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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 05/21/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 05/21/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding Applicant’s argument (REMARKS page 5) about the objection to claim 20, the objection has been overcome by the amendment.
Regarding Applicant’s argument (REMARKS pages 5-10) about the rejections of claims 14-25 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), the rejections have been overcome by the amendment and the explanations/clarifications.
Regarding Applicant’s argument (REMARKS page 10) about the rejections of claims 14-25 under 35 U.S.C. 102, Examiner disagrees because:
1) Roger (‘052) Fig.5 item 505, Fig.10 (measurement dots in item 1001 (MMIC#1) and 1002 (MMIC#2)), and Fig.15 (measurement dots in MMIC#1 and MMIC#2) clearly shows the claimed language “forming a subset of antenna signals by omitting at least one antenna signal from a complete set of the antenna signals”, in which:
i) Fig.5 item 505 is “a subset of antenna”;
ii) the (measurement dots in Fig.10 and Fig.15 are “a subset of antenna signals”;
iii) measurement dots from MMIC#1 can be interpreted as “a subset of antenna signals” and measurement dots from MMIC#2 can be interpreted as “omitting at least one antenna signal from a complete set of the antenna signals”;
iv) measurement dots from MMIC#1 and MMIC#2 can be interpreted as “a complete set of the antenna signals”.
2) There is no claimed language regarding “actively forming a subset”. And it is not clear what belongs to the “actively forming”. The measurement dots from MMIC#1 in Roger (‘052) Fig.10 and Fig.15 are “actively” formed “a subset” because they are measured data and they form a cluster.
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.
Claims 14-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Roger et al. (US 12,189,052, hereafter Roger).
Regarding claim 14, Roger (‘052) discloses that A method for detecting erroneous antenna signals from a radar sensor having a plurality of antennas { Fig.5 item 503, 504 (transmit antennas), 505, 506 (receive antennas); Fig.10; Col.2 lines 7 (A method is provided for processing radar signals), 9 (determining a variation of at least one radar parameter), 21-22 (determined whether a single parameter falls outside a predefined (maximum) variation), 66 (determining an error compensation vector); col.9 lines 47-48 (Each MMIC 501, 502 is coupled with M transmit antennas 503, 504 and N receive antennas 505, 506); Examiner’s note: col.2 lines 21-22 and Fig.10 for “detecting erroneous antenna signals” }, the method comprising the following steps:
forming a subset of antenna signals by omitting at least one antenna signal from a complete set of the antenna signals { Fig.5 item 505; Fig.10 measurement dots in item 1001 (MMIC#1) and 1002 (MMIC#2); Fig.15 measurement dots in MMIC#1 and MMIC#2; Examiner’s note: measurement dots in MMIC#2 is interpreted as “omitting at least one antenna signal” };
estimating a direction to an object using the subset and an antenna pattern of the radar sensor {Fig.5; Fig.9; Fig.15 fit line using MMIC#1 (see mark below); Fig.24; col.14 line 58-67 (For each selected target (known to be unique in this R/D cell), (substantially) linear phase variations across virtual channels are expected based on a uniquely detected angle θ. 2) The ideal phase slope can be deduced from the expected phase delay from one channel to the next:
PNG
media_image1.png
20
91
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,wherein n is the channel and s is the distance between antennas.); Examiner’s note: Fig.5 for “an antenna pattern”. Fig.9 and Fig.15 fit line for “estimating a direction to an object”. Fig.24 shows that phase offset is obtained from direction θ. };
PNG
media_image2.png
557
882
media_image2.png
Greyscale
determining a correlation value of the subset of the antenna signals with the antenna pattern in the estimated direction { Fig.11; Fig.15 fit line with measurement dots in MMIC#1 with real phases on Rx array; Fig.16 fit line with measurement dots in MMIC#1 with real phases on Rx array; col.19 lines 50-55 (determine the constant by calculating for k=0 ... (K-1):
PNG
media_image3.png
17
196
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, wherein mA[k] is a slope obtained ( e.g., by linear line fitting) for the phases); Examiner’s note:
PNG
media_image3.png
17
196
media_image3.png
Greyscale
for “a correlation value”}; and
classifying the at least one omitted antenna signal as erroneous when the correlation value satisfies a selection condition { Fig.11; Fig.16 fit line with measurement dots in MMIC#1 and MMIC#2; col.19 lines 39-41 (determine the constant mA such that
PNG
media_image4.png
15
148
media_image4.png
Greyscale
is minimized) , 65 (There is a P[k*] with a minimum sqErr[k*]); col.20 lines 17-18 (the best compensation value ( as indicated by arrow 1106 in); Examiner’s note: results from MMIC#2 shows “erroneous” }.
Regarding claim 15, which depends on claim 14, Roger (‘052) discloses that in the method,
a further subset is formed from the complete set by omitting at least one other antenna signal from the complete set when the correlation value does not satisfy the selection condition { Fig.5 item 506; Fig.10 measurement dots in item 1001 (MMIC#1) and 1002 (MMIC#2); Fig.15 measurement dots in MMIC#1 and MMIC#2; Examiner’s note: measurement dots in MMIC#2 is interpreted as “the subset” for the case that “when the correlation value does not satisfy the selection condition”. measurement dots in MMIC#1 is interpreted as “a further subset” and measurement dots in MMIC#2 is interpreted as “omitting at least one other antenna signal” },
wherein a further direction to the object is estimated using the further subset and the antenna pattern { Fig.5 item 506; Fig.9; Fig.15 fit line using MMIC#1 (see mark below); Fig.24; col.14 line 58-67 (For each selected target (known to be unique in this R/D cell), (substantially) linear phase variations across virtual channels are expected based on a uniquely detected angle θ. 2) The ideal phase slope can be deduced from the expected phase delay from one channel to the next:
PNG
media_image1.png
20
91
media_image1.png
Greyscale
,wherein n is the channel and s is the distance between antennas.); Examiner’s note: Fig.5 item 506 for “the antenna pattern”. Fig.9 and Fig.15 fit line for “a further direction to the object is estimated”. Fig.24 shows that phase offset is obtained from direction θ.}, and
PNG
media_image2.png
557
882
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a further correlation value of the further subset of the antenna signals with the antenna pattern in the estimated further direction is determined { Fig.11; Fig.15 fit line with measurement dots in MMIC#1 with real phases on Rx array; Fig.16 fit line with measurement dots in MMIC#1 with real phases on Rx array; col.19 lines 50-55 (determine the constant by calculating for k=0 ... (K-1):
PNG
media_image3.png
17
196
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, wherein mA[k] is a slope obtained ( e.g., by linear line fitting) for the phases); Examiner’s note:
PNG
media_image3.png
17
196
media_image3.png
Greyscale
for “a correlation value”}, and
wherein the at least one omitted other antenna signal is classified as erroneous when the further correlation value satisfies the selection condition { Fig.11; Fig.16 fit line with measurement dots in MMIC#1 and MMIC#2; col.19 lines 39-41 (determine the constant mA such that
PNG
media_image4.png
15
148
media_image4.png
Greyscale
is minimized) , 65 (There is a P[k*] with a minimum sqErr[k*]); col.20 lines 17-18 (the best compensation value ( as indicated by arrow 1106 in); Examiner’s note: results from MMIC#2 shows “erroneous”}.
Regarding claim 16, which depends on claims 14-15, Roger (‘052) discloses that in the method,
the correlation value and the further correlation value are compared to one another when none of the correlation value and the further correlation value satisfies the selection condition { Fig.11; Fig.15; Examiner’s note: both fit line from MMIC#1 and fit line from MMIC#2 are off the real phase on Rx array},
PNG
media_image2.png
557
882
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the at least one omitted antenna signal or the at least one other omitted antenna signal with a greatest correlation value is classified as erroneous { Figs.15-16 measurement dots from MMIC#2; col.19 lines 39-41 (determine the constant mA such that
PNG
media_image4.png
15
148
media_image4.png
Greyscale
is minimized); col.20 lines 16-17 (the best compensation value ( as indicated by arrow 1106 in); Examiner’s note: Fig.16 shows that measurement dots from MMIC#2 has “a greatest correlation value” |m1 -mA| > |m0-mA|.}.
Regarding claim 17, which depends on claim 14, Roger (‘052) discloses that in the method,
a rough direction to the object is ascertained using all antenna signals and the antenna pattern {Fig.9},
wherein the estimation of the direction using the subset is limited to a direction range around the rough direction { Fig.10 items 1001, 1002 are around 1003}.
Regarding claim 18, which depends on claim 14, Roger (‘052) discloses that in the method,
the subset includes at least three antenna signals { col.9 lines 47-50 (Each MMIC 501, 502 is coupled with M transmit antennas 503, 504 and N receive antennas 505, 506. In this example N=M=4, i.e. each MMIC 501, 502 has four transmit channels and four receive channels.)}.
Regarding claim 19, which depends on claim 14, Roger (‘052) discloses that in the method,
a rough direction to the object is read in and the estimation of the direction using the subset is limited to a direction range around the rough direction {Fig.9; Fig.10 items 1001, 1002 are around 1003; Examiner’s note: Fig.10 item 1003 is interpreted as “read in” because it is estimated first in Fig.9},
wherein the subset includes at least two of the antenna signals { col.9 lines 47-50 (Each MMIC 501, 502 is coupled with M transmit antennas 503, 504 and N receive antennas 505, 506. In this example N=M=4, i.e. each MMIC 501, 502 has four transmit channels and four receive channels.)}.
Regarding claim 20, which depends on claim 14, Roger (‘052) discloses that in the method,
the object is selected using all of the antenna signals and at least one object criterion from a group of objects represented in the antenna signals {Fig.19; Fig.24; Col.21 lines 62-66 (When there is a single object in one range-Doppler bin, the situation is preferable since the sample groups 1001, 1002 each lie (approximately) on a respective straight line ( even if there is a phase shift between the sample groups and thus a shift between the two lines).)}.
Regarding claim 21, which depends on claim 14, Roger (‘052) discloses that in the method,
a compensation value for the at least one antenna signal classified as erroneous is calculated using the estimated direction { Fig.11 item 1106, mA; col.19 lines 39-41 (determine the constant mA such that
PNG
media_image4.png
15
148
media_image4.png
Greyscale
is minimized) , 65 (There is a P[k*] with a minimum sqErr[k*]); col.20 lines 12-14 (Value pairs of P[k] and sqErr[k] are interpolated by a parabola 1301 with a minimum 1302 to determine the best compensation value 15), 17-18 (the best compensation value ( as indicated by arrow 1106 in); Examiner’s note: results from MMIC#2 shows “erroneous”},
wherein the at least one antenna signal classified as erroneous and/or the antenna pattern is compensated using the compensation value { Fig.11 item 1102, 1104, 1106; col.20 lines 17-18 (the best compensation value ( as indicated by arrow 1106); Examiner’s note: results from MMIC#2 shows “erroneous”}.
Regarding claim 22, which depends on claim 14, Roger (‘052) discloses that in the method,
the at least one erroneous antenna signal is determined via at least two measurements of the object { Fig.10 four measurements in MMIC#2}.
Regarding claim 23, which depends on claim 22, Roger (‘052) discloses that in the method,
one compensation value is calculated per measurement { Fig.11 each measurement has one offset with respect to item 1105},
wherein the compensation values of the measurements are time-filtered to obtain a filtered compensation value { col.11 lines 1-2 (generate an averaged error compensation vector before applying it to other areas of the range/Doppler map); col.17 lines 65-67 (compute an error compensation vector and normal acquisitions may be conducted in an interleaved way. Hence an error compensation vector may); col.18 line 1 (( e.g., periodically or at a given time scheme) be determined); Examiner’s note: “averaged error compensation vector” is “time-filtered” “filtered compensation value” because “an error compensation vector” “periodically” “be determined” and “average” performs smoothing filter},
wherein the at least one antenna signal classified as erroneous and/or the antenna pattern is compensated using the filtered compensation value {Fig.11 item 1106; col.11 lines 1-2 (generate an averaged error compensation vector before applying it to other areas of the range/Doppler map); col.20 lines 17-18 (the best compensation value ( as indicated by arrow 1106); Examiner’s note: “average” for “filtered compensation value”}.
Regarding claim 24, Roger (‘052) discloses that A control device { Fig.1 item 103 (radar control device); Col.4 lines 55-57 (A device is suggested for processing radar signals comprising, wherein the device is configured to conduct the steps of the method as described herein.); col.6 lines 48 (Fig.1), 50 (a radar control device 103) } configured to detect erroneous antenna signals from a radar sensor having a plurality of antennas, the control device configured to:
form a subset of antenna signals by omitting at least one antenna signal from a complete set of the antenna signals;
estimate a direction to an object using the subset and an antenna pattern of the radar sensor;
determine a correlation value of the subset of the antenna signals with the antenna pattern in the estimated direction; and
classify the at least one omitted antenna signal as erroneous when the correlation value satisfies a selection condition.
{The claim limitations above are the same or substantially the same scope as the corresponding claim limitations in claim 14. Therefore the claim limitations above are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as in claim 14. See the rejections of claim 14}.
Regarding claim 25, Roger (‘052) discloses that A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium on which is stored a computer program for detecting erroneous antenna signals from a radar sensor having a plurality of antennas, the computer program, when executed by a computer {Fig.1; Col.5 lines 16-19 (a computer program product is suggested, which is directly loadable into a memory of a digital processing device, comprising software code portions for performing the steps of the method as described herein) }, causing the computer to perform the following steps:
forming a subset of antenna signals by omitting at least one antenna signal from a complete set of the antenna signals;
estimating a direction to an object using the subset and an antenna pattern of the radar sensor;
determining a correlation value of the subset of the antenna signals with the antenna pattern in the estimated direction; and
classifying the at least one omitted antenna signal as erroneous when the correlation value satisfies a selection condition.
{The claim limitations above are the same or substantially the same scope as the corresponding claim limitations in claim 14. Therefore the claim limitations above are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as in claim 14. See the rejections of claim 14}.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 YONGHONG LI whose telephone number is (571)272-5946. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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.
/YONGHONG LI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights