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
Claims 1 and 17 objected to because of typographical errors: 1) “the signal” in line 5. It appears it should be “the incoming signal”. 2) “con-trolled” in line 6. It appears that “-” should not be there. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 2 objected to because of typographical errors: 1) “comprising” in line 2. It appears it should be “further comprising”. 2) “the fixed delay line” in line 2. It appears that “fixed” should not be there. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claims 4-5 and 20 objected to because of typographical errors: “the signal” in line 2. It appears it should be “the incoming signal”. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claims 4 and 20 objected to because of the following informalities: “the signal is a ranging system signal or a non-ranging signal” in line 2. It appears there is no limitation for this claimed language because “a ranging system signal or a non-ranging signal” is for any signal.
Claim 9 objected to because the acronyms TX should be accompanied by the language they represent when first introduced.
Claims 12 and15 objected to because of typographical errors: “The delay circuit system” in line 1. It appears that “system” should not be there. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claims 12-14 objected to because of typographical errors: “where” in line 2. It appears that it should be “wherein”. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 15 objected to because of the following informalities: “the same delay line” in line 2. It appears that “same” should not be there. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 objected to because of typographical error: “the fixed delay line” in line 2. It appears that “fixed” should not be there. 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 2, 6-7, 10, 12-16, 18 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 2 and 18 recite the limitation “the fixed delay line” in claim 2 line 2 and claim 18 lines 2-3. It is indefinite because: i) “fixed delay line” is not mentioned. ii) it is not clear whether or not “the fixed delay line” relates to the “a delay line” defined in claim 1 line 5 and claim 17 line 5, respectively. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “the [[fixed]] delay line”. Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claim 6 recites the limitation " the limiting amplifier" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “limiting amplifier” 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 "a [[the]] limiting amplifier". Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the time delay and amplitude limitation parameters” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “time delay and amplitude limitation parameters” 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 “[[the]] time delay and amplitude limitation parameters”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “an opto-electronic converter prior to and after a fiber delay” in line 2. It is indefinite because: i) it is not clear how “an opto-electronic converter”, which is one converter, connects “prior to and after a fiber delay”. ii) it is not clear what relationship between the “a fiber delay” and the “delay circuit”. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “[[an]] opto-electronic converters prior to and after [[a fiber]] the delay line”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claims 12 and 15 recite the limitation " The delay circuit system" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “delay circuit system” 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 "The delay circuit [[system]] ". Appropriate clarifications are required.
Claim 13 recites the limitation " the target simulator " in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “target simulator” 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 "the delay circuit ". Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “each object” in line 2. It is indefinite because it is not clear how many objects exist. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as "[[each]] an object". Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 16 recites the limitations : 1) “the frequencies” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “frequencies” 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 “[[the]] frequencies”. 2) “the intermediate frequency path” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “intermediate frequency path” 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 “[[the]] an intermediate frequency path”. Appropriate clarifications are 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.
Claims 1-5, 10-11, 13-14, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US5,177,488, hereafter Wang).
Regarding claim 1, Wang (‘488) discloses that A delay circuit { Fig.1 item 12 (target speed and distance simulator); Fig.2 item 28, 30 (delay line); col.3 lines 16-21 (FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a radar target speed and distance simulation system in accordance with the invention; FIG. 2 is a block diagram of the multiple optical delay line speed and distance simulator;)}, comprising:
a) receiver for an incoming signal { Fig.1 item 10 (antenna), 18 (radar receiver); col.3 lines 39-42 (A sample from the radar for input line 14 could also be obtained from several other places, such as the output of antenna 10)};
b) an input power detector { Fig.1 item 10 (antenna);};
c) a power controlling circuit { Fig.2 item 22 (power divider)}; and
d) a delay line configured to introduce a predetermined time delay to the signal { Fig.2 items 28, 30 (delay line) with control by item 32 (control circuit) with input range (delay); col.2 lines 8-10 (provide a programmable signal delay mechanism for a radar test target simulator that can provide real time delay), 42-43 (Each delay line includes a plurality of fiber optic segments having predetermined optical delays); col.4 lines 8-9 (transmitted through a programmed length of optical fiber to produce the desired time delay), 42-43 (delayed optical outputs from the delay lines 28, 30); Examiner’s note: Fig.2 shows that delay line delays RFin},
wherein the delay circuit is adapted to provide an output by introducing a con-trolled time delay and power setting to said incoming signal { Fig.2; col.4 lines 24-26 (FIG. 1 is split by an RF power divider 22, and each divided portion is used to modulate respective low noise opto-electronic transmitters 24 and 26.), 32 (dividing the input RF signal,), 34-35 (split between the various delay lines with an optical splitter), 38-41 (delay which these lines add to their respective optical signals is controlled by the computer in the simulator 12 via appropriate control interface circuitry 32.); Examiner’s note: “divided portion” for “power setting”. Fig.2 range(delay) for “con-trolled time delay”}.
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) discloses that the delay circuit
comprising an attenuator or a further amplifier downstream the fixed delay line {Fig.3 item 54 (in-line fiber optic amplifiers); col.5 lines 48-49 (A preferred structure for each delay line is shown in FIG. 3.); col.6 line 45 (in-line fiber optic amplifiers 54)}, and
controlled to reestablish an original signal power of the incoming signal { col.6 lines 42-45 (the long aggregate length of the various optical fiber segments can result in appreciable cumulative losses. To compensate for such losses, in-line fiber optic amplifiers 54 may be employed.), 52-53 (The amplifiers 54 are pumped with respective pump lasers p.); Examiner’s note: “pump lasers p” for “controlled”}.
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) discloses that in the delay circuit,
the delay line includes a PCB transmission line, coaxial cable, or fiber { abstract line 2 (fiber optic delay lines,) }.
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) discloses that in the delay circuit,
the signal is a ranging system signal or a non-ranging signal { Fig.1 item 18 (radar receiver), therefore signal from item 10 (antenna) is radar signal; col.2 line 58 (The output radar signal); Examiner’s note: “radar signal” for “a ranging system signal”}.
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) discloses that in the delay circuit,
the signal is one of a radar, sonic, photonic, RF, TOF camera, and/or LiDAR signal { Fig.1 item 18 (radar receiver), therefore signal from item 10 (antenna) is radar signal; col.2 line 58 (The output radar signal)}.
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claims 1 and 3, Wang (‘488) discloses that the delay circuit further comprising
an opto-electronic converter prior to and after a fiber delay { Fig.2 items 24 (O-E Xmitter), 28 (delay line), 34 (O-E Xducer); col.4 lines 36-38 (opto-electronic transmitter 24, 26, fiber optic delay lines 28, 30.), 43-44 (opto-electric transducers 34, 36)}.
Regarding claim 11, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) discloses that the delay circuit further comprising
multiple delay lines in the delay circuit {Fig.2 items 28, 30 (delay line) Fig.3 items 44a-b, 46a-b; col.5 lines 52-54 (a coiled length of optical fiber 44a, 44b, etc., and a short adjacent length of optical fiber 46a, 46b)} and
a switch for selecting the predetermined time delay { Fig.3 item 50a, b (switches); col.2 lines 8-10 (provide a programmable signal delay mechanism for a radar test target simulator that can provide real time delay), 42-43 (Each delay line includes a plurality of fiber optic segments having predetermined optical delays); col.6 line 13 (switches 50a, 50b, 50n), 15-18 (select between their respective delay lines 44a, 44b, etc. and the optical bypasses to those lines 46, 46b, etc. for inclusion in an aggregate delay line.)}.
Regarding claim 13, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) discloses that in the delay circuit,
the target simulator applies a frequency shift to a return signal { Fig.2 item 40 (Doppler shift)}.
Regarding claim 14, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) discloses that in the delay circuit,
each object to be simulated has a separate delay line {Fig.3; col.2 lines 8-11 (provide a programmable signal delay mechanism for a radar test target simulator that can provide real time delay of the actual radar transmitted pulses and simulate long target distances,), 27-33 (This line, the active line, has the correct length for the distance being simulated. While this active line is being used, the inactive line(s) are being reconfigured for new simulated distances, This reconfiguration consists of changing the line length by switching in or out incremental lengths of line,)}.
Regarding claim 17, Wang (‘488) discloses that A Radar target simulator comprising a delay circuit {title (PROGRAMMABLE FIBER OPTIC DELAY LINE, AND RADAR TARGET SIMULATION SYSTEM INCORPORATING THE SAME); Fig.1 item 12 (target speed and distance simulator); Fig.2 item 28, 30 (delay line); col.3 lines 16-21 (FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a radar target speed and distance simulation system in accordance with the invention; FIG. 2 is a block diagram of the multiple optical delay line speed and distance simulator;)}, wherein the delay circuit comprises:
a) receiver for an incoming signal;
b) an input power detector;
c) a power controlling circuit; and
d) a delay line configured to introduce a predetermined time delay to the signal,
wherein the delay circuit is adapted to provide an output by introducing a con-trolled time delay and power setting to said incoming signal.
{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}.
Regarding claims 18-20, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claims 2-4, respectively. Accordingly, claims 18-20 are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claims 2-4, respectively, shown above.
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 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (‘488) as applied to claims 1 and 11, respectively, above, and further in view of Abou-Jaoude et al. (US 2004/0012517, hereafter Abou-Jaoude).
Regarding claim 6, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) discloses that in the delay circuit,
the limiting amplifier is adapted to limit the amplitude of the incoming signal { Fig.1 item 12 (target speed and distance simulator); col.6 lines 42-45 (the long aggregate length of the various optical fiber segments can result in appreciable cumulative losses. To compensate for such losses, in-line fiber optic amplifiers 54 may be employed.)}.
However, Wang (‘488) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “the limiting amplifier is adapted to limit the amplitude of the incoming signal to simulate the radar cross-section of a target”. In the same field of endeavor, Abou-Jaoude (‘517) discloses that
the limiting amplifier is adapted to limit the amplitude of the incoming signal to simulate the radar cross-section of a target {Fig.1; [0010] lines 4-6 (automotive radar System is simulating targets by providing variable parameters in the conditioned signal, including distance (using a SAW or coaxial device), and size (or RCS).)}.
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 Wang (‘488) with the teachings of Abou-Jaoude (‘517) { simulate targets by providing variable parameters in the conditioned signal (e.g. distance, size, RCS) } to simulate targets by providing variable parameters in the conditioned signal (e.g. distance, size, RCS). Doing so would simulate targets with variable parameters (distance, speed, radar cross section, etc.) for radar device so as to assure proper performance of the radar system being regularly tested in a certain application (e.g. automotive radar systems), as recognized by Abou-Jaoude (‘517) {[0004] lines 1-11 (Automobile manufacturers have begun producing automotive radar Systems. The automotive radar then determines, from the delay of a return Signal received by the antenna, the distance an object causing the return signal. The automotive radar can also determine, from the Doppler frequency shift of the return signal, the Speed an object causing the return Signal is traveling. The automotive radar System can also determine the size of an object causing the return signal through the radar cross section (RCS).); [0005] lines 1-2 (To assure proper performance of an automotive radar System, the device must be regularly tested.)}.
Regarding claim 12, which depends on claim 1 and 11, Wang (‘488) discloses that in the delay circuit system,
the multiple delay lines comprise short delay lines {Fig.3 items 44 (long), 46 (short); col.5 lines 49-54 (The delay line is broken into a series of individual fiber optic delay segments 42, 42b, ... 42n-2, 42n-1, 42n, where n in the total number of delay segments. Each segment consists of a coiled length of optical fiber 44a, 44b, etc., and a short adjacent length of optical fiber 46a, 46b)}.
However, Wang (‘488) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “the multiple delay lines comprise short delay lines which are coaxial”. In the same field of endeavor, Abou-Jaoude (‘517) discloses that
the multiple delay lines comprise short delay lines which are coaxial { Fig.3 (10m delay); [0021] lines 4-7 (The Switches in the delay modules can connect to a short through line to effectively provide minimal delay, or through either a SAW device or coaxial cable length to provide the delay shown.)}.
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 Wang (‘488) with the teachings of Abou-Jaoude (‘517) {use coaxial cable to provide delay} to use coaxial cable to provide delay. Doing so would simulate targets with variable parameters (distance, speed, radar cross section, etc.) for radar device with low cost so as to assure proper performance of the radar system being regularly tested in a certain application (e.g. automotive radar systems), as recognized by Abou-Jaoude (‘517) {[0004] lines 1-11 (Automobile manufacturers have begun producing automotive radar Systems. The automotive radar then determines, from the delay of a return Signal received by the antenna, the distance an object causing the return signal. The automotive radar can also determine, from the Doppler frequency shift of the return signal, the Speed an object causing the return Signal is traveling. The automotive radar System can also determine the size of an object causing the return signal through the radar cross section (RCS).); [0005] lines 1-2 (To assure proper performance of an automotive radar System, the device must be regularly tested.); [0009] line 5 (lower cost components)}.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (‘488) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dan et al. (CN 111812604, hereafter Dan).
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) discloses that the delay further comprising
a controller configured to adjust the time delay based on a user-defined input to simulate various radar target scenarios {Fig.1 item 13 (control panel); Fig.2 item 32 (control circuit) with input of range (delay), range rate (speed); col.3 lines 45-47 (periodically updates the delay at a controlled rate to simulate a target speed relative to the radar set based on an input from simulator operator control panel 13.)}.
However, Wang (‘488) does not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “a controller configured to adjust the time delay and amplitude limitation parameters”. In the same field of endeavor, Dan (‘604) discloses that
a controller configured to adjust the time delay and amplitude limitation parameters based on a user-defined input to simulate various radar target scenarios { Fig.5; page 11 lines 5-6 from bottom (various parameters of the simulator (including working mode, pulse time delay, movement speed, power attenuation and so on);); page 15 lines 8-9 (The working parameters include: working mode, power attenuation value and pulse time delay value); Examiner’s note: “power attenuation value” for “amplitude limitation parameters” }.
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 Wang (‘488) with the teachings of Dan (‘604) { simulate targets by various parameters of the simulator (including working mode, pulse time delay, movement speed, power attenuation)} to simulate targets by various parameters of the simulator (including working mode, pulse time delay, movement speed, power attenuation). Doing so would provide a radio frequency signal capable of simulating the echo signal of radar system under various environments so as to meet the requirement of testing the radar performance, as recognized by Dan (‘604) {page 3 line 13 from bottom (simulate the echo signal of radar system under various environments,); page 4 lines 10-12 (providing a radio frequency signal capable of generating full phase with the radar , the millimeter wave target simulator of analog radar pulse modulation characteristic, to meet the requirement of testing the millimetre wave radar performance, which is a technical problem urgently to be solved in the field.)}.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (‘488) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Vorderderfler et al. (Vorderderfler, Michael, Michael E. Gadringer, Helmut Schreiber, Andreas Gruber, Wolfgang Bösch, Steffen Metzner, Horst Pflügl, and Michael Paulweber. "Frequency dividers in radar target stimulator applications." e & i Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik 135, no. 4 (2018): 344-351, hereafter Vorderderfler).
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) does not explicitly disclose “a frequency divider before the delay line”. In the same field of endeavor, Vorderderfler (‘NPL) discloses that the delay circuit further comprising
a frequency divider before the delay line { Fig.2 (RTS, target 1, RCS, delay, doppler); Fig.10 (÷4, RTS, IF—signal 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 Wang (‘488) with the teachings of Vorderderfler (‘NPL) {use frequency multipliers and dividers in simulator} to use frequency multipliers and dividers in simulator. Doing so would use frequency dividers and multipliers for frequency translation task so as to provide comprehensive simulation for different types of radar sensor (e.g. short-range, long-range) during testing and validating of the radar device, as recognized by Vorderderfler (‘NPL) {Fig.1; page 344 abstract lines 2-6 (testing, validating, comprehensive stimulation, stimulating short-range radar sensors, Coping with the requirements imposed by these types of sensors we investigate the usage of frequency multipliers and dividers in the frequency translation section of the radar stimulator); page 345 left column lines 2-3 from bottom (using frequency dividers and multipliers for these frequency translation tasks); page 347 right column lines 9-10 (A multiplier with the factor n-1 in the feedback loop changes the output frequency of the divider); page 348 right column lines 1-2 from bottom (Different types of radars (SRR to LRR) are used in a vehicle to monitor the surrounding environment)}.
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claims 1 and 8, Wang (‘488) does not explicitly disclose “a signal bandwidth is restored with a frequency multiplier in a TX Path”. In the same field of endeavor, Vorderderfler (‘NPL) discloses that in the delay circuit,
a signal bandwidth is restored with a frequency multiplier in a TX Path { Fig.2 TX; Fig.6 (bandwidth); Fig.10 (TX, x4); Examiner’s note: Fig.10 RF signal in TX has bandwidth determined by IF signal}.
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 Wang (‘488) with the teachings of Vorderderfler (‘NPL) {use frequency multipliers and dividers in simulator operating with IF signal} to use frequency multipliers and dividers in simulator operating with IF signal. Doing so would use frequency dividers and multipliers for frequency translation task so as to provide comprehensive simulation for different types of radar sensor (e.g. short-range, long-range) during testing and validating of the radar device, as recognized by Vorderderfler (‘NPL) {Fig.1; page 344 abstract lines 2-6 (testing, validating, comprehensive stimulation, stimulating short-range radar sensors, Coping with the requirements imposed by these types of sensors we investigate the usage of frequency multipliers and dividers in the frequency translation section of the radar stimulator); page 345 left column lines 2-3 from bottom (using frequency dividers and multipliers for these frequency translation tasks); page 347 right column lines 9-10 (A multiplier with the factor n-1 in the feedback loop changes the output frequency of the divider); page 348 right column lines 1-2 from bottom (Different types of radars (SRR to LRR) are used in a vehicle to monitor the surrounding environment)}.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (‘488) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Robbins et al. (US 6236363, hereafter Robbins).
Regarding claim 15, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) does not explicitly disclose “multiple channels of an antenna array multiplex into the same delay line”. In the same field of endeavor, Robbins (‘363) discloses that in the delay circuit system,
multiple channels of an antenna array multiplex into the same delay line { Fig.1 item 4 (multi. Channel simulator); Fig.3 array line; Fig.9A item 60 (multipath delays)}.
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 Wang (‘488) with the teachings of Robbins (‘363) {use antenna array coupled to a same delay line} to use antenna array coupled to a same delay line. Doing so would test multi-sensor antenna arrays involving the simulation of a single channel so as to provide a device for generating multiple source signals that allows for operator control and adjustment of simulated environmental and equipment conditions, as recognized by Robbins (‘363) {col.10 lines 11-12 (The present method of testing multi-sensor antenna arrays involves the simulation of a single channel. ), 37 ( only test a single antenna element at a time), 39-42 ( generating multiple source signals that allows for operator control and adjustment of simulated environmental and equipment conditions.)}.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (‘488) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bourde et al . (US 20220171022, hereafter Bourde).
Regarding claim 16, which depends on claim 1, Wang (‘488) does not explicitly disclose “a mixer to adapt the frequencies as a downconverter and upconverter from the intermediate frequency path”. In the same field of endeavor, Bourde (‘022) discloses that in the delay circuit further comprising
a mixer to adapt the frequencies as a downconverter and upconverter from the intermediate frequency path { Fig.2 item 203; [0044] lines 1 (The I/Q mixer 203 may be an SSB mixer), 3-5 (resulting in an output of either the upper sideband (USB) or the lower sideband (LSB), rejecting the LSB or USB, respectively.); [0045] lines 1-6 (the I/Q mixer 203 includes an LO port, an RF port and an IF port); [0046] lines 4-6 (the RF signal output by the I/Q mixer 203 may include a desired sideband (DSB) and an undesired sideband (USB),)}.
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 Wang (‘488) with the teachings of Bourde (‘022) {use a mixer for changing frequencies of incoming signal and output signal} to use a mixer for changing frequencies of incoming signal and output signal. Doing so would emulate echo signals with minimum interference (such as ghost targets) so as to test radars (e.g. frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) radars) by simulating target without ghost target interference, as recognized by Bourde (‘022) {[0006] lines 3-4 (test frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) radars), 8-10 (generate return signals ( emulated echo signals) from the emulated radar targets, as well as unwanted signals what may be referred to as "ghost targets); [0020] line 2 (emulate echo signals), 5-6 (embodiments minimize interference, such as ghost targets,)}.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 111812604 discloses that “an input power detector” { page 10 lines 1 (the power attenuation control circuit 4-2), 17-18 (the power control unit can be composed of a power detector)}, “a power controlling circuit” { page 10 lines 1 (the power attenuation control circuit 4-2)}, and “wherein the delay circuit is adapted to provide an output by introducing a con-trolled time delay and power setting to said incoming signal” {page 6 lines 1-2 (The working parameters include: working mode, power attenuation value and pulse time delay value); page 13 lines 5-6 (the delay of the other signal source is adjusted to be about 60 µs, the output power is adjusted), 16-17 (control the power of each signal in real time); page 14 lines 9-10 from bottom (the attenuation unit is used for adjusting the power of the amplified Ka wave band radio frequency signal to a preset range;)}, which further support the rejection of claims 1 and 17.
CN 116520266 discloses that “ the limiting amplifier is adapted to limit the amplitude of the incoming signal to simulate the radar cross-section of a target” {Fig.1 item 2 (low-noise amplifier); page 9 lines 2 (gain control of the low-noise amplifier 2), 24-27 (RCS (radar scattering cross-sectional area) is an imaginary area defined as the ratio of the reverse echo power to the incident injection power density of the radar probe target in a given direction, the parameter being described in unit area. The larger the RCS value is, the stronger the backscatter echo capability is, and the larger the echo power received by the radar is.)}, which further support the rejection of claim 6.
CN 202204928 discloses that “a controller configured to adjust the time delay and amplitude limitation parameters based on a user-defined input to simulate various radar target scenarios” {[0044] lines 1-3 (controlling the display module 3 for providing a human-computer interaction interface and display interface for the user , and the intermediate frequency analogue signal generating module 4 according to the parameters set by user s, an amplitude adjusting module for time sequence control)}, which further support the rejection of claim 7.
US10866308 discloses that “an opto-electronic converter prior to and after a fiber delay” { Fig.2A items 226 (RF to Optical), 228 (fiber optical delay), 234 (optical to RF)}, which further support the rejection of claim 10.
US 11,415,668 discloses that “ each object to be simulated has a separate delay line” { Fig.1 item 300 (target emulation array), τ; col.12 lines 49-50 (a time delay device 210); col.15 lines 54-56 (each target emulation array 300; i.e. preferably for each object to be emulated.) } , which further support the rejection of claim 14.
US 20210055383 discloses that “a mixer to adapt the frequencies as a downconverter and upconverter from the intermediate frequency path” { Fig.1B item 403; [0034] lines 2-6 (The mixer 403 is an in – phase ( I ) -quadrature ( Q ) mixer ( IQ mixer ) , or 1 - Q modulator , which for reasons described below , is beneficially a single sideband IQ mixer , with standard 90 ° phasing of the RF ( USB ) or the lower sideband ( LSB ) ,)}, which further support the rejection of claim 16.
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