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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 01/30/2022, as a continuation of a patent application filed through the PCT. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the PCT/CN2022/075257 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed 07/21/2026, has been entered into the record. Claims 1-20 stand rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 07/21/2026, have been carefully considered by the Examiner. The Examiner agrees that the amendment to the independent claims overcomes the rejection over 35 USC 102 set out in the previous Office Action. However, a new rejection is set out below using a reference not discussed in the previous Office Action. This new rejection is necessitated by the Applicant’s amendments, because said amendments change the scope of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 16 recite the limitation, “wherein M first signals comprised in the first signal group and N second signals comprised in the second signal group are alternately distributed, wherein a first number of continuous first signals and a second number of continuous second signals are alternately distributed, and wherein the first number is different from the second number” [boldface for emphasis]. Based on the language of claims 1 and 16 as amended, it is unclear what (if any) difference there is between M and the first number and N and the second number. Specifically, it is unclear whether the applicant intends to differentiate between the number of signals per signal group and the number of continuous signals per signal group. Appropriate correction is required.
The dependent claims are rejected due to their dependency on an indefinite independent claim.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonthron et al. (US 2006/0262007 A1), hereinafter Bonthron, in view of Hotta et al. (US 2023/0074625 A1), hereinafter Hotta.
Regarding claim 1, Bonthron teaches (note: what Bonthron does not teach is struck through),
A detection apparatus, comprising a transmitter and a receiver (fig. 7, Tx 101 and Rxs 121-141), wherein:
the transmitter is configured to transmit a first signal group and a second signal group (fig. 7, stepped frequency transmit signal generator 405 feeds Tx 101. See also, p. 34, lines 14-17, “This waveform is comprised of two linearly stepped frequency sequences intertwined, one having an equal but negative slope Dfs / Ts with respect to the other the other, during a predetermined time interval.”),
wherein M first signals comprised in the first signal group and N second signals comprised in the second signal group are alternately distributed (figs. 9C-9G, signals from group A and group B are alternately distributed in time),
the receiver is configured to receive a third signal group and a fourth signal group (fig. 7, receive path 121, 12, 62, 55, 65, 45, 340, 300. See also, p. 34, lines 19-23, “Using the type of stepped frequency pattern described in FIG. 9D, target information may be calculated from the digitized down-converted signals shown in FIGs. 2A-B, FIG. 7, FIG. 11, FIG. 12, FIGs. 13 A-H, and FIGs. 14A-C in a manner similar to that as described for the frequency modulation pattern of FIG. 9 A, with the exception that A/D samples of the down- converted signals must be correctly associated with their corresponding pattern A or B”), wherein:
the third signal group and the fourth signal group are used to determine association information of a target (p. 35, para. 1, “the complex phase of each target spectral peak may be used for advantage in target data association and range-velocity ambiguity resolution”);
a third signal comprised in the third signal group is an echo signal of the first signal comprised in the first signal group and that is reflected by the target (p. 23, para. 2, “The reflected signal from a target will be received by an array of n receiver antennas” See also, p. 34, para. 3, “Using the type of stepped frequency pattern described in FIG. 9D, target information may be calculated from the digitized down-converted signals shown in FIGs. 2A-B, FIG. 7, FIG. 11, FIG. 12, FIGs. 13 A-H, and FIGs. 14A-C”); and
a fourth signal comprised in the fourth signal group is an echo signal that is of the second signal comprised in the second signal group and that is reflected by the target (p. 23, para. 2, “The reflected signal from a target will be received by an array of n receiver antennas” See also p. 34, lines 19-23,“Using the type of stepped frequency pattern described in FIG. 9D, target information may be calculated from the digitized down-converted signals shown in FIGs. 2A-B, FIG. 7, FIG. 11, FIG. 12, FIGs. 13 A-H, and FIGs. 14A-C in a manner similar to that as described for the frequency modulation pattern of FIG. 9 A, with the exception that A/D samples of the down- converted signals must be correctly associated with their corresponding pattern A or B.” The examiner notes that associating received signals with their corresponding pattern necessitates that both signal groups are received).
Hotta teaches,
…wherein M first signals comprised in the first signal group and N second signals comprised in the second signal group are alternately distributed, wherein a first number of continuous first signals and a second number of continuous second signals are alternately distributed, and wherein the first number is different from the second number (fig. 2. See also para. 0030, “In the first modulation period, a frequency-modulated high frequency signal (hereinafter referred to as up-down chirp) is generated where the frequency increases in an up-chirp and decreases in a down chirp. In the second modulation period, a high frequency signal composed of a plurality of chirp signals (hereinafter referred to as chirp wave group) is generated.” The examiner notes that Hotta’s first signal group is an up ramp-down ramp shown in the first modulation period, and Hotta’s second signal group is a down ramp as shown in the second modulation period. One (or, arguably, two) first continuous signal(s) is/are followed by at least three second continuous signals, i.e., the first number of continuous first signals is different from the second number of continuous second signals, and said signals are alternately distributed)
Bonthron and Hotta are analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the detection apparatus of Bonthron with the unequal number of first and second signals of Hotta. The number of repeated signals per modulation period that result in the unequal number of first and second signals of Hotta is no more than a simple design choice, as indicated in para. 0049 of Hotta, which states, “In FIG. 2, only one pair of the up-down chirp indicated by triangle shape is generated, but two or more pairs of the plurality of up-down chirp signals may be generated.” Therefore, modulating the signals of Bonthron such that, e.g., two signals from Group A are transmitted followed by one from Group B is a simple modification that a person of ordinary skill in the art would make to modify the detection apparatus as needed for varying uses of the detection apparatus (such as the axial displacement estimation of Hotta).
Regarding claim 2, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 1. Bonthron further teaches,
…wherein: a frequency step direction of the first signal group is an upward step, and a frequency step direction of the second signal group is a downward step; or a frequency step direction of the first signal group is a downward step, and a frequency step direction of the second signal group is an upward step (fig. 9D, the frequency step of group A is an upward step and the frequency step of group B is a downward step).
Regarding claim 3, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 1. Bonthron does not teach,
…at least two continuous first signals and at least one continuous second signal are alternately distributed; or at least one continuous first signal and at least two continuous second signals are alternately distributed
Hotta teaches,
…at least two continuous first signals and at least one continuous second signal are alternately distributed; or at least one continuous first signal and at least two continuous second signals are alternately distributed (fig. 2, at least one continuous first signal and at least two continuous second signals are alternately distributed. See para. 0030, “In the first modulation period, a frequency-modulated high frequency signal (hereinafter referred to as up-down chirp) is generated where the frequency increases in an up-chirp and decreases in a down chirp. In the second modulation period, a high frequency signal composed of a plurality of chirp signals (hereinafter referred to as chirp wave group) is generated.” See also para. 0049, “In FIG. 2, only one pair of the up-down chirp indicated by triangle shape is generated, but two or more pairs of the plurality of up-down chirp signals may be generated.”).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the detection apparatus of Bonthron with the at least one continuous of first signal followed by at least two continuous second signals of Hotta. The number of repeated signals per modulation period that result in the unequal number of first and second signals of Hotta is no more than a simple design choice, as indicated in para. 0049 of Hotta, which states, “In FIG. 2, only one pair of the up-down chirp indicated by triangle shape is generated, but two or more pairs of the plurality of up-down chirp signals may be generated.” Therefore, modulating the signals of Bonthron such that, e.g., one signal from Group A is transmitted followed by at least two signals from Group B is a simple modification that a person of ordinary skill in the art would make to modify the detection apparatus as needed for varying uses of the detection apparatus (such as the axial displacement estimation of Hotta).
Regarding claim 4, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 1. Bonthron further teaches,
…a first pulse repetition interval is the same as or different from a corresponding second pulse repetition interval (fig. 9D, pulse repetition interval Ts for A and B are the same);
the first pulse repetition interval is a time interval between an ith first signal and an (i+k1)th first signal in the first signal group, k1 is a positive integer, and i is any integer in [1, M] (fig. 9D, first pulse repetition interval Ts is the time interval between each subsequent signal of group A); and
the corresponding second pulse repetition interval is a time interval between a zth second signal and a (z+k2)th second signal in the second signal group, k2 is a positive integer, and z is any integer in [1, N] (fig. 9D, first pulse repetition interval Ts is the time interval between each subsequent signal of group B).
Regarding claim 5, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 4. Bonthron further teaches,
…wherein at least one of the following: any two first pulse repetition intervals in the first signal group are the same or any two second pulse repetition intervals in the second signal group are the same (fig. 9D, the pulse repetition interval Ts is the same for each signal in groups A and B).
Regarding claim 6, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 4. Bonthron further teaches,
…wherein at least one of the following: at least two first pulse repetition intervals in the first signal group are different; or at least two second pulse repetition intervals in the second signal group are different (p. 35, para. 2, “One skilled in the art can modify the abovementioned waveform in a way such as using non-equal frequency step sizes, using more than two sequences, using sequences that have different step sizes from each other, using sequences that have different or opposite slopes, or using more than one value of ∆TD to obtain advantageous results for an application.” The examiner notes that using more than one value of ∆TD would result in the pulse repetition interval between two subsequent pulse pairs being different, see fig. 9E).
Regarding claim 7, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 1. Bonthron further teaches,
…wherein: an absolute value of a difference between an absolute value of a first frequency step size and an absolute value of a corresponding second frequency step size is less than or equal to a first threshold (fig. 9D, ∆fs is the same value for signal groups A and B; therefore, |∆fA-∆fB| = 0, which is less than or equal to a threshold of 0);
the first frequency step size is a frequency offset between an (m+k1)th first signal and an mth first signal in the first signal group, k1 is a positive integer, and m is any integer in [1, M] (fig. 9D, ∆fs is the frequency offset between any two subsequent signals in signal group A); and
the second frequency step size is a frequency offset between an (n+k2)th second signal and an nth second signal in the second signal group, k2 is a positive integer, and n is any integer in [1, N] (fig. 9D, ∆fs is the frequency offset between any two subsequent signals in signal group B).
Regarding claim 8, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 7. Bonthron further teaches,
…wherein the absolute value of the difference between the absolute value of the first frequency step size and the absolute value of the corresponding second frequency step size is equal to 0 (fig. 9D, ∆fs is the same value for signal groups A and B; therefore, |∆fA-∆fB| = 0, which is less than or equal to a threshold of 0).
Regarding claim 9, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 7. Bonthron further teaches,
…wherein at least one of the following:
an absolute value of a difference between any two first frequency step sizes in the first signal group is less than or equal to a second threshold; or an absolute value of a difference between any two second frequency step sizes in the second signal group is less than or equal to a third threshold (fig. 9D, ∆fs is the frequency offset between any two subsequent signals in signal groups A and B. ∆fs is the same value for all members of signal groups A and B. Therefore, the absolute value of the difference between any two frequency step sizes for respective signals in groups A and B is less than or equal to a threshold of 0).
Regarding claim 10, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 9. Bonthron further teaches,
…wherein at least one of the following: the absolute value of the difference between the any two first frequency step sizes in the first signal group is equal to 0, and/or the absolute value of the difference between the any two second frequency step sizes in the second signal group is equal to 0 (fig. 9D, ∆fs is the frequency offset between any two subsequent signals in signal groups A and B. ∆fs is the same value for all members of signal groups A and B. Therefore, the absolute value of the difference between any two frequency step sizes for respective signals in groups A and B is less than or equal to a threshold of 0).
Regarding claim 11, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 1. Bonthron further teaches,
The detection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein M is equal to N (fig. 9D, signal group A and signal group B both consist of eight pulses).
Claim 16 is rejected for the same reasons and using the same citations as claim 1, noting that Bonthron teaches a signal processing method (see, e.g., abs., “Methods and apparatus are presented”).
Claims 12, 14-15, 17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonthron in view of Hotta and further in view of Wang et al. (Wang W, Du J, Gao J. Multi-Target Detection Method Based on Variable Carrier Frequency Chirp Sequence. Sensors (Basel). 2018 Oct 10;18(10):3386. doi: 10.3390/s18103386.), hereinafter Wang. The examiner notes that a copy of Wang was submitted by the applicant with their IDS and thus has not been furnished with this office action.
Regarding claim 12, Bonthron in view of Hotta teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 1. Bonthron further teaches (note: what Bonthron does not teach is struck through),
…wherein the detection apparatus further comprises at least one processor (fig. 7, signal processor 300), the at least one processor configured to:
determine the third signal group and the fourth signal group, wherein the third signal group comprises M third signals, the fourth signal group comprises N fourth signals, the M third signals are echo signals obtained after the M first signals are reflected by the target, and the N fourth signals are echo signals obtained after the N second signals are reflected by the target (p. 34, para. 3, “Using the type of stepped frequency pattern described in FIG. 9D, target information may be calculated from the digitized down-converted signals shown in FIGs. 2A-B, FIG. 7, FIG. 11, FIG. 12, FIGs. 13 A-H, and FIGs. 14A-C in a manner similar to that as described for the frequency modulation pattern of FIG. 9 A, with the exception that A/D samples of the down- converted signals must be correctly associated with their corresponding pattern A or B and de- intertwined before spectral processing such as, but not limited to, a Fourier transform or inverse Fourier transform.” See also, from the description of fig. 7, p. 23, para. 2, “The reflected signal from a target will be received by an array of n receiver antennas”);
perform (p. 34, para. 3, “A/D samples of the down- converted signals must be correctly associated with their corresponding pattern A or B and de- intertwined before spectral processing such as, but not limited to, a Fourier transform.” See also p. 35, para. 1, “Also, the complex phase of each target spectral peak may be used for advantage in target data association and range-velocity ambiguity resolution”), and
perform (p. 34, para. 3, “A/D samples of the down- converted signals must be correctly associated with their corresponding pattern A or B and de- intertwined before spectral processing such as, but not limited to, a Fourier transform.” See also p. 35, para. 1, “Also, the complex phase of each target spectral peak may be used for advantage in target data association and range-velocity ambiguity resolution.”); and
determine the association information of the target(p. 35, para. 1, “Also, the complex phase of each target spectral peak may be used for advantage in target data association and range-velocity ambiguity resolution”).
Wang teaches,
…perform two-dimensional fast Fourier transform (FFT) on the third signal group to obtain a first distance-Doppler spectrum (fig. 5, steps one and two), and
perform two-dimensional FFT on the fourth signal group to obtain a second distance-Doppler spectrum, wherein the two-dimensional FFT comprises distance dimension FFT and Doppler dimension FFT (fig. 5, steps one and two); and
determine the association information of the target based on the first distance-Doppler spectrum and the second distance-Doppler spectrum (fig. 5, final two steps).
Bonthron and Wang are analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the radar data processing of Bonthron to include the FFT of Wang. Bonthron proposes using FFT transforms (p. 25, lines 3-5) and teaches both frequency-binning and range-binning data. Bonthron does not explicitly teach using a two-dimensional FFT to produce range-Doppler maps. However, using a two-dimensional FFT to produce a range-Doppler map is a common technique in the art that can be incorporated into signal-group based analysis with the advantageous result of improving de-aliasing (i.e., accomplishing the velocity ambiguity resolution desired by the invention of Bonthron), as evidenced by the use of the technique in Wang.
Regarding claim 14, Bonthron in view of Hotta and further in view of Wang teaches he detection apparatus according to claim 12. Bonthron as previously modified by Hotta and Wang further teaches (note: what the previous combination of Bonthron, Hotta, and Wang does not teach is struck through),
…the association information of the target comprises a first distance and a first speed of the target (p. 35, para. 1, “Also, the complex phase of each target spectral peak may be used for advantage in target data association and range-velocity ambiguity resolution”); and
Wang teaches,
…the association information of the target comprises a first distance and a first speed of the target (fig. 5, final two steps); and
the at least one processor is configured to:
detect the first distance-Doppler spectrum to obtain a second distance and a second speed of the target, and detect the second distance-Doppler spectrum to obtain a third distance and a third speed of the targe (fig. 4, eqs. 13-16); and
fuse the second distance and the third distance to obtain the first distance of the target, and fuse the second speed and the third speed to obtain the first speed of the target (fig. 5, final step. See also fig. 7).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the detection apparatus of Bonthron with the distance-Doppler data processing of Wang to arrive at the claimed invention. Bonthron teaches using the reflection data from the taught radar device to resolve range-velocity ambiguities. The data processing technique of Wang is effective for de-aliasing velocity data, thus enabling the desired result of Bonthron with high accuracy.
Regarding claim 15, Bonthron in view of Hotta and further in view of Wang teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 13. Bonthron as previously modified by Hotta and Wang further teaches (note: what Bonthron does not further teach is struck through),
the at least one processor is further configured to:
obtain a phase difference of the target based on the first distance-Doppler spectrum and the second distance-Doppler spectrum (p. 37, para. 1, “By measuring the phase difference between the spectral peaks in the down-converted difference signals corresponding to the original and time-delayed sequences A and B…”);
obtain a fourth speed of the target based on the phase difference (p. 37, para. 1, “By measuring the phase difference between the spectral peaks in the down-converted difference signals corresponding to the original and time-delayed sequences A and B that occur at the same frequency or in the same frequency bin of each Fourier transform, the target relative velocity can be directly determined”); and
determine a fifth speed of the target based on the first speed and the fourth speed of the target (eq. 5, noting the description of eq. 5 on p. 37, para. 1).
Hotta teaches,
…a first pulse repetition interval of the first signal group is different from a second pulse repetition interval of the second signal group (fig. 2, pulse repetition interval of first signal group is Tm, pulse repetition interval of second group is less than Tm since multiple signals repeat within one modulation period)
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the detection apparatus of Bonthron in view of Hotta and further in view of Wang with the differing PRIs of Hotta. The differing PRIs of Hotta is no more than a simple design choice, as indicated in para. 0049 of Hotta, which states, “In FIG. 2, only one pair of the up-down chirp indicated by triangle shape is generated, but two or more pairs of the plurality of up-down chirp signals may be generated.” Therefore, modulating the PRI of the signals of Bonthron is as modification that would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art for using the detection apparatus of Bonthron for varying uses (such as the axial displacement estimation of Hotta).
Claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons and using the same citations as claim 12.
Claim 19 is rejected for the same reasons and using the same citations as claim 14.
Claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons and using the same citations as claim 15.
Claims 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bonthron in view of Hotta and further in view of Wang, as applied to claims 12 and 17, respectively, above, and further in view of Tazuko (JP 6448827 B2).
Regarding claim 13, Bonthron in view of Hotta and further in view of Wang teaches the detection apparatus according to claim 12. Bonthron as previously modified by Hotta and Wang further teaches (note: what Bonthron does not teach is struck through),
…wherein the association information of the target comprises a first distance and a first speed of the target (p. 35, para. 1, “Also, the complex phase of each target spectral peak may be used for advantage in target data association and range-velocity ambiguity resolution”); and
Wang further teaches (note: what Wang does not teach is struck through),
…wherein the association information of the target comprises a first distance and a first speed of the target (fig. 5, final two steps); and
the at least one processor is specifically configured to:
perform cyclic shift on the first distance-Doppler spectrum in a Doppler dimension based on a distance unit to obtain a third distance-Doppler spectrum (eq. 18. See also the para. Immediately following eq. 18, “The symbol of 𝑓𝐷,max is determined according to the aliasing direction. 𝑞2 and 𝑞1 indicate the number of Doppler frequency aliasing.”),
perform cyclic shift on the second distance-Doppler spectrum in the Doppler dimension based on a distance unit to obtain a fourth distance-Doppler spectrum, and perform non-coherent accumulation on the fourth distance-Doppler spectrum and the first distance-Doppler spectrum, wherein a static target in the fourth distance-Doppler spectrum coincides with a static target in the first distance-Doppler spectrum (see above, noting that (a) the claimed system only needs to perform either non-coherent accumulation between the second and third or first and fourth distance-Doppler spectrums.); and
detect a distance-Doppler spectrum (fig. 5, final two steps).
Tazuko teaches,
wherein the association information of the target comprises (p. 8, para. 7, “One method in the case where the predicted speed is known is a method in which the same frequency in the spectrum of each frequency step is aligned in the same bin in the vicinity of the Doppler frequency corresponding to the predicted speed. That is, since the predicted speed is known, as can be seen from FIG. 12, it is also known how many bins in the circumference of the spectrum of each frequency step have the predicted speed. Therefore, for example, the spectrum of each frequency step is cyclically shifted so that the predicted speed comes to the bin No. 50, for example, approximately in the middle of about 100 bins.”); and
the at least one processor is specifically configured to:
perform cyclic shift on the first (p. 8, para. 7, “Therefore, for example, the spectrum of each frequency step is cyclically shifted so that the predicted speed comes to the bin No. 50, for example, approximately in the middle of about 100 bins.”), and perform non-coherent accumulation on the third distance-Doppler spectrum and the second distance-Doppler spectrum, wherein a target in the third distance-Doppler spectrum coincides with a target in the second distance-Doppler spectrum (p. 8, para. 9“Since the number of bins is different for each frequency step, the number of the central bin is also different, but when performing non-coherent integration, cyclic shift is performed so that the frequency of the prediction speed is the same bin number.”); or
detect a distance-Doppler spectrum obtained through the non-coherent accumulation, to obtain (p. 3, para. 7, “The speed estimation unit 63 detects the target speed from the Doppler spectrum of each step obtained by the FFT unit 62.”).
Tazuko is analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of endeavor. It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the detection apparatus of Bonthron in view of Hotta and further in view of Wang with the data processing teachings of Wang and Tazuko to arrive at the claimed invention. Bonthron teaches using radar data to resolve range-velocity ambiguities but does not teach doing so through cyclic shifting in the Doppler dimension or with non-coherent accumulation. Wang teaches using cyclic shifting on range-Doppler maps to improve velocity de-aliasing, thus resolving range-velocity ambiguities, but does not teach non-coherent accumulation after cyclic shifting. Tazuko teaches non-coherent accumulation after cyclic shifting in the Doppler dimension to improve the SNR of the received signal. Incorporating the cyclic shifting of Wang and Tazuko into Bonthron would have the predictable result of resolving range-velocity ambiguities in the data of Bonthron. Incorporating the non-coherent accumulation on the cyclically-shifted data of Tazuko would have the predictable result of improving SNR of the received data. Therefore, the combination of Bonthron, Wang, and Tazuko renders obvious the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 18 is rejected for the same reasons and using the same citations as claim 13.
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 Anna K Benjamin Gosling whose telephone number is (571)272-0401. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday, 7-3 Eastern; Friday 8-4 Eastern.
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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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.
/Anna K. Benjamin Gosling/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/NAZRA NUR WAHEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights