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 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 1-5, 8-9, 11, 13-15, 17-23, and 26 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the device" in line 2 page 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, since “a device” was not previously recited in claim 1.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the analogue domain" in page 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as “an analog domain” was not previously recited in claims 1 and 5.
Claim 18 recites “a heart condition” and it is not clear whether it is different and distinct from recited “a heart condition” in recited in claim 17.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the model" in line 7 page 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as “a model” was not previously recited in claims 1 and 21.
Claims 2-5, 8-9, 11, 13-15, 17-23, and 26 are rejected as they inherit rejection of claim 1 due to their dependency.
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 (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 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, 8, 11, 22-23, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Lin et al.,” US 2014/0330540 (hereinafter Lin).
Regarding to claim 1, Lin teaches an apparatus for performing a remote measurement of a bio-signal of a subject (Doppler radar non-contact vital sign detection [0007]), the device comprising:
at least one radar signal transmitter configured to transmit at least a first radar signal at a first carrier frequency and a second radar signal at a second carrier frequency (transceiver transmitting and receiving signals [0034] Figure 1; transceiver with multi-wavelength, frequencies of wavelengths 1 and 2 similar, close to each other [0039]; carrier frequency [0071], small difference in carrier frequency [0078]);
at least one signal receiver configured to receive at least one radar return signal (transceiver receive reflected signals [0008]);
detection circuitry coupled to the signal receiver, wherein the detection circuitry is configured to produce at least one first detection signal for the first carrier frequency and at least one second detection signal for the second carrier frequency in response to receiving the at least one radar return signal at the signal receiver (first and second baseband complex signal [0008]),
wherein the first carrier frequency and the second carrier frequencies are such that at least one of the at least one first detection signal and/or or the at least one second detection signals signal comprise a contribution from the bio-signal and a contribution from at least one of a further bio-signal and/or or a background (vital signs such as respiration rate and heart rate extracted [0008]; noise from random body movements [0007]); and
signal combining circuitry configured to perform a signal combining process with the at least one first detection signal and the at least one second detection signal to produce at least one combined signal comprising an at least reduced contribution from at least one of the further bio- signal and/or or the background (mathematically combining first and second signals to cancel out Doppler frequency drift and cancelling random body movement [0008]).
Regarding to claims 2-5, 8, 11, and 22-23, Lin teaches all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Lin further teaches following limitations:
Of claim 2, wherein the bio-signal comprises a heartbeat signal (and wherein at least one of the further bio-signal or and/or wherein the background comprises at least one of: a respiration signal and/or or a movement artefact (respiration and heartbeat signals and random/irregular body movement [0014])
Of claim 3, wherein the signal combining process comprises processing at least one of the at least one first detection signal and/or or the at least one second detection signal signals to cancel or at least offset their respective contributions from at least one of the further bio-signal and/or or the background (combining signals to cancel out random body movements [0033], Figure 1, I and Q channels going to DAQ and cancellation algorithm 150).
Of claim 4, wherein the at least one first detection signal comprises a first in-phase signal and a first quadrature signal and the at least one second detection signal comprises a second in-phase signal and a second quadrature signal and wherein the signal combining process comprises combining the first and second in-phase signals and combining the first and second quadrature signals to produce a first in-phase combined signal and a second quadrature combined signal (baseband I/Q channel, combining two channels [0069] and [0075])
Of claim 5, wherein at least one of a), b) or c):
a) the signal combining process is performed in the analogue domain;
b) the signal combining process comprises determining at least one of a relationship or a difference between at least one of the at least one first detection signal or the at least one second detection signal and processing the signals to compensate for the at least one of the relationship or the difference ( difference observed in a spectrum, in the presence of DC offset in a shift, and estimate DC offset [0049], combining channels to enhance or cancel among signals with different phase offsets [0069]) or
c) the signal combining process comprises performing at least one of a scaling or a shifting process on at least one of the at least one first detection signal or the at least one second detection signal.
Of claim 8, further comprising at least one of amplification circuitry or digitization circuitry for performing an amplification process or a digitisation process, respectively, on the at least one combined signal (amplified baseband signals [0079], DAQ [0035]).
Of claim 11, the detection circuitry comprises at least one of a) or b):
a) a first IQ demodulation module configured to perform a first demodulation or decoding process to produce in-phase and quadrature signals for the first frequency and a second IQ demodulation module configured to perform a second demodulation process to produce in- phase and quadrature signals for the second frequency (I and Q demodulation [0058]); or b) two detection chains for each carrier frequency.
Of claim 22, wherein at least one of a) or b):
a) the signal transmitter comprises a Doppler-radar based signal transmitter (Doppler radar [0007]); or
b) the signal receiver and signal transmitter form part of a dual-band transceiver
Of claim 23, wherein a) the first carrier frequency in the range 300 MHz to 300 GHz or, between 1 GHz and 10 GHz, b) the second carrier frequency is in the range 300 MHz to 300 GHz or, 1 GHz and 10 GHz (carrier frequency of 5.8 GHz [0071]; 4-7 GHz [0076]).
Regarding to claim 25, Lin teaches a method comprising:
transmitting at least one radar signal at a first carrier frequency and a second radar signal at a second carrier frequency (transceiver with multi-wavelength, frequencies of wavelengths 1 and 2 similar, close to each other [0039])
receiving at least one radar return signal (transceiver receive reflected signals [0008]);
produce at least one first detection signal for the first carrier frequency and at least one second detection signal for the second carrier frequency in response to receiving the at least one radar return signal first and second baseband complex signal [0008]),
wherein the first carrier frequency and the second carrier frequencies are such that at least one of the at least one first detection signal or the at least one second detection signal comprise a contribution from the bio-signal and a contribution from at least one of a further bio-signal or a background (vital signs such as respiration rate and heart rate extracted [0008]; noise from random body movements [0007]);
perform a signal combining process with the at least one first detection signal and the at least one second detection signal to produce at least one combined signal comprising an at least reduced contribution from at least one of the further bio-signal or the background (mathematically combining first and second signals to cancel out Doppler frequency drift and cancelling random body movement [0008]).
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of “Smolarz et al.,” “A 24 GHz Microwave sensor with built-in calibration capability designed in MMIC technology,” IEEE Volume 9 (published on 03/01/2021, hereinafter Smolarz).
Regarding to claim 9, Lin teaches all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Lin does not further disclose at least one of: wherein the apparatus comprises a passive reflectometer circuit or wherein the passive reflectometer circuit comprises a 5-port reflectometer.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in radar sensor, Smolarz teaches using a multiport reflectometer, specifically five-port reflectometer (2nd paragraph , Col. 1 page 31515).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify radar sensor system as taught by Lin to incorporate teaching of Smolarz, since five-port reflectometer was well known in the art as taught by Smolarz. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Lin with no change in their respective functions, adding five port reflectometer and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide simplified measurement circuit with preserving accurate measurements (3rd paragraph, Col. 1 page 31514), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 13-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of “Heneghan et al.,” US 2010/0179438 (hereinafter Heneghan).
Regarding to claims 13-15 and 17, Lin teaches all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Lin does not further disclose following limitations:
Of claim 13, wherein the first and second carrier frequencies are selected such that one of the first and second frequencies is lower than the other, higher frequency, wherein the lower frequency is selected to allow sensing of larger signal variations over time and wherein the higher frequency is selected to allow sensing of both larger signal variations and smaller signal variations and
Of claim 14, wherein the larger signal variation corresponds to at least one of the further bio-signal and/or the background, and
Of claim 15, wherein the smaller signal variations correspond to the bio-signal being sensed, and wherein at least one of a) or b): a) the at least one radar signal transmitter is configured to transmit a further radar signal at a third carrier frequency, wherein the detection circuitry is further configured to produce at least one third detection signal for the third carrier frequency and the signal combining circuitry additionally uses the third detection signal or b) the at least one radar signal transmitter is configured to transmit a plurality of radar signals at a corresponding plurality of carrier frequencies, and wherein the signal combining circuitry is configured to perform a signal combining process using the corresponding plurality of detection signals.
Of claim 17, further comprising signal processing circuitry configured to process the at least one combined signal or a signal derived from the at least one combined signal to determine at least one of: a heart condition, and/or a health condition, and/or a health status of a subject.
However, in analogous field of endeavor in non-contact vital sign detection system, Heneghan teaches monitoring cardiopulmonary activities, wherein multiple carrier frequencies are used and measurement at multiple frequencies are analyzed, specifically, lower frequencies are used to determine large motions accurately and higher-frequency signals are suited for measuring small motions ([0044] and [0050]) and combining the signals ([0039] and [0046]), the results are used to calculate parameters to measure overall cardiorespiratory health ([0053]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify radar as taught by Lin to incorporate teaching of Heneghan, since using plurality carrier frequencies was well known in the art as taught by Heneghan. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Lin with no change in their respective functions, but applying multiple carrier frequencies, and reducing vibrational noise, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide meaningful results based on combining multiple signals ([0053]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 18-19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of “Pijlman et al.,” US 2024/0012128 (hereinafter Pijlman, filing date 01/04/2022).
Regarding to claim 18, Lin teaches all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Lin does teach wherein the at least one combined signal comprises first and second combined signals, wherein the first and second combined signals are orthogonal ( quadrature and in-phase component [0035]; [0038]; I and Q channels [0069]; quadrature and in-phase are orthogonal signals).
Lin does not further disclose wherein the at least one signal processing circuitry is configured to apply a trained model to the orthogonal signals or signals derived from the orthogonal signal to determine a heart condition.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in radar detection apparatus, Pijlman teaches
wherein the at least one signal processing circuitry is configured to apply a trained model to the orthogonal signals or signals derived from the orthogonal signal to determine a heart condition ( machine learning algorithms, logical rules that can be applied to achieve the results of the Doppler sensing and analysis [0022], I and Q channels to determine movement [0040]; heartbeat movement [0026]; health conditions monitored by monitoring movements [0051]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify radar as taught by Lin to incorporate teaching of Pijlman, since machine learning algorithm was well known in the art as taught by Pijlman. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Lin with no change in their respective functions, but using machine learning algorithms in analyzing radar sensed/received signals, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide detection unit adaptable to learn ([0022]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding to claim 19, Lin teaches all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Lin does not further disclose comprising a further sensor configured to sense a background electromagnetic field corresponding to a communication network and wherein the signal combining process further comprises reducing the contribution to the combined signal from the sensed background electromagnetic field based on the output from the further sensor.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in Doppler sensing movement device, Pijlman teaches detecting motion, including period movement like breathing and heartbeat movements, and a vibration movement ([0026]), and also identify possible noise sources like vibrations in the received signal often caused by mechanical vibration or electromagnetic interference ([0042]) and vibration in the received signal sometimes correlates with mechanical elements of the network devices expanding and contracting ([0045]) and reducing contribution of the noise ([0044] and [0054]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify radar as taught by Lin to incorporate teaching of Pijlman, since electromagnetic interference was well known in the art as taught by Pijlman. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Lin with no change in their respective functions, but simply identifying possible noise sources like vibrations due to electromagnetic interference in the received signal, and reducing vibrational noise, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide enhanced detection of desired motion while cancelling out the electromagnetic interference motions ([0042] and [0044]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of “Adib et al.,” US 2025/0352103 (hereinafter Adib)1.
Regarding to claims 20-21, Lin teaches all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Lin does not further disclose following limitations:
Of claim 20, wherein the signal combining process further comprises applying a pre-determined model to at least one of: the at least one first detection signal, the at least one second detection signal, a signal representative of the background electromagnetic field, at least one topological information and/or or subject information to determine the combined signal.
Of claim 21, wherein the model comprises at least one of: a convolutional neural-network or a recurrent neural network; for example, a long short term memory network.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in radar monitoring system, Adib teaches radar sensor ([0062]) detecting heartbeats, applying a pre-determined model to detected signal (estimate heartbeat signals using the trained model[0140]-[0143]) and the model is a convolutional neural network ([0121]-[0122]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify radar as taught by Lin to incorporate teaching of Adib, since using the model to analyze the signals such as convolutional neural network was well known in the art as taught by Adib. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Lin with no change in their respective functions, but using the trained model of convolutional neural network to analyze the signals, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide accurate measurement of inter-beat-intervals ([0085]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of “Gorgutsa et al.,” US 2019/0336038 (hereinafter Gorgutsa).
Regarding to claim 26, Lin teaches all limitations of claim 1 as set forth above.
Lin further teaches wherein the carrier frequency is 5.8 GHz (5.8 GHz radar [0056]), but does not further disclose that the other carrier frequency is 2.45 GHz as claimed.
However, in the analogous field of endeavor in doppler radar sensors for detecting vital signs, Gorgutsa discloses respiration sensor measuring breathing rate using an antenna designed to radiate at 2.45 GHz ([0132] and [0140]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify radar as taught by Lin to incorporate teaching of Gorgutsa, since respiration sensor operating at 2.45 GHz was well known in the art as taught by Gorgutsa. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by Lin with no change in their respective functions, but using 2.45 GHz as second carrier frequency, and reducing vibrational noise, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide accurate respiration rate measurement ([0132]), and there was reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
“Zhang et al.,” US 2018/0368739 teaches radar detection of the respiration and heartbeat ([0002]) extracting vital sign signals and reduce the noise ([0054]).
“Biber et al.,” US 2015/0320342 discloses different radar signals from different frequencies are combined resulting in a large ratio of wanted signal to noise signal ([0043] and [0055]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICIA J PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-1788. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8 am - 3 pm.
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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached at 571-272-2714. 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.
/PATRICIA J PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
1 Provisional application 63/276,889 with filing date 11/08/2021, has same disclosure of limitations (page 11 1sta paragraph).
Prosecution Insights