DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1—20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/03/2024 has been considered by the examiner and an initialed copy of the IDS is hereby attached.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Elements 408 and 410 from Figure 4A are not mentioned in the Specifications.
Paragraph [0047] mentions “transmitter 404” and “receiver 406” which are not labelled in Figure 4A. The transmitter and receiver labels in Figure 4A are 408 and 410, respectively.
Figure 9 and element 900 are not mentioned in the Specifications.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because of the following informalities:
Figure 2B has a typographical error in the title “‘() bi-static transceiver”, which should recite as “(b) bi-static transceiver”.
Figure 4A, element 402 has a typographical error “h_NLoS”, which should recite as “h_LoS”
Figure 8 has a typographical error in the title “(b) Micro-doppler Plot ….”, which should recite as “Micro-doppler Plot …” as Figure 8 has no (a) and (b) figures.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 14, 18, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 14 (line 16) recites “detecting object or movement”, which should recite “detecting the object or movement”.
Claim 18 (line 2) recites “extract plurality of channel impulse responses (CIRs)”, which should recite “extract the plurality of channel impulse responses (CIRs)”.
Claim 18 (line 4) recites “provide sequence of synchronized CIRs”, which should recite “provide the sequence of synchronized CIRs”.
Claim 18 (line 5) recites “detect object or movement”, which should recite “detect the object or movement”.
Claim 18 (line 6) recites “actuate alert”, which should recite “actuate the alert”.
Claim 18 (line 6) recites “corresponding to prediction or perform task”, which should recite “corresponding to the prediction or perform the task”.
Claim 20 (line 2) recites “extract plurality of channel impulse responses (CIRs)”, which should recite “extract the plurality of channel impulse responses (CIRs)”.
Claim 20 (line 4) recites “provide sequence of synchronized CIRs”, which should recite “provide the sequence of synchronized CIRs”.
Claim 20 (line 5) recites “detect object or movement”, which should recite “detect the object or movement”.
Claim 20 (line 6) recites “actuate an alert”, which should recite “actuate the alert”.
Claim 20 (line 6) recites “corresponding to prediction or perform task”, which should recite “corresponding to the prediction or perform the task”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sheikh et al. (US 2024/0280680), hereinafter Sheikh.
Regarding claim 12, Sheikh discloses,
A method of synchronizing a plurality of ultra-wideband (UWB) nodes for radar-like functionality, the method comprising:
upsampling each channel impulse response (CIR) of a plurality of plurality of CIRs from a UWB signal (see Fig. 4 and 5, step 110, further see paragraph [0112], “The subset of measurement samples may be input to an oversampling process 110 for oversampling the subset of measurement samples to generate an increased number of measurement samples in the subset.”, further see paragraph [0059]);
employing a lead edge detection algorithm and aligning the plurality of CIRs based on a lead edge (see Fig. 4 and 5, step 106, further see paragraph [0108], “For instance, a leading-edge algorithm 106 may be used for detecting a first peak in the set of measurement samples…”);
determining a phase of a line-of-sight path signal for each CIR (see paragraphs [0148], “The time instance of the pulse peak value may be determined for a LOS path…”, further see paragraphs [0132], [0138]—[0139], Examiner’s Note: The time instance of the pulse peak value in radar is directly related to the phase of the radar signal.); and
eliminating phase error by subtracting the phase of the line-of-sight path signal from each subsequent path signal (see paragraph [0107], “The set of measurement samples may be processed, e.g., based on the absolute square operation, to remove or at least reduce unknown phase offset from the set of measurement samples”).
Regarding claim 13, Sheikh, as shown above, discloses claim 12.
Sheikh further discloses,
wherein the line-of-sight path signal is determined using lead edge detection (see Fig. 4 and 5, step 106, further see paragraphs [0108] and [0055], “For instance, a leading-edge algorithm 106 may be used for detecting a first peak in the set of measurement samples…”).
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 4, 10, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al. (US 2024/0280680), in view of Zheng et al. (US 2020/0309932), hereinafter Zheng.
Regarding claim 1, Sheikh discloses,
A detection method comprising:
transmitting a UWB signal from a designated transmitter node (see paragraphs [0022], [0081] e.g., “…Referring now to FIG. 1, transmission of radio signals between…” and [0082] e.g., “…provided using ultra-wideband (UWB) communication.”, further see Fig. 1);
receiving the UWB signal at a separate receiving node (see paragraph [0022], “…A receiver (e.g., the first radio signal transceiver) correlates a received signal…”, and paragraph [0083], “…radio signal transceiver 12…”, further see Fig. 1);
extracting a plurality of channel impulse responses (CIRs) from the UWB signal (see paragraph [0090], “…The set of measurement samples may correspond to CIR samples...”);
synchronizing the plurality of CIRs to provide a sequence of synchronized CIRs by:
upsampling each CIR (see Fig. 4 and 5, step 110, further see paragraph [0112], “The subset of measurement samples may be input to an oversampling process 110 for oversampling the subset of measurement samples...”, further see paragraph [0030], “The oversampling may also be referred to as up-sampling of the subset of measurement samples”);
estimating a phase noise based on a phase of a line-of-sight path signal (see paragraphs [0132], [0138]—[0139], Examiner’s Note: These paragraphs give details on correlating the received signal with the transmitted signal to find and remove the phase offset); and
eliminating the phase noise from each CIR (see paragraph [0107], “…to remove or at least reduce unknown phase offset from the set of measurement samples…”); and
processing the synchronized CIRs to detect an object or activity (see paragraph [0010], “…for determining a time duration for signal propagation between a first and a second radio signal transceiver in relation to determining a distance between the first and the second radio signal…”).
Sheikh does not disclose the limitation below. However, Zheng rectifies the deficiencies of Sheikh by teaching,
synchronizing the plurality of CIRs to provide a sequence of synchronized CIRs by:
aligning the plurality of CIRs (see Fig. 4A-4B, steps 414 and 442, further see paragraph [0046], “Steps 414 and 442 may align the CIRs received by nodes”, of Zheng);
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Zheng into the
invention of Sheikh. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as
they both disclose a radar apparatus for target tracking. Sheikh discloses in paragraph [0059], “…the measurement samples of the set of measurement samples correspond to combining measurement samples based on multiple receiver chains...”. Therefore, the measurement samples in Sheikh are combined but Sheikh fails to explicitly disclose aligning. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the process of combining measurement samples as disclosed by Sheikh by incorporating the aligning process as taught by Zheng. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve feature extractions and prevent the combination of misaligned samples resulting from transmitters/receivers that are not synchronized. (see paragraphs [0044] and [0046] of Zheng).
Regarding claim 4, Sheikh in view of Zheng, as shown above, teaches claim 1.
Zheng further teaches,
wherein processing includes phase pattern analysis of the synchronized CIRs (see Fig. 2, 6, 7A-7B, and 10 as well as related paragraphs [0007], [0013]—[0015], [0018] of Zheng).
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 motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng by incorporating the phase pattern analysis as taught by Zheng. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve feature extractions based on a selected position and amplitude (see paragraph [0003] of Zheng).
Regarding claim 10, Sheikh in view of Zheng, as shown above, teaches claim 1.
Sheikh further discloses,
wherein aligning the plurality of CIRs includes employing a lead edge detection algorithm and aligning the CIRs based on a first path signal (see Fig. 4 and 5, step 106, further see paragraphs [0108] and [0055] , “For instance, a leading-edge algorithm 106 may be used for detecting a first peak in the set of measurement samples…”).
Regarding claim 11, Sheikh in view of Zheng, as shown above, teaches claim 1.
Sheikh further discloses,
wherein estimating the phase noise includes separating the line-of-sight path signal (see paragraphs [0092]—[0094] and Fig. 2, Examiner’s Note: These paragraphs give details on using timing to extract LoS.).
Claims 2, 3, 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al. (US 2024/0280680), in view of Zheng et al. (US 2020/0309932), and further in view of McFadden et al. (US 2023/0243957), hereinafter McFadden.
Regarding claim 2, Sheikh in view of Zheng, as shown above, teaches claim 1. Sheikh in view of Zheng does not teach the limitation of claim 2.
However, McFadden teaches,
further comprising notifying a user of a prediction responsive to detecting the object or activity (see Fig. 1A, steps 106 and 124, further see paragraphs [0017], [0025]--[0026], [0060], “…for creation of an alert when a potential object-of-interest … is detected via at least one ultra-wideband (UWB) radar of an object detection system…” of McFadden).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by McFadden into the invention of Sheikh in view of Zheng. These references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they all disclose a radar apparatus for target tracking and detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng by incorporating the prediction alert system as taught by McFadden. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to detect objects in an efficient and cost-effective manner (see paragraphs [0003]—[0007] of McFadden).
Regarding claim 3, Sheikh in view of Zheng, as shown above, teaches claim 1. Sheikh in view of Zheng does not teach the limitation of claim 3.
However, McFadden teaches,
further comprising performing a task responsive to detecting the object or activity (see Fig. 4 and paragraph [0060], further see paragraph [0026] and “The alert may be sent to an operator or other person so that further action can be taken if needed…” of McFadden).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by McFadden into the invention of Sheikh in view of Zheng. These references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they all disclose a radar apparatus for target tracking and detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng by incorporating the alert system as taught by McFadden. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to detect objects in an efficient and cost-effective manner (see paragraphs [0003]—[0007] of McFadden).
Regarding claim 14, Sheikh discloses,
A distributed ultra-wideband (UWB) radar system comprising:
a transmitting node operable to transmit a UWB signal (see paragraphs [0022], [0081] and [0082] as well as Fig. 1, “…the transmission of radio signals illustrated in FIG. 1…”);
a receiving node operable to:
receive the UWB signal (see paragraph [0022], “…A receiver (e.g., the first radio signal transceiver) correlates a received signal…”, and see paragraph [0082], “…provided using ultra-wideband (UWB) communication.”);
extract a plurality of channel impulse responses (CIRs) from the UWB signal (see paragraph [0090], “…The set of measurement samples may correspond to CIR samples...”);
synchronize the plurality of CIRs to provide a sequence of synchronized CIRs by:
upsampling each CIR (see Fig. 4 and 5, step 110, further see paragraph [0112], “The subset of measurement samples may be input to an oversampling process 110 for oversampling the subset of measurement samples...”, further see paragraph [0030], “The oversampling may also be referred to as up-sampling of the subset of measurement samples”);
estimating a phase error based on a phase of a line-of-sight path (see paragraphs [0132], [0138]—[0139], Examiner’s Note: These paragraphs give details on correlating the received signal with the transmitted signal to find and remove the phase offset); and
eliminating the phase error (see paragraph [0107], “…to remove or at least reduce unknown phase offset from the set of measurement samples…”);
process the synchronized CIRs to detect an object or movement (see paragraph [0010], “…for determining a time duration for signal propagation between a first and a second radio signal transceiver in relation to determining a distance between the first and the second radio signal…”);
Sheikh does not disclose the limitation below. However, Zheng rectifies the deficiencies of Sheikh by teaching,
synchronizing the plurality of CIRs to provide a sequence of synchronized CIRs by:
aligning the plurality of CIRs (see Fig. 4A-4B, steps 414 and 442, further see paragraph [0046], “Steps 414 and 442 may align the CIRs received by nodes”, of Zheng);
Sheikh in view of Zheng does not disclose the limitation below. However, McFadden rectifies the deficiencies of Sheikh in view of Zheng by teaching,
responsive to detecting an object or movement, actuating an alert corresponding to a prediction or performing a task based on the object or movement (see Fig. 1A, steps 106 and 124 as well as Fig. 4, further see paragraphs [0017], [0025]--[0026], [0060], “…for creation of an alert when a potential object-of-interest … is detected via at least one ultra-wideband (UWB) radar of an object detection system…”, and “The alert may be sent to an operator or other person so that further action can be taken if needed…” of McFadden).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by McFadden into the invention of Sheikh in view of Zheng. These references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they all disclose a radar apparatus for target tracking and detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng by incorporating the alert system as taught by McFadden. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to detect objects in an efficient and cost-effective manner (see paragraphs [0003]—[0007] of McFadden).
Regarding claim 15, Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden, as shown above, teaches claim 14. Zheng further teaches,
wherein the transmitting node is one of a plurality of transmitting nodes (see Figure 1 and paragraphs [0029], “…One or more of nodes 110-136 may periodically transmit (or blink) a UWB message…” of Zheng).
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 motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden by incorporating the plurality of transmitting nodes as taught by Zheng. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to detect objects in an effective manner (see paragraph [0003] of Zheng).
Regarding claim 16, Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden, as shown above, teaches claim 15.
Zheng further teaches,
wherein the receiving node is one of a plurality of receiving nodes (see Abstract, “…on a UWB signal received at a plurality of receiving nodes…”, further see paragraph [0029], “…Nodes 110-136 may be operable as a transceiver for sending and receiving a UWB message…” of Zheng).
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 motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden by incorporating the plurality of receiving nodes as taught by Zheng. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to detect objects in an effective manner (see paragraph [0003] of Zheng).
Regarding claim 17, Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden, as shown above, teaches claim 14.
Zheng further teaches,
wherein the receiving node is one of a plurality of receiving nodes (see Abstract, “…on a UWB signal received at a plurality of receiving nodes…”, further see paragraph [0029], “…Nodes 110-136 may be operable as a transceiver for sending and receiving a UWB message…” of Zheng).
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 motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden by incorporating the plurality of receiving nodes as taught by Zheng. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to detect objects in an effective manner (see paragraph [0003] of Zheng).
Regarding claim 18, Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden, as shown above, teaches claim 17.
Sheikh further discloses,
wherein the plurality of receiving nodes communicates with a central processing unit to extract a plurality of channel impulse responses (CIRs) from the UWB signal (see Fig. 10, elements 300 and 302, further see paragraphs [0161]--[0165], “The device 300 further comprises a processing unit 302 configured to…”),
synchronize the plurality of CIRs to provide a sequence of synchronized CIRs (see paragraph [0011], Fig. 4 and 5, step 114, further see paragraphs [0119] and [0124] of Sheikh),
process the synchronized CIRs to detect an object or movement (see paragraph [0010], “…for determining a time duration for signal propagation between a first and a second radio signal transceiver in relation to determining a distance between the first and the second radio signal…”), and/or
Sheikh does not disclose the limitation below. However, McFadden rectifies the deficiencies of Sheikh by teaching,
actuate an alert corresponding to a prediction or perform a task based on the object or movement (see Fig. 1A, steps 106 and 124 as well as Fig. 4, further see paragraphs [0017], [0025]--[0026], [0060], “…for creation of an alert when a potential object-of-interest … is detected via at least one ultra-wideband (UWB) radar of an object detection system…”, and “The alert may be sent to an operator or other person so that further action can be taken if needed…” of McFadden).
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 motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden by incorporating the prediction alert system as taught by McFadden. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to detect objects in an efficient and cost-effective manner (see paragraphs [0003]—[0007] of McFadden).
Regarding claim 19, Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden, as shown above, teaches claim 17.
Sheikh further discloses,
wherein the plurality of receiving nodes is in communication with a controller operable to employ a data fusion algorithm (see Fig. 10, elements 300 and 302, further see paragraphs [0161]--[0165], “The device 300 further comprises a processing unit 302 configured to…” and “…may be implemented as a general-purpose processing unit, such as a central processing unit (CPU), which may execute the instructions of one or more computer programs…”).
Regarding claim 20, Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden, as shown above, teaches claim 14.
Sheikh further discloses,
wherein the receiving node is in communication with a controller operable to extract a plurality of channel impulse responses (CIRs) from the UWB signal (see Fig. 10, elements 300 and 302, further see paragraphs [0161]--[0165], “The device 300 further comprises a processing unit 302 configured to…”),
synchronize the plurality of CIRs to provide a sequence of synchronized CIRs (see paragraph [0011], Fig. 4 and 5, step 114, further see paragraphs [0119] and [0124]),
process the synchronized CIRs to detect an object or movement (see paragraphs [0003], [0005], [0007], [0010]), and
Sheikh does not disclose the limitation below. However, McFadden rectifies the deficiencies of Sheikh by teaching,
actuate an alert corresponding to a prediction or perform a task based on the object or movement (see Fig. 1A, steps 106 and 124 as well as Fig. 4, further see paragraphs [0017], [0025]--[0026], [0060], “…for creation of an alert when a potential object-of-interest … is detected via at least one ultra-wideband (UWB) radar of an object detection system…”, and “The alert may be sent to an operator or other person so that further action can be taken if needed…” of McFadden).
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 motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden by incorporating the prediction alert system as taught by McFadden. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and McFadden would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to detect objects in an efficient and cost-effective manner (see paragraphs [0003]—[0007] of McFadden).
Claims 5, 6, 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al. (US 2024/0280680), in view of Zheng et al. (US 2020/0309932), and further in view of Bliss et al. (US 2023/0139637), hereinafter Bliss.
Regarding claim 5, Sheikh in view of Zheng, as shown above, teaches claim 4. Sheikh in view of Zheng does not teach the limitation of claim 5.
However, Bliss teaches,
wherein processing includes detecting a micro-motion (see paragraph [0026], “…monitor vital sign information (such as heartbeat and breathing)…” and “…a radar sensor captures micro-scale chest motions (corresponding to the vital sign information)…” of Bliss).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Bliss into the
invention of Sheikh in view of Zheng. These references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they all disclose a radar apparatus for target tracking and detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng by incorporating the micro-motion detection as taught by Bliss. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and Bliss would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide accurate and timely vital sign information in a convenient and less expensive way during everyday activities. (see paragraphs [0003] of Bliss).
Regarding claim 6, Sheikh in view of Zheng and Bliss, as shown above, teaches claim 5.
Bliss further teaches,
wherein the micro-motion is breathing or a heartbeat (see paragraph [0026], “…monitor vital sign information (such as heartbeat and breathing)…” of Bliss).
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 motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng by incorporating the micro-motion detection as taught by Bliss. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and Bliss would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide accurate and timely vital sign information in a convenient and less expensive way during everyday activities. (see paragraphs [0003] of Bliss).
Regarding claim 7, Sheikh in view of Zheng, as shown above, teaches claim 1. Sheikh in view of Zheng does not teach the limitation of claim 7.
However, Bliss teaches,
wherein processing includes range-doppler estimation (see paragraph [0043] as well as Fig. 4B, “FIG. 4B provides an illustration of a range image and a micro-Doppler image based on a radar return signal received and processed by the radar sensor” of Bliss).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Bliss into the
invention of Sheikh in view of Zheng. These references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they all disclose a radar apparatus for target tracking and detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng by incorporating the range-(micro-)doppler estimation as taught by Bliss. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and Bliss would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide accurate and timely vital sign information as both range and (micro-)doppler estimates are needed for micro-motion detection. (see paragraphs [0043] of Bliss).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al. (US 2024/0280680), in view of Zheng et al. (US 2020/0309932), and further in view of “Human Activity Classification Based On Breathing Patterns Using IR-UWB Radar” an IEEE Conference Proceeding by Kumar et al., hereinafter Kumar.
Regarding claim 8, Sheikh in view of Zheng, as shown above, teaches claim 1. Sheikh in view of Zheng does not teach the limitation of claim 8.
However, Kumar teaches,
wherein processing includes short-time Fourier transform (see Abstract, “After the respiration patterns are collected, the short-time Fourier transform (STFT) is applied to the received signal.”, further see Section III (A) of Kumar).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Kumar into the
invention of Sheikh in view of Zheng. These references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they all disclose a radar apparatus for target tracking and detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng by incorporating the short-time Fourier transform as taught by Kumar. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and Kumar would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to classify and detect human activity using machine or deep learning approaches. (see Section V of Kumar).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al. (US 2024/0280680), in view of Zheng et al. (US 2020/0309932), and further in view of “Constant false alarm rate” a Wikipedia webpage, hereinafter Wiki.
Regarding claim 9, Sheikh in view of Zheng, as shown above, teaches claim 1. Sheikh in view of Zheng does not teach the limitation of claim 9.
However, Wiki teaches,
wherein processing includes employing a constant false alarm rate algorithm to identify a target (see first paragraph, “Constant false alarm rate (CFAR) detection is a common form of adaptive algorithm used in radar systems to detect target…”, and for further details see the whole document of Wiki).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Wiki into the
invention of Sheikh in view of Zheng. These references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they all disclose a radar apparatus for target tracking and detection. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the motion detection method as disclosed by Sheikh in view of Zheng by incorporating the CFAR algorithm as taught by Wiki. The combination of Sheikh in view of Zheng and Wiki would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to detect ‘real’ targets in presence of background of noise, clutter and interference (see Section ‘Principle’ of Wiki).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIMISH P. HATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-9508. The examiner can normally be reached M--F 8.30 am to 5.30 pm ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Resha H. Desai can be reached at (571) 270 7792. The fax phone number for 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.
/NIMISH P. HATHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights