DETAILED ACTION
Non-Final Rejection
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 .
Benefit of an Earlier Filing
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in Foreign Application No. (KR) 10-2023-0187654 filed on 20th December, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/23/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102“(a)(1)” or “(a)(2)” or both as being anticipated by KLUS (DE102021121156B4).
Referring to Claim 1, KLUS teaches an ultrasonic sensor ([0001]) comprising:
a transmission/reception interface configured to transmit an ultrasonic signal, based on a burst signal, and receive an echo signal with respect to the ultrasonic signal ([0027]);
a signal processor configured to detect an envelope signal from the burst signal and the echo signal ([0033]);
a signal compressor configured to: compare the envelope signal with a preconfigured threshold, based on a preconfigured sampling rate ([0033]);
in response to a size of the envelope signal satisfying a preconfigured reference, generate a data frame including sizes of the envelope signal ([0022]-[0023]; [0033]; [0323]).
Referring to Claim 2, KLUS teaches the ultrasonic sensor of claim 1, wherein the signal compressor is further configured to:
in response to a size of the envelope signal satisfying the preconfigured reference, match time stamp data related to a corresponding sampling time point, and the size of the envelope signal to be stored in a memory ([0033]; [0330]).
Referring to Claim 3, KLUS teaches the ultrasonic sensor of claim 2, wherein the signal compressor is further configured to:
in response to a size of the envelope signal not satisfying the reference, store a level value preconfigured to be output and time stamp data related to a corresponding sampling time point in the memory ([0338]).
Referring to Claim 4, KLUS teaches the ultrasonic sensor of claim 3, wherein the signal compressor is further configured to:
search the memory in response to a generation number of the time stamp data reaching a preconfigured reference number ([0022]-[0024]);
extract a size of the envelope signal and time stamp data matched to a level value preconfigured to be output, in response to the reference being satisfied so as to generate a data frame ([0022]-[0024]).
Referring to Claim 5, KLUS teaches the ultrasonic sensor of claim 1, wherein the signal compressor is further configured to:
compare the envelope signal with one threshold and store, in response to a size of the envelope signal at a sampling time point being greater than or equal to at least one of the threshold, a first level value, time stamp data related to the corresponding sampling time point, the size of the envelope signal, or any combination of the first level value, the time stamp data and the size of the envelope signal ([0338]).
Referring to Claim 6, KLUS teaches the ultrasonic sensor of claim 5, wherein the signal compressor is further configured to store a second level value and time stamp data related to a corresponding sampling time point, in response to a size of the envelope signal being less than a threshold ([0338]).
Referring to Claim 7, KLUS teaches the ultrasonic sensor of claim 1, wherein the signal compressor is further configured to, in response to a size of the envelope signal at a sampling time point falling between a first threshold and a second threshold greater than the first threshold, compare the envelope signal with at least two thresholds and store a first level value, time stamp data related to the corresponding sampling time point, and the size of the envelope signal (Fig. 10, Fig. 11; [0334], [0335]).
Referring to Claim 8, KLUS teaches the ultrasonic sensor of claim 7, wherein the signal compressor is configured to:
in response to a size of the envelope signal being less than the first threshold, store a second level value and time stamp data related to a corresponding sampling time point ([0338]);
in response to the size of the envelope signal being greater than the second threshold, store a third level value and time stamp data related to a corresponding sampling time point ([0338]).
Referring to Claim 9, KLUS teaches the ultrasonic sensor of claim 1, wherein the envelope signal comprises a first envelope signal from the burst signal and a second envelope signal from the echo signal ([0033]-[0045]; Fig. 10; Fig. 11).
Claim 10 is essentially the same as Claim 1 and refers to a signal processing method of the ultrasonic sensor of Claim 1. Therefore Claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 1 above.
Claim 11 is essentially the same as Claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 2 above.
Claim 12 is essentially the same as Claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 3 above.
Claim 13 is essentially the same as Claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 4 above.
Claim 14 is essentially the same as Claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 5 above.
Claim 15 is essentially the same as Claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 6 above.
Claim 16 is essentially the same as Claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 7 above.
Claim 17 is essentially the same as Claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 8 above.
Claim 18 is essentially the same as Claim 9 and is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 9 above.
Claim 19 is essentially the same as Claim 1 and refers to a vehicle for the ultrasonic sensor of Claim 1; and further comprises a vehicle controller ([0002]); transmit the data frame to the vehicle controller ([0027]). Therefore Claim 19 is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 1 above.
Claim 20 is essentially the same as Claim 9 and is rejected for the same reasons as applied to Claim 9 above.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record in the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. However, any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMIE M N'DURE whose telephone number is (571)272-6031. The examiner can normally be reached on 8AM-5:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Isam Alsomiri can be reached on 571-272-6970. 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.
/AMIE M NDURE/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ISAM A ALSOMIRI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645