DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
The following is a non-final Office Action in response to claims filed 09 July 2024.
Claims 1-4 are pending.
Claims 1-4 have been examined.
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 09 July 2024 are being considered by the Examiner.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application(s) PCT/JP2022/008015 filed 02/25/2022 under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged.
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 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims are directed to a process (an act, or series of acts or steps), a machine (a concrete thing, consisting of parts, or of certain devices and combination of devices), and a manufacture (an article produced from raw or prepared materials by giving these materials new forms, qualities, properties, or combinations, whether by hand labor or by machinery). Thus, each of the claims falls within one of the four statutory categories (Step 1). The claims recite a method (process) and apparatus, however, the claim(s) recite(s) determining accounts are fake by manipulating account data which is an abstract idea of *** as well as the abstract idea of performing computations in accordance with a mathematical formula on that data.
The limitations of:
In claim 1: “covariance matrix calculation circuitry to acquire a received signal vector of a reflected wave from a reception array antenna to receive the reflected wave from a target, and calculate a covariance matrix of the received signal vector; unnecessary vector value removal circuitry to remove a vector value present inside a convex hull of an array manifold vector of the reception array antenna from a plurality of vector values that the array manifold vector is capable of taking; and expected-power-value estimation circuitry to estimate an expected-power-value of the reflected wave using a vector value that is not removed by the unnecessary vector value removal circuitry among the plurality of vector values that the array manifold vector is capable of taking, and the covariance matrix calculated by the covariance matrix calculation circuitry,”
In claim 4: “acquiring a received signal vector of a reflected wave from a reception array antenna to receive the reflected wave from a target, and calculating a covariance matrix of the received signal vector; removing a vector value present inside a convex hull of an array manifold vector of the reception array antenna from among a plurality of vector values that the array manifold vector is capable of taking; and estimating an expected-power-value of the reflected wave using a vector value that is not removed among the plurality of vector values that the array manifold vector is capable of taking, and the covariance matrix calculated” as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mathematical concepts—mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations but for the recitation of generic computer components (Step 2A Prong 1). That is, other than reciting “an expected-power-value estimation device comprising...circuitry,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from the mathematical concept grouping. For example, but for the “an expected-power-value estimation device comprising...circuitry” language, “acquire” “remove,” “estimate” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually calculating an estimated power from received or acquired signals which is mathematical concept of performing computations on received data. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the as a mathematical concepts, but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mathematical Concepts” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim(s) recite(s) an abstract idea (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application (Step 2A Prong Two). Method claim 1 is devoid of structure whatsoever and thus does not integrate the claims into a practical application. Next, claim 1 only recites one additional element – using “an expected-power-value estimation device comprising...circuitry” to perform the steps. The “expected-power-value estimation device comprising...circuitry” in the steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of electronic data storage and arithmatic) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Specifically the claims amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer or invoking computers as tools by adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - see MPEP 2106.04(d)(I) discussing MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, the combination of these additional elements does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea, even when considered as a whole (Step 2A Prong Two: NO).
The claim does not include a combination of additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception (Step 2B). Method claim 1 is devoid of structure whatsoever and thus does not amount to significantly more. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application (Step 2A Prong 2) in claim 1, the combination of additional elements of using “an expected-power-value estimation device comprising...circuitry” to perform the steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, when considering the additional elements alone, and in combination, there is no inventive concept in the claim. As such, the claim(s) is/are not patent eligible, even when considered as a whole (Step 2B: NO).
Claim 2 recite(s) the additional limitation(s) further limiting the vector value and calculating beat signals which is still directed towards the abstract idea previously identified and is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Again, as discussed with respect to claims 1 and 4, the claims are simply limitations which are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a computer or with computing components. Accordingly, the additional element(s) does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Even when considered as a whole, the claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
Claim 3 recite(s) the additional limitation(s) further limiting the method used (Capon method) which is still directed towards the abstract idea previously identified and is not an inventive concept that meaningfully limits the abstract idea. Again, as discussed with respect to claims 1 and 4, the claims are simply limitations which are no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a computer or with computing components. Accordingly, the additional element(s) does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Even when considered as a whole, the claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
Claims 1-4 are therefore not eligible subject matter, even when considered as a whole.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kanamoto et al. (US PG Pub. 2010/0271254).
As per claim 1, Kanamoto discloses an expected-power-value estimation device comprising (signal processing unit, Kanamoto ¶210; device, radar, control unit, microcomputer, ¶211):
covariance matrix calculation circuitry to acquire a received signal vector of a reflected wave from a reception array antenna to receive the reflected wave from a target, and calculate a covariance matrix of the received signal vector (a correlation matrix computation unit computing a correlation matrix from each of a complex number data of a detected beat frequency for which the target was detected for each of the antennas, Kanamoto ¶57; a correlation matrix computation unit 128, ¶369; wherein the correlation matrix is a covariance matrix as per ¶364 of Kanamoto);
unnecessary vector value removal circuitry to remove a vector value present inside a convex hull of an array manifold vector of the reception array antenna from a plurality of vector values that the array manifold vector is capable of taking (noise, noise vector, Kanamoto ¶432; from reflection component, ¶491; array-type antenna, ¶227) (Examiner interprets the reflection component to include the use of a convex hull); and
expected-power-value estimation circuitry to estimate an expected-power-value of the reflected wave using a vector value that is not removed by the unnecessary vector value removal circuitry among the plurality of vector values that the array manifold vector is capable of taking, and the covariance matrix calculated by the covariance matrix calculation circuitry (calculation of electronic power, Kanamoto ¶29; By adding the process, described above, of computing the received electronic power and deleting an unnecessary wave, it is possible to delete the unnecessary incoming reception wave, when the number of reception waves was overestimated in the estimation of the number of reception waves in step S2105. Therefore, it is possible to retain a margin of the setting of the threshold value .lamda.th and the threshold value .lamda.th' in the estimation process of the number of incoming waves described below (in other words, even if each threshold value is not set rigidly, the reception wave that does not have an adequate reception electric power is deleted), ¶586; incoming wave estimation process, ¶588-¶611).
As per claim 2, Kanamoto discloses as shown above. Kanamoto further discloses wherein the unnecessary vector value removal circuitry
specifies a vector value corresponding to each of a plurality of received signals included in the received signal vector among the plurality of vector values that the array manifold vector is capable of taking, and output a specification result of the vector value corresponding to each of the received signals (a vector for each direction and angle, Kanamoto ¶426; internally predetermined, ¶577),
calculates first beat signals from the respective received signals (beat signals, beat signal generation unit, Kanamoto ¶57 and ¶82), and
calculate second beat signals by multiplying the respective first beat signals with a frequency characteristic of a transmission/reception system between the expected-power-value estimation device and the target (generating a beat signal comprising a frequency of a difference between the transmission wave and the reflection wave; a frequency resolution processing unit frequency resolving the beat signal into a beat frequency of a predetermined resolution number in chronological order and computing a complex number data; a peak detection unit detecting a peak value from an intensity value of each of the beat frequency and detecting an existence of a target; a correlation matrix computation unit computing a correlation matrix from each of a complex number data of a detected beat frequency for which the target was detected for each of the antennas; an eigen value computation unit computing an eigen value from a correlation matrix; a comparison unit comparing an eigen value obtained by normalizing, and a predetermined threshold value; a determination unit determining a number of an eigen value of a numeric value, among an eigen value corresponding to a beat frequency for which a target was detected, the numeric value exceeding the threshold value, as a number of the incoming waves, Kanamoto ¶72; Further, the velocity detection unit 26 computes the relative velocity v with respect to the target by the difference in the beat frequency of the combination for each ascending region and the descending region, which are inputted in series, ¶239),
calculates a plurality of differences between the respective first beat signals calculated, and the second beat signal corresponding to the respective first beat signals (generating a beat signal comprising a frequency of a difference between the transmission wave and the reflection wave; a frequency resolution processing unit frequency resolving the beat signal into a beat frequency of a predetermined resolution number in chronological order and computing a complex number data; a peak detection unit detecting a peak value from an intensity value of each of the beat frequency and detecting an existence of a target; a correlation matrix computation unit computing a correlation matrix from each of a complex number data of a detected beat frequency for which the target was detected for each of the antennas; an eigen value computation unit computing an eigen value from a correlation matrix; a comparison unit comparing an eigen value obtained by normalizing, and a predetermined threshold value; a determination unit determining a number of an eigen value of a numeric value, among an eigen value corresponding to a beat frequency for which a target was detected, the numeric value exceeding the threshold value, as a number of the incoming waves, Kanamoto ¶72), and
specifies a vector value corresponding to a received signal related to a difference smaller than a threshold among the plurality of differences calculated, on a basis of the specification result output, and remove the specified vector value as the vector value that is present inside the convex hull (Therefore, the peak detection unit 23 can detect each peak value of the spectrum as a beat frequency, in other words, an existence of a target which depends on the distance, by converting the complex number data for either one of the antennas, or the added value of the complex number data for all of the antennas, into a frequency spectrum. By the addition of the complex number data for all of the antennas, the noise element is averaged, and the S/N ratio increases. The peak combination unit 24 combines the beat frequency and its peak value, entered by the peak detection unit 23 and shown in FIG. 4, with a beat frequency of each ascending region and the descending region and its peak value, in a matrix fashion in a round-robin matter. In other words, the peak combination unit 24 combines all of the beat frequencies in each of the ascending region and the descending direction. Thus, the peak combination unit 23 outputs, in series, to the distance detection unit 25 and the velocity detection unit 26. Here, the horizontal axis of FIG. 4 indicates the frequency point of the beat frequency, while the vertical axis indicates the level (intensity) of the signal, Kanamoto ¶236-¶237; remove signal component vector, ¶424).
As per claim 3, Kanamoto discloses as shown above. Kanamoto further discloses wherein the expected-power-value estimation circuitry estimates the expected-power-value of the reflected wave by executing a Capon method that uses the vector value that is not removed by the unnecessary vector value removal circuitry among the plurality of vector values that the array manifold vector is capable of taking, and the covariance matrix calculated by the covariance matrix calculation circuitry (Capon method, Kanamoto ¶5; calculation of electronic power, ¶29; By adding the process, described above, of computing the received electronic power and deleting an unnecessary wave, it is possible to delete the unnecessary incoming reception wave, when the number of reception waves was overestimated in the estimation of the number of reception waves in step S2105. Therefore, it is possible to retain a margin of the setting of the threshold value .lamda.th and the threshold value .lamda.th' in the estimation process of the number of incoming waves described below (in other words, even if each threshold value is not set rigidly, the reception wave that does not have an adequate reception electric power is deleted), ¶586; incoming wave estimation process, ¶588-¶611).
As per claim 4, Kanamoto discloses an expected-power-value estimation method comprising (method, algorithm, Kanamoto ¶349):
acquiring a received signal vector of a reflected wave from a reception array antenna to receive the reflected wave from a target, and calculating a covariance matrix of the received signal vector;
removing a vector value present inside a convex hull of an array manifold vector of the reception array antenna from among a plurality of vector values that the array manifold vector is capable of taking (noise, noise vector, Kanamoto ¶432; from reflection component, ¶491; array-type antenna, ¶227); and
estimating an expected-power-value of the reflected wave using a vector value that is not removed among the plurality of vector values that the array manifold vector is capable of taking, and the covariance matrix calculated (calculation of electronic power, Kanamoto ¶29; By adding the process, described above, of computing the received electronic power and deleting an unnecessary wave, it is possible to delete the unnecessary incoming reception wave, when the number of reception waves was overestimated in the estimation of the number of reception waves in step S2105. Therefore, it is possible to retain a margin of the setting of the threshold value .lamda.th and the threshold value .lamda.th' in the estimation process of the number of incoming waves described below (in other words, even if each threshold value is not set rigidly, the reception wave that does not have an adequate reception electric power is deleted), ¶586; incoming wave estimation process, ¶588-¶611).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure (additional art can be located on the PTO-892):
Kanamoto (US PG Pub. 2011/ 0156947) Electronic scanning radar apparatus, receiving wave direction estimating method, and computer-readable storage media storing receiving wave direction estimation program.
Kurono et al. (US PG Pub. 2013/0249731) Radar apparatus and target detecting method.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to ANDREW B WHITAKER whose telephone number is (571)270-7563. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8am-5pm, EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Lynda Jasmin can be reached on (571) 272-6782. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-
automated- interview-request-air-form
/ANDREW B WHITAKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629
Prosecution Insights