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 10/30/2024. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/30/2024 and 03/26/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph [0051], “207a” and “207b” should be written “207-1” and “207-2” in accordance with Fig. 2.
Similarly, “208a” in both paragraphs [0051] and [0052] should be “208-1”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a second direction of arrival” in lines 29-30 should read “a second direction of arrival value”. This change is necessary in order to provide antecedent basis for “the second direction of arrival value” on page 2, line 1.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the third processor is configured to communication” in line 1 should read “the third processor is configured to communicate.”
Appropriate correction 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.
Claims 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoffmann et al. (US-20230314588-A1; hereinafter Hoffmann).
Regarding claim 15, Hoffmann discloses:
A method, comprising:
receiving a first dataset from a first radar device (see at least [0118]; “For this purpose, the data sets of the radar units 10, 20 can be transmitted to a computing unit 90 of the radar system 100, which is implemented as a separate computer, for example, or to a computing module of a (master) radar unit.” See also [0175]; “For method step VS4, it is necessary that the three-dimensional range-Doppler-angle data sets are transmitted to a central computing unit. This can, for example, be integrated in a “master” radar unit if the computing capacity is sufficient. To reduce the amount of data to be transmitted, it is possible to transmit only the radial velocity with the maximum amplitude for each range angle cell.”), wherein the first dataset includes a data peak associated with a first object, wherein the data peak is associated with a range value and a direction of arrival value expressed in a first coordinate space (see at least [0116]; “Information regarding the distance d.sub.j of an object O can be calculated by evaluating the signal propagation time over the transmission channel. The radial velocity v.sub.r,j of an object O is proportional to the frequency shift of the received signal based on the Doppler effect. By evaluating the phase differences along the receiving antenna array, it is possible to determine the azimuth angle ϑ.sub.j of the object to the respective radar unit 10, 20.”);
receiving a second dataset from a second radar device (see at least [0118]; “For this purpose, the data sets of the radar units 10, 20 can be transmitted to a computing unit 90 of the radar system 100, which is implemented as a separate computer, for example, or to a computing module of a (master) radar unit.”), wherein the second dataset includes values associated with range values and direction of arrival values expressed in a second coordinate space (see at least [0116]; “Information regarding the distance d.sub.j of an object O can be calculated by evaluating the signal propagation time over the transmission channel. The radial velocity v.sub.r,j of an object O is proportional to the frequency shift of the received signal based on the Doppler effect. By evaluating the phase differences along the receiving antenna array, it is possible to determine the azimuth angle ϑ.sub.j of the object to the respective radar unit 10, 20.”);
modifying the second dataset using a coordinate transformation function to generate a third dataset (see at least [0119]; “In the computing unit 90 or in the computing module, the different data sets can be transformed into a common coordinate system by co-registration using the information about the installation positions of the radar units 10, 20.”) including second values associated with range values and direction of arrival values expressed in the first coordinate space (see at least [0169]; “Due to the known positions of the radar units to each other, the relative reference of the total coordinate system to each individual radar unit can be established without further ado, wherein the coordinate origin can be chosen arbitrarily. It is particularly useful to define the origin, for example, in the coordinate origin of a radar unit or on an axis centered between the radar units used.”); and
processing the third dataset to determine that a second data peak is present within the third dataset at the range value and the direction of arrival value to determine that the second peak is associated with a valid detection of the first object (see at least [0221], which discusses estimating position error: “To estimate this error, the reconstructed images of the different radar units 10, 20 can be compared. For example, this is possible via a renewed CFAR-based target detection. Here, it is investigated whether the deviation of the target positions in the different images is larger than a previously defined threshold value.” Note that position information comprises direction of arrival information as azimuth information, see [0117] and [0145].).
Regarding claim 20, Hoffmann discloses the method of claim 15. Hoffmann further teaches:
further comprising determining that the first object is associated with a valid object detection by determining that a first direction of arrival of the first object determined using the first dataset is within a threshold a second direction of arrival determined using the second data peak in the third dataset (see at least [0221], which discusses estimating position error: “To estimate this error, the reconstructed images of the different radar units 10, 20 can be compared. For example, this is possible via a renewed CFAR-based target detection. Here, it is investigated whether the deviation of the target positions in the different images is larger than a previously defined threshold value.” Note that position information comprises direction of arrival information as azimuth information, see [0117] and [0145].).
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 1 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoffmann.
Regarding claim 1, Hoffmann discloses [Note: what Hoffmann fails to disclose is strike-through]
A system (see at least Fig. 1, radar system 100), comprising:
a first radar device (see at least Fig. 1, radar unit 10), including:
a first plurality of transmitter modules configured to transmit a first plurality of transmitted radar signals (see at least Fig. 1, TX element, and [0006]; “Such radar units known from the prior art have at least one transmitting antenna (or also several transmitting antenna elements of a transmitting antenna array)…”),
a first plurality of receiver modules (see at least Fig. 1, RX elements, and [0109]; “In this exemplary embodiment, the radar unit 10 has its own local oscillator LO, a modulation generator MG, at least one high-frequency mixer M, a transmitting antenna TX, and a receiving antenna array RX that includes four receiving antenna elements.”) configured to receive first reflections of the first plurality of transmitted radar signals (see at least [0115]; “Object parameters are determined with the aid of a modulated transmit signal which is transmitted or radiated by the transmitting antenna TX via a reciprocal transmission channel and is reflected by at least one object, wherein the transmit signal reflected at the object is received as a received signal by the receiving antenna elements of the receiving antenna array RX.”) and to generate first signals based on the first received reflections (see at least [0115]; “Then, the received signal can be mixed into the baseband by a high-frequency mixer M. The baseband signals can then be sampled by the analog-to-digital converter ADC and digitally processed using a computing unit 90.”), and
a first processor (see at least [0098] – [0102]; “In a further embodiment, in which the radar system has a plurality of mutually spaced radar units (e.g., at least three or at least four or at least eight), a plurality of spatial fields of vision are detected in each case by at least two radar units of the radar system, and the measurement data of the radar units are processed, e.g., in pairs, for each of the fields of vision using the above method… [0102] In particular, at least one radar unit of the at least two or the plurality of radar units has a computational module configured to perform the above method, eliminating the need for an additional computational unit.”) configured to process the first signals to generate a first dataset that includes a first two-dimensional data frame wherein the first two-dimensional data frame includes a first data peak associated with a first object associated with a first range value and a first direction of arrival value expressed in a first coordinate space relative to a location of the first radar device (see at least [0116]; “Information regarding the distance d.sub.j of an object O can be calculated by evaluating the signal propagation time over the transmission channel. The radial velocity v.sub.r,j of an object O is proportional to the frequency shift of the received signal based on the Doppler effect. By evaluating the phase differences along the receiving antenna array, it is possible to determine the azimuth angle ϑ.sub.j of the object to the respective radar unit 10, 20.”);
a second radar device (see at least Fig 1, radar unit 20), including:
a second plurality of transmitter modules configured to transmit a second plurality of transmitted radar signals,
a second plurality of receiver modules configured to receive second reflections of the second plurality of transmitted radar signals and to generate second signals based on the second received reflections (see at least references cited above for the first radar device and [0109]; “In the present exemplary embodiment, the radar unit 20 is constructed in the same way as the radar unit 10.”), and
a second processor (see at least [0098] – [0102]; “In a further embodiment, in which the radar system has a plurality of mutually spaced radar units (e.g., at least three or at least four or at least eight), a plurality of spatial fields of vision are detected in each case by at least two radar units of the radar system, and the measurement data of the radar units are processed, e.g., in pairs, for each of the fields of vision using the above method… [0102] In particular, at least one radar unit of the at least two or the plurality of radar units has a computational module configured to perform the above method, eliminating the need for an additional computational unit.”) configured to process the second signals to generate a second dataset (see at least [0117]; “The digital baseband signals can be processed in such a way that a three-dimensional result space produces a data set (distance d.sub.j, radial velocity v.sub.r,j, azimuth angle ϑ.sub.j).”) that includes first values expressed in a second coordinate space relative to a location of the second radar device (see at least [0116]; “Information regarding the distance d.sub.j of an object O can be calculated by evaluating the signal propagation time over the transmission channel. The radial velocity v.sub.r,j of an object O is proportional to the frequency shift of the received signal based on the Doppler effect. By evaluating the phase differences along the receiving antenna array, it is possible to determine the azimuth angle ϑ.sub.j of the object to the respective radar unit 10, 20.”); and
a third processor (see at least [0103]; “Alternatively, or additionally, the radar system further comprises a, preferably central, computing unit (master computing unit), which is configured to receive the measurement data of the computing units and to perform the above procedure.”) configured to:
receive the first dataset from the first radar device;
receive the second dataset from the second radar device (see at least [0118]; “For this purpose, the data sets of the radar units 10, 20 can be transmitted to a computing unit 90 of the radar system 100, which is implemented as a separate computer, for example, or to a computing module of a (master) radar unit.” See also [0175]; “For method step VS4, it is necessary that the three-dimensional range-Doppler-angle data sets are transmitted to a central computing unit. This can, for example, be integrated in a “master” radar unit if the computing capacity is sufficient. To reduce the amount of data to be transmitted, it is possible to transmit only the radial velocity with the maximum amplitude for each range angle cell.”);
modify the second dataset using a coordinate transformation function to generate a third dataset (see at least [0119]; “In the computing unit 90 or in the computing module, the different data sets can be transformed into a common coordinate system by co-registration using the information about the installation positions of the radar units 10, 20.”), wherein the third dataset includes second values expressed in the first coordinate space (see at least [0169]; “Due to the known positions of the radar units to each other, the relative reference of the total coordinate system to each individual radar unit can be established without further ado, wherein the coordinate origin can be chosen arbitrarily. It is particularly useful to define the origin, for example, in the coordinate origin of a radar unit or on an axis centered between the radar units used.”);
process the third dataset using a constant false alarm rate algorithm (see at least [0118]; “From the data set, which spans the three-dimensional result space (distance, radial velocity, and azimuth angle), objects or radar targets and their object parameters can be detected and/or determined, for example, using a constant false alarm rate (CFAR) method in which a dynamic threshold value is specified. For this purpose, the data sets of the radar units 10, 20 can be transmitted to a computing unit 90 of the radar system 100, which is implemented as a separate computer, for example, or to a computing module of a (master) radar unit.”) to identify a second data peak associated with a second range value and a second direction of arrival (see at least [0205]; “The search for local amplitude maxima in the common field of vision is particularly advantageous for object detection. Suitable CFAR adaptations or constant power thresholds can be used for this purpose. Since this object detection is carried out two-dimensionally in the common coordinate system, it is indirectly applied to the range-angle data of the radar units.”); and
determining, by comparing the second direction of arrival value to the first direction of arrival value, that the second data peak is associated with a valid detection of the first object (see at least [0221], which discusses estimating position error: “To estimate this error, the reconstructed images of the different radar units 10, 20 can be compared. For example, this is possible via a renewed CFAR-based target detection. Here, it is investigated whether the deviation of the target positions in the different images is larger than a previously defined threshold value.” Note that position information comprises direction of arrival information as azimuth information, see [0117] and [0145].).
However, the radar device embodiment taught by Hoffmann only includes one transmitter element rather than multiple transmitter modules.
Hoffmann explicitly teaches that it is known in the prior art to either include one or multiple transmitter elements (see [0006], quoted above). It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to use either one or multiple transmitter elements in the radar devices.
Regarding claim 6, Hoffmann discloses the system of claim 1. Hoffmann further teaches:
wherein a first field of vision of the first radar device at least partially overlaps a second field of vision of the second radar device (see at least [0041]; “One aspect of the invention is a discrete total coordinate system generated from measurement data of at least two radar units of a radar system which cover a common field of vision (in which the fields of vision of the individual radar units at least partially, possibly only partially, overlap).”).
Regarding claim 7, Hoffmann discloses the system of claim 1. Hoffmann further teaches:
wherein the third processor is configured to determine that the second direction of arrival value is within a threshold value of the first direction of arrival (see at least [0221], which discusses estimating position error: “To estimate this error, the reconstructed images of the different radar units 10, 20 can be compared. For example, this is possible via a renewed CFAR-based target detection. Here, it is investigated whether the deviation of the target positions in the different images is larger than a previously defined threshold value.” Note that position information comprises direction of arrival information as azimuth information, see [0117] and [0145].).
Regarding claim 8, Hoffmann discloses the system of claim 1. Hoffmann further teaches:
wherein the third processor is configured to determine that the second direction of arrival value is equal to the first direction of arrival (see at least [0223]; “The position errors can be reduced by an iterative correction in method step VS9 until the correct or sufficiently accurate vector velocities have been found and the target positions have been determined (sufficiently) accurately.” Note that position information comprises direction of arrival information as azimuth information, see [0117] and [0145].).
Regarding claim 9, Hoffmann discloses the system of claim 1. Hoffmann further teaches:
wherein the third processor is configured to communication with a driver-assistance system based upon the determination that the second data peak is associated with a valid detection of the first object (see at least [0004]; “Reliable ambient area detection of vehicles (automobiles) can be seen as a prerequisite for the further automation of, sometimes safety-critical, driving functions of the vehicles, such as in driver assistance systems, highly automated driving systems and fully autonomous driving systems.” See also [0014]; “It is therefore the object of the invention to improve the disadvantages of the solutions known from the prior art and to provide an alternative possibility for a method of processing radar signals of a radar system as well as a corresponding radar system, which preferably has an improved angular resolution without increasing the physical dimensions of the aperture of the receiving antenna array.”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-14 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowed claims:
Hoffmann is considered close prior art as it discloses:
A system (see at least Fig. 1, radar system 100), comprising:
a first radar device configured to process first received signals (see at least [0115]; “Then, the received signal can be mixed into the baseband by a high-frequency mixer M. The baseband signals can then be sampled by the analog-to-digital converter ADC and digitally processed using a computing unit 90.”)(see at least [0116]; “Information regarding the distance d.sub.j of an object O can be calculated by evaluating the signal propagation time over the transmission channel. The radial velocity v.sub.r,j of an object O is proportional to the frequency shift of the received signal based on the Doppler effect. By evaluating the phase differences along the receiving antenna array, it is possible to determine the azimuth angle ϑ.sub.j of the object to the respective radar unit 10, 20.”);
a second radar device (see at least Fig 1, radar unit 20) configured to process second received signals (see at least [0115]; “Then, the received signal can be mixed into the baseband by a high-frequency mixer M. The baseband signals can then be sampled by the analog-to-digital converter ADC and digitally processed using a computing unit 90.”) (see at least [0116]; “Information regarding the distance d.sub.j of an object O can be calculated by evaluating the signal propagation time over the transmission channel. The radial velocity v.sub.r,j of an object O is proportional to the frequency shift of the received signal based on the Doppler effect. By evaluating the phase differences along the receiving antenna array, it is possible to determine the azimuth angle ϑ.sub.j of the object to the respective radar unit 10, 20.”); and
a processor (see at least [0103]; “Alternatively, or additionally, the radar system further comprises a, preferably central, computing unit (master computing unit), which is configured to receive the measurement data of the computing units and to perform the above procedure.”) configured to:
receive the first dataset from the first radar device,
receive the second dataset from the second radar device (see at least [0118]; “For this purpose, the data sets of the radar units 10, 20 can be transmitted to a computing unit 90 of the radar system 100, which is implemented as a separate computer, for example, or to a computing module of a (master) radar unit.” See also [0175]; “For method step VS4, it is necessary that the three-dimensional range-Doppler-angle data sets are transmitted to a central computing unit.”),
modify the second dataset using a coordinate transformation function to generate a third dataset (see at least [0119]; “In the computing unit 90 or in the computing module, the different data sets can be transformed into a common coordinate system by co-registration using the information about the installation positions of the radar units 10, 20.”) including second values associated with range values and direction of arrival values (see at least [0118]; “From the data set, which spans the three-dimensional result space (distance, radial velocity, and azimuth angle), objects or radar targets and their object parameters can be detected and/or determined, for example, using a constant false alarm rate (CFAR) method in which a dynamic threshold value is specified.”) expressed in the first coordinate space (see at least [0169]; “Due to the known positions of the radar units to each other, the relative reference of the total coordinate system to each individual radar unit can be established without further ado, wherein the coordinate origin can be chosen arbitrarily. It is particularly useful to define the origin, for example, in the coordinate origin of a radar unit or on an axis centered between the radar units used.”), and
process the third dataset using a constant false alarm rate algorithm using a (see at least [0118]; “From the data set, which spans the three-dimensional result space (distance, radial velocity, and azimuth angle), objects or radar targets and their object parameters can be detected and/or determined, for example, using a constant false alarm rate (CFAR) method in which a dynamic threshold value is specified. For this purpose, the data sets of the radar units 10, 20 can be transmitted to a computing unit 90 of the radar system 100, which is implemented as a separate computer, for example, or to a computing module of a (master) radar unit.”) to determine that a second data peak is present within the third dataset (see at least [0205]; “The search for local amplitude maxima in the common field of vision is particularly advantageous for object detection. Suitable CFAR adaptations or constant power thresholds can be used for this purpose. Since this object detection is carried out two-dimensionally in the common coordinate system, it is indirectly applied to the range-angle data of the radar units.”) at the range value and the direction of arrival value to determine that the second peak is associated with a valid detection of the first object (see at least [0221]; “To estimate this error, the reconstructed images of the different radar units 10, 20 can be compared. For example, this is possible via a renewed CFAR-based target detection. Here, it is investigated whether the deviation of the target positions in the different images is larger than a previously defined threshold value.” Note that position information comprises range information as well as direction of arrival information in the form of azimuth information, see [0117] and [0145].),
However, the prior art does not make clear at least processing radar signals using a constant false alarm rate to generate a “second” dataset, and then subsequently using a constant false alarm rate again to process and detect peaks in a “third” dataset, wherein the third dataset is generated by applying a coordinate transformation to the second dataset, and a different threshold value is used for the two applications of the constant false alarm rate algorithm.
Hoffmann does teach performing a CFAR detection multiple times, in particular before and after constructing an image using inverse SAR (see both [0205] and [0221]). However, these applications of the CFAR algorithm in Hoffmann are both performed after the coordinate-transform step (see at least [0196], where data sets are co-registered prior to object detection with CFAR in [0205]). The prior art does not supply a teaching, suggestion, or motivation to modify the method of Hoffmann, which performs CFAR detection on a dataset before and after inverse SAR processing, to instead perform CFAR on a dataset before and after coordinate transformation.
Claims 2-5 and 16-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The combination of claims 1 and 2 and claims 15 and 16 contain analogous subject matter to claim 10. If dependent claims 2 and 16 are rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of base claims 1 and 15, respectively, they would be allowable for reasons analogous to claim 10.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Bharadwaj et al (US-10962637-B2) is considered relevant because it teaches adjusting a threshold used for CFAR detection based on confidence metric results provided by the neural network classifier.
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