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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6, 11 objected to because of the following informalities: 1) " the one or more back-scattered signals are stitched to form an entire aperture array" in claim 1 lines 5-6, claim 6 lines 10-11, claim 11 lines 7-8. It appears that this limitation is the same as “rearranging, via the one or more hardware processors, the one or more back-scattered signals to generate one or more sub-array elements, wherein the one or more sub-array elements are visualized as translated and decimated arrays of the entire aperture array” in claim 1 lines 7-10, claim 6 lines 12-14, claim 11 lines 9-11. 2) “a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) to obtain a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the one or more sub-array elements” in claim 1 lines 12-14, claim 6 lines 16-18, claim 11 lines 13-14, respectively and “a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the entire aperture array” in claim 1 lines 3-4 from bottom, claim 6 lines 3-4 from bottom, claim 11 line 3 from bottom, respectively. It appears that “2D” and “FFT” only need to be defined once. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-15 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, 6, 11 recite the limitations: 1) “the one or more sub-array elements are visualized as translated and decimated arrays of the entire aperture array” in claim 1 lines 8-10, claim 6 lines 13-14, claim 11 lines 10-11, respectively. It is indefinite because the “one or more sub-array elements” are rearranged “the one or more back-scattered signals”, which “are received when the at least one object at the target is scanned by one or more periodic blocks of array of sensors”, as indicated in lines 3-5, and it is not clear whether or not “the one or more back-scattered signals” are visible signals. Based on claims 2, 7, 12, the “array of sensors” are MIMO radar. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention knows that MIMO radar operates radio frequency signals, which is not visualized. It is not clear how radar signals “are visualized”. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “the one or more sub-array elements are translated and decimated arrays of the entire aperture array”. 2) “the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array” in claim 1 line 16, claim 6 line 20, claim 11 lines 16-17, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “2D FFT of the entire aperture array” is not defined or mentioned. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “[[the]] a 2D FFT of the entire aperture array”. 3) “reordering” “the stacked sub band of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array” in claim 1 lines 23-24 and claim 11 line 23 and “reorder the stacked sub bands of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array” in claim 6 line 27. It is indefinite because it is not clear where and when “the stacked sub band of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array” is calculated. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “reordering” “ the one or more stacked sub-array matrices”. 4) “a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the entire aperture array” in claim 1 lines 3-4 from bottom, claim 6 lines 3-4 from bottom, claim 11 line 3 from bottom, respectively. It is indefinite because it is not clear whether or not the “a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the entire aperture array” is the same as “the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array” mentioned in claim 1 line 16, claim 6 line 20, claim 11 lines 16-17, respectively. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “[[a]] the two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the entire aperture array”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claims 2-5 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1 because each of dependent claims 2-5 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 1.
Claims 7-10 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 6 because each of dependent claims 7-10 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 6.
Claims 12-15 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 11 because each of dependent claims 12-15 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear independent claim 11.
Claims 2, 7, 12 recite the limitations: 1) “an inter element distance for at least one array element in the one or more sub-array elements are uniform” in claim 2 lines 4-5, claim 7 lines 4-5, claim 12 lines 4-6, respectively. It is indefinite because: i) it is not clear how “an inter element distance for” “one array element” is measured. ii) it is not clear how “an inter element distance”, which is one value, “are uniform”. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “inter element distances in the one or more sub-array elements are uniform”. 2) “even if the inter element distance of one or more array elements of the at least one MIMO radar is uniform or nonuniform” claim 2 lines 5-7, claim 7 lines 5-6, claim 12 lines 6-7, respectively. It is indefinite because: i) it is not clear how “the inter element distance for” “one array element” is measured. ii) it is not clear how “the inter element distance”, which is one value, “is uniform or nonuniform”. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “even if [[the]] inter element distances of the at least one MIMO radar is uniform or nonuniform”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claims 4, 9, 14 recite the limitation “the one or more array elements” in claim 4 line 5, claim 9 line 5, claim 14 line 6, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “one or more array elements” is not defined or mentioned. It is not clear whether or not “the one or more array elements” is the same as the “one or more sub-array elements” mentioned in claim 1 line 8, claim 6 lines 12-13, claim 11 lines 9-10, respectively. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “one or more array elements”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liu et al. (K. Liu et al., "MIMO-SAR Image Antialiasing for Cascaded mmWave Radar Sensor," 2023 IEEE Radar Conference (RadarConf23), San Antonio, TX, USA, 2023, pp. 1-6, doi: 10.1109/RadarConf2351548.2023.10149686, Date of Conference: 01-05 May 2023, Date Added to IEEE Xplore: 21 June 2023).
Regarding claim 1, Liu (‘NPL) discloses that A processor implemented method { page 2 right column lines 2 (TI AWR2243 [5] and AWR1843BOOST), 4 (MIMO-SAR imaging algorithm)}, comprising:
receiving, via one or more hardware processors, one or more back-scattered signals from at least one object at a target as an input { Fig.1; Fig.2; Fig.3; Fig.5; page 2 right column below Eq.(2) line 4 (reflected), 3 from bottom (target); page 3 left column line 12 (received signal)},
wherein the one or more back-scattered signals are received when the at least one object at the target is scanned by one or more periodic blocks of array of sensors {Fig.4}, and
wherein the one or more back-scattered signals are stitched to form an entire aperture array { Fig.1 (a)-(b); Fig.4; };
rearranging, via the one or more hardware processors, the one or more back-scattered signals to generate one or more sub-array elements { Fig.1 (a)-(b); Examiner’s note: “Virtual” for “rearranging” “to generate one or more sub-array elements”},
wherein the one or more sub-array elements are visualized as translated and decimated arrays of the entire aperture array { Fig.1(b); Fig.4};
computing, via the one or more hardware processors, a Fourier transform (FT) of the one or more sub-array elements by deploying a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) to obtain a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the one or more sub-array elements { page 3 right column below Fig.4 lines 11-12 (the MIMO-SAR data sm,n (x; y; k) for virtual channel (m,n) is expressed as), Eq.(21) (
PNG
media_image1.png
156
470
media_image1.png
Greyscale
), 19 (2D Fourier transform), Eq.(22) (
PNG
media_image2.png
87
472
media_image2.png
Greyscale
) },
wherein the Fourier transform of the one or more sub-array elements are relatively equivalent to a weighted superposition of one or more sub bands of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array { Fig.4 (aperture for SAR is Lx and Ly, Δx, Δy); page 3 right column below Fig.4 lines 1-3 from bottom (2D Fourier transform, Eq.(22)
PNG
media_image2.png
87
472
media_image2.png
Greyscale
); page 4 left column lines 4-5 (wavenumber kx and ky domain, ksx and ksy are the special sampling frequencies,), Eq.(24), Eq.(25) (
PNG
media_image3.png
94
253
media_image3.png
Greyscale
); Examiner’s Note: Eq.(22)-(25) for “a weighted superposition of one or more sub bands of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array” based on Fig.4};
vectorizing, via the one or more hardware processors, the 2D FFT of the one or more sub-array elements to obtain one or more vectorized sub-array matrices { page 3 right column below Fig.4 lines 11-12 (the MIMO-SAR data sm,n(x; y; k) for virtual channel (m; n)), 1-3 from bottom (2D Fourier transform, Eq.(22),
PNG
media_image4.png
48
213
media_image4.png
Greyscale
; Examiner’s note:
PNG
media_image4.png
48
213
media_image4.png
Greyscale
for “vectorized sub-array matrices”},
wherein the one or more vectorized sub-array matrices are stacked to form one or more stacked sub-array matrices { page 3 right column Eq.(22) Sm,n(kx; ky; k) ; Examiner’s note: Σ for “stacked”}, and
wherein the one or more stacked sub-array matrices are relatively equivalent to a stacked sub band of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array using a precomputed weight matrix {Fig.4 (aperture for SAR is Lx and Ly, Δx, Δy); page 3 right column Eq.(22) (
PNG
media_image5.png
93
486
media_image5.png
Greyscale
); page 4 left column lines 4-5 (wavenumber kx and ky domain, ksx and ksy are the special sampling frequencies,), Eq.(24), Eq.(25) (
PNG
media_image6.png
108
295
media_image6.png
Greyscale
); page 4 Eq.(35); Examiner’s note:
PNG
media_image7.png
22
190
media_image7.png
Greyscale
for “a precomputed weight matrix”};
reordering, via the one or more hardware processors, the stacked sub band of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array to obtain a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the entire aperture array {page 4 right column Eq.(35); Examiner’s note:
PNG
media_image8.png
131
275
media_image8.png
Greyscale
for “reordering” “the stacked sub band of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array”}; and
estimating, via the one or more hardware processors, a three-dimensional (3D) reflectivity function of the target from the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array {Fig.4 (X-Y-Z); page 2 right column below Eq.(6) line 2 (reflectivity p,); page 4 right column Eq.(35); Examiner’s note:
PNG
media_image8.png
131
275
media_image8.png
Greyscale
for “(3D) reflectivity function” because of (x,y,k) }.
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Liu (‘NPL) discloses that in the processor implemented method,
the array of sensors corresponds to at least one multiple-input and multiple-output (MIMO) radar {title},
wherein the at least one MIMO radar comprises one or more transmitters and one or more receivers { Fig.1(a) (Rx, Tx); page 1 right column lines 1-2 from bottom (radar consists of two chips and 8Tx8Rx for each)}, and
wherein an inter element distance for at least one array element in the one or more sub-array elements are uniform even if the inter element distance of one or more array elements of the at least one MIMO radar is uniform or nonuniform { Fig.1(a)-(b) }.
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Liu (‘NPL) discloses that in the processor implemented method,
the one or more sub-array elements are generated by combining corresponding individual array elements across the one or more periodic blocks {Fig.1(b)}.
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claim 1, Liu (‘NPL) discloses that in the processor implemented method,
the precomputed weight matrix is obtained by at least one phase relationship of one or more spatial array elements { page 3 Eq.(22) (
PNG
media_image9.png
31
186
media_image9.png
Greyscale
); page 4 right column lines 7-8 from bottom (the weights of wm,n are overlayed with the calibrated phase and amplitude of virtual channels) },
wherein the at least one phase relationship corresponds to a spatial shift with respect to a reference element { Fig.4 (Δx, Δy); page 3 Eq.(22) (
PNG
media_image9.png
31
186
media_image9.png
Greyscale
); page 4 left column lines 4-5 (wavenumber kx and ky domain, ksx and ksy are the special sampling frequencies,), Eq.(24), Eq.(25) (
PNG
media_image6.png
108
295
media_image6.png
Greyscale
); }, and
wherein the one or more spatial array elements corresponds to one or more positions of the one or more array elements in the at least one MIMO radar { Fig.4 (Δx, Δy) }.
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 1, Liu (‘NPL) discloses that in the processor implemented method,
the stacked sub band of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array are computed by multiplying an inverted precomputed weight matrix with the one or more stacked sub-array matrices { page 3 right column Eq.(22) (
PNG
media_image10.png
31
427
media_image10.png
Greyscale
); Examiner’s note: “-” in
PNG
media_image11.png
22
186
media_image11.png
Greyscale
for “an inverted precomputed weight matrix” }.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 6-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (‘NPL) in view of Ahmed et al . (US 10,775,476, hereafter Ahmed).
Regarding claim 6, Liu (‘NPL) discloses that A system { page 1 abstract lines 1-2 (a cascaded mmWave Radar sensor system,); }, comprising:
:
receive one or more back-scattered signals from at least one object at a target as an input,
wherein the one or more back-scattered signals are received when the at least one object at the target is scanned by one or more periodic blocks of array of sensors, and
wherein the one or more back-scattered signals are stitched to form an entire aperture array;
rearrange the one or more back-scattered signals to generate one or more sub-array elements,
wherein the one or more sub-array elements are visualized as translated and decimated arrays of the entire aperture array;
compute a Fourier transform (FT) of the one or more sub-array elements by deploying a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) to obtain a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the one or more sub-array elements,
wherein the Fourier transform of the one or more sub-array elements are relatively equivalent to a weighted superposition of one or more sub bands of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array;
vectorize the 2D FFT of the one or more sub-array elements to obtain one or more vectorized sub-array matrices,
wherein the one or more vectorized sub-array matrices are stacked to form one or more stacked sub-array matrices, and
wherein the one or more stacked sub-array are relatively equivalent to a stacked sub band of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array using a precomputed weight matrix;
reorder the stacked sub bands of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array to obtain a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the entire aperture array; and
estimate a three-dimensional (3D) reflectivity function of the target from the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array.
{The claim limitations above are the same or substantially the same scope as the corresponding claim limitations in claim 1. Therefore the claim limitations above are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as in claim 1. See the rejections of claim 1}.
However, Liu (‘NPL) does not explicitly disclose that (see words with underline) “a memory storing instructions; one or more communication interfaces; and one or more hardware processors coupled to the memory via the one or more communication interfaces, wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured by the instructions to”. In the same field of endeavor, Ahmed (‘476) discloses that a system {Fig.13} comprising:
a memory storing instructions {Fig.13 item 1306 (memory); col.13 lines 60-61 (Stored in the memory 1306 are both data and several components that are executable by the processor 1303.); col.14 lines 21-23 (instructions in a random access portion of the memory 1306 to be executed by the processor 1303,) };
one or more communication interfaces {Fig.13 item 1309 (local interface); col.14 lines 54-57 (the local interface 1309 can be an appropriate network that facilitates communication between any two of the multiple processors 1303, between any processor 1303 and any of the memories 1306,)}; and
one or more hardware processors coupled to the memory via the one or more communication interfaces {Fig.13 item 1303 (processor(s)), 1306 (memory), 1309 (interface); col.14 lines 54-57 (the local interface 1309 can be an appropriate network that facilitates communication between any two of the multiple processors 1303, between any processor 1303 and any of the memories 1306,)},
wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured by the instructions {col.13 lines 60-61 (Stored in the memory 1306 are both data and several components that are executable by the processor 1303.); col.14 lines 21-23 (instructions in a random access portion of the memory 1306 to be executed by the processor 1303,)} to
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu (‘NPL) with the teachings of Ahmed (‘476) {use software with memory and communication interface to control radar processors} to use software with memory and communication interface to control radar processors. Doing so would provide a multi-function software radar so as to design a MIMO radar processing device with enhanced flexibility, as recognized by Ahmed (‘476) {col.1 lines 19 (multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) radar), 23-24 (provide enhanced flexibility for transmit beampatterns.); col.3 lines 15-16 (Fig.13, a processing device); col.4 lines 2-3 (design multi-function software radar); col.14 lines 2-5 (stored in the memory 1306 and are executable by the processor 1303 as can be appreciated. Where any component discussed herein is implemented in the form of software, any one of a number of programming languages)}.
Regarding claims 7-10, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claims 2-5, respectively. Accordingly, claims 7-10 are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claims 2-5, respectively, shown above.
Regarding claim 11, Liu (‘NPL) discloses that {page 1 abstract lines 11-12 (The proposed algorithm is evaluated by both simulation and real data processing); Examiner’s note: “simulation and real data processing” for “one or more instructions which when executed by one or more hardware processors cause”}:
receiving one or more back-scattered signals from at least one object at a target as an input,
wherein the one or more back-scattered signals are received when the at least one object at the target is scanned by one or more periodic blocks of array of sensors, and
wherein the one or more back-scattered signals are stitched to form an entire aperture array;
rearranging the one or more back-scattered signals to generate one or more sub-array elements,
wherein the one or more sub-array elements are visualized as translated and decimated arrays of the entire aperture array;
computing a Fourier transform (FT) of the one or more sub-array elements by deploying a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) to obtain a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the one or more sub-array elements,
wherein the Fourier transform of the one or more sub-array elements are relatively equivalent to a weighted superposition of one or more sub bands of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array;
vectorizing the 2D FFT of the one or more sub-array elements to obtain one or more vectorized sub-array matrices,
wherein the one or more vectorized sub-array matrices are stacked to form one or more stacked sub-array matrices, and
wherein the one or more stacked sub-array matrices are relatively equivalent to a stacked sub band of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array using a precomputed weight matrix;
reordering the stacked sub band of the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array to obtain a two dimensional (2D) Fast Fourier transform (FFT) of the entire aperture array; and
estimating a three-dimensional (3D) reflectivity function of the target from the 2D FFT of the entire aperture array.
{The claim limitations above are the same or substantially the same scope as the corresponding claim limitations in claim 1. Therefore the claim limitations above are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as in claim 1. See the rejections of claim 1}.
However, Liu (‘NPL) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “One or more non-transitory machine-readable information storage mediums comprising one or more instructions which when executed by one or more hardware processors cause”. In the same field of endeavor, Ahmed (‘476) discloses that
One or more non-transitory machine-readable information storage mediums comprising one or more instructions which when executed by one or more hardware processors cause { Fig.13 item 1306 (memory); col.13 lines 60-61 (Stored in the memory 1306 are both data and several components that are executable by the processor 1303.); col.14 lines 21-23 (instructions in a random access portion of the memory 1306 to be executed by the processor 1303,) }.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Liu (‘NPL) with the teachings of Ahmed (‘476) {use software with memory to control radar processors} to use software with memory to control radar processors. Doing so would provide a multi-function software radar so as to design a MIMO radar processing device with enhanced flexibility, as recognized by Ahmed (‘476) {col.1 lines 19 (multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) radar), 23-24 (provide enhanced flexibility for transmit beampatterns.); col.3 lines 15-16 (Fig.13, a processing device); col.4 lines 2-3 (design multi-function software radar); col.14 lines 2-5 (stored in the memory 1306 and are executable by the processor 1303 as can be appreciated. Where any component discussed herein is implemented in the form of software, any one of a number of programming languages)}.
Regarding claims 12-15, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claims 2-5, respectively. Accordingly, claims 12-15 are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claims 2-5, respectively, shown above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2017/0329002 discloses that “a system” {Fig.6} “comprising: a memory” {Fig.6 (flash memory, memory)}; “one or more communication interfaces” {Fig.6 (communication)}; and “one or more hardware processors coupled to the memory via the one or more communication interfaces” {Fig.6 (transmitting/receiving chip)}, which further support the rejection of claim 6.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONGHONG LI whose telephone number is (571)272-5946. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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.
/YONGHONG LI/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights