CTNF 18/722,811 CTNF 96215 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/12/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered by the examiner. Examiner’s Note To help the reader, examiner notes in this detailed action claim language is in bold, strikethrough limitations are not explicitly taught and language added to explain a reference mapping are isolated from quotations via square brackets. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claim(s) 21 and 36 is/are 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. 07-34-05 Claim 21 recites the limitation ‘ the LNA’ . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Regarding claim 36, the term “ significantly less than 100 nm ” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ significantly less ” is not defined by the claim. Since this limitation is undefined and unrestricted by the Applicant, the Examiner asserts that its scope is undefined. However, in the interest of compact prosecution and for the purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret such limitation as any number under 100nm. Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 8-15 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Regarding claim(s) 8-15 , Applicant's claim(s) encompass an invention that the prior art does not disclose, teach, or otherwise render obvious. For instance, Liu in view of Hekimian fail to disclose the specific displacement-induced phase delays as recited within claim 8. As best understood within the context of Applicant' s claimed invention as a whole, these limitations do not appear to be disclosed, taught, nor otherwise rendered obvious by the prior art. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-2, 5-7, 16, 18-19, 22-26, 28-35, 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US PAT 11051703 hereinafter Liu) in view of Hekimian et al. (US PAT 3711773 hereinafter Hekimian) . Regarding claim 1, Liu teaches A displacement-sensing Doppler radar, comprising (para 6 “Doppler radar.”) : a first frequency synthesizer (para 12 “signal generator 136”) configured to generate a transmitted signal of a first frequency (fi), which is radiated toward a target object (para 15 “phase locked loop, the output signal of the phase or frequency comparator is independent of the fixed phase offset between the transmitted signal and the reflected signal”; para 12 “transmitting a radio frequency signal towards the subject;”) ; a second frequency synthesizer configured to generate a local oscillator (LO) signal of a second frequency (f2) different from the first frequency (para 25 “The PLL further includes a numerically controlled oscillator (NCO) 152. The NCO 152 implements a reference signal generator and provides an adjustable second reference signal F[n] as output, which is provided on the second input of the phase or frequency comparator 146.”; para 31 “Thus, the transmitted frequency f.sub.t and a reference frequency f.sub.r should differ in order to enable detection of the vital signs.”) ; a mixer configured to (para 36 “A mixer”) : receive a returned signal from the target object carrying displacement-induced phase delays corresponding to detected displacements of the target object; and mix the returned signal and the LO signal to generate a down-converted intermediate frequency (IF) signal (para 18 “The reflected signal R(t) and the local oscillator signal LO(t) may be provided to a mixer 132, which may down-convert the reflected signal R(t) to an intermediate frequency f.sub.IF, which is the difference between a transmitted frequency f.sub.t and a reference frequency f.sub.r of the local oscillator signal”) , wherein the down-converted IF signal carries the displacement-induced phase delays; a phase demodulation module configured to convert the displacement-induced phase delays into a modulated pulse signal (para 37 “the output signal V.sub.e[n] of the phase or frequency comparator 146 becomes proportional to the modulations induced by the time-varying displacement of the tissue.”; para 4 “continuous-wave (CW) radar, also known as a Doppler radar, transmits a radio frequency single-tone continuous-wave signal which is reflected by a target and then demodulated in a receiver.”) ; and a low-pass filter (LPF) configured to convert the modulated pulse signal into an output signal having a voltage value indicative of the detected displacements (para 4 “In the receiver, the transmitted signal may be mixed with the reflected Doppler-shifted signal to produce a mixing product which, following low pass filtering, results in a baseband signal including a low frequency component that is directly proportional to the instantaneous surface displacement.”; para 24 “A phase-demodulator configuration allows determining a displacement of the target, as phase and displacement are related by a constant which depends on the transmitted frequency and sensitivity of a generator of the adjustable second reference signal.”) . Liu does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Hekimian teaches a phase demodulation module configured to convert the displacement-induced phase delays into a modulated pulse signal (para 23 “More particularly, the filtered voltage controls the reactance modulator section Q104 and the VCO to vary the effects of C125 in the oscillator tank circuit and thereby adjust the phase of the oscillator in response to phase differences existing between the test and reference signals.”; para 2 “in addition phase deviation of high frequency signals can also be measured by utilizing the high frequency as a carrier for the audio tone, demodulating the carrier, and applying the resulting audio tone to the system of FIG. 1.”) Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Hekimian with the teachings of Liu . One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve signal transmission ( Hekimian para 5). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Hekimian merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular modulation features. Since both Liu and Hekimian disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 2, the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 1, wherein the first frequency synthesizer and the second frequency synthesizer use a common reference ( REF ) signal of a reference frequency ( f REF ) to generate the transmitted signal and the LO signal so that the transmitted signal and the LO signal have correlated phase noises according to the phase noise of the common REF signal (Liu para 29 the transmitted signal is generated by a first phase-locked loop and the first reference signal is generated by a second phase-locked loop, wherein the first phase-locked loop and the second phase-locked loop uses the same reference clock. The use of the same reference clock implies that the transmitter and the receiver make use of the same oscillator, whereby phase noise of the transmitted signal and the first reference signal may be partially correlated “) . Regarding claim 5 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 2, further comprising a rectifier positioned between the mixer and the phase demodulation module and configured to rectify the down-converted IF signal from a sine-wave signal into a square-wave IF signal, wherein rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal are synchronized with the rising/falling zero-crossings of the sine-wave signal . Liu does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Hekimian teaches further comprising a rectifier positioned between the mixer and the phase demodulation module and configured to rectify the down-converted IF signal from a sine-wave signal into a square-wave IF signal (Hekimian para 20 “The other of the exclusive OR input signals is provided by limiter or squaring amplifier 161 driven by (VCO) 17”) , wherein rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal are synchronized with the rising/falling zero-crossings of the sine-wave signal (Hekimian para 19 “Differential amplifier 160 detects zero-crossings of the input signal and provides a square wave at its output terminal; the amplifier therefore serves as limiter 11, operating as an open loop zero-crossing detector.”; fig 6-7) . Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Hekimian with the teachings of Liu . One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve signal transmission ( Hekimian para 5). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Hekimian merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular modulation features. Since both Liu and Hekimian disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 6 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 5, wherein the rectifier has a constant phase-to-phase conversion gain when converting the rising/falling zero-crossings of the sine-wave signal into the rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal . Liu does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Hekimian teaches wherein the rectifier has a constant phase-to-phase conversion gain (Hekimian para 3 “The incoming test signal is applied to a limiter 11 which provides a square wave version of the input signal, having zero-crossings in time coincidence with those of the input signal.”) when converting the rising/falling zero-crossings of the sine-wave signal into the rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal (Hekimian para 19 “Differential amplifier 160 detects zero-crossings of the input signal and provides a square wave at its output terminal; the amplifier therefore serves as limiter 11, operating as an open loop zero-crossing detector. DC stabilization is provided by resistors R103, R104 and capacitor C104.”) . Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Hekimian with the teachings of Liu . One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve signal transmission ( Hekimian para 5). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Hekimian merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular modulation features. Since both Liu and Hekimian disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 7 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 5, wherein the displacement-induced phase delays are embedded in the temporal locations of the rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal . Liu does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Hekimian teaches wherein the displacement-induced phase delays are embedded in the temporal locations of the rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal (Hekimian claim 1 “the duty cycle of said output square wave is proportional to the degree of phase displacement between said input and reference signals;”) . Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Hekimian with the teachings of Liu . One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve signal transmission ( Hekimian para 5). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Hekimian merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular modulation features. Since both Liu and Hekimian disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 16 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 1, wherein both the first frequency synthesizer and the second frequency synthesizer are low phase noise synthesizers (Liu 34 “the reflected signal R(t) and the first reference signal LO(t) are partially correlated and residual phase noise may therefore insignificantly influence the vital sign carrying signal B[n].”) . Regarding claim 18 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 5, wherein the Doppler radar is configured to avoid detection nulls by: using the rectifier to perform a constant-gain phase-to-phase conversion from the sine-wave IF signal into the square-wave IF signal; using the phase demodulation module to perform a constant-gain phase-to-pulse width/duty cycle conversion from the square-wave IF signal into the modulated pulse signal; and using the low pass filter to perform a constant-gain duty-cycle-to-voltage-level conversion from the modulated pulse signal to the output voltage signal . Liu does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Hekimian teaches using the rectifier to perform a constant-gain phase-to-phase conversion from the sine-wave IF signal into the square-wave IF signal (Hekimian para 5 “The output signal from filter 21 is applied to rectifier 23 where it is full wave rectified and applied to an average jitter detector circuit 25. This circuit provides a dc output signal having an amplitude corresponding to the average value of the rectified signal provided by rectifier 23. The signal from detector 25 is applied to a meter switch 20 which selectively applies signals representing respective parameters to a meter 30.”) ; using the phase demodulation module to perform a constant-gain phase-to-pulse width/duty cycle conversion from the square-wave IF signal into the modulated pulse signal (Hekimian claim 7 “input signal and reference signal square waves are at different amplitude levels and having a second polarity when said input signal and reference signal square waves are at the same amplitude levels, whereby the duty cycle of said output square wave is proportional to the degree of phase displacement between said input and reference signals”) ; and using the low pass filter to perform a constant-gain duty-cycle-to-voltage-level conversion from the modulated pulse signal to the output voltage signal (Hekimian para 21 “This square wave is applied across cathode-connected zener diodes D107 and D108 to provide constant amplitude output pulses for following circuitry. These pulses are applied directly to the duty cycle-to-dc converter which comprises an active low pass filter having a cut-off frequency at approximately 250 Hz.”) . Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Hekimian with the teachings of Liu . One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve signal transmission ( Hekimian para 5). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Hekimian merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular modulation features. Since both Liu and Hekimian disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 19 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 1, wherein both the transmitted signal and the returned signal are single-tone signals without sidebands, which allows the displacement-induced phase delays to be extracted from the returned signal (Liu para 65 “The bandpass filter 319 could also be a lowpass filter or a highpass filter. Thus, a single-tone continuous-wave radio frequency signal T(t) may be passed to the transmitter antenna 112.”) using a single mixer without using a quadrature demodulation (Liu para 18 “The reflected signal R(t) and the local oscillator signal LO(t) may be provided to a mixer 132,”) configured of two mixers or a quadrature demodulation on the square-wave IF signal in digital signal processing to extract the displacement-induced phase delays (Liu para 28 “According to an embodiment, the vital sign carrying signal is a complex form combination of an inphase and a quadrature component. Thus, a phase-locked loop in digital domain may process a single complex form signal.”) . Regarding claim 22 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 1, further comprising no more than one ADC to convert the output voltage signal (Liu para 21 “The DSP 140 may further comprise an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) 144”) . Regarding claim 23 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 1, wherein: when the target object is undergoing a static displacement (Liu para 5 “a typical subject, an average maximum amplitude of the chest tissue displacement”) , the output voltage signal is a direct current (DC) signal having a level indicative of the static displacement (Liu para 9 “the vital sign may only be detected if DC information of the target is preserved.”) ; and when the target object is undergoing a vibrational displacement, the output voltage signal is a baseband signal having a frequency identical to the vibration frequency and having a voltage amplitude proportional to an amplitude of the vibrational displacement (Liu para 5 “a typical subject, an average maximum amplitude of the chest tissue displacement”; para 22 “The phase or frequency comparator 146 is arranged to provide an output signal V.sub.e[n] which is indicative of a phase difference between the vital sign carrying signal B[n] and the adjustable reference signal F[n].”) . Regarding claim 24 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 1, wherein the output signal can be used to distinguish the displacement directions of the target object based on the direction of change of the voltage value (Liu para 8 “Provided that the maximum amplitude of the displacement of the target is much smaller than the free-space wavelength of the transmitted signal, the VCO fine tuning voltage controlled by the PLL reflects the phase variation of the Doppler signal due to the heartbeat.”) . Regarding claim 25 , Liu teaches the cited prior art teaches A method for detecting object displacements using a Doppler radar, the method comprising (Liu para 6 “Doppler radar.”) : generating a transmitted signal of a first frequency (Liu para 12 “signal generator 136”) ; radiating the transmitted signal toward a target object to cause the transmitted signal to be reflected off the target object (Liu para 15 “phase locked loop, the output signal of the phase or frequency comparator is independent of the fixed phase offset between the transmitted signal and the reflected signal”; para 12 “transmitting a radio frequency signal towards the subject;”) ; receiving a returned signal reflected off the target object carrying displacement-induced phase delays corresponding to a type of detected displacement of the target object (Liu para 16 “the tissue in the chest region of the subject will, due to the heartbeat and respiration, exhibit a time-varying displacement along the direction of propagation of the transmitted signal T(t) and the reflected signal R(t).”) ; mixing the received signal with a local oscillator ( LO ) signal to generate a down-converted intermediate frequency ( IF ) signal, wherein the down-converted IF signal carries the displacement-induced phase delays (Liu para 17 “The first reference signal generator 134 may provide a first reference signal, which may hereinafter also be called a local oscillator (LO) signal.”) ; processing the down-converted IF signal so that the displacement-induced phase delays is converted into a modulated pulse signal (Liu para 35 “As described above, the reflected signal R(t) will be modulated by the time-varying displacement of the tissue emitting the reflected signal R(t).”) ; and converting the modulated pulse signal into an output signal having a voltage value indicative of the detected displacement (Liu para 9 “vital sign may only be detected if DC information of the target is preserved”) . Liu does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Hekimian teaches a modulated pulse signal (para 23 “More particularly, the filtered voltage controls the reactance modulator section Q104 and the VCO to vary the effects of C125 in the oscillator tank circuit and thereby adjust the phase of the oscillator in response to phase differences existing between the test and reference signals.”; para 2 “in addition phase deviation of high frequency signals can also be measured by utilizing the high frequency as a carrier for the audio tone, demodulating the carrier, and applying the resulting audio tone to the system of FIG. 1.”) Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Hekimian with the teachings of Liu . One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve signal transmission ( Hekimian para 5). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Hekimian merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular modulation features. Since both Liu and Hekimian disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 26 , the cited prior art teaches The method of claim 25, wherein prior to mixing the received signal with the LO signal, the method further comprises generating the LO signal at a second frequency different from the first frequency (Liu para 33 “the signal generator 136, the first reference signal generator 134 may be implemented as a phase-locked loop, which receives the reference clock signal and input of a reference frequency f.sub.r and generates a continuous wave radio frequency signal LO(t) having the reference frequency f.sub.r.”) , wherein both the first frequency and the second frequency are generated based on a common reference signal at a third frequency of f REF (Liu para 32 “As shown in FIG. 1, the device 100 may comprise an oscillator 116, which may provide a reference clock signal. The reference clock signal may be provided as input to the signal generator 136 and may drive the forming of the radio frequency signal T(t) by the transmitter 110. The signal generator 136 may be implemented as a phase-locked loop,”). ( Regarding claim 28 , the cited prior art teaches The method of claim 25, where the type of detected displacement of the target object includes a static displacement and/or a vibrational displacement (Liu para 5 “a typical subject, an average maximum amplitude of the chest tissue displacement”). Regarding claim 29 , the cited prior art teaches The method of claim 25, wherein the down-converted IF signal is a sine-wave IF signal, and wherein processing the down-converted IF signal to convert the displacement-induced phase delays into the modulated pulse signal further includes (Liu 37 “As described above, the feedback signal F[n] tracks the phase of the downconverted reflected signal R(t). Therefore, the output signal V.sub.e[n] of the phase or frequency comparator 146 becomes proportional to the modulations induced by the time-varying displacement of the tissue.”) : rectifying the sine-wave IF signal into a square-wave IF signal so that the rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal are synchronized with the rising/falling zero-crossings of the sine-wave IF signal, wherein the displacement-induced phase delays are embedded in the rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal . Liu does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Hekimian teaches rectifying the sine-wave IF signal into a square-wave IF signal (Hekimian para 3 “The incoming test signal is applied to a limiter 11 which provides a square wave version of the input signal, having zero-crossings in time coincidence with those of the input signal.”) so that the rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal are synchronized with the rising/falling zero-crossings of the sine-wave IF signal (Hekimian para 3 “The incoming test signal is applied to a limiter 11 which provides a square wave version of the input signal, having zero-crossings in time coincidence with those of the input signal. The output signal from limiter 11 is applied to a digital phase detector 13 which also receives a reference square wave from a limiter circuit 15. The input signal to limiter circuit 15 is derived from a voltage controlled oscillator (VCO) 17”) , wherein the displacement-induced phase delays are embedded in the rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal (Hekimain par 21 “The output square wave from the digital phase detector has a duty cycle proportional to the phase difference between the test and reference signals.”) . Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Hekimian with the teachings of Liu . One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve signal transmission ( Hekimian para 5). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Hekimian merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular modulation features. Since both Liu and Hekimian disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 30 , the cited prior art teaches The method of claim 29, wherein the square-wave IF signal has the same frequency as the third frequency of f REF , and wherein processing the down-converted IF signal to convert the displacement-induced phase delays into the modulated pulse signal further includes (Liu para 16 “The phase locked loop may hence perform down-conversion of the reflected signal to provide a baseband output signal indicative of a frequency or phase difference between the reflected signal and the adjustable reference signal received at the first and the second input of the phase or frequency comparator, respectively”) : comparing the rising edges or the falling edges of the square-wave IF signal with the corresponding rising edges or falling edges of the common reference signal; and generating the modulated pulse signal having a duty cycle proportional to the displacement-induced phase delays . Liu does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Hekimian teaches comparing the rising edges or the falling edges of the square-wave IF signal with the corresponding rising edges or falling edges of the common reference signal (Hekimian para 20 “The output signal from amplifier 160 is applied to the digital phase detector 13 which includes transistors Q101 and Q102. These transistors and their associated components form an exclusive OR gate which provides the exclusive-OR square wave signal described above in relation to FIG. 6(c).”) ; and generating the modulated pulse signal having a duty cycle proportional to the displacement-induced phase delays (Hekimian para 8 “The output signal of the exclusive OR gate is a square wave having positive and negative levels of the same magnitude and a duty cycle proportional to deviation from the quiescent phase displacement between the signals. The square wave duty cycle is converted, by means of a low pass filter, to a proportional dc voltage level which is utilized to phase-lock a voltage controlled oscillator (VCO) to the test signal”) . Regarding claim 31 , claim 31 recites substantially the same limitations as claim 12 , and is therefore rejected for similar reasons. Regarding claim 32 , the cited prior art teaches The method of claim 25, wherein prior to mixing the received signal, the method further comprises amplifying the received signal to provide additional signal gain (Liu para 9 “However, radio frequency and baseband amplifiers may be required to amplify the weak reflection signal. Thus, the DC information will also be amplified and the receiver may be saturated when the subject approaches the radar antennas.”). Regarding claim 33 , claim 33 recites substantially the same limitations as claim 21 , and is therefore rejected for similar reasons. Regarding claim 34 , claim 34 recites substantially the same limitations as claim 23 , and is therefore rejected for similar reasons. Regarding claim 35 , the cited prior art teaches The method of claim 25, wherein the type of detected displacement is a vibration displacement comprising a vibration frequency (Liu para 16 “The heartbeat and the respiration of the subject cause a respective periodic motion or displacement of the tissue in the chest region of the subject.”) , and wherein the output voltage signal is a baseband signal having a frequency identical to the vibration frequency (Liu para 4 “the transmitted signal may be mixed with the reflected Doppler-shifted signal to produce a mixing product which, following low pass filtering, results in a baseband signal including a low frequency component that is directly proportional to the instantaneous surface displacement.”) and having a voltage amplitude proportional to an amplitude of the vibrational displacement (Liu para 4 “the transmitted signal may be mixed with the reflected Doppler-shifted signal to produce a mixing product which, following low pass filtering, results in a baseband signal including a low frequency component that is directly proportional to the instantaneous surface displacement.”) . Regarding claim 37 , the cited prior art teaches The method of claim 25, wherein the transmitted signal is a single-tone signal without sidebands, and wherein the received signal and the LO signal are mixed to generate the down-converted IF signal with a single mixer without using either a quadrature demodulation (Liu para 18 “The reflected signal R(t) and the local oscillator signal LO(t) may be provided to a mixer 132,”) configured with two mixers or a quadrature demodulation configured with a digital signal processor (DSP) to extract the displacement-induced phase delays (Liu para 28 “According to an embodiment, the vital sign carrying signal is a complex form combination of an inphase and a quadrature component. Thus, a phase-locked loop in digital domain may process a single complex form signal.”) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US PAT 11051703 hereinafter Liu) in view of Hekimian et al. (US PAT 3711773 hereinafter Hekimian) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Moore (US PAT 11588488) . Regarding claim 3 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 2, wherein: the transmitted signal has the first frequency f 1 = N 1 [Symbol font/0xB4] f REF (Liu para 13 “the phase or frequency comparator and the reference signal generator form a phase-locked loop which tracks frequency and phase variations of the reflected signal.”) ; the returned signal has the same frequency as the transmitted signal (Liu para 4 “A continuous-wave (CW) radar, also known as a Doppler radar, transmits a radio frequency single-tone continuous-wave signal which is reflected by a target and then demodulated in a receiver.”) ; the LO signal has the second frequency f 2 = N2[Symbol font/0xB4]fREF (Liu para 13 “Similar to the signal generator 136, the first reference signal generator 134 may be implemented as a phase- locked loop, which receives the reference clock signal and input of a reference frequency f.sub.r and generates a continuous wave radio frequency signal LO(t) having the reference frequency f.sub.r.”) ; and the down-converted IF signal has an intermediate frequency f IF = | f 1 [Symbol font/0x2D] f 2 | = | N 1 [Symbol font/0x2D] N 2 |[Symbol font/0xB4] f REF = N [Symbol font/0xB4] f REF , wherein N is an integer number (Liu para 18 “The reflected signal R(t) and the local oscillator signal LO(t) may be provided to a mixer 132, which may down-convert the reflected signal R(t) to an intermediate frequency f.sub.IF, which is the difference between a transmitted frequency f.sub.t and a reference frequency f.sub.r of the local oscillator signal.” [beat signal is produced from mixing]) . The cited prior art does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Moore teaches first frequency f 1 = N 1 [Symbol font/0xB4] f REF (para 24 “In an embodiment, a dual-loop phase-locking circuit includes a first input configured to receive a first reference signal at a first reference frequency fref1 having a first reference phase and a second input configured to receive a second reference signal at a second reference frequency fref2 that is independently locked to a multiple N of the reference signal and having a second reference phase.”) second frequency f2 = N2[Symbol font/0xB4]fREF (para 24 “In an embodiment, a dual-loop phase-locking circuit includes a first input configured to receive a first reference signal at a first reference frequency fref1 having a first reference phase and a second input configured to receive a second reference signal at a second reference frequency fref2 that is independently locked to a multiple N of the reference signal and having a second reference phase.”) Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Moore with the teachings of the cited prior art. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve SNR ( Moore para 4). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Moore merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular modulation features. Since both the cited prior art and Moore disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US PAT 11051703 hereinafter Liu) in view of Hekimian et al. (US PAT 3711773 hereinafter Hekimian) and further in view of Moore (US PAT 11588488) as applied to claim 4, and further in view of Petitjean et al. (EP 0023458 hereinafter Petitjean) . Regarding claim 4 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 3, wherein N = 1 such that the down-converted IF signal has the same frequency as the common REF signal . The cited prior art does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Petitjean teaches wherein N = 1 such that the down-converted IF signal has the same frequency as the common REF signal (p.6 “Controlling the oscillator 19 consists in choosing the ratio N of the frequency divider 21 with variable ratio so that, FO being chosen and F2 being fixed, we have FO- (N.F2) = F2.”; p.3 “the first input of which is connected at the output of the local oscillator and the second at the output of the emission oscillator, and, the output of which is connected to the voltage control input of the emission oscillator, which makes it possible to control the 'transmission oscillator to the local oscillator in phase and at a frequency difference equal to the intermediate frequency coming from the reference oscillator.”). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Petitjean with the teachings of the cited prior art. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve detections ( Petitjean p.7). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Petitjean merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular processing features. Since both the cited prior art and Petitjean disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 17, 20-21, 38-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US PAT 11051703 hereinafter Liu) in view of Hekimian et al. (US PAT 3711773 hereinafter Hekimian) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Kundu et al. (US PAT 10972109 hereinafter Kundu) . Regarding claim 17 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 16, wherein: the first frequency synthesizer is a first low-noise frequency synthesizer selected from the following: a first sub-sampling phase-locked loop (SSPLL); and a first frequency multiplier; and the second frequency synthesizer is a second low-noise frequency synthesizer selected from the following: a second SSPLL; and a second frequency multiplier . The cited prior art does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Kundu teaches the first frequency synthesizer is a first low-noise frequency synthesizer selected from the following: a first sub-sampling phase-locked loop (SSPLL); and a first frequency multiplier (Kundu para 9 “FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an arrangement for a frequency locking loop (FLL) for use with a sub-sampling phase locked loop (SSPLL) system in accordance with some embodiments and/or aspects.”) ; and the second frequency synthesizer is a second low-noise frequency synthesizer selected from the following: a second SSPLL; and a second frequency multiplier (Kundu para 53 “The transmit circuitry 415 and/or the receive circuitry 520 can include a PLL or SSPLL. For example, the transmit circuitry 415 can include an SSPLL for up-conversion and the receive circuitry 420 can include an SSPLL for down-conversion.”). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Kundu with the teachings of the cited prior art. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve VCO performance ( Kundu para 79). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Kundu merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular processing features. Since both the cited prior art and Kundu disclose similar circuitry using oscillators, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 20 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 1, further comprising: a receiver antenna configured to receive the returned signal (Liu Abstract “receiving a reflected signal from the subject”) ; and a low noise amplifier (LNA) configured to receive the returned signal and amplify the returned signal to provide additional signal gain (Liu para 9 “However, radio frequency and baseband amplifiers may be required to amplify the weak reflection signal. Thus, the DC information will also be amplified and the receiver may be saturated when the subject approaches the radar antennas.”) . The cited prior art does not explicitly teach the remaining strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Kundu teaches a low noise amplifier (LNA) (Kundu para 50 “Radio frequency circuitry 425 may include one or more instances of radio chain circuitry 472, which in some aspects may include one or more filters, power amplifiers, low noise amplifiers,”). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Kundu with the teachings of the cited prior art. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve VCO performance ( Kundu para 79). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Kundu merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular processing features. Since both the cited prior art and Kundu disclose similar circuitry using oscillators, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 21 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing Doppler radar of claim 1, further comprising an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) disposed after the LNA and configured to convert the output voltage signal into a digital signal for further processing (Liu para 21 “The DSP 140 may further comprise an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) 144 for converting the analog signal to digital domain forming a vital sign carrying signal B[n]”; fig 4) . The cited prior art does not explicitly teach the remaining strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Kundu teaches a low noise amplifier (LNA) (Kundu para 50 “Radio frequency circuitry 425 may include one or more instances of radio chain circuitry 472, which in some aspects may include one or more filters, power amplifiers, low noise amplifiers,”). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Kundu with the teachings of the cited prior art. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve VCO performance ( Kundu para 79). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Kundu merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular processing features. Since both the cited prior art and Kundu disclose similar circuitry using oscillators, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 38 , Liu teaches A displacement-sensing apparatus, comprising: a transmitting antenna (Abstract “transmitting a radio frequency signal towards the subject”) ; a receiver antenna (fig 1) ; and a continuous wave (CW) Doppler radar coupled to the transmitting antenna and the receiver antenna (para 4 “A continuous-wave (CW) radar, also known as a Doppler radar”) , wherein the CW Doppler radar further comprises: a first frequency synthesizer configured to generate a transmitted signal of a first frequency, which is radiated by the transmitting antenna toward a target object (para 12 “signal generator 136”; fig 1) ; a low noise amplifier (LNA) configured to amplify a received signal outputted by the receiver antenna (Liu para 9 “However, radio frequency and baseband amplifiers may be required to amplify the weak reflection signal. Thus, the DC information will also be amplified and the receiver may be saturated when the subject approaches the radar antennas.”) , wherein the received signal is generated based on a returned signal reflected off the target object (Abstract “receiving a reflected signal from the subject”) , and wherein the returned signal carrying displacement-induced phase delays corresponding to detected displacements of the target object (Liu para 16 “the tissue in the chest region of the subject will, due to the heartbeat and respiration, exhibit a time-varying displacement along the direction of propagation of the transmitted signal T(t) and the reflected signal R(t).”) ; a mixer configured to mix the received signal and a local oscillator ( LO ) signal to generate a down-converted sine-wave intermediate frequency ( IF ) signal (Liu para 17 “The first reference signal generator 134 may provide a first reference signal, which may hereinafter also be called a local oscillator (LO) signal.”) , wherein the down-converted sine-wave IF signal carries the displacement-induced phase delays (para 20 “In order to demodulate or extract the phase and/or frequency modulation of the reflected signal R(t), caused by the displacement of the tissue, the device 100 employs a signal processing circuitry 140 which implements a phase-locked loop (PLL). The PLL may operate in a phase-demodulator or frequency-demodulator configuration.”) ; a rectifier configured to convert the sine-wave IF signal into a square-wave IF signal, wherein the displacement-induced phase delays are embedded in the rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal ; a phase demodulation module configured to convert the displacement-induced phase delays into a modulated pulse signal (para 4 “continuous-wave signal which is reflected by a target and then demodulated in a receiver. By the Doppler effect, the radio frequency signal reflected by the moving tissue of the target undergoes a frequency shift proportional to the surface velocity of the tissue”) ; and a low-pass filter (LPF) configured to convert the modulated pulse signal into an output signal having a voltage value indicative of the detected displacements (para 22 “The mixed signal of the intermediate frequency may, for example, after being lowpass filtered”; para 9 “the vital sign may only be detected if DC information of the target is preserved.”) . Liu does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Hekimian teaches a rectifier configured to convert the sine-wave IF signal into a square-wave IF signal, wherein the displacement-induced phase delays are embedded in the rising/falling edges of the square-wave IF signal (para 3 “a limiter 11 which provides a square wave version of the input signal, having zero-crossings in time coincidence with those of the input signal. The output signal from limiter 11 is applied to a digital phase detector 13 which also receives a reference square wave from a limiter circuit 15.”; claim 1 “converting said input signal and said reference signal to respective square waves alternating between first and second amplitude levels”) a modulated pulse signal (para 23 “More particularly, the filtered voltage controls the reactance modulator section Q104 and the VCO to vary the effects of C125 in the oscillator tank circuit and thereby adjust the phase of the oscillator in response to phase differences existing between the test and reference signals.”; para 2 “in addition phase deviation of high frequency signals can also be measured by utilizing the high frequency as a carrier for the audio tone, demodulating the carrier, and applying the resulting audio tone to the system of FIG. 1.”) Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Hekimian with the teachings of Liu . One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve signal transmission ( Hekimian para 5). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Hekimian merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular modulation features. Since both Liu and Hekimian disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. The cited prior art does not explicitly teach the remaining strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Kundu teaches a low noise amplifier (LNA) (Kundu para 50 “Radio frequency circuitry 425 may include one or more instances of radio chain circuitry 472, which in some aspects may include one or more filters, power amplifiers, low noise amplifiers,”). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Kundu with the teachings of the cited prior art. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve VCO performance ( Kundu para 79). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Kundu merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular processing features. Since both the cited prior art and Kundu disclose similar circuitry using oscillators, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Regarding claim 39 , claim 39 recites substantially the same limitations as claim 26 , and is therefore rejected for similar reasons. Regarding claim 40 , the cited prior art teaches The displacement-sensing apparatus of claim 38, wherein the target object has a distance d obj to both the transmitting antenna and the receiver antenna (Liu para 47 “The static target distance d.sub.0 will produce a DC level on top of which there is a modulation based on vital signs.”) , and wherein the displacement-induced phase delays include a phase delay PNG media_image1.png 25 121 media_image1.png Greyscale wherein [Symbol font/0x6C] c is the wavelength of the transmitted signal (Liu Equation 6) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US PAT 11051703 hereinafter Liu) in view of Hekimian et al. (US PAT 3711773 hereinafter Hekimian) as applied to claim 25, and further in view of Petitjean et al. (EP 0023458 hereinafter Petitjean) . Regarding claim 27 , the cited prior art teaches The method of claim 25, wherein the difference between the first frequency and the second frequency is f REF . The cited prior art does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Petitjean teaches wherein the difference between the first frequency and the second frequency is f REF (p.3 “the 'transmission oscillator to the local oscillator in phase and at a frequency difference equal to the intermediate frequency coming from the reference oscillator.”). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Petitjean with the teachings of the cited prior art. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve detections ( Petitjean p.7). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Petitjean merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular processing features. Since both the cited prior art and Petitjean disclose similar circuitry using oscillators and reference signals, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US PAT 11051703 hereinafter Liu) in view of Hekimian et al. (US PAT 3711773 hereinafter Hekimian) as applied to claim 35, and further in view of Peczalski et al. (US 20140260523 hereinafter Peczalski) . Regarding claim 36 , the cited prior art teaches The method of claim 35, wherein the detected vibrational displacement has a detection accuracy significantly less than 100 nm . The cited prior art does not explicitly teach the strikethrough limitations. However, in a related field of endeavor, Peczalski teaches wherein the detected vibrational displacement has a detection accuracy significantly less than 100 nm (0003 “By measuring the relative phase change along the round trip of the reflected RF wave, such radar-based sensors have been shown to exhibit a wide-field of view and to reliably measure displacements in the nanometer range”). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing of the instant application, to include the teachings of Peczalski with the teachings of the cited prior art. One would have been motivated to do so in order to advantageously improve system accuracy ( Peczalski 0003). Further still, the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007) provides that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may render a claimed invention obvious over such combination. Here, Peczalski merely teaches that it is well-known to incorporate the particular processing features. Since both the cited prior art and Peczalski disclose similar radars, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the combination of elements here has previously been executed according to known methods, thereby evidencing that such combination would yield predictable results. Conclusion 07-96 The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to application’s disclosure: Ball (US 4635059) discloses “A Doppler radar system for mounting on a vehicle to sense the speed of movement of the vehicle and to provide an output proportional to the speed of the vehicle. The output is substantially free from errors due to the vibration and of the vehicle. A Janus configuration is also provided which also eliminates errors due to the angle of tilt of the vehicle. (See abstract)” Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISMAAEEL A. SIDDIQUEE whose telephone number is (571) 272-3896. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8am-5pm. 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ISMAAEEL A. SIDDIQUEE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648 /TIMOTHY A BRAINARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 2 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 3 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 4 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 5 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 6 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 7 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 8 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 9 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 10 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 11 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 12 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 13 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 14 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 15 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 16 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 17 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 18 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 19 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 20 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 21 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 22 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 23 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 24 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 25 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 26 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 27 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 28 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 29 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 30 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 31 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 32 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 33 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/722,811 Page 34 Art Unit: 3648
Prosecution Insights