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 the Claims
Claims 1, 5-11 and 14 filed on 6 FEB 2024 are currently pending and have been examined.
Priority
The pending application 18/681,800, filed on 6 FEB 2024, is a national stage application filed under 35 U.S.C. 371 of PCT/JP2022/030332, filed on 8 AUG 2022, and claims priority from foreign application JP2021-140481, filed on 30 AUG 2021 in Japan.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6 FEB 2024, 1 NOV 2024, and 4 AUG 2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 9 recites “clusters whose representative points are located within a certain distance.” It is unclear to the examiner what the certain distance is relative to.
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, 5-11 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan et al. (EP 3,349,038 A1, cited by applicant in IDS dated 4 AUG 2025) in view of Hong et al. (US 2021/0389416 A1).
Regarding claim 1 (Original), Yan et al. discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Yan et al. has been struck-through]
An electronic device (Yan et al. vehicle mounted radar system, ¶ [0023])comprising:
a transmission antenna that transmits a transmission wave (Yan et al. “Both the emitter and detector may comprise multiple elements to form an antenna array as is known in the art. So in other words the objects in the environment are illuminated with radar, and echo signals (radar reflections/detections/returns) are received for processing in the later steps.” - ¶ [0023]);
a reception antenna that receives a reflected wave, which is the reflected transmission wave (Yan et al. “Both the emitter and detector may comprise multiple elements to form an antenna array as is known in the art. So in other words the objects in the environment are illuminated with radar, and echo signals (radar reflections/detections/returns) are received for processing in the later steps.” - ¶ [0023]);
a signal processor that detects an object on a basis of a transmission signal transmitted as the transmission wave and a reception signal received as the reflected wave (Yan et al. “The emitter/detection units are mounted on the (host) vehicle 1, which includes processing means to process data of the radar returns.” - ¶ [0021]),
wherein the controller performs control such that, when the transmission wave is transmitted a plurality of times in certain units (Yan et al. “Multi-scan detections provide data with respect to detections from multiple snapshots (at a plurality of time instants).” - ¶ [0026]),
wherein the signal processor outputs a result of the detection of the object on a basis of a selected cluster, whose area of a range over which a point group spreads (Yan et al. “In this step a spread function is determined. This can be alternatively regarded as an "extension estimation". The term "extension" or "spread" may be regarded as a parameter relating to the spread in the cluster with regard to any radar parameter (variable); this may be in one, two or three dimensional space for example but is not limited to spatial extension/spread.” - ¶ [0028]) is the smallest among a plurality of clusters obtained by performing clustering on results of detection performed on the object the plurality of times (Yan et al. “The figure also shows different types of objects in the vehicle environment (proximity) and may include "objects-of-interest" (targets such as another vehicle 2) and "object of non-interest" (clutter, interfering objects) in the view of the radar, such as guide rails, trees and such like.” - ¶ [0021]; “It is noted that reflection density is closely connected to the scattering structure of the objects in physics. The denser the scattering structures on an object, the greater the reflection-density. Guardrails contain lots of free space in structure. Hence reflection-density of guardrails is typically less than that of vehicles. Refection-density of poles is also difference from that of vehicles.” -¶ [0055]; where vehicle is selected as the object-of-interest, and the vehicle having the highest reflection-density has the smallest spread).
Hong et al. discloses:
a controller that controls a radiation pattern of the transmission wave (Hong et al. “In examples, the signal processor 240 can: control transmission and/or receipt of probe signals… control probe signal modification… and/or modifying probe signal characteristics…” - ¶ [0037])
a transmission wave with a varied radiation pattern is included at least once (Hong et al. “The additional phase variance preferably changes over time (e.g., changing between each chirp, changing between sets of multiple chirps, changing during a chirp such as changing more than once for each chirp, etc.)…” - ¶ [0054])
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hong et al. into the invention of Yan et al. to yield the invention of claim 1 above. Both Yan et al. and Hong et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose radar systems for performing signal processing and detecting objects over a plurality of frames. Yan et al. discloses the limitations of claim 1 outlined above. However, Yan et al. fails to explicitly disclose a controller that controls a radiation pattern of the transmission wave and a transmission wave with a varied radiation pattern is included at least once. This feature is disclosed by Hong et al. where “the signal processor 240 can: control transmission and/or receipt of probe signals… control probe signal modification… and/or modifying probe signal characteristics…” (Hong et al.¶ [0037]) and “The additional phase variance preferably changes over time (e.g., changing between each chirp, changing between sets of multiple chirps, changing during a chirp such as changing more than once for each chirp, etc.)…” (Hong et al. ¶ [0054]). The combination of Yan et al. and Hong et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to vary the chirp pattern so that does not match the pattern of any other radar system concurrently transmitting in order to mitigate radar interference (Hong et al.¶ [0024]).
Regarding claim 5 (Currently Amended), Yan et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Yan et al. has been struck-through]
The electronic device according to claim 1,
Hong et al. discloses:
wherein the controller controls a phase of the transmission wave and performs control such that, when the transmission wave is transmitted the plurality of times in the certain units, a transmission wave with a varied radiation pattern is included at least once (Hong et al. “The additional phase variance preferably changes over time (e.g., changing between each chirp, changing between sets of multiple chirps, changing during a chirp such as changing more than once for each chirp, etc.)…” - ¶ [0054]).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hong et al. into the invention of Yan et al. to yield the invention of claim 5 above. Both Yan et al. and Hong et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose radar systems for performing signal processing and detecting objects over a plurality of frames. Yan et al. as modified above discloses the electronic device of claim 1. However, Yan et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller controls a phase of the transmission wave and performs control such that, when the transmission wave is transmitted the plurality of times in the certain units, a transmission wave with a varied radiation pattern is included at least once. This feature is disclosed by Hong et al. where “The additional phase variance preferably changes over time (e.g., changing between each chirp, changing between sets of multiple chirps, changing during a chirp such as changing more than once for each chirp, etc.)…” (Hong et al. ¶ [0054]). The combination of Yan et al. and Hong et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to vary the chirp pattern so that does not match the pattern of any other radar system concurrently transmitting in order to mitigate radar interference (Hong et al.¶ [0024]).
Regarding claim 6 (Original), Yan et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Yan et al. has been struck-through]
The electronic device according to claim 5,
Hong et al. discloses:
wherein the controller varies the phase of the transmission wave such that a variation in a radiation direction of the transmission wave falls within a certain range (Hong et al. “This phase variance preferably includes imposing small phase shifts (e.g., shifts between the different transmitters, shifts with respect to any other suitable phase reference, etc.), such as phase shifts less than a threshold magnitude (e.g., 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, or 90 degrees, etc.)… In this example, the phase variance is controlled within a one- or two-dimensional space (e.g., wherein the one or two free variables of the space are associated with the beam steering heading, such as corresponding to an azimuthal angle and/or an elevation angle).” - ¶ [0054]).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hong et al. into the invention of Yan et al. to yield the invention of claim 6 above. Both Yan et al. and Hong et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose radar systems for performing signal processing and detecting objects over a plurality of frames. Yan et al. as modified above discloses the electronic device of claim 5. However, Yan et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller varies the phase of the transmission wave such that a variation in a radiation direction of the transmission wave falls within a certain range. This feature is disclosed by Hong et al. where “This phase variance preferably includes imposing small phase shifts (e.g., shifts between the different transmitters, shifts with respect to any other suitable phase reference, etc.), such as phase shifts less than a threshold magnitude…” (Hong et al. ¶ [0054]). The combination of Yan et al. and Hong et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to vary the chirp pattern so that does not match the pattern of any other radar system concurrently transmitting in order to mitigate radar interference (Hong et al.¶ [0024]).
Regarding claim 7 (Original), Yan et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Yan et al. has been struck-through]
The electronic device according to claim 6,
Hong et al. discloses:
wherein the controller varies the phase of the transmission wave such that the variation in the radiation direction of the transmission wave becomes larger than or equal to 1° and smaller than or equal to 15° (Hong et al. “This phase variance preferably includes imposing small phase shifts (e.g., shifts between the different transmitters, shifts with respect to any other suitable phase reference, etc.), such as phase shifts less than a threshold magnitude (e.g., 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, or 90 degrees, etc.)” - ¶ [0054]).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hong et al. into the invention of Yan et al. to yield the invention of claim 6 above. Both Yan et al. and Hong et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose radar systems for performing signal processing and detecting objects over a plurality of frames. Yan et al. as modified above discloses the electronic device of claim 5. However, Yan et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller varies the phase of the transmission wave such that the variation in the radiation direction of the transmission wave becomes larger than or equal to 1° and smaller than or equal to 15°. This feature is disclosed by Hong et al. where “This phase variance preferably includes imposing small phase shifts (e.g., shifts between the different transmitters, shifts with respect to any other suitable phase reference, etc.), such as phase shifts less than a threshold magnitude (e.g., 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, or 90 degrees, etc.)” (Hong et al. ¶ [0054]). The combination of Yan et al. and Hong et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to vary the chirp pattern so that does not match the pattern of any other radar system concurrently transmitting in order to mitigate radar interference (Hong et al.¶ [0024]).
Regarding claim 8 (Currently Amended), Yan et al. as modified above discloses:
The electronic device according to claim 1,
wherein the transmission wave is transmitted the plurality of times in one frame in the certain units (Yan et al. “Multi-scan detections provide data with respect to detections from multiple snapshots (at a plurality of time instants).” - ¶ [0026])
Regarding claim 9 (Currently Amended), Yan et al. as modified above discloses:
The electronic device according to claim 1,
wherein the signal processor selects the selected cluster from, among the plurality of clusters obtained by performing the clustering on the results of the detection performed on the object the plurality of times, clusters whose representative points are located within a certain distance (Yan et al. “The distribution may be centered on point P and the variables correlated. The distribution may have standard deviation values (13 and 14 respectively) in the direction v, and w, referenced from point P and perpendicular and parallel respectively to the correlation line 12. In an example, the spread or extension functions of one or both or the two variables may be determined based on one or both of these standard deviations.” - ¶ [0052]).
Regarding claim 10 (Currently Amended), Yan et al. as modified above discloses:
The electronic device according to claim 1, Yan et al. as modified above discloses:
wherein the signal processor outputs an average, a median, a minimum value, or a maximum value of representative points of the selected cluster as the result of the detection of the object (Yan et al. “In automotive radar target discrimination and classification, such distinguishing features may be derived from various radar data such as the mean, extension, and deviation of radar parameters.” - ¶ [0004]; “The distribution may be centered on point P and the variables correlated.” - ¶ [0052]; “e.g. functions to get maximum, minimum, or mean estimates, i.e. max(), min(), mean(), etc.” - ¶ [0053]).
Regarding claim 11 (Original), Yan et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Yan et al. has been struck-through]
A method for controlling an electronic device (Yan et al. vehicle mounted radar system, ¶ [0023]), the method comprising the steps of:
transmitting a transmission wave using a transmission antenna (Yan et al. “Both the emitter and detector may comprise multiple elements to form an antenna array as is known in the art. So in other words the objects in the environment are illuminated with radar, and echo signals (radar reflections/detections/returns) are received for processing in the later steps.” - ¶ [0023]);
receiving a reflected wave, which is the reflected transmission wave, using a reception antenna (Yan et al. “Both the emitter and detector may comprise multiple elements to form an antenna array as is known in the art. So in other words the objects in the environment are illuminated with radar, and echo signals (radar reflections/detections/returns) are received for processing in the later steps.” - ¶ [0023]);
detecting an object on a basis of a transmission signal transmitted as the transmission wave and a reception signal received as the reflected wave (Yan et al. “The emitter/detection units are mounted on the (host) vehicle 1, which includes processing means to process data of the radar returns.” - ¶ [0021]);
performing control such that, when the transmission wave is transmitted a plurality of times in certain units (Yan et al. “Multi-scan detections provide data with respect to detections from multiple snapshots (at a plurality of time instants).” - ¶ [0026]),
outputting a result of the detection of the object on a basis of a selected cluster, whose area of a range over which a point group spreads (Yan et al. “In this step a spread function is determined. This can be alternatively regarded as an "extension estimation". The term "extension" or "spread" may be regarded as a parameter relating to the spread in the cluster with regard to any radar parameter (variable); this may be in one, two or three dimensional space for example but is not limited to spatial extension/spread.” - ¶ [0028]) is the smallest among a plurality of clusters obtained by performing clustering on results of detection performed on the object the plurality of times (Yan et al. “The figure also shows different types of objects in the vehicle environment (proximity) and may include "objects-of-interest" (targets such as another vehicle 2) and "object of non-interest" (clutter, interfering objects) in the view of the radar, such as guide rails, trees and such like.” - ¶ [0021]; “It is noted that reflection density is closely connected to the scattering structure of the objects in physics. The denser the scattering structures on an object, the greater the reflection-density. Guardrails contain lots of free space in structure. Hence reflection-density of guardrails is typically less than that of vehicles. Refection-density of poles is also difference from that of vehicles.” -¶ [0055]; where vehicle is selected as the object-of-interest, and the vehicle having the highest reflection-density has the smallest spread).
Hong et al. discloses:
controlling a radiation pattern of the transmission wave (Hong et al. “In examples, the signal processor 240 can: control transmission and/or receipt of probe signals… control probe signal modification… and/or modifying probe signal characteristics…” - ¶ [0037])
a transmission wave with a varied radiation pattern is included at least once (Hong et al. “The additional phase variance preferably changes over time (e.g., changing between each chirp, changing between sets of multiple chirps, changing during a chirp such as changing more than once for each chirp, etc.)…” - ¶ [0054])
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hong et al. into the invention of Yan et al. to yield the invention of claim 1 above. Both Yan et al. and Hong et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose radar systems for performing signal processing and detecting objects over a plurality of frames. Yan et al. discloses the limitations of claim 1 outlined above. However, Yan et al. fails to explicitly disclose controlling a radiation pattern of the transmission wave and a transmission wave with a varied radiation pattern is included at least once. This feature is disclosed by Hong et al. where “the signal processor 240 can: control transmission and/or receipt of probe signals… control probe signal modification… and/or modifying probe signal characteristics…” (Hong et al.¶ [0037]) and “The additional phase variance preferably changes over time (e.g., changing between each chirp, changing between sets of multiple chirps, changing during a chirp such as changing more than once for each chirp, etc.)…” (Hong et al. ¶ [0054]). The combination of Yan et al. and Hong et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to vary the chirp pattern so that does not match the pattern of any other radar system concurrently transmitting in order to mitigate radar interference (Hong et al.¶ [0024]).
Regarding claim 14 (Currently Amended), Yan et al. as modified above discloses:
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing computer program instructions, which when executed by an electronic device (Yan et al. vehicle mounted radar system, ¶ [0023]), cause the electronic device, to:
transmit a transmission wave using a transmission antenna (Yan et al. “Both the emitter and detector may comprise multiple elements to form an antenna array as is known in the art. So in other words the objects in the environment are illuminated with radar, and echo signals (radar reflections/detections/returns) are received for processing in the later steps.” - ¶ [0023]);
receive a reflected wave, which is the reflected transmission wave, using a reception antenna (Yan et al. “Both the emitter and detector may comprise multiple elements to form an antenna array as is known in the art. So in other words the objects in the environment are illuminated with radar, and echo signals (radar reflections/detections/returns) are received for processing in the later steps.” - ¶ [0023]);
detect an object on a basis of a transmission signal transmitted as the transmission wave and a reception signal received as the reflected wave (Yan et al. “The emitter/detection units are mounted on the (host) vehicle 1, which includes processing means to process data of the radar returns.” - ¶ [0021]);
perform control such that, when the transmission wave is transmitted a plurality of times in certain units (Yan et al. “Multi-scan detections provide data with respect to detections from multiple snapshots (at a plurality of time instants).” - ¶ [0026]),
output a result of the detection of the object on a basis of a selected cluster, whose area of a range over which a point group spreads (Yan et al. “In this step a spread function is determined. This can be alternatively regarded as an "extension estimation". The term "extension" or "spread" may be regarded as a parameter relating to the spread in the cluster with regard to any radar parameter (variable); this may be in one, two or three dimensional space for example but is not limited to spatial extension/spread.” - ¶ [0028]) is the smallest among a plurality of clusters obtained by performing clustering on results of detection performed on the object the plurality of times (Yan et al. “The figure also shows different types of objects in the vehicle environment (proximity) and may include "objects-of-interest" (targets such as another vehicle 2) and "object of non-interest" (clutter, interfering objects) in the view of the radar, such as guide rails, trees and such like.” - ¶ [0021]; “It is noted that reflection density is closely connected to the scattering structure of the objects in physics. The denser the scattering structures on an object, the greater the reflection-density. Guardrails contain lots of free space in structure. Hence reflection-density of guardrails is typically less than that of vehicles. Refection-density of poles is also difference from that of vehicles.” -¶ [0055]; where vehicle is selected as the object-of-interest, and the vehicle having the highest reflection-density has the smallest spread).
Hong et al. discloses:
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing computer program instructions (Hong et al. “The instructions are preferably executed by computer-executable components preferably integrated with the system. The computer-readable medium can be stored on any suitable computer readable media such as RAMs, ROMs, flash memory, EEPROMs, optical devices (CD or DVD), hard drives, floppy drives, or any suitable device.”- ¶ [0089]), which when executed by an electronic device (Hong et al. system 200, Fig. 2A), cause the electronic device, to:
control a radiation pattern of the transmission wave (Hong et al. “In examples, the signal processor 240 can: control transmission and/or receipt of probe signals… control probe signal modification… and/or modifying probe signal characteristics…” - ¶ [0037]);
a transmission wave with a varied radiation pattern is included at least once (Hong et al. “The additional phase variance preferably changes over time (e.g., changing between each chirp, changing between sets of multiple chirps, changing during a chirp such as changing more than once for each chirp, etc.)…” - ¶ [0054]);
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Hong et al. into the invention of Yan et al. to yield the invention of claim 1 above. Both Yan et al. and Hong et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose radar systems for performing signal processing and detecting objects over a plurality of frames. Yan et al. discloses the limitations of claim 1 outlined above. However, Yan et al. fails to explicitly disclose a controller that controls a radiation pattern of the transmission wave. This feature is disclosed by Hong et al. where “the signal processor 240 can: control transmission and/or receipt of probe signals… control probe signal modification… and/or modifying probe signal characteristics…” (Hong et al.¶ [0037]). The combination of Yan et al. and Hong et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to vary the chirp pattern so that does not match the pattern of any other radar system concurrently transmitting in order to mitigate radar interference (Hong et al.¶ [0024]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAOMI M WOLFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-3929. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 4:30 pm 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, 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.
NAOMI M. WOLFORD
Examiner
Art Unit 3648
/N.M.W./ Examiner, Art Unit 3648
8 JAN 2026
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648