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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The amendment filed 01/23/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the claims are sufficient to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) of claims 1 and 10. Accordingly the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 01/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicants arguments to claim 1, applicant states “For example, pending independent claim 1 recites "transmitting an acoustic burst that propagates through a surface over an ultrasonic transducer, the surface being unblemished by any visible indication of a sensor" and “In any case, the cited art fails to teach the recited claim limitation.”, examiner respectfully disagrees. Ishii teaches ultrasonic sensors (interpreted as the ultrasonic transducer) which are configured to transmit and receive ultrasonic waves and these sensors are equipped to an outer wall of a vehicle, such as at a bumper (See Paragraphs 17, 31 of Ishii). Thus, Ishii properly teaches the newly added limitation of transmitting an acoustic burst (transmit and receive ultrasonic waves) that propagates through a surface over an ultrasonic transducer, the surface being unblemished by any visible indication of a sensor (an ultrasonic sensor is, for example, equipped to an outer wall of a vehicle, such as at a bumper). The same response as detailed above is presented to other independent claims 10 and 18 respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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(s) 1-7 and 10-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishii (US 20190242985 A1) in view of Littrell (US 20250056164 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ishii teaches a sensing method that comprises: transmitting an acoustic burst that propagates through a surface over an ultrasonic transducer (ultrasonic sensor 2), the surface being unblemished by any visible indication of a sensor (An ultrasonic sensor is, for example, equipped to an outer wall of a vehicle, such as at a bumper). (Paragraph 31, 17, Fig.1)
Ishii also teaches receiving an acoustic signal with a MEMS (micro-electromechanical systems) receiver (receiving element 222 is a micro electro mechanical systems (MEMS) element having a function of converting mechanical vibrations and electric signals), the MEMS receiver representing the acoustic signal as an electrical receive signal. (Paragraphs 66, 94, Claim 6, Figs.1, 3-5)
Ishii also teaches processing the electrical receive signal to detect a reflection of the acoustic burst (MEMS element having a function of converting mechanical vibrations and electric signals) (receive a reflected wave by an object existing around the ultrasonic sensor 2 and generate a reception signal). (Paragraphs 66, 31, 85, Figs.1, 3-5)
Ishii does not explicitly teach a MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 2, Ishii teaches wherein the surface has no opening or acoustic window for conveying the acoustic burst. (Figs.2-5)
Regarding claim 3, Ishii teaches wherein the surface includes an aperture for passing the acoustic signal to the MEMS receiver. (Fig.1)
Ishii does not explicitly teach a MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 4, Ishii teaches wherein the surface is a bumper cover or body panel of a vehicle. (Paragraph 28, Fig.1)
Regarding claim 5, Ishii teaches wherein the MEMS receiver is positioned to receive the acoustic signal as the acoustic signal passes to a side or around an edge of the surface. (Paragraphs 31, 66, 94, Fig.1)
Ishii does not explicitly teach a MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 6, Ishii teaches wherein ultrasonic transducer and the MEMS receiver are part of a concealed assembly that further includes a controller configured to perform said processing. (Paragraph 44, Figs.1-2)
Ishii does not explicitly teach a MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 7, Ishii teaches wherein said ultrasonic transducer is one of an array of ultrasonic transducers cooperatively transmitting the acoustic burst through the surface. (Paragraphs 96, 79, Fig.6)
Regarding claim 10, Ishii teaches an ADAS (advanced driver-assistance system) comprising: an ultrasonic transducer configured to transmit an acoustic burst (ultrasonic sensor 2 is configured to transmit and receive ultrasonic waves) that propagates through a surface over the ultrasonic transducer, the surface being unblemished by any visible indication of a sensor (An ultrasonic sensor is, for example, equipped to an outer wall of a vehicle, such as at a bumper). (Abstract, Paragraphs 17, 31, Fig.1)
Ishii also teaches a MEMS (micro-electromechanical systems) receiver configured to convert a received acoustic signal into an electrical receive signal (receiving element 222 is a micro electro mechanical systems (MEMS) element having a function of converting mechanical vibrations and electric signals). (Paragraphs 66, 94, Claim 6, Figs.1, 3-5)
Ishii also teaches a controller configured to detect a reflection of the acoustic burst based on the electrical receive signal (MEMS element having a function of converting mechanical vibrations and electric signals) (receive a reflected wave by an object existing around the ultrasonic sensor 2 and generate a reception signal. (Paragraphs 44, 66, 31, 85, Figs.1-5)
Ishii does not explicitly teach a MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 11, Ishii teaches wherein the surface has no opening or acoustic window for conveying the acoustic burst. (Figs.2-5)
Regarding claim 12, Ishii teaches wherein the surface includes an aperture for passing the acoustic signal to the MEMS receiver. (Fig.1)
Ishii does not explicitly teach a MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 13, Ishii teaches wherein the surface is a cover of a vehicle bumper. (Paragraph 28, Fig.1)
Regarding claim 14, Ishii teaches wherein the MEMS receiver is positioned to receive the acoustic signal as the acoustic signal passes to a side or around an edge of the surface. (Paragraphs 31, 66, 94, Fig.1)
Ishii does not explicitly teach a MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 15, Ishii teaches wherein ultrasonic transducer, the MEMS receiver, and the controller are each part of a concealed assembly that contacts a backside of the surface. (Paragraph 44, Figs.1-2)
Ishii does not explicitly teach a MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 16, Ishii teaches wherein said ultrasonic transducer is one of an array of ultrasonic transducers configured to cooperatively transmit the acoustic burst through the surface. (Paragraphs 96, 79, Fig.6)
Regarding claim 17, Ishii teaches wherein the ultrasonic transducer is further configured to convert acoustic signals into a second electrical receive signal, and wherein the controller operates on the second electrical receive signal and the electrical receive signal from the MEMS receiver to detect the reflection. (Paragraphs 31, 79, 85, 94, 96, 102, Claim 5, Fig.1)
Ishii does not explicitly teach the MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone as taught by Littrell in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 18, Ishii teaches a sensor controller that comprises: a transmitter that drives an ultrasonic transducer to transmit an acoustic burst (ultrasonic sensor 2 is configured to transmit and receive ultrasonic waves) that propagates through a bumper cover or body panel unblemished by any indication of a sensor (an ultrasonic sensor is, for example, equipped to an outer wall of a vehicle, such as at a bumper). (Paragraphs 31, 44, 17, Figs.1-2)
Ishii also teaches a receiver that receives an electrical receive signal from a MEMS receiver representing an acoustic signal (receiving element 222 is a micro electro mechanical systems (MEMS) element). (Paragraphs 66, 94, Claim 6, Figs.1, 3-5)
Ishii also teaches a processor that processes the electrical receive signal to detect a reflection of the acoustic burst (receive a reflected wave by an object existing around the ultrasonic sensor 2 and generate a reception signal. (Paragraphs 44, 66, 31, 85, Figs.1-5)
Ishii does not explicitly teach a MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 19, Ishii teaches a second receiver configured to receive a second electrical receive signal from the ultrasonic transducer, wherein the processor is configured to detect the reflection based on each of the second electrical receive signal and the electrical receive signal from the MEMS receiver. (Paragraphs 31, 79, 85, 94, 96, 102, Claim 5, Fig.1)
Ishii does not explicitly teach the MEMS microphone.
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone as taught by Littrell in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Claim(s) 8-9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishii in view of Littrell and Caspall (US 20210132204 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Ishii does not explicitly teach wherein the acoustic burst is steerable by the array of ultrasonic transducers.
Caspall teaches wherein the acoustic burst is steerable by the array of ultrasonic transducers. (Paragraph 6)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate wherein the acoustic burst is steerable by the array of ultrasonic transducers as taught by Caspall in order to allow for precise aiming of sound energy thus having results that are clearer and at desired target.
Regarding claim 9, Ishii teaches receiving a second acoustic signal with the ultrasonic transducer, the ultrasonic transducer conveying the second acoustic signal as a second electrical receive signal. (Paragraphs 79, 94, 96, 102, Claim 5, Fig.1)
Ishii does not explicitly teach wherein the processing determines a distance to a reflector based at least in part on the second electrical receive signal and the electrical receive signal from the MEMS microphone.
Caspall teaches wherein the processing determines a distance to a reflector based at least in part on the second electrical receive signal and the electrical receive signal from the receiver. (Paragraphs 50, 54)
Littrell teaches a MEMS microphone. (Paragraph 3, 38, 40)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate wherein the processing determines a distance to a reflector based at least in part on the second electrical receive signal and the electrical receive signal from the receiver as taught by Caspall in order build a picture on the display of the environment and further modify Ishii to incorporate a MEMS microphone as taught by Littrell in order to converts sound pressure into an electrical voltage and/or convert movement into an electrical voltage.
Regarding claim 20, Ishii does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is configured to provide a controllable phase shift between the second electrical receive signal and the electrical receive signal from the MEMS microphone for controllable directional sensitivity.
Caspall teaches wherein the processor is configured to provide a controllable phase shift between the second electrical receive signal and the electrical receive signal from the MEMS microphone for controllable directional sensitivity. (Paragraphs 6, 72, 81)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Ishii to incorporate wherein the processor is configured to provide a controllable phase shift between the second electrical receive signal and the electrical receive signal from the MEMS microphone for controllable directional sensitivity as taught by Caspall in order build a picture on the display of the environment with improved image quality and resolution.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDALLAH ABULABAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4755. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00am-3:00pm EST.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/ABDALLAH ABULABAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645