DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the initial filing filed on April 14, 2024.
Claims 6-7, 13, 21-22, and 25 are cancelled.
Claims 1-5, 8-12, 14-20, 23-24, and 26 have been examined in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 4/14/2024 has been acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 .
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 1-2, 4-5, 12, 14, 16--17, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Esplin et al (US 2017/0016944 A1) in view of Burke et al (US 4896164 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Esplin teaches a system for testing radio sensors within large temperature ranges comprising [0002 for thermal testing of RF (radar) antennas]:
a DUT chamber for accommodating a radar device under test (DUT) [0004 for a anechoic chamber (DUT) chamber and 0029 for thermal testing system element 2020];
a target zone for accommodating a test target [0002 for RF energy transmitted by the antenna and 0029 for temperature effects of received signals]; and
wherein: the partition unit comprises a thermally insulating material that is transparent to radiation generated by the radar device under test [0005 for high temperature, low dielectric chamber with 0025 for heat chamber is substantially transparent].
Esplin fails to explicitly teach radar and a partition unit for dividing the DUT chamber from the target zone.
Burke has a radar-transparent window may be architecturally and structurally mounted within the walls of a building (abstract) and teaches radar and a partition unit for dividing the DUT chamber from the target zone [figure 1 element 10 for window between radar antenna 16 and radar target element 18 with col 2, lines 1-10 for having a radar window interposed between antenna and target inherently performing a dividing function].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the separation calculations as taught by Burke for the purpose to provide great security (Burke, col 2, lines 1-10).
Regarding Claim 2, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the partition unit comprises at least one layer having radio frequency transparency of between 1.02 and 1.10.
Burke has a radar-transparent window may be architecturally and structurally mounted within the walls of a building (abstract) and teaches the partition unit comprises at least one layer having radio frequency transparency of between 1.02 and 1.10 [col 2, lines 30-40 for dielectric constant].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the separation calculations as taught by Burke for the purpose to provide great security (Burke, col 2, lines 1-10).
Regarding Claim 4, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the partition unit comprises a first plastic layer, a second plastic layer and a thermal insulating radio frequency window sandwiched between the first plastic layer and the second plastic layer.
Burke has a radar-transparent window may be architecturally and structurally mounted within the walls of a building (abstract) and teaches the partition unit comprises a first plastic layer, a second plastic layer and a thermal insulating radio frequency window sandwiched between the first plastic layer and the second plastic layer [col 2, lines 20-40 for rigid polyimide foam with interior layer element 26 and exterior layer element 22].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the separation calculations as taught by Burke for the purpose to make a panel which is architecturally and structurally sound (Burke, col 2, lines 45-55).
Regarding Claim 5, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the partition unit comprises a foam closed-cell material.
Burke has a radar-transparent window may be architecturally and structurally mounted within the walls of a building (abstract) and teaches the partition unit comprises a foam closed-cell material [col 2, lines 20-40 for rigid polyimide foam with interior layer element 26 and exterior layer element 22].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the separation calculations as taught by Burke for the purpose to make a panel which is architecturally and structurally sound (Burke, col 2, lines 45-55).
Regarding Claim 12, Esplin teaches the partition unit comprises a dome-shaped thermally isolating radome window [0026 for hemispherical (dome) shaped radome].
Regarding Claim 14, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the target zone comprises an open-air zone for outdoor testing.
Burke has a radar-transparent window may be architecturally and structurally mounted within the walls of a building (abstract) and teaches the target zone comprises an open-air zone for outdoor testing [col 2, lines 1-10 for external located radar (open air) and figure 1 element 18].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the separation calculations as taught by Burke for the purpose to make a panel which is architecturally and structurally sound (Burke, col 2, lines 45-55).
Regarding Claim 16, Esplin teaches the condensation prevention unit comprises a heating element configured to warm the partition unit [0026 for using an electric heater].
Regarding Claim 17, Esplin teaches the condensation prevention unit comprises two concentric shells, between which a stream of hot air is introduced [0034 for having inlet and outlet (stream for air)].
Regarding Claim 24, Esplin teaches the target zone comprises a chamber with inner walls lined with radio frequency absorbers [0029 for rf absorbing materials in the chamber].
Claims 3, 11, 15, 18-20, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Esplin et al (US 2017/0016944 A1) in view of Burke et al (US 4896164 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hines et al (US 4860602 A).
Regarding Claim 3, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the partition unit comprises at least one layer having thermal conductivity between 25 milliwatts per millikelvin and 35 milliwatts per millikelvin.
Hines has a thermally insulated test chamber for performing antenna testing over a broad frequency range (abstract) and teaches the partition unit comprises at least one layer having thermal conductivity between 25 milliwatts per millikelvin and 35 milliwatts per millikelvin [col 2, lines 20-40 for using polystyrene foam insulation].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the separation calculations as taught by Hines for the purpose to provide thermal insulation with little or no reflection or absorption of RF energy (Hines, col 2, lines 20-35).
Regarding Claim 11, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the partition unit comprises a planar thermally isolating radome window.
Hines has a thermally insulated test chamber for performing antenna testing over a broad frequency range (abstract) and teaches the partition unit comprises a planar thermally isolating radome window [figure 1 element 20 for a planar window].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the separation calculations as taught by Hines for the purpose to provide thermal insulation with little or no reflection or absorption of RF energy (Hines, col 2, lines 20-35).
Regarding Claim 15, Esplin fails to explicitly teach a condensation prevention unit operable to prevent condensation forming on the partition unit.
Hines has a thermally insulated test chamber for performing antenna testing over a broad frequency range (abstract) and teaches the partition unit comprises a planar thermally isolating radome window [figure 1 element 20 for a planar window].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the construction calculations as taught by Hines for the purpose to provide thermal insulation with little or no reflection or absorption of RF energy (Hines, col 2, lines 20-35).
Regarding Claim 18, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the DUT chamber comprises a thermal chamber operable to maintain ambient temperatures between −40 Celsius and +125 Celsius.
Hines has a thermally insulated test chamber for performing antenna testing over a broad frequency range (abstract) and teaches the DUT chamber comprises a thermal chamber operable to maintain ambient temperatures between −40 Celsius and +125 Celsius [col 3, lines 55 to col 4, lines 5].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the separation calculations as taught by Hines for the purpose to control temperature in the test chamber (Hines, col 3, lines 55-65).
Regarding Claim 19, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the DUT chamber comprises a thermal chamber and an openable lid wherein: when in an open configuration, the lid is removed providing access to the thermal chamber; when in a closed configuration, the lid presses against thermally resistant silicon pads.
Hines has a thermally insulated test chamber for performing antenna testing over a broad frequency range (abstract) and the DUT chamber comprises a thermal chamber and an openable lid wherein: when in an open configuration, the lid is removed providing access to the thermal chamber [col 3, lines 5-15 for having a chamber with removable end panel (open configuration)];
when in a closed configuration, the lid presses against thermally resistant silicon pads [col 3 lines 5-15 for layers of polystyrene insulation].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the temperature calculations as taught by Burke for the purpose to provide access into the test chamber (Hines, col 3, lines 20-25).
Regarding Claim 20, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the thermal chamber is fluidly coupled to a thermal machine operable to cool or heat a temperature regulation fluid and to provide a stream of the temperature regulation fluid through the thermal chamber.
Hines has a thermally insulated test chamber for performing antenna testing over a broad frequency range (abstract) and teaches the thermal chamber is fluidly coupled to a thermal machine operable to cool or heat a temperature regulation fluid and to provide a stream of the temperature regulation fluid through the thermal chamber [col 3, lines 40-55 for means to inject hot or cold air (regulate temperature)].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the air temperature calculations as taught by Hines for the purpose to circulate air within the chamber (Hines, col 3, lines 45-55).
Regarding Claim 23, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the thermal machine further comprises a fluid pump and the stream of temperature regulation fluid is provided by pump action.
Hines has a thermally insulated test chamber for performing antenna testing over a broad frequency range (abstract) and teaches the thermal machine further comprises a fluid pump and the stream of temperature regulation fluid is provided by pump action [col 3, lines 40-55 for means to inject hot or cold air (regulate temperature)].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the air temperature calculations as taught by Hines for the purpose to circulate air within the chamber (Hines, col 3, lines 45-55).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Esplin et al (US 2017/0016944 A1) in view of Burke et al (US 4896164 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mackenzie (US 5408244 A).
Regarding Claim 8, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the partition unit has a radome thickness or half the radar's transmission wavelength.
Mackenzie has a multi-layer radome construction (abstract) and teaches the partition unit has a radome thickness or half the radar's transmission wavelength [col 1, lines 35-45 for an electrical thickness of ½ wavelength].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the layer calculations as taught by Mackenzie for the purpose to provide adequate strength and rigidity (Mackenzie, col 1, lines 45-55).
Regarding Claim 9, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the partition unit comprises multiple antireflective layers.
Mackenzie has a multi-layer radome construction (abstract) and teaches the partition unit comprises multiple antireflective layers [col 4, lines 5-15 and col 4 lines 55-6- for D sandwich (multiple layers)].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the layer calculations as taught by Mackenzie for the purpose to optimize performance design (Mackenzie, col 4, lines 55-60).
Regarding Claim 10, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the multiple antireflective layers comprises a first quarterwave radome lining layer, a second quarterwave radome lining layer and a radome foam layer sandwiched between the first quarterwave radome lining layer and the second quarterwave radome lining layer.
Mackenzie has a multi-layer radome construction (abstract) and teaches the multiple antireflective layers comprises a first quarterwave radome lining layer, a second quarterwave radome lining layer and a radome foam layer sandwiched between the first quarterwave radome lining layer and the second quarterwave radome lining layer [col 5, lines 45-60 for optimum spacing between skin layers of ¼ wavelength (quarterwave)].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the layer calculations as taught by Mackenzie for the purpose to optimize performance design (Mackenzie, col 4, lines 55-60).
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Esplin et al (US 2017/0016944 A1) in view of Burke et al (US 4896164 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Russell et al (US 6,114,985 A).
Regarding Claim 26, Esplin fails to explicitly teach the test target comprises a point target.
Russell has a test station for testing the performance of an automotive Forward Looking Sensor (abstract) and teaches the test target comprises a point target [col 9, lines 30-35 for single element array].
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 testing chamber techniques, as disclosed by Esplin, further including the point calculations as taught by Russell for the purpose to accommodate a particular test application (Russell, col 9, lines 30-35).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tockstein et al (US 2013/0125676 A1) has a radio-frequency transparent window having internal conduits for the passage of cooling fluid is configured for simulating a highly uniform thermal environment for testing a device.
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