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 .
Response to Amendment
The following is a final office action in response to the communication filed on 06/22/2026. Claim 1 has been amended. Claim 1 is currently pending and has been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and remarks filed on 06/22/2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s amendments overcome the 35 U.S.C. §112(b) rejection of the claim.
Applicant’s arguments provided for the 35 U.S.C. §103 rejections of claim 1 have been considered but are not persuasive.
(A) Applicant argues, “Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as allegedly being unpatentable over Whorf et al. (US-20220349989-A1; hereinafter Whorf) in view of Factor et al. (US-20140209678-A1; hereinafter Factor), further in view of the Department of Defense's interface standard MIL-STD-704F for Aircraft Electric Power Characteristics (referred to hereinafter as MIL-STD- 704F). Applicant respectfully traverses.
“Neither Whorf nor Factor, alone or in combination, teaches or suggests the claimed pulse accumulation architecture for determining target proximity relative to a high-speed flying device. Whorf generally relates to radar tracking and directional processing systems, while Factor relates to radar warning systems and threat indication techniques. However, neither reference discloses or suggests: (1) accumulating reflected pulse signals over multiple pulse cycles for determining entry of a target into a predefined target engagement zone; (2) generating warning indications based on accumulated pulse detection criteria; (3) coordinated operation between adaptive threshold comparison, pulse accumulation processing, and synchronized transmitter/receiver control; or (4) determining target proximity based on accumulated reflected pulse signals corresponding to operational conditions of a high-speed flying device,” (from remarks pages 3-4).
As to point (A), Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant asserts that the cited references alone or in combination do not teach four specific limitations from claim 1.
Regarding the first limitation cited above (“accumulating reflected pulse signals over multiple pulse cycles for determining entry of a target into a predefined target engagement zone”), Factor teaches pulse integration, a radar signal processing technique used to boost the Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) of weak echo signals by summing multiple consecutive pulses, in [0161], as cited in the previous office action. Regarding the “predefined target engagement zone”, it is noted that this feature is not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Regarding the second limitation cited above (“generating warning indications based on accumulated pulse detection criteria”), as explained in the previous office action, Factor provides “threat parameters” to a central computer after threat detection by the pulse doppler radar missile warning system, see Fig. 4A, blocks 401 and 402. Generated “threat parameters” are interpreted to be “warning indications” under broadest reasonable interpretation.
Regarding the third limitation cited above (“coordinated operation between adaptive threshold comparison, pulse accumulation processing, and synchronized transmitter/receiver control”), in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “coordinated operation between”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Regarding the fourth limitation cited above (“determining target proximity based on accumulated reflected pulse signals corresponding to operational conditions of a high-speed flying device”), each individual limitation of claim 1 has been mapped in the nonfinal rejection to the combination references of Whorf, Factor, and interface standard MIL-STD-704F. As this fourth limitation does not quote claim language directly, it is not understood which specific limitations or combination of limitations Applicant is asserting are not taught by the references.
(B) Applicant argues, “Applicant further submits that MIL-STD-704F merely specifies aircraft electrical power characteristics and does not disclose or suggest radar signal accumulation processing, target proximity determination, warning generation algorithms, or the claimed signal-processing architecture. The Office Action therefore relies on improper hindsight reconstruction using Applicant's disclosure as a roadmap to selectively combine unrelated teachings from multiple references,” (from remarks page 4).
As to point (B), Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant asserts that applying the MIL-STD-704F reference constitutes improper hindsight because these electrical specifications do not discuss subjects related to using radar to detect flying devices. The invention of primary reference Whorf is taught to be applicable to “a munition flying ballistic at supersonic speeds” in [0079] and taught to have electronics in at least Fig. 5. Because militaries use munitions flying at supersonic speeds, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to make such a munition as taught by Whorf according to a military interface standard for aircraft electric power characteristics, such as the standard taught in MIL-STD-704F.
(C) Applicant argues, “Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that the amended claims are definite, novel, and non-obvious over the cited references, and respectfully requests withdrawal of the rejections,” (from remarks page 4).
As to point (C), see points (A) and (B).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 17 recites “a receiving antennas”. The article ‘a’ is singular and does not agree with the plural noun “antennas”.
Lines 21-24 recite “the communication block providing a transmission channel…”. These lines mark a departure from the previous items in claim 1, which all list hardware that the claimed flying devices comprise. To mark this distinction, Examiner suggests changing lines 21-24 to read “wherein the communication block provides a transmission channel…and also receives pulse signal indications…”
Appropriate correction 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.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whorf et al. (US-20220349989-A1; hereinafter Whorf) in view of Factor et al. (US-20140209678-A1; hereinafter Factor), further in view of the Department of Defense’s interface standard MIL-STD-704F for Aircraft Electric Power Characteristics (referred to hereinafter as MIL-STD-704F).
Regarding claim 1, Whorf discloses [Note: what Whorf fails to disclose is strike-through]
A (see at least [0070]; “A direction finding (DF) processor 520 may function to combine each of the individual signals and communicate the combined signal to a vehicle controller 522.”) for determining a target proximity (see at least [0052]; “Referring now to FIG. 3, a diagram of an element coordinate separation 300 exemplary of an embodiment of the inventive concepts disclosed herein is shown. Each individual element 122-128 may be slightly offset from another to reduce the direction of arrival ambiguity estimated from the relative phase of the received signal at each element. These precise signals may enable an overall capability of the WBDF aperture 120 to achieve high certainty of target location.”) for use in supersonic and hypersonic flying devices (see at least [0079]; “The WBDF aperture 120 may be directly applicable to a small UAV flight slow and level at a constant altitude, or a munition flying ballistic at supersonic speeds, or anything in between, as well as many other options.”), comprising:
a digital processing block (see at least Fig. 5, direction finding processor 520) that receives demodulated signals after wave separation from a receiver (see at least [0070]; “In embodiments, the system 500 may include a down conversion, digitization and feature extraction 512-518 via a down converter individually coupled with each of the individual antenna elements 122-128.”), accumulates the demodulated signals, and generates (see at least [0070]; “A direction finding (DF) processor 520 may function to combine each of the individual signals and communicate the combined signal to a vehicle controller 522.”), and also receives control commands from the communication block and generates synchronized pulses to control the entire operation (see at least [0070]; “The vehicle controller 522 may operatively couple with each of the elements of the planar array and a vehicle function 524.” Fig. 5 shows that communication between the vehicle controller 522 and the planar array 122-128 passes through the DF processing 520.) of the receiver and a transmitter (see at least [0046]; “In some embodiments, the antenna element 122 may include an aperture 136 associated with the elongated dielectric feed to provide transmission and reception of radar energy.”);
a high-frequency transceiver block (see at least Fig. 5, digitization and feature extraction blocks 512-518) that comprises signal generation and reception circuits, envelope wave separation circuits (see at least [0046]; “In some embodiments, the antenna element 122 may include an aperture 136 associated with the elongated dielectric feed to provide transmission and reception of radar energy.” See also [0070]; “In embodiments, the system 500 may include a down conversion, digitization and feature extraction 512-518 via a down converter individually coupled with each of the individual antenna elements 122-128.”), (see at least [0046]; “The antenna element 122 may include a cover 134 and couple to the aerial vehicle 130 via a cable connection 132. In some embodiments, the antenna element 122 may include an aperture 136 associated with the elongated dielectric feed to provide transmission and reception of radar energy.”), while the received signal is wave-separated (see at least [0070]; “In embodiments, the system 500 may include a down conversion, digitization and feature extraction 512-518 via a down converter individually coupled with each of the individual antenna elements 122-128.”) (see at least [0052]; “These precise signals may enable an overall capability of the WBDF aperture 120 to achieve high certainty of target location.”) within a coverage area (see at least [0051]; “In one embodiment of the inventive concepts disclosed herein, the WBDF aperture 120 may be configured for a forward field-of-view with an azimuth potential 222 of within approximately +/−180 degrees of the forward y axis 162 and an elevation potential 220 of approximately +/−90 degrees of the down z axis 166.”);
an antenna block (see at least Fig. 1, antennas 122-138) that radiates high-frequency signals into space and receives them back (see at least [0046]; “The antenna element 122 may include a cover 134 and couple to the aerial vehicle 130 via a cable connection 132. In some embodiments, the antenna element 122 may include an aperture 136 associated with the elongated dielectric feed to provide transmission and reception of radar energy.”), comprising a set of the transmitting antenna and receiving antennas, said antennas independent of one another (see at least [0046]; “Each individual antenna element may be individually powered and configured to operatively couple with the aerial vehicle via a cable.”), with directional patterns and arrangements on a given one of the flying devices to observe an entire forward space along a direction of movement (see at least [0051]; “In one embodiment of the inventive concepts disclosed herein, the WBDF aperture 120 may be configured for a forward field-of-view with an azimuth potential 222 of within approximately +/−180 degrees of the forward y axis 162 and an elevation potential 220 of approximately +/−90 degrees of the down z axis 166. In some embodiments, the elevation potential 220 may be substantially greater than the indicated 180 degrees depending on aerial vehicle structure, vehicle size, and available radar penetration of the vehicle structure.”); and
the communication block (see at least Fig. 5, vehicle controller 522) providing a transmission channel for control information from the flying device to the digital processing block (see at least [0070]; “A direction finding (DF) processor 520 may function to combine each of the individual signals and communicate the combined signal to a vehicle controller 522. The vehicle controller 522 may operatively couple with each of the elements of the planar array and a vehicle function 524.”)
However, Whorf does not explicitly teach:
Generating target proximity warning signals;
Comparison and alerting circuits;
Transmitting single pulses;
Comparing the received signal against an adaptive threshold;
A power supply block responsible for voltage transformation suitable for each of a signal circuit, ensuring isolation from other signals and complying with military and aviation standards; and
Receiving by the communication block pulse signal indications from the digital processing block when an algorithm determines that the target has entered the influence zone.
Whorf discloses a sideband direction finding aperture that provides target tracking, and Factor is directed to a system and device for protecting aircrafts against incoming threats that also incorporates target tracking. Factor teaches:
A pulse signal accumulation system (see at least Fig. 1, aircraft protection system 100; see also [0161]; “In some embodiments, the pulse Doppler radar MWS may provide parameters related to the transmitter waveform, such as Tx frequency, waveform pulse-wave (PW), pulse repetition rate (PRR), pulse repetition frequency (PRF), pulse repetition interval (PRI) or inter-pulse period (IPP), modulation of the above, number of pulses per each integration cycle, coherent and non-coherent integration parameters, threshold levels, and/or other parameters that may be used for implementing low-band confirmation functionality inside or together with the MWS sensor.”) for determining a target proximity (see at least [0009]; “The MACS-D-LB system may perform the following operations: verify that a threat exists (e.g., verify that the suspected threat is not a false alarm); measure or estimate the threat characteristics (e.g., distance of the threat from the aircraft, velocity of the incoming threat, or the like); track the threat (e.g., by two stages, first Low-Band and then Ka-Band RF tracking); point an integral (e.g., Laser) IR counter-measure accurately on the threat or towards the threat; counter the incoming threat by means of the IR counter-measure (e.g., Jamming).”) for use in flying devices (see at least [0007]; “The present invention may include, for example, systems, devices, and methods for protecting aircrafts against incoming threats.”), comprising:
a digital processing block (see at least Fig. 1, DSP module 107) that receives demodulated signals after wave separation from a receiver (see at least Fig. 3, demodulation occurs at 319 and the signal is sent to the FPGA 301. The FPGA sends signals to the DSP, see [0118]; “FPGA 301 may perform part of the signal processing algorithms for confirmation, as well as fine and precise tracking of the threat; and may provide digital outputs (for example, to DSP module 107 of FIG. 1).”), accumulates the demodulated signals (see at least [0161]; “coherent and non-coherent integration parameters”), and generates target proximity warning signals to a communication block (see at least Fig. 4A, block 401 “Threat initial detection by pulse doppler radar missile warning system” and block 402 “Provision of threat parameters and rough (sector) angular position to central computer”.), and also generates pulses to control the operation (see at least [0101]; “DSP module 107 may comprise a digital signal processor or other suitable processor or controller which may perform, for example, processing of the data generated from both low and high frequency bands of the Dual RF Frequency Band Unified RVS with DIRCM, pre-triggering of the countermeasure functionality of the unified RVS, calculation of threat fine angular position out of low frequency band data for activation of the high frequency band functionality, and/or calculation of threat precise angular position for activation of the DIRCM functionality and controlling the elevation motor 104 and azimuth motor 105.”) of the receiver and a transmitter (see at least [0108]; “FIG. 3 may demonstrate architecture of the Dual RF Frequency Band unified RVS with DIRCM that comprises an implementation of a high and low frequency transmitter and receiver with array beam forming, high frequency receiver and low frequency receiver that may utilize a dual axis sigma/delta architecture; other suitable architectures or components may be used.”);
a high-frequency transceiver block (see at least Fig. 1, RF Module 101) that comprises signal generation and reception circuits (see at least the circuit diagram of Fig. 3), envelope wave separation circuits (see at least [0114]; “Antenna high frequency interfaces 311 may further be used for receiving the high frequency RF Rx signals (e.g., from high and low frequency antennas 325) that may then pass through circulators or switches 310, may be amplified using Low Noise Amplifiers (LNAs) 313, may be filtered using BPFs 314, and may be down-converted to the IF2 frequency using mixers 315 and RF source 306.”), comparison and alerting circuits (see at least [0077]; “In some embodiments, the calculation of fine and precise angular position of the incoming threat using the tracking and confirmation functionality and both frequency bands of Dual RF Frequency Band unified RVS with DIRCM may be performed by methods such as, for example, dual axis sigma/delta calculation or mono-pulse tracking, amplitude comparison, phase comparison, and/or other suitable methods.” See also [0118]; “FPGA 301 may perform part of the signal processing algorithms for confirmation, as well as fine and precise tracking of the threat; and may provide digital outputs (for example, to DSP module 107 of FIG. 1).”), a high-frequency signal is transmitted as single pulses through a transmitting antenna (see at least [0016]; “In some demonstrative embodiments of the present invention, the system comprises: a pulse Doppler radar Missile Warning System (MWS) comprising a waveform transmitter; wherein the dual-band RF track-and-confirm module is a passive receiving module that avoids transmitting of waveforms, and that receives a return of the waveform transmitted by said waveform transmitter of said pulse Doppler radar MWS.” See also Fig. 3, antennas 325), while the received signal is wave-separated (see again [0114]) and compared against an adaptive threshold (see at least [0161]; “In some embodiments, the pulse Doppler radar MWS may provide parameters related to the transmitter waveform, such as Tx frequency, waveform pulse-wave (PW), pulse repetition rate (PRR), pulse repetition frequency (PRF), pulse repetition interval (PRI) or inter-pulse period (IPP), modulation of the above, number of pulses per each integration cycle, coherent and non-coherent integration parameters, threshold levels, and/or other parameters that may be used for implementing low-band confirmation functionality inside or together with the MWS sensor.”) for target detection (see at least [0010]; “In accordance with the present invention, by utilizing a specific antenna design on the MACS-D-LB system, as well as dedicated RF signal processing, the MACS-D-LB system may perform the following: an active Low-Band MWS performs detection (by using Low-Band signals); the active pulse Doppler MWS declares the threat, or provides pre-alarm of the threat; the active pulse Doppler MWS provides threat-related data (e.g., antenna, antenna sector, real-time radar parameters) to the central computer via an interface…’) within a coverage area (see at least [0151]; “Each antenna covers a sector of approximately 60 to 90 degrees, in Azimuth and Elevation planes. For example, there may be 4 to 6 antennas used in the pulse Doppler radar MWS, and each antenna may be installed in (or mounted on) a different area or section of the aircraft. There may be a small overlap between the coverage of the multiple antennas, for example, in the Azimuth plane. The antennas may be installed over the Azimuth plane of the aircraft, and thus it may be possible to extract a better Azimuth angular location or direction of the threat (e.g., rather than an Elevation angular location or direction of the threat).”);
a power supply block (see at least Fig. 1, power supply 106);
an antenna block (see at least Fig. 1, low band and high band antennas 102) that radiates high-frequency signals into space and receives them back (see at least), comprising a set of the transmitting antenna and receiving antennas (see at least [0151]; “The signal may be transmitted by the pulse Doppler radar MWS, may be echoed back from the threat, and may be received by the same antenna and transmitted back to the LRU for signal processing.”); and
the communication block (see at least Fig. 1, interface 110, and [0100]; “Mechanical chassis 108 may comprise one or more external electrical connectors that may be used as connection to interface 110 with the A/C, pulse Doppler radar MWS and the central computer.”) providing a transmission channel for control information from the flying device to the digital processing block (see at least [0122]; “After extraction of threat parameters (block 402), the threat data and navigation data may be provided (block 403) to the Dual RF Frequency Band Unified RVS with DIRCM. The threat data may include the prioritized data by the optional central computer (block 405).”) and also receiving pulse signal indications from the digital processing block when an algorithm determines that the target has entered an influence zone (see at least Fig. 4A, step 402: “Provision of threat parameters and rough (sector) angular position to central computer”).
Both Whorf and Factor are directed to using radar on an aircraft to find a precise angular location of a target. Whorf does not teach details for the underlying circuitry or transmitted signals. 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 radar system used in Whorf to include the signal generation circuits, comparison and alerting circuits, the transmission of pulses, the comparison of received signals to a threshold and the use of a power supply block as taught by Factor. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include these elements as they represent known techniques in the radar art, to which one of ordinary skill would turn to fill in the details on which Whorf is silent. Use of Factor’s techniques would have a reasonable expectation of success due to both Whorf and Factor using radar on and airborne vehicle with the purpose of finding a precise angular location of a target. Furthermore, incorporating into Whorf the teachings of Factor on generating target proximity warning signals and sending indications when the target is detected into the would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in order to communicate the results of radar detection. Doing so also gives the possibility of receiving feedback and prioritization, as taught by Factor (see Factor at least Fig. 4A, blocks 402 and 405).
However, neither Whorf nor Factor explicitly teach a power supply block responsible for voltage transformation suitable for each of a signal circuit, ensuring isolation from other signals and complying with military and aviation standards.
MIL-STD-704F teaches a power supply block responsible for voltage transformation suitable for each of a signal circuit, ensuring isolation from other signals and complying with military and aviation standards (see at least page 9, section 5.4.5; “Equipment having multiple input terminals for connection to more than one power source shall isolate the inputs from each other so that one power source cannot supply power to another. AC inputs shall not be paralleled. DC inputs shall be protected with blocking diodes if they are paralleled.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the Department of Defense’s interface standard in the electrical systems of Whorf because the invention of Whorf is directed towards military applications such as missiles and unmanned aircraft systems (see Whorf at least [0003]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US-3792471-A discloses a radar tracking system for use on supersonic airplanes or missiles.
US-20210404783-A1 discloses a radar warning system on supersonic aircraft.
US-20120002049-A1 discloses a radar transmitter and receiver mounted in a supersonic missile.
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 Ashley B. Raynal whose telephone number is (703)756-4546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 AM - 4 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, 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.
/ASHLEY BROWN RAYNAL/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/OLUMIDE AJIBADE AKONAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights