Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/725,236

SCANNING A BODY OF WATER WITH A FISHING SONAR APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jun 28, 2024
Examiner
ARMSTRONG, JONATHAN D
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
UAB Deeper
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
52%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
54%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 52% of resolved cases
52%
Career Allow Rate
218 granted / 415 resolved
+0.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+1.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
63 currently pending
Career history
478
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§103
55.6%
+15.6% vs TC avg
§102
20.5%
-19.5% vs TC avg
§112
18.4%
-21.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 415 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jales (US 2018/0259618 A1; search report). Regarding claims 1 and 8, Jales discloses a fishing sonar apparatus for scanning a body of water and a method performed by a fishing sonar apparatus for scanning a body of water, wherein the fishing sonar apparatus comprises a control unit configured to: - emit, by means of a fishing sonar module comprised in the fishing sonar apparatus [[0036] fisherman desire highly detailed and accurate information and/or imagery of underwater structure and mid water targets (e.g., fish) … sonar system 110], a phase-modulated impulse sonar signal having a first frequency into the body of water [[0090] pulse generator 242 may also be configured to shape a pulse envelope and/or to modulate the frequency or the phase of the carrier wave within the pulse to perform pulse compression.]; - receive a reflected phase-modulated impulse sonar signal from the body of water [[0034] a series of acoustic pulses (e.g., pulses having audio frequency waves as a carrier), receive corresponding acoustic returns (e.g., echoes), and convert the acoustic returns into sonar data and/or imagery (e.g., remote sensor image data)], wherein said received reflected sonar signal comprises a reflection of the emitted sonar signal being incident on at least one first object surrounded by the body of water [[0008] frequency or a phase of the carrier wave within the pulse may be modulated to perform pulse compression in some embodiments, and side lobes appearing in the correlated return signal due to the pulse compression may be effectively suppressed by the attenuating]; and - determine a correlated signal between the reflected phase-modulated impulse sonar signal and a reference signal at least partly constructed based on the reflected phase-modulated impulse sonar signal [[0008] determining a correlated return signal based on the return signal and the pulse, comparing the correlated return signal against one or more bounds that are determined relative to the return signal], wherein said correlated signal is a phase-correlated signal determined based on a phase difference [[0011] logic device according to some embodiments may include a subtractor configured to determine the gradient of the first and/or second sensor return; [0092] subtractor 254 may be configured to determine a difference between input values, for example, and provide the difference as an output. Output 248 may be configured to provide the selectively attenuated correlated signal as an output signal for further processing] of the reflected sonar signal and the reference signal [[0103] compression process may include modulating the frequency or the phase of the carrier wave (e.g., carrier wave 410) to transmit the pulse and correlating a return signal (e.g., an echo representing at least a portion of the transmitted pulse reflected from a target) with a replica of the transmitted pulse, such that the resulting correlated return signal may in effect represent a compressed version of the return signa]; and - obtain at least one object-related information associated with the at least one first object surrounded by the body of water based on said phase-correlated signal [[0104] phase-modulated to switch the phase according to binary codes such as Barker codes or other appropriate codes. Such phase modulation may also be referred to as phase-code modulation or pulse-code modulation; [0105] correlated return signal obtained by correlating a return signal (e.g., an echo) representing at least a portion of the transmitted pulse reflected from a target) with a replica of the frequency-modulated or phase-modulated transmitted pulse such as pulse 500A or 500B can provide an improve range resolution of target ranging]. Regarding claims 3 and 10, Jales teaches the fishing sonar apparatus according to claim 1 and the method of claim 8, wherein said received reflected sonar signal further comprises a reflection of the emitted sonar signal being incident on at least one second object surrounded by the body of water [[fig. 3] transmit #310, receive reflected from the target #320, determine a correlated return signal #330]; and wherein the control unit is further configured to: - obtain at least one object-related information associated with the at least one second object surrounded by the body of water based on said phase-correlated signal [[0033] sonar system 110 may be implemented according to other sonar system arrangements ( e.g., remote sensing system arrangements) that can be used to detect objects within a water column and/or a floor of a body of water.]. Regarding claims 5 and 12, Jales teaches the fishing sonar apparatus according to claim 1 and the method of claim 8, wherein the control unit is further configured to:- determine a time-of-flight of the phase-correlated reflected sonar signal [[0120] a selectively attenuated correlated return signal 730A-730F ( e.g., corresponding to the selectively attenuated correlated return signal z discussed above in connection with Equation 5) are plotted, where the x-axis represents a range or distance and the y-axis represents an amplitude or magnitude (e.g., power) of signals]; and - calculate a distance of the at least one first object and/or the at least one second object from the sonar module based on the determined time-of-flight of the reflected sonar signal [[0066] radars, sonars, lidars, other ranging systems]. Regarding claim 14, Jales teaches the method according to claim 8, wherein said at least one first and/or second objects comprise at least one of a fish among a school of fish [[0036] mid water targets (e.g. fish)], and sea vegetation and a bottom part of a sea and/or a lake [[0034] bottom profile]. Regarding claim 15, Jales teaches the method according to claim 8, wherein the reference signal is at least one of a predetermined reference signal, a reference signal constructed based on a reflected phase-modulated impulse sonar signal generated under a test operation condition of the fishing sonar module in a test chamber, and a reference signal constructed based on a reflected phase-modulated impulse sonar signal generated under real-life operation condition of the fishing sonar module [[0141] FIG. l0C includes graph 1004 showing a series of returns before being filtered by gradient filter 800 and/or 900, and graph 1005 showing the same series of returns after being filtered by gradient filter 800 and/or 900, where target response 1024 is heavily clipped. As can be seen in FIG. l0A, interference peak 1010 has been removed from the series of returns by application of gradient filter 800 and/or 900, and heavily clipped target response 1022 has been left substantially unchanged. Testing indicates, the results are similar for interference peaks overlapping unclipped and clipped target responses.]. Regarding claim 16, Jales teaches a computer program carrier carrying one or more computer programs configured to be executed by one or more processors of a processing system comprised in a control unit, the one or more programs comprising instructions for performing the method according to claim 8, and wherein the computer program carrier is one of an electronic signal, optical signal, radio signal or a computer-readable storage medium [[0150] software … one or more general purpose or specific purpose computers and/or computer systems]. Regarding claim 17, Jales teaches a computer program product comprising instructions which, when the program is executed by one or more processors of a processing system comprised in a control unit, causes the processing system to carry out the method according to claim 8 [[0150] software … one or more general purpose or specific purpose computers and/or computer systems]. Regarding claim 18, Jales teaches a vessel for scanning a body of water, the vessel comprising: a perception system for monitoring a surrounding environment of the vessel such as the body of water; a localization system configured to monitor a geographical position and heading of the vessel; and a fishing sonar apparatus according to claim 1 [[fig. 1b] shows a vessel]. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jales (US 2018/0259618 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Dubrovinskaya (2019, J. of the ASA; search report). Regarding claims 2 and 9, Jales does not explicitly teach and yet Dubrovinskaya teaches the fishing sonar apparatus according to claim 1 and the method of claim 8, wherein the phase- correlated signal is a phase-only correlated, POC, signal [[pg. 4775, col. 1-2 bridging] typical underwater ranging schemes rely on ToA, time difference of arrival, or received signal strength, which is translated into distance via an acoustic propagation model.9 ToA measurements can be obtained by separately analyzing the reflection patterns of transmitted signals,10 which can be estimated via matched filtering or by using phase-only correlation and the kurtosis metric to mitigate channel enhanced noise.11 Still, ToA measurements tend to be noisy due to multipath: mistaking a non-specular multipath component for the direct path is often regarded as measurement noise,12 and can be mitigated by transmitting signals having a narrow auto-correlation,13,14 or by averaging ToA measurements over different signals.15 Yet, instead of considering multipath as a distortion, the wealth of multipath arrivals can be exploited in passive systems in order to improve the localization accuracy, as well as to find the range of the acoustic source16 or to localize it with multiple receivers through a propagation model.17]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the ranging system as taught by Jales, with the phase only correlated time of flight ranging as taught by Dubrovinskaya so that channel enhanced noise may be mitigatyed (Dubrovinskaya) [[pg. 4775, col. 1-2 bridging]]. Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jales (US 2018/0259618 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Kim (2002, ASA). Regarding claims 4 and 11, Jales does not explicitly teach and yet Kim teaches the fishing sonar apparatus according to claim 1 and the method of claim 8, wherein the at least one object-related information associated with the at least one first and/or second objects comprises at least one of a distance of the at least one first and/or second object from the fishing sonar module [[pg. 795, sec. a. data collection] chirp sonar system (model: Data Sonics CAP 6000W) was set up and calibrated to transmit a 20 ms pulse ranging in frequency from 1 to 10 kHz at a repetition rate of 250 ms. Since the ship’s speed was kept at 5 knots, this repetition rate corresponds to 0.64 m distance.], and a distance of the at least one first object from the at least one second object [[pg. 795, sec. a.] water depth in the survey area increases monotonously seawards from 6 to 92 m. Figure 2 is the sea floor features map of the survey area synthesized from sediment], and a hardness characteristics of the at least one first and/or second object [[fig. 3] FIG. 3. (a) The transmitted chirp signal and (b) its amplitude spectrum. (c) A single chirp sonar trace. (d) The portion of the bottom return in (c) after matched filtering and (e) its envelope.; [pg. 797, col. 1] similarity index is a useful parameter to distinguish the bottom type as a function of grain size, hardness, and degree of sorting which aggregately define the bottom sediment facies.; [fig. 4] compares rocky bottom, sandy bottom, muddy bottom]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the sonar device as taught by Jales, with the matched filtering, envelope, and hardness detection as taught by Kim so that profiling data may be used to determined from what various types of sediments and rocks the sea floor is composed (Kim) [[pg. 794, col. 1]]. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jales (US 2018/0259618 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Clark (US 2019/0072951 A1; search report). Regarding claim 7, Jales does not explicitly teach and yet Clark teaches the fishing sonar apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the fishing sonar apparatus is comprised in a castable enclosure [[title castable sonar devices]; [abstract] one or more castable devices can be integrated with a transducer assembly, such as a phased array, that emits sonar beams and receives sonar returns from the underwater environment. Processing circuitry may receive the sonar returns, process the sonar returns, generate an image, and transmit the image to a display.; [0096] castable device 20 may be associated with the gathered sonar data for correlation and/or storage.]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to implement the sonar device as taught by Jales, with the castable sonar device as taught by Clark so that the sonar may be retrieved from the water when not in use. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6 and 13 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 6, the closest prior art of record does not appear to teach the fishing sonar apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the control unit is further configured to:- extract an envelope of the reflected sonar signal; - multiply the extracted envelope of the reflected sonar signal with the phase-correlated signal; and - determine the hardness characteristics of the at least one first object and/or at least one second object based on the multiplied signal. Regarding claim 13, the closest prior art of record does not appear to teach the method according to of claim 8,wherein the obtaining at least one object-related information associated with the at least one first object and/or at least one second object further comprises: - extracting an envelope of the reflected sonar signal; - multiplying the extracted envelope of the reflected sonar signal with the phase- correlated signal; and - determining the hardness characteristics of the at least one first object and/or at least one second object based on the multiplied signal. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7339. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9am-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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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. /JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 28, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12566264
ENHANCED RESOLUTION SPLIT APERTURE USING BEAM SEGMENTATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12535001
DOWNHOLE ACOUSTIC SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING A RATE OF PENETRATION OF A DRILL STRING AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12510644
Ultrasonic Microscope and Carrier for carrying an acoustic Pulse Transducer
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Patent 12504525
OBJECT DETECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
Patent 12495789
ULTRASONIC GENERATOR AND METHOD FOR REPELLING MOSQUITO IN VEHICLE USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
52%
Grant Probability
54%
With Interview (+1.5%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 415 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month