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 .
Status of Claims
The following is a non-final, first office action in response to the communication filed 10/16/2024. Claims 1-15 are currently pending and have been examined.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Benefit is given to the priority document KR10-2024-0063417 and the effective filing date of 05/14/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/16/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc.
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.
Claim 6 is 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 6 recites “a predetermined vertical spacing in a vertical direction” in line 3. However, no frame of reference for determining which direction is vertical has been given, and it is unclear how the vertical direction relates to the layout of other claim elements. For examination purposes, the transmitting antennas will be understood as being spaced apart in a horizontal direction, and the vertical direction will be understood relative to this definition of horizontal. Appropriate clarification is requested.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kishigami (US-20250231284-A1; hereinafter Kishigami).
Regarding claim 1, Kishigami discloses:
A radar apparatus (see at least Abs; “Provided is a radar device…”) comprising:
four transmitting antennas comprising first, second, third, and fourth transmitting antennas (see at least Fig. 26, Tx #1 through Tx #4) sequentially arranged by predetermined first, second, and third separation distances (see at least [0320]; “In FIG. 26, the antenna spacing D.sub.Tx(1, 2) between Tx #1 and Tx #2 is 5D.sub.H, the antenna spacing D.sub.Tx(2, 3) between Tx #2 and Tx #3 is 5D.sub.H, and the antenna spacing D.sub.Tx(3, 4) between Tx #3 and Tx #4 is 4D.sub.H.”); and
four receiving antennas comprising first, second, third, and fourth receiving antennas (see at least Fig. 26, Rx #1 through Rx #4) sequentially arranged by predetermined fourth, fifth, and sixth separation distances (see at least [0320]; “In addition in FIG. 26, the antenna spacing D.sub.Rx(1, 2) between Rx #1 and Rx #2 is D.sub.H, the antenna spacing D.sub.Rx(2, 3) between Rx #2 and Rx #3 is D.sub.H, the antenna spacing D.sub.Rx(3, 4) between Rx #3 and Rx #4 is 2D.sub.H…”),
wherein the predetermined first, third, fourth, and sixth separation distances are set to different numerical values (using the mapping given above and the distances related in [0320], the first distance would be equal to 5DH, the third distance to 4DH, the fourth to DH, and the sixth to 2DH).
Regarding claim 2, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 1. Kishigami further teaches:
further comprising a signal processor controlling transmission/reception of a radar signal (see at least Fig. 1, radar transmission signal generator 101 and signal processor 207) through a plurality of transmitting channels (see at least Fig. 1, transmission radio units 107) and a plurality of receiving channels (see at least Fig. 1, antenna system processors 201) and processing the radar signal (see at least Fig. 1, flow diagrams for radar transmission signal generator 101 and radar receiver 200).
Regarding claim 3, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 1. Kishigami further teaches:
wherein the signal processor processes signals transmitted by the four transmitting antennas to be transmitted simultaneously (see at least [0045]; “A MIMO radar transmits, from a plurality of transmission antennas (also referred to as a transmission array antenna), signals (radar transmission waves) multiplexed using, for example, time division, frequency division, or code division multiplexing, and receives signals (radar reflected waves) reflected from a nearby object by using a plurality of reception antennas (also referred to as a reception array antenna).”.
Regarding claim 4, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 1. Kishigami further teaches:
wherein the four transmitting antennas and the four receiving antennas are arranged on respective straight lines to be spaced apart from each other (see at least arrangement of transmitting and receiving antennas in Fig. 26, copied below).
PNG
media_image1.png
248
764
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 4. Kishigami further teaches:
wherein the straight line on which the four transmitting antennas are be spaced apart from each other is parallel to the straight line on which the four receiving antennas are be spaced apart from each other (see at least arrangement of transmitting and receiving antennas in Fig. 26).
Regarding claim 7, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 1. Kishigami further teaches:
wherein the four transmitting antennas are arranged in a region above or below the four receiving antennas in a vertical direction (see at least arrangement of transmitting and receiving antennas in Fig. 26).
Regarding claim 8, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 1. Kishigami further teaches:
wherein the first separation distance, the third separation distance, the fourth separation distance, and the sixth separation distance are determined based on a predetermined ratio (see at least description of relative distances in [0320]. See also [0321]; “Therefore, in the transmission/reception antenna arrangement illustrated in FIG. 26, D.sub.Tx(1, 2)≥D.sub.Tx(2, 3)≥D.sub.Tx(3, 4), and D.sub.Rx(1, 2)≤D.sub.Rx(2, 3)≤D.sub.Rx(3, 4)≤D.sub.Rx(4, 5)≤D.sub.Rx(5, 6). Consequently, the above-described (Condition 1) is satisfied.”).
Regarding claim 9, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 1. Kishigami further teaches:
wherein the first separation distance and the third separation distance are set based on a product of a predetermined transmitting antenna spacing factor and a unit separation distance, and
the fourth separation distance and the sixth separation distance are set based on a product of a predetermined receiving antenna spacing factor and the unit separation distance (see again [0320], where antenna spacing is given as a coefficient, mapped to the antenna spacing factor, multiplied by DH-, mapped to the unit separation distance).
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.
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 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kishigami.
Regarding claim 10, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 9. However, Kishigami does not explicitly teach a value for DH for the embodiment shown in Fig. 26.
Regarding multiple other embodiments, Kishigami teaches:
wherein the unit separation distance is set to half the wavelength of a frequency of the radar signal transmitted by the transmitting antennas (see at least [0176], [0297], [0307], [0317], [0327] and [0337]; “DH= 0.5λ”).
Given that no specific value is taught for DH for the embodiment of Fig. 26, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the filing date of the claimed invention to use the DH value taught for other, related embodiments.
Regarding claim 11, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 10. Kishigami further teaches:
wherein the predetermined transmitting antenna spacing factor comprises a first factor set between the first transmitting antenna and the second transmitting antenna and a second factor set between the third transmitting antenna and the fourth transmitting antenna (see at least [0320], where factors are mapped to the coefficients; “In FIG. 26, the antenna spacing D.sub.Tx(1, 2) between Tx #1 and Tx #2 is 5D.sub.H, the antenna spacing D.sub.Tx(2, 3) between Tx #2 and Tx #3 is 5D.sub.H, and the antenna spacing D.sub.Tx(3, 4) between Tx #3 and Tx #4 is 4D.sub.H.”), and
the predetermined receiving antenna spacing factor comprises a third factor set between the first receiving antenna and the second receiving antenna and a fourth factor set between the third receiving antenna and the fourth receiving antenna (see at least [0320]; “In addition in FIG. 26, the antenna spacing D.sub.Rx(1, 2) between Rx #1 and Rx #2 is D.sub.H, the antenna spacing D.sub.Rx(2, 3) between Rx #2 and Rx #3 is D.sub.H, the antenna spacing D.sub.Rx(3, 4) between Rx #3 and Rx #4 is 2D.sub.H…”).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kishigami in view of Loesch et al. (US-20230137298-A1; hereinafter Loesch).
Regarding claim 6, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 1. However, Kishigami does not explicitly teach:
wherein at least two transmitting antennas among the four transmitting antenna are arranged to be spaced apart from the remaining transmitting antennas by a predetermined vertical spacing in a vertical direction.
Kishigami discloses a radar device, wherein a transmission array antenna includes a plurality of transmission antennas, and a reception array antenna includes a plurality of reception antennas. Loesch is directed to a radar device having a plurality of transmit antennas and a plurality of receive antennas. Loesch teaches:
wherein at least two transmitting antennas among the four transmitting antenna are arranged to be spaced apart from the remaining transmitting antennas by a predetermined vertical spacing in a vertical direction (see at least Fig. 4 and description in [0044]; “FIG. 4 shows a schematic plan view of a further radar device 1d. In contrast to the radar device 1c shown in FIG. 3, a further transmit antenna 2d is provided which is vertically offset relative to the other transmit antennas 2a-2c arranged horizontally adjacent one another.”).
Both Kishigami and Loesch teach radar MIMO arrays with transmitting and receiving antennas arranged on respective straight lines spaced apart from each other. 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 transmitting array used in Kishigami to include a vertically offset transmitting and receving antenna, as taught by Loesch. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to include vertically offset antennas in order to be able to determine an elevation angle, as recognized by Loesch (see Loesch at least [0044]; “The radar device 1d can consequently determine an elevation angle.”).
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kishigami in view of Sugano et al. (JP-2015190944-A; hereinafter Sugano).
Regarding claim 12, Kishigami discloses the radar apparatus of claim 11. However, Kishigami does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first, second, third, and fourth factors are set to different numerical values, and are set by one-to-one matching in a set of 2N, 3N, 4N, and 8N, wherein N is a real number greater than 0.
Kishigami discloses a radar device, wherein a transmission array antenna includes a plurality of transmission antennas, and a reception array antenna includes a plurality of reception antennas. Sugano is directed to a radar system having a plurality of transmit antennas and a plurality of receive antennas. Sugano teaches:
wherein the first, second, third, and fourth factors are set to different numerical values, and are set by one-to-one matching in a set of 2N, 3N, 4N, and 8N, wherein N is a real number greater than 0 (see at least Fig. 4. Multiple selections of four antennas from receiving antennas 21-0 to 21-13 and four antennas from transmitting antennas 11-0 to 11-15 fulfill the requirements of claim 12).
Both Kishigami and Sugano teach radar MIMO arrays with transmitting and receiving antennas arranged on respective straight lines spaced apart from each other. 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 transmitting array used in Kishigami to use inter-element spacing embodiments taught by Sugano. One of ordinary skill would be motivated to use the arrangement of Sugano in order to provide redundancy at virtual antenna positions (see Sugano translation at least [0024]; “In the virtual array 40, the number of virtual antennas that are in the same position varies from 1 to 5.” See also Abs; “PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a radar system which can reduce influences when data of an element is lost.”).
Regarding claim 13, Kishigami in view of Sugano discloses the radar apparatus of claim 12. Sugano further teaches:
wherein N is set to be 1 (see translation at least [0023]; “In the arrangement example shown in Figure 4, the receiving antennas 21-0 to 21-13 are arranged in a line at a constant interval d equal to half a wavelength of the radio signal”. Multiple selections of four antennas from receiving antennas 21-0 to 21-13 and four antennas from transmitting antennas 11-0 to 11-15 of Fig. 4 fulfill the requirements of claim 12 when N=1).
It would have been obvious to combine Kishigami and Sugano for the reasons given regarding claim 12.
Regarding claim 14, Kishigami in view of Sugano discloses the radar apparatus of claim 12. Sugano further teaches:
wherein the first factor is set to 2N (see at least Fig. 4, distance between 11-2 and 11-3 is 2d), the second factor is set to be 3N (see at least Fig. 4, distance between 11-6 and 11-7 is 3d), the third factor is set to be 4N (see at least Fig. 4, distance between 21-0 and 21-4 is 4d), and the fourth factor is set to be 8N (see at least Fig. 4, distance between 21-5 and 21-13 is 8d).
It would have been obvious to combine Kishigami and Sugano for the reasons given regarding claim 12.
Regarding claim 15, Kishigami in view of Sugano discloses the radar apparatus of claim 12. Sugano further teaches:
wherein the first factor is set to 4N (see at least Fig. 4, distance between 11-8 and 11-9 is 4d), the second factor is set to 8N (see at least Fig. 4, distance between 11-11 and 11-12 is 8d), the third factor is set to 2N (see at least Fig. 4, distance between 21-0 and 21-2 is 2d), and the fourth factor is set to 3N (see at least Fig. 4, distance between 21-10 and 21-13 is 3d).
It would have been obvious to combine Kishigami and Sugano for the reasons given regarding claim 12.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ashley B. Raynal whose telephone number is (703)756-4546. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 AM - 4 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, 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.
/ASHLEY BROWN RAYNAL/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/OLUMIDE AJIBADE AKONAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights