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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on October 21st, 2024 has been received and considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Instance 800 in Figure 8 is not referenced in the specification.
Instance 106 is used to refer to two different parts in Figure 1.
Instance 2402 in Figure 24 is not referenced in the specification.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Specification [0035] : Instances 112 and 114 referenced in the specification is not labeled in Figure 1.
Specification [0036] : Instance 108 referenced in the specification is not labeled in Figure 1.
Specification [0051] : Grammatical error, “However, compared to other Dicke comparison radiometer,”. The examiner suggests amending this phrase to “compared to other Dicke comparison radiometers”.
Specification [0052] : Instance 202 is referred to as a quadrature coupler, and instance 204 is referred to as a sum-difference coupler, but the figure indicates the reverse. Either the figure or specification must be amended to rectify this.
Specification [0060] : Grammatical error, “graph 700 with results of monte carlo simulation”. The examiner suggests amending this phase to “graph 700 with results of a Monte Carlo simulation”.
Specification [0075] : Instance 1910 referenced in the specification is not labeled in Figure 19.
Specification [0090] : “The host computing device 202” – Instance 202 is referenced in error. Instances 208 and 210 are also referenced in error.
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 2, 5 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b).
Claim 2 recites, "an in-phase part I" and "a quadrature phase part Q". It is unclear if the limitations are a part of the output signals recited in claim 1 or if it is a part of another signal. For examination purposes the examiner will interpret the limitations to recite, "an in-phase part of the output signals I" and "a quadrature phase part of the output signals Q", as suggested by Paragraph [0042] of Applicant’s specification “Furthermore, in an implementation of the radiometer 100, the in-phase (I) and quadrature (Q) signals are obtained by Fourier transformation of digitally sampled signals. Alternatively, the in-phase (I) and quadrature (Q) signals are obtained by Hilbert transformation of digitally sampled signals.”.
Claims 5 and 17 recites the limitation "wherein the N-path transmission combiner is a 3-path transmission combiner comprising a sum-difference coupler receiving T". Here, the limitations TA, TRA, TC, and TH are not defined within the claim. Paragraph [0035] of Applicant’s specification describes the limitations TA, TRA, to be “The radiometer system 100 includes a combiner 102 including a sum-difference coupler 104 configured to receive in an input antenna TA(f) signal and a reference signal TREF and generate a sum output signal and a difference output signal.”. Paragraph [0066] of the Applicant’s specification describes the limitations TC, and TH to be “Here Tc and TH used by the transmission combiner 1202 are cold and hot reference temperatures.” For the purposes of prior art examination, TA will be interpreted as the antenna input signa, TRA will be interpreted as a reference signal, TC will be interpreted as a cold reference signal, and TH will be interpreted as a hot reference signal. As claims 18-20 are dependent upon claim 17, these are also rejected.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “wherein the transmission combiner is at least one of a 6-path transmission combiner and an 8-path transmission combiner”. However, the parent claim, claim 17, previously specifies that the transmission combiner is a 3-path transmission combiner “and wherein the N-path transmission combiner is a 3-path transmission combiner comprising …”. Based on the current phrasing of the claim, the dependent claim is in direct conflict with the limitations of the parent claim, rendering the claim indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the limitation “wherein the N-path transmission combiner is a 3-path transmission combiner” of claim 17 will be interpreted as “wherein the N-path transmission combiner is at least a 3-path transmission combiner”.
Regarding Claim 20, the same argument as claim 19 applies, where the limitation “wherein the transmission combiner is a 4-path transmission combiner” is in conflict with the limitations of claim 19. For the purposes of examination, the limitation “wherein the N-path transmission combiner is a 3-path transmission combiner” of claim 17 will be interpreted as “wherein the N-path transmission combiner is at least a 3-path transmission combiner”.
Allowable Subject Matter
The claims are directed towards allowable subject matter for the following reasons:
The present invention is directed towards a radiometer system comprising an N-path transmission combiner utilizing one or more sum-difference couplers and one or more quadrature couplers. The one or more sum-output signals are quadrature injected with noise reference output signals into a complex cross-correlator, whereby a plurality of calibration outputs for a radio antenna are determined. Independent claims 1 and 17 teach the novel and non-obvious features of:
A radiometer system, comprising:
an N-path transmission combiner including one or more sum-difference couplers and one or more quadrature couplers to generate N-path output signals including one or more sum output signals, difference output signals, and quadrature injected noise reference output signals; and
an N-path radio receiver array configured to couple the one or more sum output signals, the difference output signals, and the quadrature injected noise reference output signals into a complex cross-correlator,
wherein the complex cross-correlator is configured to process the one or more sum output signals, the difference output signals, and the quadrature injected noise reference output signals to generate a plurality of calibration outputs to be interpreted by a computer based algorithm to determine calibration parameters of the radiometer system.
wherein the N-path transmission combiner is a 3-path transmission combiner comprising a sum-difference coupler receiving TA and TRA and generating output signals that are input into two quadrature couplers and a quadrature coupler receiving Tc and TH and generating output signals that are input into two sum-difference couplers.
The following references have been identified as the most relevant prior art to the claimed invention:
Floyd et al. (US 10551162), hereinafter Floyd, generally relates to a code modulated phased-array radio interferometer for receiving a plurality of signals. Floyd discloses: an N-path transmission combiner (Floyd Col. 5 lines 57-60); generate N-path output signals (Floyd Fig. 3, further Col. 12 lines 23-30); wherein the complex cross-correlator is configured to process (Floyd Fig. 3, further Col. 12 lines 31-40); interpreted by a computer based algorithm to determine (Floyd Figs. 2-4, further Col. 12 lines 35-40). Floyd does not use said complex-correlator sum or difference output signals to generate a plurality of calibration outputs, as it does not deal with calibration of a radiometer and instead is a phased-array interferometer. Further, Floyd does not mention the use of sum-difference or quadrature couplers.
Dykstra et al. (US 6950634), hereinafter Dykstra, teaches a doubly balanced radio transceiver system. Dykstra discloses: A radiometer system (Dykstra, Abstract), including one or more sum-difference couplers and one or more quadrature couplers (Dykstra Col. 2 lines 30-35); to generate N-path output signals (Dykstra, Instance 145 Fig. 1) . Dykstra generally discloses the use of sum-difference and quadrature couplings in the context of processing radio signals, but fails to do so for N-paths or to couple the system to a reference noise. Additionally, Dykstra is silent regarding the use of a cross-correlator.
McKinley et al. (US 9435838), cited by applicant in IDS dated October 21st, 2024), hereinafter McKinley discloses a system for the automatic calibration of radiometers using a reference noise injection technique. McKinley discloses: A radiometer system (McKinley, abstract); including one or more sum-difference couplers (McKinley, Col. 14 lines 19-27); quadrature injected noise reference output signals (McKinley Col. 8, lines 4-9); generate a plurality of calibration outputs to be interpreted by a computer based algorithm to determine calibration parameters of the radiometer system (McKinley Fig. 3, further Col. 19 lines 1-9). Here, McKinley does disclose a system for the automatic calibration of radiometers using a standard noise-injection. However, the system is only designed to function for one input, makes no use of a cross-correlator, nor does it generate an N-path output to be fed to said cross-correlator.
Neither Floyd, Dykstra, nor McKinley anticipate nor render obvious:
A radiometer system, comprising:
an N-path transmission combiner including one or more sum-difference couplers and one or more quadrature couplers to generate N-path output signals including one or more sum output signals, difference output signals, and quadrature injected noise reference output signals; and
an N-path radio receiver array configured to couple the one or more sum output signals, the difference output signals, and the quadrature injected noise reference output signals into a complex cross-correlator,
wherein the complex cross-correlator is configured to process the one or more sum output signals, the difference output signals, and the quadrature injected noise reference output signals to generate a plurality of calibration outputs to be interpreted by a computer based algorithm to determine calibration parameters of the radiometer system.
wherein the N-path transmission combiner is a 3-path transmission combiner comprising a sum-difference coupler receiving TA and TRA and generating output signals that are input into two quadrature couplers and a quadrature coupler receiving Tc and TH and generating output signals that are input into two sum-difference couplers.
Moreover, even assuming arguendo that the features of the claims exist individually, the combination of features as claimed would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art because any combination of the evidence obtained to reach the combination of features as claimed would require a substantial reconstruction of Applicant's claimed invention relying on improper hindsight bias.
Dependent claims 3-16 and 18-20 are also directed towards allowable materials as depending from allowed claim 1 and claim 17.
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 labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS JAMES HALLORAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8643. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am-5pm.
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, Resha H. Desai can be reached at (571) 270-7792. 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.
/T.J.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights