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 .
Priority
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s claim to priority benefits of DE10 2022 209 121.3 filed 9/2/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 10/23/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered if signed and initialed by the Examiner.
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 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.
For applicant’s benefit portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
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 8-9 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roger et al. (US 2021/0364622 A1), and further in view of Wintermantel (US 2022/0236406 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Roger et al. (‘622) discloses “a method (paragraph 9: a method is provided for processing radar signals) for self-calibration of a radar system (paragraph 186: compensation of errors or dynamic calibration of a radar system or a portion of a radar system) which includes at least two antenna groups to which at least one transmission channel and one receiving channel are assigned (paragraph 153: Figure 5: a printed circuit board 500 including two MMICs 501, 502. Each MMIC 501, 502 is coupled with M transmit antennas 503, 504 and N receive antennas 505, 506. In this example N=M=4, i.e. each MMIC 501, 502 has four transmit channels and four receive channels), the method comprising the following steps:
measuring a plurality of targets by the radar system (paragraph 137: based on the outputs of the second FFT stage 306 the radar signal processing circuit 111 determines range information as well as velocity information (e.g. in form of a R/D (range/Doppler) map) for one or more objects at 307);
processing range and Doppler information for each antenna group (paragraph 43: the expected characteristic is determined based on remote data and/or an intrinsic signal characteristic of the signal in one or several of the dimensions… angle, range and Doppler range), and
detecting the targets to obtain reflection lists with complex amplitudes for each target (paragraph 138: he second stage FFT 306 goes over the result of the first FFT stages 303, 304 over multiple chirps, for each range bin, generating, per range bin, a complex value for each Doppler bin. For multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) radar systems, the result of the second FFT stage 306 includes, for each virtual antenna, a complex value for each combination of Doppler bin and range bin (i.e. for each Doppler/range bin) …a MIMO radar system comprises a number of M transmitters and a number of N receivers, which results in M×N signals representing a number of N×M virtual antennas. This provides an antenna-specific R/D map; paragraph 139: as an FFT output consists in general of complex values, a peak selection in an FFT output (such as the aggregate R/D map) may be understood as a selection based on absolute values (i.e. complex magnitudes of the complex outputs) or power (i.e. squares of absolute values));
compensating amplitude differences for the channels (paragraphs 51-53: the error compensation vector is determined based on at least one of the following: a signal linearity, a signal invariability, and an anticipated signal behavior in at least one of the dimensions angle, range and Doppler range; paragraph 62: the error compensation vector is determined for phase errors, amplitude errors and/or gain errors);
using two-dimensional linear regression to estimate a regression plane for which a mean square distance of the phase measurement values of the channels of the antenna groups becomes minimal (paragraph 172-179: phase difference Δφ between two MMICs 601, 602 may be corrected by conducting the following acts: [0173] 1) Compute aggregate range-Doppler map 401…find FFT peaks 402 in the range-Doppler map 401. [0175] 3) Select strongest FFT peak 402. Compile second stage FFT output for each virtual antenna of the range/Doppler bin of the selected FFT peak…these values (hereinafter also referred to as “samples”) of the strongest FFT peak 402 are used as reference for the compensation…4) find at least one error compensation vector (phase shift), e.g., by at least one of the following approaches: a) finding a preferable (improved, optimized or optimal) line by utilizing the least squares method, which indicates the phase shift between groups of samples (i.e. between samples of virtual antennas across different MMICs)…b) utilize different method, e.g., a neural network, trained to find an error compensation vector for the sets of samples as input…5) apply phase shift on other peaks 402 (i.e. on samples of other FFT peaks 402; paragraph 208: the power measured depends on the transmission channel power and the reception channel gain. If an error exists over multiple measurements, an error compensation vector may be determined based on the power values of multiple isolated targets over multiple frames; Figure 11);
calculating a difference between the measured phase value and the regression plane for each channel to obtain an intragroup phase correction value (paragraph 180: information coming from the result of the processing of the reception signals done by the MMICs may be used to compute an error compensation vector (also referred to as error compensation vector)…this error compensation vector is then used to compensate the results of any radar signal processing; paragraph 182: he solutions described throughout this application may refer to a compensation of phase errors or other errors like amplitude errors on the transmission channel, gain error on the receive channel, etc.; paragraph 185: each error contributes to an overall error that needs to be compensated. For example, an error in a radar receiver experiences error contributions from a multitude of components, e.g., an antenna of a transmitter, an antenna of the receiver, a modulator at the transmitter, and a receiver array group delay (due to the local oscillator and/or due to filters)); paragraph 326: when there is a single object in one range-Doppler bin, the situation is preferable since the sample groups 1001, 1002 each lie (approximately) on a respective straight line (even if there is a phase shift between the sample groups and thus a shift between the two lines)…in case there are more objects in one range-Doppler bin, the samples within the sample groups 1001, 1002 may typically be more scattered. Still, a line (i.e. linear model) can be found for each sample group 1001, 1002 and the above approach can similarly be applied to determine the shift between the lines (and thus the error compensation vector) …in this case, complex mathematics may be used to find the linear model for a sample group)”,
“compensating control vectors of each channel with the intragroup phase correction value and the intergroup phase correction value (paragraph 167: the radar signal processing circuit 111 may analyze FFT peaks according to the origin of the data used to compute the FFT (for example per MMIC 301, 302 and for a given set of transmitters 104 or transmit antennas)…the radar signal processing circuit 111 then uses this analysis to compute a correction vector between FFT bins (e.g., containing FFT output values per MMIC 301, 302 and for a given set of transmitters 104 or transmit antennas, e.g., associated with the MMIC 301, 302); paragraph 168: the radar signal processing circuit 111 may then apply the error compensation vector to the detected peaks of the range/Doppler map or even all areas indicated by the range/Doppler map (e.g., to the second stage FFT output values in other areas of the range/Doppler map besides the FFT peak whose values have been used for computing the compensation value)…in case the radar signal processing circuit 111 determines multiple error compensation vectors, each for a respective FFT peak, it may average the error compensation vectors to generate an averaged error compensation vector before applying it to other areas of the range/Doppler map; paragraph 342: When there is a single object in one range-Doppler bin, the situation is preferable since the sample groups 1001, 1002 each lie (approximately) on a respective straight line (even if there is a phase shift between the sample groups and thus a shift between the two lines). In case there are more objects in one range-Doppler bin, the samples within the sample groups 1001, 1002 may typically be more scattered …a line (i.e. linear model) can be found for each sample group 1001, 1002 and the above approach can similarly be applied to determine the shift between the lines (and thus the error compensation vector). In this case, complex mathematics may be used to find the linear model for a sample group).”
Roger et al. (‘622) does not explicitly disclose “calculating a distance between two regression planes of different antenna groups, with modulo
PNG
media_image1.png
20
24
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, to obtain an intergroup phase correction value.”
Wintermantel (‘406) relates to radar system. Wintermantel (‘406) teaches “calculating a distance between two regression planes of different antenna groups, with modulo
PNG
media_image1.png
20
24
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, to obtain an intergroup phase correction value (paragraph 57: the azimuth angle-dependent phase differences φ(m)−φ(0) increasing or reducing in linear manner over the eight antenna combinations are maintained apart from possible constant and thus compensatable phase shifts (for example due to different line lengths) until after the second DFT; if there is therefore just one object in a range/relative velocity gate (j,l), the local complex spectral value v(j,l,m) rotates over the eight antenna combinations m=0, 1, . . . , 7 with a constant velocity of rotation dependent on the azimuth angle (see by way of example FIG. 8a). Digital beam shaping for the azimuth direction may therefore be performed in each range/relative velocity gate…sums are formed over the complex values relating to the eight antenna combinations, which are each multiplied by a set of complex factors with a linearly changing phase…depending on the linear phase change of the respective factor set, radiation lobes result with different beam directions… the beam width of these radiation lobes is markedly less than that of the individual antennas…the above-described summation is achieved by a 16-point DFT, wherein the 8 values of the eight antenna combinations are supplemented by 8 zeros…the discrete frequency values n=0, 1, . . . , 15 of this DFT correspond to different phase differences
PNG
media_image2.png
14
256
media_image2.png
Greyscale
between adjacent antenna combinations (mods(n,16) here denotes the symmetrical modulo, i.e. imaging onto the domain −8 . . . +8) and thus to different azimuth angles
PNG
media_image3.png
16
158
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
18
190
media_image4.png
Greyscale
and may therefore be denoted angle gates).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill-in-the-art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Roger et al. (‘622) with the teaching of Wintermantel (‘406) for measuring more reliable phase correction value. In addition, both of the prior art references, (Roger et al. (‘622) and Wintermantel (‘406)) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as, processing range Doppler values of received signals for phase compensation for different antenna groups.
Regarding claim 9, which is dependent on independent claim 8, Roger et al. (‘622)/Wintermantel (‘406) discloses the method of claim 8. Roger et al. (‘622) further discloses “measured values of all targets for each channel are averaged when calculating the intragroup phase correction value when there is no angular dependence of a phase error (paragraph 168: the radar signal processing circuit 111 may then apply the error compensation vector to the detected peaks of the range/Doppler map or even all areas indicated by the range/Doppler map (e.g., to the second stage FFT output values in other areas of the range/Doppler map besides the FFT peak whose values have been used for computing the compensation value)…in case the radar signal processing circuit 111 determines multiple error compensation vectors, each for a respective FFT peak, it may average the error compensation vectors to generate an averaged error compensation vector before applying it to other areas of the range/Doppler map).”
Regarding claim 12, which is dependent on independent claim 8, Roger et al. (‘622)/Wintermantel (‘406) discloses the method of claim 8. Roger et al. (‘622) further discloses “the range and Doppler information is processed using a fast Fourier transformation (paragraph 172-179: phase difference Δφ between two MMICs 601, 602 may be corrected by conducting the following acts: compute aggregate range-Doppler map 401…find FFT peaks 402 in the range-Doppler map 401; paragraph 175: 3) Select strongest FFT peak 402. Compile second stage FFT output for each virtual antenna of the range/Doppler bin of the selected FFT peak…these values (hereinafter also referred to as “samples”) of the strongest FFT peak 402 are used as reference for the compensation…4) find at least one error compensation vector (phase shift), e.g., by at least one of the following approaches: a) finding a preferable (improved, optimized or optimal) line by utilizing the least squares method, which indicates the phase shift between groups of samples (i.e. between samples of virtual antennas across different MMICs)…b) utilize different method, e.g., a neural network, trained to find an error compensation vector for the sets of samples as input…5) apply phase shift on other peaks 402 (i.e. on samples of other FFT peaks 402).”
Regarding claim 13, which is dependent on independent claim 8, Roger et al. (‘622)/Wintermantel (‘406) discloses the method of claim 8. Roger et al. (‘622) further discloses “the detection of the targets is carried out using the following steps: discriminating energy in each angle cell against a threshold value for an estimated noise energy; and determining a local maximums when multiple adjacent angle cells are above the threshold value (paragraph 215: FIG. 23 shows a diagram comprising a curve of a signal power in the angular dimension 2301 with a local maximum 2303 as well as a curve of a threshold 2302…the local maximum 2303 corresponds to a target detected on a non-coherent integration map and CFAR based target detection; paragraph 216-223: he reference target selection may comprise the following acts: for each NCI (non-coherent integration) level target detection: determine angle A to select R/D cells (“RD_Cell”)…an FFT over several virtual channels can be used to obtain the angle A as follows: A=FFT({RD_Cell}); paragraph 218: 2) R/D cells are selected, which contain only a single strong target…3)…at least one of the following selection criteria can be used to select a suitable target, e.g.: a) A single local maximum above a CFAR-based threshold: #LocalMax(CFAR(A)>0)=1…b) A target power above a predefined value… c) A target power difference with the lobe of the next highest power value being above a predefined value…4) A subset of selected targets can be extracted to improve computation speed and avoid overfitting…machine learning can be used to remove existing (e.g., stationary) targets from the scenery).”
Regarding claim 14, which is dependent on independent claim 8, Roger et al. (‘622)/Wintermantel (‘406) discloses the method of claim 8. Roger et al. (‘622) further discloses “the compensation of the amplitude differences is carried out using the following steps: calculating an average receive power; calculating a deviation of the amplitude of each channel from the average receive power; and compensating the amplitude based on the deviation (paragraph 323: for more accurate calibration, the error compensation vector can be computed on several FFT peaks or an average of multiple FFT peaks can be used to compute the error compensation vector; paragraph 457: for each receiver RX #1 to RX #4, an estimated RX power is determined by calculating an average value of each of the lines; paragraph 458: for each transmitter TX #1 to TX #3, an estimated TX power is determined by calculating an average value of each of the columns).”
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roger et al. (US 2021/0364622 A1)/Wintermantel (US 2022/0236406 A1), and further in view of Yamada (US 5,999,120).
Regarding claim 10, which is dependent on independent claim 8, Roger et al. (‘622)/Wintermantel (‘406) discloses the method of claim 8. Roger et al. (‘622)/Wintermantel (‘406) does not explicitly disclose “each angle is calibrated via a separate target when calculating the intragroup phase correction value when a phase error is angle- dependent.”
Yamada (‘120) relates to radar apparatus. Yamada (‘120) teaches “each angle is calibrated via a separate target when calculating the intragroup phase correction value when a phase error is angle-dependent (Figure 1: calculate first correction values
PNG
media_image5.png
22
42
media_image5.png
Greyscale
for correcting phase shift between receiving channels...detect three peak levels corresponding to respective targets…set final correction values taking account of first correction values
PNG
media_image6.png
26
46
media_image6.png
Greyscale
and second correction values
PNG
media_image7.png
20
34
media_image7.png
Greyscale
).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill-in-the-art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Roger et al. (‘622)/Wintermantel (‘406) with the teaching of Yamada (‘120) for measuring more reliable phase correction value. In addition, both of the prior art references, (Roger et al. (‘622), Wintermantel (‘406) and Yamada (‘120)) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as, processing range values of received signals for phase compensation for different antenna sets.
Regarding claim 11, which is dependent on claim 10, Roger et al. (‘622)/Wintermantel (‘406) discloses the method of claim 10. Roger et al. (‘622)/Wintermantel (‘406) does not explicitly disclose “intermediate angles for which there is no separate target are interpolated.”
Yamada (‘120) relates to radar apparatus. Yamada (‘120) teaches “intermediate angles for which there is no separate target are interpolated (Figure 5).”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill-in-the-art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Roger et al. (‘622)/Wintermantel (‘406) with the teaching of Yamada (‘120) for measuring more reliable phase correction value. In addition, all of the prior art references, (Roger et al. (‘622), Wintermantel (‘406) and Yamada (‘120)) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as, processing range values of received signals for phase compensation for different antenna sets.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Choi et al. (US 12,270,892 B2) describes a method of processing a radar signal, the method including generating radar data based on a radar transmission signal transmitted through an array antenna of a radar sensor based on a frequency modulation model and a radar reception signal received through the array antenna as the radar transmission signal is reflected by a target, correcting the radar data using a correction vector for correcting a feedline error occurring due to a feedline delay difference between channels of the array antenna, and estimating a direction of arrival corresponding to the corrected radar data using a direction matrix reflecting a phase shift of the corrected radar data according to frequency modulation characteristics of the frequency modulation model (column 1 lines 45-58).
EP 0959522 B1 describes the final correction values obtained by this method for determining the phase correction values of the radar apparatus are stored in a memory section of the radar apparatus and the phase of each channel is corrected with this final correction value in a signal processing section, whereby the phase shifts are canceled between the channels and the 0° direction agrees with the electrical center direction (paragraph 13); a first target is placed at the structural front of the radar apparatus and the radar apparatus is actuated channel by channel for every antenna element. It is desirable then to obtain a phase correction value for each channel so as to match the phases of signals reflected by the first target and reaching the respective antenna elements with each other and to employ this phase correction value as the first correction value (paragraph 14); second and third targets having an equal cross section of reflection to that of the first target are placed at uniform distance from the radar apparatus and at uniform spacing to the first target, the radar apparatus is actuated to detect the first to third targets with effecting the phase correction with the first correction values, and the second correction values are obtained based on detection levels of the respective targets (paragraph 15); If the 0° direction agrees with the electrical center direction the detection levels of the second and third targets with respect to the first target will become equal to each other. Conversely, if the two directions disagree a difference will appear between the detection levels of the second and third targets. Therefore, an angular difference can be detected between the 0° direction and the electrical center direction from the level difference and phase correction values determined according to the angular difference can be used as the second correction values (paragraph 16).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NUZHAT PERVIN whose telephone number is (571)272-9795. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-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, William J Kelleher can be reached at 571-272-7753. 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.
/NUZHAT PERVIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights