configured to be connected directly (Fig. 1) to the signal processing device.
With regards to claim 9, the D1 reference discloses a vehicle (¶ 0048: mobile platform).
Examiner Note
Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. However, any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. 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)). Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 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
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 Dan Pihulic whose telephone number is 571-272-6977. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Helal Algahaim, can be reached on 571-270-5227.
/Daniel Pihulic/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3645