DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 02/17/2026. Claims 1-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination. Claim 1, 2, and 14-20 were amended.
Reply to Remarks
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 8 of the Applicant's Remarks, filed 02/17/2026, with respect to the claim interpretations have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the claim interpretations have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 8-10 of the Applicant's Remarks, filed 02/17/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3, 5-13, and 15-20 under §101 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. The claims lack any sort of vehicle control and the signal offset is broadly claimed and does not describe any sort of dataset a person could not comprehend or read. For example, the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of removing weather related attenuation effects means to examine shapes on a visual medium and selecting which ones are not actually present. Further, the end result of the claims’ determinations is the display of data which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. The details present in the Applicant’s specifications that could overcome the 101 rejections, such as the examination or adjustment of decibels, are not included in the claim. Further, the claim language “to a control system of the vehicle” is not sufficient to positively claim vehicle control and rather indicates intended use. The Examiner respectfully directs the Applicant to look at claims 4 and 14 for examples of claims that positively recite vehicle control.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 11-12 of the Applicant's Remarks, filed 02/17/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-3 and 5-20 under §102/103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Davalos, and Hong.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-3, 5-13, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
As per claim 1
Step 1: The claim is directed to a process as it recites (a method comprising).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A method comprising:
receiving, at a computing system coupled to a vehicle, radar imagery corresponding to an environment of the vehicle;
estimating, by the computing system using a weather estimation model, weather conditions for the environment;
determining, based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment, weather-related attenuation effects on the radar imagery by calculating a signal loss value associated with the radar imagery;
removing the weather-related attenuation effects to correct the radar imagery by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery; and
providing the corrected radar imagery to a control system of the vehicle.
The recited limitations, as drafted, are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as these steps fall within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because they cover concepts performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. The mere nominal recitation of computing system, and its unrecited processor, does not take the claim limitations out of the mental process grouping. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A method comprising:
receiving, at a computing system coupled to a vehicle, radar imagery corresponding to an environment of the vehicle;
estimating, by the computing system using a weather estimation model, weather conditions for the environment;
determining, based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment, weather-related attenuation effects on the radar imagery by calculating a signal loss value associated with the radar imagery;
removing the weather-related attenuation effects to correct the radar imagery by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery; and
providing the corrected radar imagery to a control system of the vehicle.
The recited computing system is recited at a high level of generality and merely applies the exception using generic computer components to automate the abstract idea. Further, the instructions for receiving radar imagery (i.e., as a general means of receiving, at a computing system coupled to a vehicle, radar imagery), amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the instruction for providing the corrected radar imagery is also recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a general means of providing the corrected radar imagery to a control system), and is similar to displaying information, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using
generic computer components, and the extra-solution activity of acquiring data. The use of generic computer components to execute a program is well-understood and conventional. Further the mere collection or receipt of data to be used by a computer program for the purposes of making determinations or manipulating data is also well understood and conventional. For these reasons, claim 1 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
As per claims 2-3, and 5-13
These process claims further define the abstract ideas of the mental processes illustrated in claim 1, they do not recite any additional elements or other limitations that transform the attenuation of the radar imagery using the gathered rain rate or aperture loss, or weather loss data, and these elements are well-understood, routine and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103.
As per claim 15
Step 1: The claim is directed to an apparatus as it recites (a system comprising).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A system comprising:
a vehicle radar system; and
a computing device comprising one or more processors coupled to a vehicle, wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
receive radar imagery corresponding to an environment of the vehicle;
estimate, using a weather estimation model, weather conditions for the environment;
determine, based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment, weather-related attenuation effects on the radar imagery by calculating a signal loss value associated with the radar imagery;
remove the weather-related attenuation effects to correct the radar imagery by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery; and
provide the corrected radar imagery to a control system of the vehicle.
The recited limitations, as drafted, are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as these steps fall within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because they cover concepts performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. The mere nominal recitation of computing device, and its processors, do not take the claim limitations out of the mental process grouping. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A system comprising:
a vehicle radar system; and
a computing device comprising one or more processors coupled to a vehicle, wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
receive radar imagery corresponding to an environment of the vehicle;
estimate, using a weather estimation model, weather conditions for the environment;
determine, based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment, weather-related attenuation effects on the radar imagery by calculating a signal loss value associated with the radar imagery;
remove the weather-related attenuation effects to correct the radar imagery by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery; and
provide the corrected radar imagery to a control system of the vehicle.
The recited computing device and its processors are recited at a high level of generality and merely applies the exception using generic computer components to automate the abstract idea. Further, the instructions for receiving radar imagery (i.e., as a general means to receive radar imagery), amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the instruction to provide the corrected radar imagery is also recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a general means to provide the corrected radar imagery to a control system), and is similar to displaying information, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using
generic computer components, and the extra-solution activity of acquiring data. The use of generic computer components to execute a program is well-understood and conventional. Further the mere collection or receipt of data to be used by a computer program for the purposes of making determinations or manipulating data is also well understood and conventional. For these reasons, claim 15 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
As per claims 16-19
These apparatus claims further define the abstract ideas of the mental processes illustrated in claim 15, they do not recite any additional elements or other limitations that transform the comparison or removal of the attenuation of the radar imagery using the gathered aperture loss, or weather loss data, and these elements are well-understood, routine and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103.
As per claim 20
Step 1: The claim is directed to an apparatus as it recites (a non-transitory computer-readable medium).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium configured to store instructions, that when executed by a computing system comprising one or more processors, causes the computing system to perform operations comprising:
receiving radar imagery corresponding to an environment of a vehicle;
estimating, by the computing system using a weather estimation model, weather conditions for the environment;
determining, based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment, weather-related attenuation effects on the radar imagery by calculating a signal loss value associated with the radar imagery;
removing the weather-related attenuation effects to correct the radar imagery by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery; and
providing the corrected radar imagery to a control system of the vehicle.
The recited limitations, as drafted, are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as these steps fall within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because they cover concepts performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. The mere nominal recitation of generic processor does not take the claim limitations out of the mental process grouping. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium configured to store instructions, that when executed by a computing system comprising one or more processors, causes the computing system to perform operations comprising:
receiving radar imagery corresponding to an environment of a vehicle;
estimating, by the computing system using a weather estimation model, weather conditions for the environment;
determining, based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment, weather-related attenuation effects on the radar imagery by calculating a signal loss value associated with the radar imagery;
removing the weather-related attenuation effects to correct the radar imagery by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery; and
providing the corrected radar imagery to a control system of the vehicle.
The recited processors are recited at a high level of generality and merely apply the exception using generic computer components to automate the abstract idea. Further, the instructions for receiving radar imagery (i.e., as a general means of receiving radar imagery), amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the instruction for providing the corrected radar imagery is also recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a general means of providing the corrected radar imagery to a control system), and is similar to displaying information, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the additional elements are applying the abstract ideas in a vehicle environment. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using
generic computer components, and the extra-solution activity of acquiring data. The use of generic computer components to execute a program is well-understood and conventional. Further the mere collection or receipt of data to be used by a computer program for the purposes of making determinations or manipulating data is also well understood and conventional. For these reasons, claim 20 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
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 1, 15, and 20 are rejected under U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Davalos et al., US-20230131160-A1, in view of Hong et al., KR-101645103-B1, hereinafter referred to as Davalos, and Hong (Translation by Espacenet).
As per claim 1
Davalos discloses [a] method comprising: receiving, at a computing system coupled to a vehicle, radar imagery corresponding to an environment of the vehicle (a weather radar system on board an aircraft configured to receive a plurality of reflected radar returns over a duration preceding a current time…processing circuitry operatively coupled to a memory, the processing circuitry configured to - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶4);
estimating, by the computing system using a weather estimation model, weather conditions for the environment (processing circuitry operatively coupled to a memory, the processing circuitry configured to…analyze the 3D radar reflectivity characteristics for the volume of airspace with a pre-trained neural network-based model…output forecasted weather changes to the volume of airspace - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶4);
determining, based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment, weather-related attenuation effects on the radar imagery by calculating a signal loss value associated with the radar imagery (with the weather radar data from onboard weather radar system 102 to determine whether the combined data indicates the presence of hazardous weather such as lightning or hail. Enhanced weather radar processing system 104 may also evaluate the data it receives to detect attenuated or absent data (e.g., via attenuation from intervening weather or failure to update data). - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶19);
removing the weather-related attenuation effects to correct the radar imagery (When enhanced weather radar processing system 104 determines that the weather radar signal does include falsely exaggerated or falsely minimized hazard indications…correct for those falsely exaggerated or falsely minimized hazard indications in the weather radar data - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶19);
providing the corrected radar imagery to a control system of the vehicle (correct for those falsely exaggerated or falsely minimized hazard indications in the weather radar data, and then output a corrected weather data map, a secondary or auxiliary graphical display device, such as multi-function display MFD 138 - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶19 & ¶33).
Davalos does not specifically disclose [correcting radar data] by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery.
Davalos discloses a vehicle monitoring its weather environment. However, Hong teaches [correcting radar data] by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery (when weather conditions such as fog or rainy weather deteriorate, as the radio wave attenuation increases, corrects the position information of all targets in the radar image based on the position offset, respectively, and then again corrects the signal strengths of all the targets whose position information is corrected based on the intensity offset, respectively, collecting unit 101 collects…weather…averages the collected information as reference information for the fixed target, calculate an average value for a plurality of offsets extracted in association with the plurality of fixed targets, and correct the radar image based on the calculated average values. - Hong ¶3 & ¶8 & ¶18 & ¶26).
Davalos discloses weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images. Hong teaches an apparatus and a method for processing a radar signal for correcting a radar image associated with a fixed target.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Davalos, weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images, with an apparatus and a method for processing a radar signal for correcting a radar image associated with a fixed target, as taught by Hong, with a reasonable expectation of success for providing accurate radar images regardless of environmental changes, see Hong ¶4 for details.
As per claim 15
Davalos discloses [a] system comprising: a vehicle radar system; a computing device comprising one or more processors coupled to a vehicle, wherein the one or more processors are configured to: receive radar imagery corresponding to an environment of the vehicle (a weather radar system on board an aircraft configured to receive a plurality of reflected radar returns over a duration preceding a current time…processing circuitry operatively coupled to a memory, the processing circuitry configured to - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶4);
estimate, using a weather estimation model, weather conditions for the environment (processing circuitry operatively coupled to a memory, the processing circuitry configured to…analyze the 3D radar reflectivity characteristics for the volume of airspace with a pre-trained neural network-based model…output forecasted weather changes to the volume of airspace - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶4);
determine, based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment, weather-related attenuation effects on the radar imagery by calculating a signal loss value associated with the radar imagery (with the weather radar data from onboard weather radar system 102 to determine whether the combined data indicates the presence of hazardous weather such as lightning or hail. Enhanced weather radar processing system 104 may also evaluate the data it receives to detect attenuated or absent data (e.g., via attenuation from intervening weather or failure to update data). - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶19);
remove the weather-related attenuation effects to correct the radar imagery (When enhanced weather radar processing system 104 determines that the weather radar signal does include falsely exaggerated or falsely minimized hazard indications…correct for those falsely exaggerated or falsely minimized hazard indications in the weather radar data - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶19);
provide the corrected radar imagery to a control system of the vehicle (correct for those falsely exaggerated or falsely minimized hazard indications in the weather radar data, and then output a corrected weather data map, a secondary or auxiliary graphical display device, such as multi-function display MFD 138 - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶19 & ¶33).
Davalos does not specifically disclose [correcting radar data] by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery.
Davalos discloses a vehicle monitoring its weather environment. However, Hong teaches [correcting radar data] by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery (when weather conditions such as fog or rainy weather deteriorate, as the radio wave attenuation increases, corrects the position information of all targets in the radar image based on the position offset, respectively, and then again corrects the signal strengths of all the targets whose position information is corrected based on the intensity offset, respectively, collecting unit 101 collects…weather…averages the collected information as reference information for the fixed target, calculate an average value for a plurality of offsets extracted in association with the plurality of fixed targets, and correct the radar image based on the calculated average values. - Hong ¶3 & ¶8 & ¶18 & ¶26).
Davalos discloses weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images. Hong teaches an apparatus and a method for processing a radar signal for correcting a radar image associated with a fixed target.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Davalos, weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images, with an apparatus and a method for processing a radar signal for correcting a radar image associated with a fixed target, as taught by Hong, with a reasonable expectation of success for providing accurate radar images regardless of environmental changes, see Hong ¶4 for details.
As per claim 20
Davalos discloses [a] non-transitory computer-readable medium configured to store instructions, that when executed by a computing system comprising one or more processors, causes the computing system to perform operations comprising: receiving radar imagery corresponding to an environment of a vehicle (a weather radar system on board an aircraft configured to receive a plurality of reflected radar returns over a duration preceding a current time…processing circuitry operatively coupled to a memory, the processing circuitry configured to, processors 122 , server 118 and onboard weather radar system 102 may be implemented in hardware, software, firmware, or any combination thereof - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶4 & ¶59);
estimating, by the computing system using a weather estimation model, weather conditions for the environment (processing circuitry operatively coupled to a memory, the processing circuitry configured to…analyze the 3D radar reflectivity characteristics for the volume of airspace with a pre-trained neural network-based model…output forecasted weather changes to the volume of airspace - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶4);
determining, based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment, weather-related attenuation effects on the radar imagery by calculating a signal loss value associated with the radar imagery (with the weather radar data from onboard weather radar system 102 to determine whether the combined data indicates the presence of hazardous weather such as lightning or hail. Enhanced weather radar processing system 104 may also evaluate the data it receives to detect attenuated or absent data (e.g., via attenuation from intervening weather or failure to update data). - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶19);
removing the weather-related attenuation effects to correct the radar imagery (When enhanced weather radar processing system 104 determines that the weather radar signal does include falsely exaggerated or falsely minimized hazard indications…correct for those falsely exaggerated or falsely minimized hazard indications in the weather radar data - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶19);
providing the corrected radar imagery to a control system of the vehicle (correct for those falsely exaggerated or falsely minimized hazard indications in the weather radar data, and then output a corrected weather data map, a secondary or auxiliary graphical display device, such as multi-function display MFD 138 - Davalos Fig. 4 (402, 404, 406) + ¶19 & ¶33).
Davalos does not specifically disclose [correcting radar data] by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery.
Davalos discloses a vehicle monitoring its weather environment. However, Hong teaches [correcting radar data] by applying a signal offset based on the calculated signal loss value to the radar imagery (when weather conditions such as fog or rainy weather deteriorate, as the radio wave attenuation increases, corrects the position information of all targets in the radar image based on the position offset, respectively, and then again corrects the signal strengths of all the targets whose position information is corrected based on the intensity offset, respectively, collecting unit 101 collects…weather…averages the collected information as reference information for the fixed target, calculate an average value for a plurality of offsets extracted in association with the plurality of fixed targets, and correct the radar image based on the calculated average values. - Hong ¶3 & ¶8 & ¶18 & ¶26).
Davalos discloses weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images. Hong teaches an apparatus and a method for processing a radar signal for correcting a radar image associated with a fixed target.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Davalos, weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images, with an apparatus and a method for processing a radar signal for correcting a radar image associated with a fixed target, as taught by Hong, with a reasonable expectation of success for providing accurate radar images regardless of environmental changes, see Hong ¶4 for details.
Claim 2 is rejected under U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Davalos, and Hong, as per claim 1, and further in view of Nagel et al., EP-3128344-A1, hereinafter referred to as Nagel (Translation by PE2E).
As per claim 2
Davalos does not specifically disclose wherein the weather estimation model comprises a processor executing a rain rate estimator algorithm, and wherein the processor executing the rain rate estimator algorithm is configured to map raw backscatter values in the radar imagery to a rain rate estimate for the environment of the vehicle.
Davalos discloses a vehicle monitoring its weather environment. However, Nagel teaches wherein the weather estimation model comprises a processor executing a rain rate estimator algorithm, and wherein the processor executing the rain rate estimator algorithm is configured to map raw backscatter values in the radar imagery to a rain rate estimate for the environment of the vehicle (radar processing unit, rain clutter the clutter volume model , η.sub.0 = backscatter coefficient of rain, which is given in the radar literature [1, page 15-12] in dependence on the rain rate r.sub.rain - Nagel ¶13 & Equation 13 + Page 4 Line & 38 & Page 5 Lines 45-54).
Davalos discloses weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images. Nagel teaches a method for suppressing windmill returns in a pulse Doppler radar.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Davalos, weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images, with a method for suppressing windmill returns in a pulse Doppler radar, as taught by Nagel, with a reasonable expectation of success to suppress returns with a low radar cross section, see Nagel ¶2 for details.
Claim 6 is rejected under U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Davalos, and Hong, as per claim 1, and further in view of Wiebold et al., US-20250088275-A1, hereinafter referred to as Wiebold.
As per claim 6
Davalos does not specifically disclose wherein estimating weather conditions for the environment comprises: receiving sensor data from one or more non-radar sensors; and estimating the weather conditions for the environment based at least in part on the sensor data.
However, Wiebold teaches wherein estimating weather conditions for the environment comprises: receiving sensor data from one or more non-radar sensors; and estimating the weather conditions for the environment based at least in part on the sensor data (A weather LiDAR system is used to measure atmospheric properties in the earth's atmosphere at high altitudes by measuring reflected or scattered back laser light from laser beams generated by a LiDAR laser of the LiDAR, weather measurement 100 includes a LiDAR laser 112 that is designed to generate transmit weather laser beams 170 – Wiebold ¶3 & ¶21).
Davalos discloses weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images. Wiebold teaches a system for optical communication and weather measurement.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Davalos, weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images, with a system for optical communication and weather measurement, as taught by Wiebold, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide improved system functionality with minimal replication of hardware, thus decreasing cost of a network rollout compared to two independent sets of systems, while providing both atmospheric information and communication functions, see Wiebold ¶29 for details, and because lidar systems could be installed on a moving vehicle.
Claims 12, and 19 are rejected under U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Davalos, and Hong, as per claim 1, and 15, respectively, and further in view of Kurono et al., US-20240168150-A1, hereinafter referred to as Kurono.
As per claim 12
Davalos does not specifically disclose further comprising: detecting a decrease in a sensing range for a radar coupled to the vehicle; and providing an output to one or more vehicle systems conveying the detected decrease in the sensing range for the radar.
However, Kurono teaches further comprising: detecting a decrease in a sensing range for a radar coupled to the vehicle; and providing an output to one or more vehicle systems conveying the detected decrease in the sensing range for the radar (When determining that the surrounding environment has rainfall, the rainfall determination unit 88 outputs a command to the driving assistance ECU 100 to reduce a control range of the driving assistance ECU 100, since the radar waves are attenuated by rainfall and a searchable region for targets becomes narrower, As a result…the driving assistance ECU 100 narrows a search region for a preceding vehicle to control the vehicle 2 to follow the preceding vehicle, which can prevent the preceding vehicle from being detected incorrectly due to rainfall, and thus making the vehicle-following control unstable - Kurono ¶58-¶59).
Davalos discloses weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images. Kurono teaches a radar device for a vehicle capable of determining rainfall.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Davalos, weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images, with a radar device for a vehicle capable of determining rainfall, as taught by Kurono, with a reasonable expectation of success to prevent the accuracy of rainfall determination from deteriorating, see Kurono ¶96 for details.
As per claim 19
Davalos does not specifically disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: detect, based on the weather-related attenuation effects, a decrease in a sensing range for a radar coupled to the vehicle; and providing an output to one or more vehicle systems conveying the detected decrease in the sensing range for the radar.
However, Kurono teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: detect, based on the weather-related attenuation effects, a decrease in a sensing range for a radar coupled to the vehicle; and providing an output to one or more vehicle systems conveying the detected decrease in the sensing range for the radar (When determining that the surrounding environment has rainfall, the rainfall determination unit 88 outputs a command to the driving assistance ECU 100 to reduce a control range of the driving assistance ECU 100, since the radar waves are attenuated by rainfall and a searchable region for targets becomes narrower, As a result…the driving assistance ECU 100 narrows a search region for a preceding vehicle to control the vehicle 2 to follow the preceding vehicle, which can prevent the preceding vehicle from being detected incorrectly due to rainfall, and thus making the vehicle-following control unstable - Kurono ¶58-¶59).
Davalos discloses weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images. Kurono teaches a radar device for a vehicle capable of determining rainfall.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Davalos, weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images, with a radar device for a vehicle capable of determining rainfall, as taught by Kurono, with a reasonable expectation of success to prevent the accuracy of rainfall determination from deteriorating, see Kurono ¶96 for details.
Claim 13 is rejected under U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Davalos, and Hong, as per claim 1, and further in view of Stadelmann, et al., US-9568602-B1, hereinafter referred to as Stadelmann.
As per claim 13
Davalos does not specifically disclose further comprising: detecting an object using the corrected radar imagery; and displaying, on a display interface of the vehicle, a representation of the object relative to the vehicle.
However, Stadelmann teaches further comprising: detecting an object using the corrected radar imagery; and displaying, on a display interface of the vehicle, a representation of the object relative to the vehicle (radar system 102 can employ an airplane rejection filter to reject the radar returns associated with the detection of airplanes, thereby preventing the display of airplanes on the weather radar screen…radar system 102 retains data associated with the filtered radar returns for use in the object sense mode…to determine locations of other aircraft - Stadelmann Column 7 Lines 27-40).
Davalos discloses weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images. Stadelmann teaches radar systems with weather sensing and detect and avoid (DAA)/due regard (DR) capability.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Davalos, weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images, with radar systems with weather sensing and detect and avoid (DAA)/due regard (DR) capability, as taught by Stadelmann, with a reasonable expectation of success to improve weather detection using simultaneously or near simultaneously transmitted radar beams at different altitude levels, see Stadelmann Column 1 Lines 52-54 for details.
Claim 14 is rejected under U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Davalos, and Hong, as per claim 1, and further in view of Wang et al., US-20230184931-A1, hereinafter referred to as Wang.
As per claim 14
Davalos does not specifically disclose wherein the control system comprises one or more processors configured to control the vehicle based on the corrected radar imagery.
However, Wang teaches wherein the control system comprises one or more processors configured to control the vehicle based on the corrected radar imagery (such as autonomous driving operations. Operation 402 includes obtaining radar point cloud data of an area in an environment…wherein the radar point cloud data is obtained or derived from a scan of the area by a radar located on the vehicle. Operation 404 includes obtaining filtered radar point cloud data by filtering the radar point cloud data using a set of one or more rules…Operation 410 includes causing the vehicle to operate based on one or more characteristics of the object determined from the set of radar point cloud data - Wang ¶44).
Davalos discloses weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images. Wang teaches systems and apparatus for performing signal processing on sensor data from radar(s) and LiDAR(s) located on the vehicles.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Davalos, weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images, with systems and apparatus for performing signal processing on sensor data from radar(s) and LiDAR(s) located on the vehicles, as taught by Wang, with a reasonable expectation of success so that the autonomous vehicle can be safely maneuvered around the objects, see Wang ¶3 for details.
Claim 17 is rejected under U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Davalos, and Hong, as per claim 15, and further in view of Lin et al., CN-116451423-A, hereinafter referred to as Lin (Translation by Espacenet).
As per claim 17
Davalos does not specifically disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: use a neural network to remove the weather-related attenuation effects based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment.
However, Lin teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: use a neural network to remove the weather-related attenuation effects based on the estimated weather conditions for the environment (a meteorological radar…employing a multi-resolution convolutional neural network as a backbone network of an inversion model…the interference of non-rainfall clouds on the inversion model is weakened by using an attention mechanism, so that a reliable radar echo data inversion method is provided for a radar uncovered area, data support is provided for the improvement of the actual short-term and imminent forecasting capability, Perform data deletion and screening on the radar data - Lin Abstract & Page 2 Lines 13-14).
Davalos discloses weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images. Lin teaches a meteorological radar combined reflectivity inversion method.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Davalos, weather radar systems configured to display forecasted weather radar images, with a meteorological radar combined reflectivity inversion method, as taught by Lin, with a reasonable expectation of success to improve upon the interference of non-precipitation clouds in the inversion model and improve the inversion accuracy, see Lin claim 4 for details.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5, 7-11, 16 and 18 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIS ASIM SHAIKH whose telephone number is (571)272-6426. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:30 M-F EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fadey S. Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
/F.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668