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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 11, and 16 objected to because of the following informalities: “as represented in the frequency domain” in claim 1 line 17, claim 11 line 12, and claim 16 line 13, respectively. It appears that it should be “in the frequency domain representation” for consistency throughout the claims. Appropriate corrections are required.
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 3-6 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.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “to convert the first digital signal, the second digital signal, and the third digital signal to the frequency domain representation” in lines 7-8. It is indefinite because as mentioned in claim 1 lines 12-13 “convert the first digital signal and the second digital signal to a frequency domain representation”, 1) it is not clear whether or not the “to convert the first digital signal, the second digital signal, and the third digital signal to the frequency domain representation” in lines 7-8 is implemented for sum of “the first digital signal, the second digital signal, and the third digital signal”. 2) it is not clear whether or not the “to convert the first digital signal, the second digital signal” “to the frequency domain representation” in lines 7-8 is the same as the “convert the first digital signal and the second digital signal to a frequency domain representation” mentioned in claim 1 lines 12-13. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “to convert the third digital signal to the frequency domain representation”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claims 4-6 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 3 because each of dependent claims 4-6 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear claim 3.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “generate, based on the frequency domain representation, the first bearing estimate and a second bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources” in lines 2-4. It is indefinite because: 1) it is not clear whether or not the “a radio source of the plurality of radio sources” in lines 3-4 is the same as the “a radio source of the plurality of radio sources” mentioned in claim 1 line 15. 2) it is not clear whether or not “generate, based on the frequency domain representation, the first bearing estimate” “ for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources” in lines 2-4 is the same as “generate, based on the frequency domain representation, a first bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources” in claim 1 lines 14-15. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “generate, based on the frequency domain representation, a second bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claims 5-6 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 4 because each of dependent claims 5-6 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear claim 4.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the radio source” in line 2. It is indefinite because it is not clear which one of the “a radio source” mentioned in claim 1 line 15 and the “a radio source” mentioned in claim 3 line 3 “the radio source” in line 2 represents. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as the “a radio source” mentioned in claim 1 line 15. Appropriate clarification is required.
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, 3, 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams (US3,701,155, hereafter Adams) in view of Roper et al. (US 20190383619, hereafter Roper) and Park et al. (KR20110022874, hereafter Park).
Regarding claim 1, Adams (‘155) discloses that An automatic direction finder {title} comprising:
a first loop antenna { Fig.1 item 3; col.3 lines 19-20 (a pair of orthogonally related loop antennas 3 and 4 coupled)};
a second loop antenna { Fig.1 item 4; ; col.3 lines 19-20 (a pair of orthogonally related loop antennas 3 and 4 coupled)}; and
one or more processors coupled to the first loop antenna and the second loop antenna {Fig.1 items on right side of item 7 (e.g. items 10(R.F. AMP), 11 (mixer), 13 (I.F.AMP), etc.); col.3 lines 19-22 (a pair of orthogonally related loop antennas 3 and 4 coupled to orthogonally related fixed coils 5 and 6, respectively. The fixed coils 5 and 6 are inductively coupled to a movable rotor 7.)}, wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
receive a first signal from the first loop antenna and a second signal from the second loop antenna {Fig.1 items 7, 10; col.3 lines 18-20 (the RF signal from source 1 is received by goniometer 2 which includes a pair of orthogonally related loop antennas 3 and 4 coupled to orthogonally related fixed coils 5 and 6, respectively. The fixed coils 5 and 6 are inductively coupled to a movable rotor 7.), 32 (RF amplifier 10)};
However, Adams (‘155) does not explicitly disclose “sample the first signal and the second signal at a sampling rate high enough to capture an entire frequency range associated with a plurality of radio sources to generate a first digital signal and a second digital signal”, “convert the first digital signal and the second digital signal to a frequency domain representation”, and “generate, based on the frequency domain representation, a first bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources by comparing relative amplitudes and phases of the first digital signal and the second digital signal as represented in the frequency domain”. In the same field of endeavor, Roper (‘619) discloses that
sample the first signal and the second signal at a sampling rate high enough to capture an entire frequency range associated with a plurality of radio sources to generate a first digital signal and a second digital signal {[0102] lines 2-7 (digital converter ( ADC ) 1508 , a digital signal processor 1510 , a non - volatile memory ( NVM ) 1512, The amplified signals from the 3D antenna are input to the ADC where they are sampled at a rate which is at least greater than 2 times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing. The times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing); [0107] lines 7-8 (The sampling rate Fs is made greater than the Nyquist rate)};
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 Adams (‘155) with the teachings of Roper (‘619) {sample received signal at a sampling rate made greater than the Nyquist rate} to sample received signal at a sampling rate made greater than the Nyquist rate. Doing so would prevent signal aliasing in signal sampling so as to provide an accurate positioning system, as recognized by Roper (‘619) {[0004] line 1 (an accurate positioning system); [0102] lines 4-7 (The amplified signals from the 3D antenna are input to the ADC where they are sampled at a rate which is at least greater than 2 times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing. The times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing)}.
However, Roper (‘619) does not explicitly disclose “convert the first digital signal and the second digital signal to a frequency domain representation”, and “generate, based on the frequency domain representation, a first bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources by comparing relative amplitudes and phases of the first digital signal and the second digital signal as represented in the frequency domain”. In the same field of endeavor, Park (‘874) discloses that
convert the first digital signal and the second digital signal to a frequency domain representation { Fig.1 item 140 (FFT), 150 (direction finding unit); page 2 line 1 (a loop antenna may be used as the direction detection antenna)}; and
generate, based on the frequency domain representation, a first bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources by comparing relative amplitudes and phases of the first digital signal and the second digital signal as represented in the frequency domain { Fig.1 item 150 (direction finding unit); page 3 lines 4-5 (both an amplitude comparison direction detection method and a phase comparison direction detection method); page 4 lines 14-16 from bottom (the antenna 110 may be configured as a loop antenna or a dipole antenna composed of N dipoles. A loop antenna is preferable when directional detection is performed using an amplitude comparison method, and a dipole antenna is preferable when directional detection is performed using a phase comparison method); page 5 lines 10-12 (the direction detector 150 detects the direction of arrival of at least one narrowband signal by simultaneously performing a direction detection algorithm using the amplitude or phase extracted by the FFT performer.) ; page 7 line 8 (detecting a direction by comparing phases) }.
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 Adams (‘155) and Roper (‘619) with the teachings of Park (‘874) {use direction finding unit to detect the direction of arrival of at least one narrowband signal by simultaneously performing a direction detection algorithm using the amplitude or phase extracted by the FFT performer} to use direction finding unit to detect the direction of arrival of at least one narrowband signal by simultaneously performing a direction detection algorithm using the amplitude or phase extracted by the FFT performer. Doing so would perform a direction detection algorithm using the amplitude or phase extracted by FFT performer so as to detect a direction of a broadband signal using a limited number of antennas, as recognized by Park (‘874) {page 1 abstract lines 1-3 (for detecting a direction of a broadband signal are provided to simultaneously detect directions without respect to the number of narrowband signals even though a limited number of antennas are used.); page 5 lines 10-12 (the direction detector 150 detects the direction of arrival of at least one narrowband signal by simultaneously performing a direction detection algorithm using the amplitude or phase extracted by the FFT performer.)}.
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Adams (‘155) and Park (‘874) do not explicitly disclose “a third loop antenna, wherein the one or more processors are coupled to the third loop antenna, and wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a third signal from the third loop antenna; and sample the third signal at a sampling rate high enough to capture the entire frequency range to generate a third digital signal, wherein the one or more processors are configured to convert the first digital signal, the second digital signal, and the third digital signal to the frequency domain representation”. In the same field of endeavor, Roper (‘619) discloses that the automatic direction finder further comprising
a third loop antenna { Fig.15 item 1502},
wherein the one or more processors are coupled to the third loop antenna {Fig.15 items 1508 (ADC), 1510 (Digital Signal Processor)}, and
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive a third signal from the third loop antenna {Fig.15 items 1508 (ADC), 1510 (Digital Signal Processor); [0102] lines 1-2 (positioning receiver 102 comprises, ADC, 1508), 4-5 (The amplified signals from the 3D antenna are input to the ADC}; and
sample the third signal at a sampling rate high enough to capture the entire frequency range to generate a third digital signal { Fig.15 item 1508 (ADC); [0102] lines 2-7 (digital converter ( ADC ) 1508 , a digital signal processor 1510 , a non - volatile memory ( NVM ) 1512, amplified signals from the 3D antenna are input to the ADC where they are sampled at a rate which is at least greater than 2 times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing . The times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing); [0107] lines 7-8 (The sampling rate Fs is made greater than the Nyquist rate)},
wherein the one or more processors are configured to convert the first digital signal, the second digital signal, and the third digital signal to the frequency domain representation {[0088] lines 3 (Goertzel algorithm), 7 (Fast Fourier Transform ( FFT )); [0103] lines 1-3 (The sampled data is then sent to the digital signal processor 1510 which performs the functions of signal filtering , for example using a Goertzel filter)}.
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 Adams (‘155) and Park (‘874) with the teachings of Roper (‘619) {sample received signal at a sampling rate made greater than the Nyquist rate and process the sampled data in frequency domain (e.g. FFT)} to sample received signal at a sampling rate made greater than the Nyquist rate and process the sampled data in frequency domain (e.g. FFT). Doing so would prevent signal aliasing in signal sampling and perform the functions of signal filtering so as to provide an accurate positioning system, as recognized by Roper (‘619) {[0004] line 1 (an accurate positioning system); [0102] lines 4-7 (The amplified signals from the 3D antenna are input to the ADC where they are sampled at a rate which is at least greater than 2 times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing. The times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing); [0103] lines 1-3 (The sampled data is then sent to the digital signal processor 1510 which performs the functions of signal filtering , for example using a Goertzel filter)}.
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), and Park (‘874) discloses that the automatic direction finder further comprising
a sense antenna {see Adams (‘155) Fig.1 item 14 (sense antenna)}.
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Adams (‘155) does not explicitly disclose that “the automatic direction finder is an integrated unit”. In the same field of endeavor, Roper (‘619) discloses that in the automatic direction finder,
the automatic direction finder is an integrated unit {[0100] lines 10-12 (a complete 3 - D Rx antenna 504 may be implemented within a volume of approximately 1 cm^3, or even inside a single integrated circuit ( IC ) package); [0104] lines 1-3 from bottom (DSP, ASIC)}.
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 Adams (‘155) and Park (‘874) with the teachings of Roper (‘619) {sample received signal at a sampling rate made greater than the Nyquist rate, process the sampled data in frequency domain (e.g. FFT), and use integrated circuit in hardware} to sample received signal at a sampling rate made greater than the Nyquist rate, process the sampled data in frequency domain (e.g. FFT), and use integrated circuit in hardware. Doing so would prevent signal aliasing in signal sampling and perform the functions of signal filtering in a compact hardware so as to provide an accurate positioning system, as recognized by Roper (‘619) {[0004] line 1 (an accurate positioning system); [0081] lines 7-8 (be made small enough such that it may be integrated into the housing for antenna 312); [0098] lines 13-14 (the antenna dimensions are compact); [0102] lines 4-7 (The amplified signals from the 3D antenna are input to the ADC where they are sampled at a rate which is at least greater than 2 times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing. The times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing); [0103] lines 1-3 (The sampled data is then sent to the digital signal processor 1510 which performs the functions of signal filtering , for example using a Goertzel filter)}.
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claims 1 and 8, Adams (‘155) does not explicitly disclose that “the integrated unit is a system-on-chip”. In the same field of endeavor, Roper (‘619) discloses that in the automatic direction finder,
the integrated unit is a system-on-chip {[0100] lines 10-12 (a complete 3 - D Rx antenna 504 may be implemented within a volume of approximately 1 cm^3, or even inside a single integrated circuit ( IC ) package); [0104] lines 1-3 from bottom (DSP, ASIC); Examiner’s note: ASIC for “system-on-chip”}.
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 Adams (‘155) and Park (‘874) with the teachings of Roper (‘619) {sample received signal at a sampling rate made greater than the Nyquist rate, process the sampled data in frequency domain (e.g. FFT), and use integrated circuit in hardware} to sample received signal at a sampling rate made greater than the Nyquist rate, process the sampled data in frequency domain (e.g. FFT), and use integrated circuit in hardware. Doing so would prevent signal aliasing in signal sampling and perform the functions of signal filtering in a compact hardware so as to provide an accurate positioning system, as recognized by Roper (‘619) {[0004] line 1 (an accurate positioning system); [0081] lines 7-8 (be made small enough such that it may be integrated into the housing for antenna 312); [0098] lines 13-14 (the antenna dimensions are compact); [0102] lines 4-7 (The amplified signals from the 3D antenna are input to the ADC where they are sampled at a rate which is at least greater than 2 times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing. The times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing); [0103] lines 1-3 (The sampled data is then sent to the digital signal processor 1510 which performs the functions of signal filtering , for example using a Goertzel filter)}.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), and Park (‘874) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schantz (US 2004/0239562, hereafter Schantz).
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), and Park (‘874) do not explicitly disclose “the one or more processors are configured to simultaneously generate multiple bearing estimates to the plurality of radio sources in a parallel processing operation based on a single time domain sampling of each of the first loop antenna and the second loop antenna”. In the same field of endeavor, Schantz (‘562) discloses that in the automatic direction finder, the one or more processors are configured to
simultaneously generate multiple bearing estimates to the plurality of radio sources in a parallel processing operation based on a single time domain sampling of each of the first loop antenna and the second loop antenna { Fig.5 RSSI, + or -; [0062] lines 1-4 (a first receiver unit 60, a second receiver unit 62 and a processor unit 64.First receiver unit 60 is coupled with one antenna element 56, 58 and second receiver unit 62 is coupled with another antenna element 56, 58), 9-11 (amplitude or strength (e.g., RSSI; Signal orientation , upright [+] or inverted [-], information)}.
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 Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), and Park (‘874) with the teachings of Schantz (‘562) { simultaneously determine signal strength and orientation for each loop antenna} to simultaneously determine signal strength and orientation for each loop antenna. Doing so would extract the signal characteristics in each respective sector uniquely identifying the respective sector so as to provide a more compact and more reliable apparatus for effecting radio direction finding operations to ascertain angle of arrival of electromagnetic signals at an antenna, as recognized by Schantz (‘562) {[0008] lines 1-4 (a more compact and more reliable apparatus for effecting radio direction finding operations to ascertain angle of arrival of electromagnetic signals at an antenna.); [0009] lines 11-12 (the signal characteristics in each respective sector uniquely identifying the respective sector)}.
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), and Park (‘874) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Hipp et al. (US 4,207,572, hereafter Hipp).
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claims 1 and 3, Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), and Park (‘874) do not explicitly disclose “the one or more processors are further configured to generate, based on the frequency domain representation, the first bearing estimate and a second bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources”. In the same field of endeavor, Hipp (‘572) discloses that in the automatic direction finder, the one or more processors are further configured to
generate, based on the frequency domain representation, the first bearing estimate and a second bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources { Col.1 lines 38-39 (The output signals from the four spaced loop antennas are isolated and individually processed); Col.3 lines 12-15 (Equation (1) gives the spaced loop output voltage in phasor form
PNG
media_image1.png
22
365
media_image1.png
Greyscale
); col.4 lines 23-25 (Equation (8) has the form of a conventional Fourier series expression for the spaced loop antenna output voltage.); Col.5 lines 43-45 (calculate the Fourier coefficients, and the set of system equations given in Equation (7) are solved to provide the four ambiguous spaced loop bearings.); col.7 lines 22-25 (To obtain the azimuth angle of arrival for the received signal, an unambiguous estimate of target bearing must be obtained to select the correct bearing value from the four ambiguous values); col.8 lines 14-15 (two of the four spaced loop bearings calculated by Equations (13) and (14) may be identified), 43-44 (the unambiguous target bearing estimate can be calculated)}.
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 Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), and Park (‘874) with the teachings of Hipp (‘572) {calculate bearing estimate based on Fourier coefficients } to calculate bearing estimate based on Fourier coefficients. Doing so would provide accurate azimuth and elevation measurements on the incident signals so as to avoid degraded direction finding performance caused by sky wave signals having significant elevation angles with horizontally polarized electric field components, as recognized by Hipp (‘572) {col.1 lines 1 (Direction finding systems), 21-26 (their direction finding performance is degraded for sky wave signals having significant elevation angles with horizontally polarized electric field components, accurate azimuth and elevation measurements on the incident signals)}.
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claims 1 and 3-4, the combination of Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), Park (‘874), and Hipp (‘572) discloses that in the automatic direction finder, the one or more processors are further configured to
apply a fault detection operation to the first and second bearing estimates {see Adams (‘155) Abstract lines 1-2 from bottom (a calibrated card or ring to display the true bearing of the signal.)}.
Regarding claim 6, which depends on claims 1 and 3-4, the combination of Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), Park (‘874), and Hipp (‘572) discloses that in the automatic direction finder, the one or more processors are further configured to
generate an overall bearing estimate for the radio source, and
wherein the overall bearing estimate comprises an average of the first and second bearing estimates.
{see Adams (‘155) Fig.1 item 7 output to item 10; col.3 lines 19-22 (a pair of orthogonally related loop antennas 3 and 4 coupled to orthogonally related fixed coils 5 and 6, respectively. The fixed coils 5 and 6 are inductively coupled to a movable rotor 7.)}.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), and Park (‘874) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pidwerbetsky et al. (US 6,046,683, hereafter Pidwerbetsky).
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claim 1, Adams (‘155), Roper (‘619), and Park (‘874) do not explicitly disclose that “the frequency range is approximately 0.19–1.75 MHz”. In the same field of endeavor, Pidwerbetsky (‘683) discloses that in the automatic direction finder,
the frequency range is approximately 0.19–1.75 MHz { Col.7 lines 7-8 (the Subcarrier frequency fs could range from 32 kHz to 1 MHz)}.
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. subcarrier frequency fs range from 32 kHz to 1 MHz) to a known device (e.g. location system) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (e.g. operate the location system with subcarrier frequency in range from 32 kHz to 1 MHz) and result in an improved system (e.g. using inexpensive crystal to generate the subcarrier frequency, as recognized by Pidwerbetsky (‘683) {col.7 lines 22-23 (The RFID Tag (103) generates the frequency f, using an inexpensive crystal)} ).
Claims 11, 13, 16, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roper (‘619) in view of Park (‘874).
Regarding claim 11, Roper (‘619) discloses that A method {[0005] line 2 (positioning system and method)} comprising:
receiving a first signal from a first loop antenna and a second signal from a second loop antenna { Fig.15 item 1502 (3D Rx antenna); [0097] lines 4-5 (3D Rx antenna 504 comprises three separate loop antennas 1502 mounted orthogonally)};
sampling the first signal and the second signal at a sampling rate high enough to capture an entire frequency range associated with a plurality of radio sources to generate a first digital signal and a second digital signal {[0102] lines 2-7 (digital converter ( ADC ) 1508 , a digital signal processor 1510 , a non - volatile memory ( NVM ) 1512, The amplified signals from the 3D antenna are input to the ADC where they are sampled at a rate which is at least greater than 2 times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing. The times the highest signal frequency to prevent aliasing); [0107] lines 7-8 (The sampling rate Fs is made greater than the Nyquist rate)};
However, Roper (‘619) does not explicitly disclose “converting the first digital signal and the second digital signal to a frequency domain representation” and “generating, based on the frequency domain representation, a first bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources by comparing relative amplitudes and phases of the first digital signal and the second digital signal as represented in the frequency domain”. In the same field of endeavor, Park (‘874) discloses that
converting the first digital signal and the second digital signal to a frequency domain representation { Fig.1 item 140 (FFT), 150 (direction finding unit); page 2 line 1 (a loop antenna may be used as the direction detection antenna)}; and
generating, based on the frequency domain representation, a first bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources by comparing relative amplitudes and phases of the first digital signal and the second digital signal as represented in the frequency domain { Fig.1 item 150 (direction finding unit); page 3 lines 4-5 (both an amplitude comparison direction detection method and a phase comparison direction detection method); page 4 lines 14-16 from bottom (the antenna 110 may be configured as a loop antenna or a dipole antenna composed of N dipoles. A loop antenna is preferable when directional detection is performed using an amplitude comparison method, and a dipole antenna is preferable when directional detection is performed using a phase comparison method); page 5 lines 10-12 (the direction detector 150 detects the direction of arrival of at least one narrowband signal by simultaneously performing a direction detection algorithm using the amplitude or phase extracted by the FFT performer.) ; page 7 line 8 (detecting a direction by comparing phases) }.
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 Roper (‘619) with the teachings of Park (‘874) {use direction finding unit to detect the direction of arrival of at least one narrowband signal by simultaneously performing a direction detection algorithm using the amplitude or phase extracted by the FFT performer} to use direction finding unit to detect the direction of arrival of at least one narrowband signal by simultaneously performing a direction detection algorithm using the amplitude or phase extracted by the FFT performer. Doing so would perform a direction detection algorithm using the amplitude or phase extracted by FFT performer so as to detect a direction of a broadband signal using a limited number of antennas, as recognized by Park (‘874) {page 1 abstract lines 1-3 (for detecting a direction of a broadband signal are provided to simultaneously detect directions without respect to the number of narrowband signals even though a limited number of antennas are used.); page 5 lines 10-12 (the direction detector 150 detects the direction of arrival of at least one narrowband signal by simultaneously performing a direction detection algorithm using the amplitude or phase extracted by the FFT performer.)}.
Regarding claim 13, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 3. Accordingly, claim 13 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 3, shown above.
Regarding claim 16, as modified above, Roper (‘619) discloses that A non-transitory, computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors {Fig.1 item 106 (processor); Fig.15 items 1510 (Digital Signal Processor), 1512 (NVM), 1514 (RAM); [0101] lines 10-11 (non - volatile memory ( NVM ) 1512); [0124] lines 2-5 (formed computing devices having at least one processor configured to execute software instructions stored on a computer readable tangible , non - transitory medium .)} to:
receive a first signal from a first loop antenna and a second signal from a second loop antenna;
sample the first signal and the second signal at a sampling rate high enough to capture an entire frequency range associated with a plurality of radio sources to generate a first digital signal and a second digital signal;
convert the first digital signal and the second digital signal to a frequency domain representation; and
generate, based on the frequency domain representation, a first bearing estimate for a radio source of the plurality of radio sources by comparing relative amplitudes and phases of the first digital signal and the second digital signal as represented in the frequency domain.
{The claim limitations above are the same or substantially the same scope as the corresponding claim limitations in claim 11. Therefore the claim limitations above are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as in claim 11. See the rejections of claim 11}.
Regarding claim 18, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 3. Accordingly, claim 18 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 3, shown above.
Claims 12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roper (‘619) and Park (‘874) as applied to claims 11 and 16, respectively, above, and further in view of Schantz (‘562).
Regarding claim 12, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 2. Accordingly, claim 12 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 2, shown above.
Regarding claim 17, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 2. Accordingly, claim 17 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 2, shown above.
Claims 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roper (‘619) and Park (‘874) as applied to claims 13 and 18, respectively, above, and further in view of Hipp (‘572).
Regarding claim 14, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 4. Accordingly, claim 14 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 4, shown above.
Regarding claim 19, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 4. Accordingly, claim 19 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 4, shown above.
Claims 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roper (‘619), Park (‘874), and Hipp (‘572) as applied to claims 14 and 19, respectively, above, and further in view of Adam (‘155).
Regarding claim 15, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 6. Accordingly, claim 15 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 6, shown above.
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 Roper (‘619), Park (‘874), and Hipp (‘572) with the teachings of Adams (‘155) {generate average of bearing estimates from loop antennas} to generate average of bearing estimates from loop antennas. Doing so would co-operate with other components (e.g. magnetic component, gyrocompass) and visually display an overall results (e.g. using visual null indicating meter) so as to display the true bearing of the signal by moving a calibrated card or ring, as recognized by Adams (‘155) {Fig.1; abstract lines 1-2 from bottom (move a calibrated card or ring to display the true bearing of the signal.); col.2 lines 6-9 (the automatic compass differs from homing devices, since the latter indicates only whether one is heading along the bearing defined by the radio wave or is to the right or left of this bearing); col.3 lines 17 (magnetic component of the RF), 25-27 (rotor 7 and pointer 8 and gyrocompass repeater card 9 driven by gyrocompass repeater motor 9a); col.5 lines 11 (visual null indicating meter 36)}.
Regarding claim 20, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 15. Accordingly, claim 20 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 15, shown above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
EP 0161940 discloses that “a third loop antenna” { Fig.3 items 12}, “wherein the one or more processors are coupled to the third loop antenna” { Fig.3 item 12 connect to items 22, 27, 31, 34, 45 (microprocessor)}, “wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a third signal from the third loop antenna” { Fig.3 item 12 connect to items 22,; col.2 lines 19-20 (the Radio frequency Signals received from the antenna means); col.11 lines 9-11 (amplifier (20, 21,22) for amplifying the radio frequency signal from each loop antenna (10, 11, 12}; and “sample the third signal at a sampling rate high enough to capture the entire frequency range to generate a third digital signal” { Fig.3 item 34 (sample and hold integrators), 44 (ADC); col.5 lines 51-52 (sample and hold integrators 32, 3 and 34.); col.6 line 243 (analogue to digital converter 44}, which further support the rejection of claim 3.
US5,124,711 discloses that “generate an overall bearing estimate for the radio source, and wherein the overall bearing estimate comprises an average of the first and second bearing estimates” { Fig.2 summer }, which further support the rejection of claim 6.
US 20230204704 discloses that “the automatic direction finder is an integrated unit” {[0048] lines 4-9 ( types of hardware logic components that can be used include Field-programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), Program-specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Program-specific Standard Products (ASSPs), System-on-a-chip systems (SOCs), Complex Programmable Logic Devices (CPLDs), etc)}, which further support the rejection of claim 8.
US 20230204704 also discloses that “the integrated unit is a system-on-chip” {[0048] lines 4-9 ( types of hardware logic components that can be used include Field-programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), Program-specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Program-specific Standard Products (ASSPs), System-on-a-chip systems (SOCs), Complex Programmable Logic Devices (CPLDs), etc)}, which further support the rejection of claim 9.
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