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
Claim 7 objected to because of typographical error: “that” in line 3. It appears that it should be “from”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 objected to because of typographical error: “a subset” in line 1. It appears that “a” should be “the”. 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 16-17 and 19 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 16-17 and 19 recites the limitation "the angle of arrival" in claim 16 line 2, claim 17 line 3, and claim 19 line 5, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “angle of arrival” 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 "an [[the]] angle of arrival of the target". Appropriate clarification is 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.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ohguchi (US 2019/0379137, hereafter Ohguchi).
Regrading claim 21, Ohguchi (‘137) discloses that A method for determining an angle of arrival of a target { Fig.1; [0006] lines 1-2 (a technique); [0094] lines 6-8 (The target data deriving unit 442 estimates directions in which targets exist on the basis of peak detection results obtained for each of the virtual antennas 33a-33d.) }, comprising:
determining, by a processor, a desired maximum range { [0074] lines 4-10 (by switching between the first mode and the second mode . The detection area of the radar device 1 can be switched by switching between the first mode and the second mode . More specifically , a radar device suitable for a short - distance , wide - angle use can be realized by selecting the first mode and a radar device suitable for a long - distance , narrow - angle use can be realized by selecting the second mode .) };
activating, by the processor, a subset of antenna elements from a plurality of antenna elements based on the desired maximum range { Fig.4 };
receiving, at a plurality of receiver antennas from the plurality of antenna elements, a plurality of incident signals reflected from the target { Fig.1 items 31 (reception antenna), RW (reflection waves); [0038] lines 1-2 (Each reception unit 3 is equipped with a reception antenna 31 and a reception processing unit 32), 5-6 (Each reception antenna 31 receives reflection waves RW from a target) };
performing, by the processor, angle of arrival (AOA) processing on respective incident signals of the subset of receiver antennas to determine the angle of arrival { [0094] lines 6-8 (The target data deriving unit 442 estimates directions in which targets exist on the basis of peak detection results obtained for each of the virtual antennas 33a-33d. )}.
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 1-2, 7-8, 10-16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muñoz et al. (US 20240230871, hereafter Muñoz) in view of Bialer et al. (US 2020/0049796, hereafter Bialer).
Regarding claim 1, Muñoz (‘871) discloses that A method for determining an angle of arrival of a target {abstract lines 1-2 (direction of arrival estimation for imaging radars.); [0002] lines 7-9 (The radar signal reflects from the object, and the reflected signal is detected by numerous receiver antennas); [0009] line 3 (methods discussed herein); [0014] lines 1-2 (FIG. 4 is a schematic that depicts signal processing to compute an angle of arrival of a reflected radar signal;)}, comprising:
receiving, at a plurality of receiver antennas, a plurality of incident signals reflected from the target {Fig.1 item 104 (receiving antennas); Fig.2B; [0007] lines 9-11 (During a radar scan (where the transmitters have emitted signals into the environment and they have reflected and been detected by the receivers),); [0014] line 2 (compute an angle of arrival of a reflected radar signal;); [0018] lines 3-4 (Y receiving antennas 104A-104Y (receivers); [0031] line 5 (estimates DOAs corresponding to targets)};
identifying, by a processor, a subset of receiver antennas from the plurality of receiver antennas {Figs.3-4; [0005] lines 6-7 (use of different subsets of virtual receivers); [0007] lines 1-2 (a subset of these 200 receive channels are selected); Examiner’s note: Figs.3-4 for “a processor”} ; and
performing, by the processor, angle of arrival (AOA) processing on respective incident signals of the subset of receiver antennas to determine the angle of arrival {[0005] lines 9-11 (two-dimensional direction of arrival estimation of radar signals based on complimentary subarrays,)}.
However, Muñoz (‘871) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “identifying, by a processor, a subset of receiver antennas from the plurality of receiver antennas when the target is in a near field of the plurality of receiver antennas”. In the same field of endeavor, Bialer (‘796) discloses that
identifying, by a processor, a subset of receiver antennas from the plurality of receiver antennas when the target is in a near field of the plurality of receiver antennas {[0003] lines 3-11 (a first far-field parameter measurement for an object for a first node of the radar using sub-nodes of the first node, determining a second far-field parameter measurement for the object for a second node of the radar using sub-nodes of the second node, and obtaining a joint parameter measurement for the object by combining the first far-field parameter measurement with the second far-field parameter measurement by correcting for a near-field phase difference between the first node and the second node); [0006] lines 2-5 (the first node and the second node of the radar form a near-field aperture, the subnodes of the first node form a far-field aperture and the subnodes of the second node form a far-field aperture.), 16 (applying a near-field correction)};
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 Muñoz (‘871) with the teachings of Bialer (‘796) {extract signal difference among antenna subsets for near-field aperture } to extract signal difference among antenna subsets for near-field aperture. Doing so would provide a near-field phase correction among antennas so as to provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario, as recognized by Bialer (‘796) {[0002] lines 1-3 from bottom (provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario.); [0006] lines 16-19 (to applying a near-field correction with respect to a selected location to the first far-field parameter measurement and the second far-field parameter measurement.)}.
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) discloses that the method further comprising:
determining an elevation and an azimuth angle to the target based on the angle of arrival {see Muñoz (‘871) [0005] lines 9-11 (two-dimensional direction of arrival estimation of radar signals based on complimentary subarrays,); [0008] lines 8-9 (estimate a position of a target in elevation and azimuth), 15-16 (compute an azimuth value for the target.); [0028] lines 3-4 (a resolution of an angle of arrival is one degree in azimuth and one degree in elevation)}.
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) discloses that the method further comprising:
providing a first array of receiver antennas in a first dimension { see Muñoz (‘871) [0052] lines 2-3 (the Y receiver antennas are arranged in a two-dimensional array.)};
providing a second array of receiver antennas in a second dimension different that the first dimension { see Muñoz (‘871) [0052] lines 2-3 (the Y receiver antennas are arranged in a two-dimensional array.); Examiner’s note: “two-dimensional array” for “a second dimension different that the first dimension”}; and
identifying a first subset of receiver antennas from the first array and from the second array { see Muñoz (‘871) [0049] lines 10-16 (separating the detection signals into N signals that correspond to N virtual receivers, a first set and a second set, first set and the second set are different from one another, a data cube based upon the N signals and extracting first values from the data cube), 20-22 (the first direction of arrival is based upon the first values extracted from the data cube.); [0052] lines 2-3 (the Y receiver antennas are arranged in a two-dimensional array.)}.
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) discloses that in the method,
the plurality of receiver antennas are a part of a multiple input multiple output (MIMO) radar {see Muñoz (‘871) Fig.1; [0006] line 2 (MIMO radar)} and
the subset correspond to a portion of a virtual array formed by the MIMO radar {see Muñoz (‘871) [0005] lines 6-7 (use of different subsets of virtual receivers); [0006] lines 2-3 (MIMO, creates a virtual array of NxM receive channels) }.
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) discloses that the method further comprising:
transmitting a beam of electromagnetic energy via a plurality of transmitter antennas { see Muñoz (‘871) Fig.1 items 102A~Y, 106 (radar signal generator) ; [0018] lines 1-3 (FIG. 1, a radar system 100. The radar system 100 includes X transmitting antennas 102A-102X (transmitters)), 1-3 from bottom (emit radar signals into an environment of the radar system 100 based upon the electrical signals); Examiner’s note: “radar” and “transmitting antennas” for “transmitting a beam of electromagnetic energy” because of inherent feature of radar},
wherein the plurality of transmitter antennas and the plurality of receiver antennas are part of a radar { see Muñoz (‘871) Fig.1 items 102A~Y, 104A~X; [0018] lines 1-4 (FIG. 1, a radar system 100. The radar system 100 includes X transmitting antennas 102A-102X (transmitters) and Y receiving antennas 104A-104Y (receivers).)}.
Regarding claim 11, which depends on claims 1 and 10, Muñoz (‘871) does not explicitly disclose “determining a range of the target based on a received incident signal from the received plurality of incident signals; and determining whether the target is in a near field or far field of the radar based on the range”. In the same field of endeavor, Bialer (‘796) discloses that the method further comprising:
determining a range of the target based on a received incident signal from the received plurality of incident signals {[0033] lines 1-3 (a signal is received from the object by reflection of the source signal by object 50 located at distance d1)}; and
determining whether the target is in a near field or far field of the radar based on the range {[0028] lines 4-5 (A far field scenario is generally defined by when the distance to the object is greater than 2D2/λ,)}.
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 Muñoz (‘871) with the teachings of Bialer (‘796) {extract signal difference among antenna subsets for near-field aperture and identify target as a near field or far field based on distance between radar and target } to extract signal difference among antenna subsets for near-field aperture and identify target as a near field or far field based on distance between radar and target. Doing so would provide a near-field phase correction among antennas accordingly so as to provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario, as recognized by Bialer (‘796) {[0002] lines 1-3 from bottom (provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario.); [0006] lines 16-19 (to applying a near-field correction with respect to a selected location to the first far-field parameter measurement and the second far-field parameter measurement.)}.
Regarding claim 12, which depends on claims 1 and 10-11, Muñoz (‘871) does not explicitly disclose “determining the angle of arrival using the plurality of incident signals when the target is in the far field of the radar”. In the same field of endeavor, Bialer (‘796) discloses that the method further comprising:
determining the angle of arrival using the plurality of incident signals when the target is in the far field of the radar { [0029] lines 8-10 (In the far-field scenario, the angles of arrival at each subnode are the same or substantially the same.); Examiner’s note: “the angles of arrival at each subnode are the same or substantially the same” implies that no need correction for far-field scenario, therefore “using the plurality of incident signals” for “angles of arrival” }.
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 Muñoz (‘871) with the teachings of Bialer (‘796) {extract signal difference among antenna subsets for near-field aperture and identify target as a near field or far field based on distance between radar and target } to extract signal difference among antenna subsets for near-field aperture and identify target as a near field or far field based on distance between radar and target. Doing so would provide a near-field phase correction among antennas accordingly so as to provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario, as recognized by Bialer (‘796) {[0002] lines 1-3 from bottom (provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario.); [0006] lines 16-19 (to applying a near-field correction with respect to a selected location to the first far-field parameter measurement and the second far-field parameter measurement.)}.
Regarding claim 13, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) discloses that in the method,
the plurality of receiver antennas are comprised in a vehicle {see Muñoz (‘871) Fig.1; Fig.5 item 502 (radar system); [0011] lines 1-2 (FIG. 1, a radar system;); [0031] lines (a radar system 502.)} and
the method further comprising:
controlling a behavior of the vehicle based on the angle of arrival {see Muñoz (‘871) [0031] lines 8-12 (the AV 500 also includes a computing system that executes a control system, where the control system receives output from the radar system 502 and controls a module of the AV 500 based upon the output from the radar system 502.), 15-17 (the control system can control the module of the AV 500 based upon the DOA computed by the DOA system 504.)}.
Regarding claim 14, which depends on claim 1, Muñoz (‘871) does not explicitly disclose “identifying a subset of receiver antennas comprises: determining a size of an aperture of the receiver antennas by testing a separation capability of the receiver antennas”. In the same field of endeavor, Bialer (‘796) discloses that in the method, identifying a subset of receiver antennas comprises:
determining a size of an aperture of the receiver antennas by testing a separation capability of the receiver antennas { Fig.3; [0028] lines 1-4 (FIG. 3 illustrates the effect of aperture size on signal detection at a radar array. The relative aperture size determines whether near-field equations or far-field equations are applicable.); [0029] lines 1-8 (The aperture d of the subnode array is the distance spanned by the subnodes 204a, ... , 204n. Due to the relatively small size of the aperture d, the subnodes 204a, ... , 204n are considered to receive signals in a far-field scenario for which the object is considered to be at infinity. For a small aperture of about 10 cm, and a wavelength of 4 mm the far-field conditions apply to objects that are at a distance of greater than about 5 meters)}.
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 Muñoz (‘871) with the teachings of Bialer (‘796) {extract signal difference among antenna subsets for near-field aperture and check effect of aperture size on signal detection at a radar array to determine whether near-field equations or far-field equations are applicable } to extract signal difference among antenna subsets for near-field aperture and check effect of aperture size on signal detection at a radar array to determine whether near-field equations or far-field equations are applicable. Doing so would provide a near-field phase correction among antennas accordingly so as to provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario, as recognized by Bialer (‘796) {[0002] lines 1-3 from bottom (provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario.); [0006] lines 16-19 (to applying a near-field correction with respect to a selected location to the first far-field parameter measurement and the second far-field parameter measurement.)}.
Regarding claim 15, as modified above, Muñoz (‘871) discloses that A sensor system { Fig.1; [0011] lines 1-2 (FIG. 1, a radar system;)} comprising:
a plurality of receiver antennas configured to receive a plurality of incident signals reflected from a target; and
a processor coupled to the plurality of receiver antennas, wherein the processor is configured to:
identify a subset of receiver antennas from the plurality of receiver antennas when the target is in a near field of the plurality of receiver antennas; and
perform angle of arrival (AOA) processing on respective incident signals of the subset of receiver antennas,
{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}.
wherein the AOA processing comprises determining a characteristic of the target based on the AOA processing {[0008] lines 8-9 (estimate a position of a target in elevation and azimuth)}.
Regarding claim 16, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 2. Accordingly, claim 16 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 2, shown above.
Regarding claim 18, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as the combination of claims 8 and 10. Accordingly, claim 18 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as the combination of claims 8 and 10, shown above.
Regarding claim 19, which depends on claim 15, Muñoz (‘871) does not explicitly disclose “determine a range of the target; determine whether the target is in the near field of the plurality of receiver antennas based on the range; and determine the angle of arrival using the plurality of incident signals when the target is in the far field of the radar”. In the same field of endeavor, Bialer (‘796) discloses that the sensor system further comprising:
determine a range of the target {Fig.4 (d1); Fig.5 (d2); [0015] lines 1-2 (Fig.5, estimating a parameter measurement of an object); [0033] lines 1-3 (a signal is received from the object by reflection of the source signal by object 50 located at distance d1); [0035] lines 7-11 (d1 is a distance between the center point of the first d1 node 202a and the reflection point location of the first parameter measurement and d2 is a distance between the center point of the second node 202b and the reflection point location of the second parameter measurement,)};
determine whether the target is in the near field of the plurality of receiver antennas based on the range {[0028] lines 4-5 (A far field scenario is generally defined by when the distance to the object is greater than 2D2/λ,); Examiner’s note: [0028] lines 4-5 implies that a near field scenario is generally defined by when the distance to the object is less than 2D2/λ }; and
determine the angle of arrival using the plurality of incident signals when the target is in the far field of the radar {[0029] lines 8-10 (In the far-field scenario, the angles of arrival at each subnode are the same or substantially the same.); Examiner’s note: “the angles of arrival at each subnode are the same or substantially the same” implies that no need correction for far-field scenario, therefore “using the plurality of incident signals” for “angles of arrival” }.
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 Muñoz (‘871) with the teachings of Bialer (‘796) {extract signal difference among antenna subsets for near-field aperture and identify target as a near field or far field based on distance between radar and target } to extract signal difference among antenna subsets for near-field aperture and identify target as a near field or far field based on distance between radar and target. Doing so would provide a near-field phase correction among antennas accordingly so as to provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario, as recognized by Bialer (‘796) {[0002] lines 1-3 from bottom (provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario.); [0006] lines 16-19 (to applying a near-field correction with respect to a selected location to the first far-field parameter measurement and the second far-field parameter measurement.)}.
Regarding claim 20, as modified above, Muñoz (‘871) discloses that A non-transitory computer readable medium including instructions for determining an angle of arrival of a target that causes a computing system to perform operations {abstract lines 1-2 (direction of arrival estimation for imaging radars.); [0032] lines 1-8 (described herein can be implemented in hardware, software, or any combination thereof. If implemented in software, the functions can be stored on or transmitted over as one or more instructions or code on a computer-readable medium. Computer-readable media includes computer-readable storage media. A computer readable storage media can be any available storage media that can be accessed by a computer.) } comprising:
receiving signal data corresponding to a plurality of incident signal reflected from the target and received at a plurality of receiver antennas {Fig.1 item 104 (receiving antennas); Fig.2B; [0007] lines 9-11 (During a radar scan (where the transmitters have emitted signals into the environment and they have reflected and been detected by the receivers),); [0014] line 2 (compute an angle of arrival of a reflected radar signal;); [0018] lines 3-4 (Y receiving antennas 104A-104Y (receivers); [0031] line 5 (estimates DOAs corresponding to targets)};
identifying a subset of receiver antennas from the plurality of receiver antennas {[0005] lines 6-7 (use of different subsets of virtual receivers); [0007] lines 1-2 (a subset of these 200 receive channels are selected)}
performing angle of arrival (AOA) processing on respective data of the subset of receiver antennas to determine the angle of arrival {[0005] lines 9-11 (two-dimensional direction of arrival estimation of radar signals based on complimentary subarrays,)}.
However, Muñoz (‘871) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “determining a range of the target” and “identifying a subset of receiver antennas from the plurality of receiver antennas based on the range”. In the same field of endeavor, Bialer (‘796) discloses that
determining a range of the target {Fig.4 (d1); Fig.5 (d2); [0015] lines 1-2 (Fig.5, estimating a parameter measurement of an object); [0033] lines 1-3 (a signal is received from the object by reflection of the source signal by object 50 located at distance d1); [0035] lines 7-11 (d1 is a distance between the center point of the first d1 node 202a and the reflection point location of the first parameter measurement and d2 is a distance between the center point of the second node 202b and the reflection point location of the second parameter measurement,)};
identifying a subset of receiver antennas from the plurality of receiver antennas based on the range {[0003] lines 3-11 (a first far-field parameter measurement for an object for a first node of the radar using sub-nodes of the first node, determining a second far-field parameter measurement for the object for a second node of the radar using sub-nodes of the second node, and obtaining a joint parameter measurement for the object by combining the first far-field parameter measurement with the second far-field parameter measurement by correcting for a near-field phase difference between the first node and the second node); [0006] lines 2-5 (the first node and the second node of the radar form a near-field aperture, the subnodes of the first node form a far-field aperture and the subnodes of the second node form a far-field aperture.), 16 (applying a near-field correction); [0029] lines 8-10 (In the far-field scenario, the angles of arrival at each subnode are the same or substantially the same.)};
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 Muñoz (‘871) with the teachings of Bialer (‘796) {extract signal difference among antenna subsets based on distance to a target } to extract signal difference among antenna subsets based on distance to a target. Doing so would provide a near-field phase correction among antennas so as to provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario, as recognized by Bialer (‘796) {[0002] lines 1-3 from bottom (provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario.); [0006] lines 16-19 (to applying a near-field correction with respect to a selected location to the first far-field parameter measurement and the second far-field parameter measurement.)}.
Claims (3-4,6) and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) as applied to claims 1 and 15, respectively, above, and further in view of He et al. (CN 109471068, hereafter He).
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) do not explicitly disclose “preforming the AOA processing comprises determining an azimuth or elevation spectrum describing a power of the respective incident signals with respect to the angle of arrival”. In the same field of endeavor, He (‘068) discloses that in the method, preforming the AOA processing comprises
determining an azimuth or elevation spectrum describing a power of the respective incident signals with respect to the angle of arrival { Fig.5; abstract line 2 ( DOA estimation); page 7 lines 27-28 (FIG. 5 processing. three-dimensional in xio axis represents pitch, azimuth axis represents azimuth , the magnitude axis represents power spectrum amplitude)}.
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 the combination of Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) with the teachings of He (‘068) {generate power spectrum of azimuth and elevation angles in DOA estimation} to generate power spectrum of azimuth and elevation angles in DOA estimation. Doing so would provide 2-dimensional DOA estimate algorithm (e.g. MUSIC algorithm DOA estimation) using peak search so as to accurately and effectively efficiently locate position (e.g. unmanned aerial vehicle position), as recognized by He (‘068) {page 2 lines 15-16 (it can accurately and effectively efficiently locating unmanned aerial vehicle position); page 5 lines 10-11 (FIG. 5 is the array signal adopts the method processed by L array power spectrum two-dimension MUSIC algorithm DOA estimation after processing.); page 9 line 1 from bottom (L matrix two dimension MUSIC algorithm constructing MUSIC spectrum peak); page 10 lines 1 (search function as signal reach angle (DOA) estimate)}.
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claims 1 and 3, Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) do not explicitly disclose “integrating respective azimuth or elevation spectra from a plurality of subsets of receiver antennas”. In the same field of endeavor, He (‘068) discloses that the method further comprising:
integrating respective azimuth or elevation spectra from a plurality of subsets of receiver antennas { Fig.1; Fig.5; page 5 lines 10-11 (FIG. 5 is the array signal adopts the method processed by L array power spectrum two-dimension MUSIC algorithm DOA estimation after processing.)}.
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 the combination of Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) with the teachings of He (‘068) {generate power spectrum of azimuth and elevation angles in DOA estimation from L-shape antenna array} to generate power spectrum of azimuth and elevation angles in DOA estimation from L-shape antenna array. Doing so would provide 2-dimensional DOA estimate algorithm (e.g. MUSIC algorithm DOA estimation) using peak search so as to accurately and effectively efficiently locate position (e.g. unmanned aerial vehicle position), as recognized by He (‘068) {page 2 lines 15-16 (it can accurately and effectively efficiently locating unmanned aerial vehicle position); page 5 lines 10-11 (FIG. 5 is the array signal adopts the method processed by L array power spectrum two-dimension MUSIC algorithm DOA estimation after processing.); page 9 line 1 from bottom (L matrix two dimension MUSIC algorithm constructing MUSIC spectrum peak); page 10 lines 1 (search function as signal reach angle (DOA) estimate)}.
Regarding claim 6, which depends on claims 1 and 3-4, Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) do not explicitly disclose “the respective azimuth or elevation spectra are integrated incoherently”. In the same field of endeavor, He (‘068) discloses that in the method,
the respective azimuth or elevation spectra are integrated incoherently { page 7 lines 14-15 (the six output signal recombination combined Y = [Y1; Y2; Y3; Y4; Y5; Y6] then using L matrix two dimension MUSIC algorithm constructing MUSIC spectrum peak search function); Examiner’s note: “combined Y = [Y1; Y2; Y3; Y4; Y5; Y6]” for “integrated incoherently”}.
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 the combination of Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) with the teachings of He (‘068) {generate power spectrum of azimuth and elevation angles in DOA estimation from L-shape antenna array using combined signals} to generate power spectrum of azimuth and elevation angles in DOA estimation from L-shape antenna array using combined signals. Doing so would provide 2-dimensional DOA estimate algorithm (e.g. MUSIC algorithm DOA estimation) using peak search so as to accurately and effectively efficiently locate position (e.g. unmanned aerial vehicle position), as recognized by He (‘068) {page 2 lines 15-16 (it can accurately and effectively efficiently locating unmanned aerial vehicle position); page 5 lines 10-11 (FIG. 5 is the array signal adopts the method processed by L array power spectrum two-dimension MUSIC algorithm DOA estimation after processing.); page 9 line 1 from bottom (L matrix two dimension MUSIC algorithm constructing MUSIC spectrum peak); page 10 lines 1 (search function as signal reach angle (DOA) estimate)}.
Regarding claim 17, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 3. Accordingly, claim 17 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 3, shown above.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mansour (US 2015/0022390, hereafter Mansour).
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 1, Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) do not explicitly disclose “the plurality of receiver antennas are part of a switched antenna array; and the method further comprising: activating the subset of receiver antennas”. In the same field of endeavor, Mansour (‘390) discloses that in the method {[0050] line 2 (method detects locations of targets)},
the plurality of receiver antennas are part of a switched antenna array { [0029] lines 4-6 (The reflected signals are received by the antenna array with individual elements that can be switched ON or OFF.) }; and
the method further comprising:
activating the subset of receiver antennas { [0068] lines 4-6 (receiving antennas are randomly Subsampled using a sampling operator R that selects a Subset in of the n, receivers,) }.
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 the combination of Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) with the teachings of Mansour (‘390) {use switch to select subset of antennas} to use switch to select subset of antennas. Doing so would suppress artifacts (e.g. ghost) using compressive radar arrays where a random subset of the receiving elements are active so as to refine the detection of the targets, as recognized by Mansour (‘390) {[0014] lines 4-5 (refine the detection of the targets and to suppress ghosting artifacts); [0026] lines 5-7 (recover targets and suppress artifacts using compressive radar arrays where a random subset of the receiving elements are active.)}.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Gupta et al . (US 2020/0319296, hereafter Gupta).
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claims 1 and 8, Muñoz (‘871) discloses that in the method,
the virtual array is a two dimensional (2D) array { [0006] lines 2-3 (MIMO, creates a virtual array of NxM receive channels), 7 (arranged in, two dimensions)}; and
.
However, Muñoz (‘871) and Bialer (‘796) do not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “wherein the AOA processing comprises performing a 2D FFT”. In the same field of endeavor, Gupta (‘296) discloses that
wherein the AOA processing comprises performing a 2D FFT {abstract lines 2-3 (perform a two - dimensional ( 2D ) fast Fourier transform ( FFT ) on an MxN element array); [0020] lines 6-8 (determine characteristics of the object . These characteristics can include range , velocity , angle of arrival ,); [0028] lines 1-2 (FIG . 2 shows a result ( range - Doppler array 200 ) of the 2D FFT processing. )}.
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying a known technique (e.g. generate range-doppler map using 2D FFT) to a known device (e.g. radar) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (e.g. generate range-doppler map) and result in an improved system (e.g. resolve a scene into a 2D grid with range and velocity on the two axes so as to identify object based on peak in the range-velocity plane, as recognized by Gupta (‘296) {[0028] lines 2-4 (resolves a scene into a 2D grid with range and velocity on the two axes .), 6-8 (The coordinates of such a peak 202 in the curve in the range - velocity plane indicate the range and velocity of the object .)}).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohguchi (‘137) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Bialer (‘796).
Regarding claim 22, which depends on claim 21, Ohguchi (‘137) does not explicitly disclose “determining an elevation and an azimuth angle to the target and a Doppler velocity based on the AOA processing”. In the same field of endeavor, Bialer (‘796) discloses that the method further comprising:
determining an elevation and an azimuth angle to the target and a Doppler velocity based on the AOA processing {[0026] lines 5-6 (to determine a location (i.e., range, elevation and azimuth) of the object); [0030] lines 3-6 (the angles of arrival
PNG
media_image1.png
21
102
media_image1.png
Greyscale
are different for each node, Doppler measurements are all different from each other.); [0031] lines 1-2 (determine radar parameters of an object, such as range, Doppler and angle)}.
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 Ohguchi (‘137) with the teachings of Bialer (‘796) {extract target parameters (e.g. range, doppler, elevation, azimuth) from received radar signal } to extract target parameters (e.g. range, doppler, elevation, azimuth) from received radar signal. Doing so would provide proper signal processing accordingly based on detected target scenario (e.g. a near-field phase correction among antennas) so as to provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario, as recognized by Bialer (‘796) {[0002] lines 1-3 from bottom (provide an efficient and practical method of applying a match filter to a signal in a wide aperture radar in a near-field scenario.); [0006] lines 16-19 (to applying a near-field correction with respect to a selected location to the first far-field parameter measurement and the second far-field parameter measurement.)}.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20180083363 discloses that “transmitting a beam of electromagnetic energy via a plurality of transmitter antennas” { [0005] lines 1-3 (transmitting electromagnetic energy in a first direction by a radar located on a top portion of a vehicle); [0029] lines 4-5 (the radar 126 may have a plurality of antennas configured to transmit and receive radio signals); [0054] lines 1-2 (The example signal transmitted by the radar unit 306 has a beamwidth 308)}, which further support the rejection of claim 10.
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