DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed May 6, 2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 4-7, 9, 11, 15-18, and 20, are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending this application.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al (US 2022/0296099 A1) in view of Ianelli et al (US 6788204 B1).
Regarding Claim 1, Chang teaches a frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) radar with an identity recognition function, comprising [0031 for using FMCW, and 0033]:
a processing module, configured to demodulate a radar echo corresponding to a radar signal to generate a digital signal [0034 for demodulating the reflected (echo) signal];
and an operation module, coupled to the processing module and configured to [0038 for having FFT processing on the array]:
divide the digital signal into a first part and a second part based on a time separation point or a frequency separation point [0038-0040 for using heartbeat, and breathing (separate signals) for processing received radar data and using calculation time];
and perform a second calculation on the second part to obtain vital sign information comprises [0038-0040 for heartbeat and breathing];
wherein performing the first calculation comprises [0038-0040 for radar echo demodulation into a digital signal in the frequency domain]:
applying a range fast Fourier transform (FFT) process to the digital signal to obtain a plurality of peak frequencies [0034 for processing the signal and 0037 for using an FFT];
converting the peak frequencies into a plurality of delay times based on a linear frequency-modulated (LFM) slope [0032 for linear frequency chirp with 0035 and equation 2 for calculating time delay].
Chang fails to explicitly teach perform a first calculation on the first part to obtain an identity code; and calculate an identity code based on the delay times.
Ianelli has surface acoustic wave radio-frequency identification tags are encoded according to partial reflections of an interrogation signal (abstract) and teaches perform a first calculation on the first part to obtain an identity code [col 9, lines 40-55 for identification code 1011011 using SAW transducer];
calculating the identity code based on the delay times [col 2, lines 40-67 for using SWA signal into time compressed surface wave].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the identity techniques, as disclosed by Chang, further including the identification code calculations as taught by Ianelli for the purpose to have larger interrogation distances (Ianelli, col 2, lines 40-67).
Regarding Claim 11, Chang teaches a method for decoding an identity code from a radar echo [0031 for using FMCW, and 0033],
performed by an operation device, and comprising [0034 for demodulating the reflected (echo) signal]:
obtaining a digital signal [0036];
dividing the digital signal into a first part and a second part based on a time separation point or a frequency separation point [0038-0040 for using heartbeat, and breathing (separate signals) for processing received radar data and using calculation time];
and performing a second calculation on the second part to obtain vital sign information [0038-0040 for heartbeat and breathing];
wherein performing the first calculation comprises [0038-0040 for radar echo demodulation into a digital signal in the frequency domain]:
applying a range FFT process to the digital signal to obtain a plurality of peak frequencies [0034 for processing the signal and 0037 for using an FFT];
converting the peak frequencies into a plurality of delay times based on an LFM slope [0032 for linear frequency chirp with 0035 and equation 2 for calculating time delay].
Chang fails to explicitly teach perform a first calculation on the first part to obtain an identity code; and calculate an identity code based on the delay times.
Ianelli has surface acoustic wave radio-frequency identification tags are encoded according to partial reflections of an interrogation signal (abstract) and teaches perform a first calculation on the first part to obtain an identity code [col 9, lines 40-55 for identification code 1011011 using SAW transducer];
calculating the identity code based on the delay times [col 2, lines 40-67 for using SWA signal into time compressed surface wave].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the identity techniques, as disclosed by Chang, further including the identification code calculations as taught by Ianelli for the purpose to have larger interrogation distances (Ianelli, col 2, lines 40-67).
Regarding Claim 2 and 12, Chang fails to explicitly teach the delay times comprise a first reference time, a second reference time, and a plurality of mark times, a first difference exists between each of the mark times and the first reference time, a second difference exists between the first reference time and the second reference time, and the identity code is calculated based on a ratio of each of the first differences to the second difference.
Ianelli has surface acoustic wave radio-frequency identification tags are encoded according to partial reflections of an interrogation signal (abstract) and teaches the delay times comprise a first reference time, a second reference time, and a plurality of mark times, a first difference exists between each of the mark times and the first reference time [col 8, lines 30-50 for two compressed pulse signals that are shifted in time (mark times)],
a second difference exists between the first reference time and the second reference time, and the identity code is calculated based on a ratio of each of the first differences to the second difference [col 8, lines 30-50 for using separation for transit time of the acoustic wave].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the identity techniques, as disclosed by Chang, further including the identification code calculations as taught by Ianelli for the purpose to reliably detect and examine signals (Ianelli, col 8, lines 40-51).
Regarding Claim 3, Chang fails to explicitly teach the operation module is further configured to determine sensing information based on the second difference.
Ianelli has surface acoustic wave radio-frequency identification tags are encoded according to partial reflections of an interrogation signal (abstract) and teaches the operation module is further configured to determine sensing information based on the second difference [col 18, lines 55-67 for using SWA data for temperature, environment and biometric calculations].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the identity techniques, as disclosed by Chang, further including the identification code calculations as taught by Ianelli for the purpose to have larger interrogation distances (Ianelli, col 2, lines 40-67).
Regarding Claim 4 and 15, Chang teaches the applying a range FFT process to the digital signal comprises: selecting the first part of the digital signal as a first side signal based on a time separation point [0037-0038];
applying the range FFT process to the first side signal to obtain a first sideband signal [0032, and 0037-0038, 0052];
and obtaining the peak frequencies from the first sideband signal [0037-0038].
Regarding Claim 5 and 16, Chang teaches the operation module is further configured to: select the second part of the digital signal as a second side signal based on the time separation point [0037-0038 for frequency signals, intermediate frequency signal, and 0058 for performing FFT on multiple chirp pulse signals];
and apply the range FFT process and a Doppler FFT process to the second side signal to obtain the vital sign information [0038].
Regarding Claim 6 and 17, Chang teaches applying a range FFT process to the digital signal comprises: applying the range FFT process to the first part of the digital signal to obtain a conversion result [0037-0038 for processing signal as a 2-dimensional array];
selecting the conversion result as a first sideband signal based on the frequency separation point [0037-0039];
and obtaining the peak frequencies from the first sideband signal [0037-0038].
Regarding Claim 7 and 18, Chang teaches the operation module is further configured to: select the second part of the conversion result as a second sideband signal based on the frequency separation point [0037-0039];
and apply a Doppler FFT process to the second sideband signal to obtain vital sign information [0037-0038 with 0058].
Regarding Claim 8 and 19, Chang teaches the radar signal has different LFM parameters in a first time slot and a second time slot [0032 for linear frequency chirp with 0035 and equation 2 for calculating time delay, 0052].
Regarding Claim 9 and 20, Chang teaches the first part of the digital signal corresponds to the first time slot, and the second part of the digital signal corresponds to the second time slot [0052-0053, with 0059].
Regarding Claim 10, Chang teaches: a signal generator, configured to generate an LFM radar signal [0032 for linear frequency chirp with 0035 and equation 2 for calculating time delay];
a transmission module, coupled to the signal generator and configured to transmit the radar signal to a sensor [0032, 0034];
and a receiving module, coupled to the transmission module and configured to receive the radar echo corresponding to the radar signal from the sensor [0034].
Chang fails to explicitly teach wherein the sensor is a surface acoustic wave (SAW) sensor.
Ianelli has surface acoustic wave radio-frequency identification tags are encoded according to partial reflections of an interrogation signal (abstract) and teaches the sensor is a surface acoustic wave (SAW) sensor [col 18, lines 55-67 for using SWA data for temperature, environment and biometric calculations].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the identity techniques, as disclosed by Chang, further including the identification code calculations as taught by Ianelli for the purpose to have larger interrogation distances (Ianelli, col 2, lines 40-67).
Regarding Claim 13, Chang teaches determining sensing information of a sensor based on the second difference, wherein the radar echo comes from the sensor [0034].
Regarding Claim 14, Chang teaches the digital signal is generated by a FMCW radar through demodulation after receiving the radar echo [0030-0032],
the radar echo corresponds to an LFM radar signal [0032].
Chang fails to explicitly teach and the sensor is a SAW sensor.
Ianelli has surface acoustic wave radio-frequency identification tags are encoded according to partial reflections of an interrogation signal (abstract) and teaches and the sensor is a SAW sensor [col 18, lines 55-67 for using SWA data for temperature, environment and biometric calculations].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the identity techniques, as disclosed by Chang, further including the identification code calculations as taught by Ianelli for the purpose to have larger interrogation distances (Ianelli, col 2, lines 40-67).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
In applicant’s arguments page 15, last paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Chang does not teach the claim amendments of divide the digital signal into a first part and a second part based on a time separation point or a frequency separation point; perform a first calculation on the first part to obtain an identity code; and perform a second calculation on the second part to obtain vital sign information. The examiner thanks the applicant for the claim amendments, new reference Ianelli teaches the identity code [Ianelli, col 18, lines 1-20].
In applicant’s arguments page 16, first paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Harma only teaches SAW RFID tags. The examiner thanks the applicant for the claim amendments, new reference Ianelli replaces Harma and Ianelli teaches the SAW tags for identification signals [Ianelli, col 5, lines 45-60].
In applicant’s arguments page 16, second paragraph of applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that the combination of Chang and Harma do not teach the amended claims. The examiner thanks the applicant for the claim amendments, new reference Ianelli replaces Harma.
The examiner acknowledges that this is a broader interpretation than Applicant’s. However, examiners are not only allowed to apply broad interpretations, but are required to do so, as it reduces the possibility that the claims, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified. MPEP §2111. Patentability is determined by the “broadest reasonable interpretation
consistent with the specification” (MPEP §2111), not the narrowest reasonable interpretation. And Applicant does not have an explicit lexicographical statement in line with MPEP §2111.01
subsection IV requiring a specific interpretation of the relevant phrases which forces the examiner to interpret them only one way.
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
For applicant’s benefit, portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, including disclosures that teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
“The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain.” In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including non-preferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v.Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005) See MPEP 2123.
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 SAMARINA MAKHDOOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Thursdays from 8:30 to 5:30 pm eastern time.
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, William Kelleher can be reached on 571-272-7753 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.
/SAMARINA MAKHDOOM/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights