DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the application filed 9 Jul 2024 and the Information Disclosure Statement filed 9 Jul 2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 11 and 16 are independent.
The claims have been rejected under nonstatutory obvious double patenting.
Notice of 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9 Jul 2024 is acknowledged. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 11 and 16 are rejected, but would be allowable if the obvious nonstatutory rejection is overcome.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance AFTER overcoming the obvious nonstatutory rejection:
Neither Doescher, Stettiner, Nishikido, Sahara, nor Doerry, either alone or in combination, anticipates or renders obvious the uniquely distinct features of:
“A radar sensor for a vehicle, comprising: a radar transmitter configured to transmit a first radar signal,
the first radar signal including a frame associated with a plurality of frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) chirps,
wherein the frame is a coherent processing interval, and wherein the plurality of FMCW chirps includes a plurality of uniform FMCW chirps having a particular chirp profile and
a plurality of non-uniform FMCW chirps having chirp profiles that differ from one another and from the particular chirp profile;
a radar receiver configured to receive a second radar signal that is a reflected signal of the first radar signal; and
control logic coupled to the radar receiver and configured to process the second radar signal, based on the uniform and non-uniform FMCW chirps in the frame,
to sense one or more parameters of an object in a field of view of the radar transmitter;
wherein the control logic uses the uniform and non-uniform FMCW chirps to sense the one or more parameters of the object by: generating a uniform data cube by performing a range transformation with fast-time samples of the second radar signal and using the uniform FMCW chirps;
generating a non-uniform data cube by performing a range transformation with fast-time samples of the second radar signal and using the non-uniform FMCW chirps, wherein the FMCW chirps used to generate the non-uniform data cube are different from the FMCW chirps used to generate the uniform data cube;
detecting a plurality of candidate objects using the uniform data cube;
determining a first parameter for the plurality of candidate objects using the uniform data cube and without using the non-uniform data cube; and
enhancing the first parameter for the plurality of candidate objects using the non-uniform data cube.”
as recited by claim 1 and similarly recited in claim(s) 11 and 16, over any of the prior art of record, alone or in combination. Claims 2-10, 12-15, and 17-20 depend on claim(s) 1, 11, and 16; and each is therefore also allowable over the prior art.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly mark “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Nonstatutory Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 11 and 16 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No.12,032,090 and over claim 1 of U.S. Patent 11,536,801 in view of Stettiner and Doescher. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent 12,032,090 and U.S. Patent 11,536,801 anticipate each and every element of the present application 18/767,794. Stettiner and Doescher teach all of the obvious elements missing in the previous patents.
Present App 18/767,794
U.S. Patent 12,032,092
U.S. Patent 11,536,801
1. A radar sensor for a vehicle, comprising: a radar transmitter configured to transmit a first radar signal,
the first radar signal including a frame associated with a plurality of frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) chirps,
wherein the frame is a coherent processing interval, and wherein the plurality of FMCW chirps includes a plurality of uniform FMCW chirps having a particular chirp profile and
a plurality of non-uniform FMCW chirps having chirp profiles that differ from one another and from the particular chirp profile;
a radar receiver configured to receive a second radar signal that is a reflected signal of the first radar signal; and
control logic coupled to the radar receiver and configured to process the second radar signal, based on the uniform and non-uniform FMCW chirps in the frame,
to sense one or more parameters of an object in a field of view of the radar transmitter;
wherein the control logic uses the uniform and non-uniform FMCW chirps to sense the one or more parameters of the object by: generating a uniform data cube by performing a range transformation with fast-time samples of the second radar signal and using the uniform FMCW chirps;
generating a non-uniform data cube by performing a range transformation with fast-time samples of the second radar signal and using the non-uniform FMCW chirps, wherein the FMCW chirps used to generate the non-uniform data cube are different from the FMCW chirps used to generate the uniform data cube;
detecting a plurality of candidate objects using the uniform data cube;
determining a first parameter for the plurality of candidate objects using the uniform data cube and without using the non-uniform data cube; and
enhancing the first parameter for the plurality of candidate objects using the non-uniform data cube.
1. A radar sensor for a vehicle, comprising: a radar transmitter configured to transmit a first radar signal,
the first radar signal including a frame associated with a plurality of frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) chirps,
wherein the frame is a coherent processing interval, wherein the plurality of FMCW chirps includes a plurality of uniform FMCW chirps having a particular chirp profile and
a plurality of non-uniform FMCW chirps having chirp profiles that differ from one another and from the particular chirp profile;
a radar receiver configured to receive a second radar signal that is a reflected signal of the first radar signal; and
a control logic coupled to the first radar receiver and configured to process the second radar signal, based on the uniform and non-uniform FMCW chirps in the frame,
to determine one or more parameters of an object in a field of view of the radar transmitter;
wherein the first radar signal includes a plurality of frames, each of the plurality of frames being a different coherent processing interval and including uniform and non-uniform FMCW chirps; and
wherein the plurality of frames have different arrangements of non-uniform FMCW chirps from one another.
5. The radar sensor of claim 1, wherein the control logic uses the uniform and non-uniform FMCW chirps in the frame to sense the one or more parameters of the object by: generating a uniform data cube by performing a range transformation with fast-time samples of the second radar signal and using the uniform FMCW chirps; and
detecting a plurality of candidate objects in the uniform data cube.
6. The radar sensor of claim 5, wherein the control logic further uses the non-uniform FMCW chirps in the frame to sense the one or more parameters of the object by: generating a non-uniform data cube by performing a range transformation with fast-time samples of the second radar signal and using the non-uniform FMCW chirps, wherein the FMCW chirps used to generate the non-uniform data cube are different from the FMCW chirps used to generate the uniform data cube; and enhancing range resolution for at least a subset of the plurality of candidate objects using the non-uniform data cube, wherein detecting the plurality of candidate objects in the uniform data cube is performed without using the non-uniform data cube and enhancing the range resolution for the at least a subset of the plurality of candidate objects is performed without using the uniform data cube.
1. A radar sensor for a vehicle, comprising: a radar transmitter configured to transmit a first radar signal,
the first radar signal including a frame associated with a plurality of frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) chirps,
wherein the frame is a coherent processing interval, wherein the plurality of FMWC FMCW chirps includes a plurality of uniform FMCW chirps having a same default chirp profile and
a plurality of non-uniform FMCW chirps having chirp profiles that differ from one another and from the default chirp profile
based at least upon differing starting frequency and repetition interval; a radar receiver configured to receive a second radar signal that is a reflected signal of the first radar signal; and
control logic coupled to the radar receiver and configured to process the second radar signal, based on the uniform and non-uniform FMCW chirps in the frame,
to sense one or more parameters of an object in a field of view of the radar transmitter.
5. The radar sensor of claim 1, wherein the chirp profiles of the non-uniform FMCW chirps differ based upon starting frequency such that a total frequency band of the frame is split into a plurality of sub-bands defined by the non-uniform FMCW chirps, and
wherein the control logic uses the non-uniform FMCW chirps in the frame to sense the one or more parameters of the object by subsampling on range within the total frequency band of the frame.
6. The radar sensor of claim 1, wherein the control logic uses the non-uniform FMCW chirps in the frame to sense the one or more parameters of the object by subsampling on Doppler over a duration of the frame.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONALD H.B. BRASWELL whose telephone number is (469)295-9119. The examiner can normally be reached on 7-5 Central Time (Dallas).
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, Alexander Sofocleous can be reached (571) 272-0635. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/Donald HB Braswell/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2825