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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on September 17, 2026, has been entered.
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 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims (claims 2-21) are directed to one or more of the 4 statutory categories, and recites determine a real sensor spectrum using the real sensor data; estimate a preliminary angle of the target based on the real sensor spectrum; predict virtual sensor data corresponding to one or more virtual receivers absent from the existing target detection system based on the estimated preliminary angle; determine a virtual sensor spectrum using the predicted virtual sensor data; combine the real sensor spectrum and the virtual sensor spectrum to form an enhanced beamformer output for the existing target detection system; and cause display of a graphical representation of the enhanced beamformer output. The above steps fall into the abstract idea of “mathematical concepts” because it recites calculation of an output and the calculation steps taken to get to the output.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim does not provide limitations that are indicative of integration into a practical application. The claim generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular environment or field of use. No outcome beyond displaying the output is set forth, such as an actual beamforming output directing/re-directing step. Also, mere instructions to perform the calculations on a processor(s) do not create a practical application. Therefore, no additional steps beyond the calculations are set forth. The output of real sensor data as claimed is considered additional elements of the data that is received or simply data gathering (insignificant extra solution activities). No details (additional steps) have been provided to clarify how the real sensor data is gathered or by what means it is gathered. The real sensor data is simply received from the detection system.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claim generally links the use of the judicial exception to a particular technology or field of use, a non-transitory computer-readable storage device(s) and one or more hardware computer processors (processors/computers). No outcome is set forth, such as actual beamforming output directing/re-directing. Also, mere instructions to perform the method on computer do not provide significantly more to the abstract idea. The receiving of sensor data by the computer processor(s) is considered additional elements of the data that is received or simply data gathering (insignificant extra solution activities). No details (additional steps) have been provided to clarify how the sensor data is gathered by the processor or by what means the sensor data is gathered. The sensor data is simply received by the processor(s). The only remaining subject matter is the determination of the enhanced beamformer output (the abstract idea itself) which provides for calculations involving the sensor data that was received. (See MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Therefore, claims 2-21 set forth an abstract idea that does not include a practical application nor significantly more and are considered ineligible subject matter under 101.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUMIDE T AJIBADE AKONAI whose telephone number is (571)272-6496. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4PM.
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, CHARLES N APPIAH can be reached at 571-272-7904. 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.
/OLUMIDE AJIBADE AKONAI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights