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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. DE 102023209463.0, filed on September 27, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character 18 is used to designate the mixer and second representation. See Spec. Paras. 23 – 25 and 34. 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. 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: See the Drawing objection above.
Appropriate correction is required.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 – 7, 10 – 14, 16 – 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lang (US 20200382170 A1).
As to claim 1, Lang discloses a method for determining phase information related to a radio frequency (RF) transmission channel, the method comprising:
generating a frequency-modulated RF signal, the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF signal including a frequency ramp (Fig. 2);
coupling a first representation of the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF signal to the RF transmission channel to generate a first frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF output signal (Fig. 9);
coupling a second representation of the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF signal to a test phase shifter (Fig. 8 the phase shifter feeding the mixer of monitor circuit 150 wherein said monitor circuit 150 is also shown in Fig. 9); and
generating a set of measurement samples during the frequency ramp, the set of measurement samples being generated based on:
setting, during the frequency ramp, a phase shift provided by the test phase shifter to each phase shift value of a predetermined set of phase shift values (Fig. 12 S1);
phase shifting the second representation of the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF signal according to each phase shift value of the predetermined set of phase shift values the respective phase shift value to generate a frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF test signal (Fig. 12 S3);
generating a down-converted signal based on mixing a first representation of the first frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF output signal with the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF test signal (Fig. 8 mixer);
sampling the down-converted signal to generate, for each phase shift value of the predetermined set of phase shift values, a respective measurement sample of a set of measurement samples (Fig. 8 ADC); and
computing the phase information related to the RF transmission channel based on the set of measurement samples (Fig. 12).
As to claim 18, Lang discloses a radar monolithic microwave integrated circuit (MMIC) device, comprising: a local oscillator configured to generate a frequency-modulated RF signal including a frequency ramp (Figs 2 & 9);
an RF transmission channel (Fig. 9);
a test phase shifter (Fig. 8 showing the phase shifter 106 feeding the mixer 107 as part of the monitor circuit 150 wherein said monitor circuit 150 is also shown in Fig. 9.);
a first coupler configured to couple a first representation of the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF signal to the RF transmission channel and couple a second representation of the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF signal to the test phase shifter (Fig. 8 couplers 109),
wherein the RF transmission channel is configured to generate a first frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF output signal based on the first representation of the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF signal (Fig. 8 phase shifters 105 and Fig. 12 S1), and
wherein the test phase shifter is configured to generate a frequency-modulated RF test signal by phase-shifting the second representation of the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF signal according to a predetermined set of phase shift values such that a phase shift applied by the test phase shifter for each phase shift value of the predetermined set of phase shift values to generate the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF test signal (Fig. 12 S3);
a second coupler coupled to the RF transmission channel to generate a first representation of the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF output signal (Fig. 8 shows multiple couplers 109);
a mixer coupled to the test phase shifter and the second coupler to receive the first representation of the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF output signal and the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF test signal (Fig. 8 shows mixer 107 electrically connected (coupled) to phase shifter 106 and couplers 109),
wherein the mixer is further configured to generate a down-converted signal based on mixing the first representation of the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF output signal with the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF test signal (Para. 41);
a controller configured to set the phase shift applied by the test phase shifter during the frequency ramp to each phase shift value of the predetermined set of phase shift values; a sampler configured to sample the down-converted signal to generate (Fig. 9 controller 120 and Fig. 12),
for each phase shift value of the predetermined set of phase shift values, a respective measurement sample of a set of measurement samples (Fig. 8 ADC); and
a processor configured to compute phase information related to the RF transmission channel based on the set of measurement samples (Applicant’s Fig. 1 shows the controller 50 comprising the processor 48, thus Lang’s controller 120 meets the scope of controller 40 and processor 48. See Lang Para 42 “The overall system is controlled by a system controller 50, which may be at least partly implemented using a processor, such as a microcontroller executing appropriate firmware.”).
As to claim 3, Lang discloses the method according to claim 2, wherein a time interval between two consecutive settings of the phase shift corresponds to a time interval between two consecutive samplings of measurement samples of the set of measurement samples (Para. 99).
As to claims 4 and 20, Lang discloses the radar MMIC device method according to claim 1 and 18, wherein the processor is configured to compute the phase information based on generating first order harmonic information related to a first order harmonic included in the set of measurement samples values (Para. 117).
As to claim 5, Lang discloses the method according to claim 4, wherein generating the first order harmonic information comprises a Fourier-Transformation of the set of measurement values, and wherein the first order harmonic information corresponds to a first order harmonic Fourier-Transformation coefficient (Para. 117).
As to claims 7 and 22, Lang discloses the radar MMIC device according to any of claims 6 and 18, wherein the processor is configured to estimate a phase error correction value and compute the phase information based on the phase error correction value (at least Paragraphs 100, 105, 111 – 115 and 122 – 123).
As to claim 10, Lang discloses the method according to any of claim 7, wherein the phase error correction value is estimated depending based on a RF delay time corresponding to a difference in time between the first frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF output signal and the frequency modulated frequency-modulated RF test signal (Para. 58).
As to claim 11, Lang discloses the method according to any of claims 7, wherein the phase error correction value is estimated depending based on a number of phase shift values in the predetermined set of phase shift values (Para. 81 the phase values are distributed uniformly based on number of measurement cycles.).
As to claim 12, Lang discloses the method according to claim 7, wherein the phase error correction value is estimated depending based on a time difference between a start of the frequency ramp and a start of sampling the down-converted signal (Para. 65 the phase is updated before the next sample thus it appears that Lang is accounting for differences in ramp start time and sampling start times. Even if applicant disagrees, it would seem necessary for the signals to be properly aligned for analysis such as correlation or matched filtering wherein the motivation would be improves signal-to-noise.).
As to claim 13, Lang discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein a point in time at which the phase shift is changed from a previous applied phase shift value to a currently applied phase shift value is offset from a point in time at which the down-converted signal is sampled to generate the respective measurement sample corresponding to the currently applied phase shift value (Paras. 50 and 105).
As to claim 14, Lang discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: storing the phase information related to the RF transmission channel in memory, and setting a phase shift of a phase shifter in the RF transmission channel based on the stored phase information (Para. 146).
As to claim 16, Lang discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: coupling a second representation of the first frequency-modulated RF output signal to an antenna for transmitting, transmitting the second representation of the first frequency-modulated RF signal; receiving a reflection signal of the second representation of the first frequency-modulated RF signal from an object; and processing the reflection signal to determine at least one of a distance or a velocity of the object or a direction of arrival direction-of-arrival (Paras. 9 & 41).
As to claim 17, Lang discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: low-pass filtering wherein the down-converted signal is low-pass filtered prior to sampling the down-converted signal (Para. 42. Fig. 3 item 20 has filtering. The ordinarily skilled artesian knows that low-pass filtering is used to remove the sum frequencies from the mixer and keep the difference frequencies. Perhaps Applicant could argue that it could be a band-pass filter BPF but one of ordinary skill would expect low-pass filer LPF. If necessary the Examiner takes official notice that LPF offers better attenuation.)
. As to claims 2 and 19, Lang discloses the radar MMIC device according to claim 18, wherein the controller is configured to align in time the setting of the phase shift with sampling the down-converted signal (Para. 99).
As to claims 6 and 21, Lang discloses the radar MMIC device according to claims 4 and 20, wherein the first harmonic information includes an imaginary part and a real part, and wherein the processor is configured to compute the phase information based on the imaginary part and the real part (Para. 98).
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 12 and 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Lang in view of official notice.
As to claim 12, Lang discloses the method according to claim 7, wherein the phase error correction value is estimated depending based on a time difference between a start of the frequency ramp and a start of sampling the down-converted signal (Para. 65 the phase is updated before the next sample thus it appears that Lang is accounting for differences in ramp start time and sampling start times. Even if applicant disagrees, it would seem necessary for the signals to be properly aligned for analysis such as correlation or matched filtering wherein the motivation would be improves signal-to-noise. To the extent necessary, the Examiner takes official notice that it would be obvious to align ramp and sampling start times to properly analyze data, e.g., correlation.).
As to claim 17, Lang discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: low-pass filtering wherein the down-converted signal is low-pass filtered prior to sampling the down-converted signal (Para. 42. Fig. 3 item 20 has filtering. The ordinarily skilled artesian knows that low-pass filtering is used to remove the sum frequencies from the mixer and keep the difference frequencies. Perhaps Applicant could argue that it could be a band-pass filter BPF but one of ordinary skill would expect low-pass filer LPF. If necessary, the Examiner takes official notice that LPF offers better attenuation.).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Lang in view of Cho (US 6750809 B1).
As to claim 8, Lang does not teach the method according to claim 7, wherein the phase error correction value is estimated depending based on a slope of the frequency ramp.
In same field, Cho teaches “The first transmitted sub-pulse and the second transmitted sub-pulse have a linear frequency modulated chirp slope a, said method comprising the step of sample shifting and phase adjusting said first radar returns reflected from said transmitted first sub-pulse with respect to said second radar returns reflected from said second pulse to form a line of frequency modulated chirp slope .gamma. with respect to time, said line connecting said first center frequency with said second center frequency (col. 9 ll. 15 – 24).”
In view of Cho, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled before filing to account for slope for phase correction to ensure that each return signal can be correctly compared, ensuring accurate results when comparing returns, integration, finding angle-of-arrival, etc.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Lang in view of Burngs (US 5608404 A ).
As to claim 9, Lang does not teach the method according to any of 7, wherein the phase error correction value is estimated depending based on a sampling rate used for sampling the down-converted signal.
In same field, Burns teaches “The prior art processing schemes require inefficient interpolation to compensate for range migration. Moreover, prior art radar architectures suffer from unduly large computational burden and memory requirements of the signal processor by not correcting the received radar phase for undesirable, motion-induced, errors using phase rotations in the local oscillator and sampling rate changes in the A/D converter (col. 2 ll. 11 – 18).”
In view of Burns, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled before filing to account for sampling rate when correcting phase to reduce computational and memory requirements thereby reducing cost.
Claims 15 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Lang in view of Doare (US 20220196791 A1).
As to claims 15 and 23, Lang does not teach the radar MMIC device according to claims 1 and 18, wherein the controller is further configured to determine whether the computed phase information exceeds a predetermined criterion, and, in case the phase information exceeds the predetermined criterion, generate a monitoring alert information.
In same field, Doare teaches “According to a further embodiment, the method further comprises: comparing the determined phase error with a phase error threshold value, and setting a warning flag if the determined phase error exceeds the phase error threshold value. In other words, as soon as a determined phase error exceeds the phase error threshold value, a warning flag is set such that the system is made aware of the reduced and possibly insufficient precision of the phase rotator (Para. 18).”
In view of Doare, it would have been obvious to ordinarily skilled before filing to communicate an alert if phase exceeds a threshold; e.g., tolerance, so that action can be taken to make and necessary troubleshooting/repair in order to ensure proper functioning.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL W JUSTICE whose telephone number is (571)270-7029. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 - 5:30 M-F.
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 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.
/MICHAEL W JUSTICE/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights