CTNF 18/937,386 CTNF 77160 DETAILED ACTION 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 USC 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 USC 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. Drawing Objections The drawings are objected as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84 because: FIG. 4: It is unclear why there are two different frequency bands with the same label "A". Appropriate corrections to the drawings and/or specification are required. 06-22 Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification Objections The disclosure is objected to under 37 CFR 1.71(a) because of the following informalities: In ¶15, line 5, "couples" should be replaced by --coupled--. In ¶15, line 6, "FIG. 3" should be replaced by --FIG. 2--. In ¶35, line 4, "access" should be replaced by --axis--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2 nd ¶: 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. Claim(s) 2, 5-7, 9, 16, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2 nd ¶ as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regard as the invention. In claims 2, 9, and 16, the equation 2 π ( k - a ) ( N + r ) is referred to by applicant as a frequency, but the equation does not have the correct units to be a frequency. Fig. 3 is also inconsistent to the equation being a frequency, where, for transmitter 2, all four illustrated transmissions start from the same frequency level and go up to the same second frequency level on the vertical/frequency axis despite being labeled with different ω values. Because of the representation of this equation as a frequency in the claims, these claims are indefinite. Claims 2, 9, and 16 also recite transmitting a signal with a frequency/phase that is a particular function of the number of empty bands r . However, in the disclosure, in ¶33, the number of empty bands is based on the velocity of the detected object, where in one example, if the velocity is in one range, there may be two empty bands (¶33, line 10), and where in other example, if the velocity is in another range, there may be one empty band (¶33, line 15). It is unclear how r is determined for generating the transmission signal before the reflected signal is used to determine the velocity of the object. The remaining claims are dependent upon the rejected claims. “We note that the patent drafter is in the best position to resolve the ambiguity in the patent claims, and it is highly desirable that patent examiners demand that applicants do so in appropriate circumstances so that the patent can be amended during prosecution rather than attempting to resolve the ambiguity in litigation.”, Halliburton Energy Services Inc. v. M-I LLC. , 85 USPQ2d 1654 at 1663. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 8, 10-13, 15, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Takayama (US 2020/0209380 A1) . In regard to claim 15 , Takayama discloses a method comprising: configuring each of a plurality of transmitters (Fig. 5) to transmit each chirp of a set of chirps with a specific spin frequency[/phase] that is different for each transmitter of the plurality of transmitters, in which the specific spin frequency[\phase] is a function of an index value identifying the corresponding transmitter, and a number of the plurality of transmitters (2nd time period, Fig. 5; ¶48; ¶90) [where the spin frequency/phase is a function of the number of transmitters because it is a multiple of 360°/M, the number of transmitters, where M=4 (in the embodiment of ¶90 where P=M); and the spin frequency/phase is a function of the index value identifying the corresponding transmitter, where the 0th transmitter has a spin phase of 0*(360°/4)=0°, the 1st transmitter has a spin phase of 1*(360°/4)=90°; the 2nd transmitter has a spin phase of 2*(360°/4)=180°, the 3rd transmitter has a spin phase of 3*(360°/4)=270°]; and determining, in a frequency domain, a Doppler representation based on reflected signals that are reflected from one or more objects (Fig. 2; ¶26; ¶68) [where there may be a single object] contacted by one or more chirps of the transmitted sets of chirps, in which the Doppler representation includes multiple spectrum bands including one or more empty spectrum bands determined by the specific spin frequency[/phase] function, wherein none of the one or more objects appears in any of the one or more empty spectrum bands (Fig. 11; ¶23; ¶26; ¶67) [where, in Fig. 11, there are different spectrum bands/bins filled and spectrum bands/bins empty depending on whether the object reflecting the signals have a relative velocity of zero or not. For example, the band/bin corresponding to v=0 is filled in the top graph but is empty in the bottom graph.]. In regard to claim 1 , Takayama further discloses a non-transitory processor-readable medium storing instructions executable by one or more processors in a radar system, the instructions comprising instructions for performing the method of claim 15 detailed above (¶52). In regard to claim 8 , Takayama discloses: a plurality of transmitters (3, Fig. 1; Fig. 3); a controller coupled to the plurality of transmitters (2, Fig. 1), the controller configurable to program each transmitters of the plurality of transmitters to transmit each chirp of a set of chirps with a programmed spin frequency[/phase] that is different for each transmitter of the plurality of transmitters, in which the programmed spin frequency[/phase] is a function of an index value identifying the corresponding transmitter, and a number of the plurality of transmitters (2nd time period, Fig. 5; ¶48; ¶90) [where the spin frequency/phase is a function of the number of transmitters because it is a multiple of 360°/M, the number of transmitters, where M=4 (in the embodiment of ¶90 where P=M); and the spin frequency/phase is a function of the index value identifying the corresponding transmitter, where the 0th transmitter has a spin phase of 0*(360°/4)=0°, the 1st transmitter has a spin phase of 1*(360°/4)=90°; the 2nd transmitter has a spin phase of 2*(360°/4)=180°, the 3rd transmitter has a spin phase of 3*(360°/4)=270°]; and a processor coupled to the plurality of transmitters (6, Fig. 1), the processor configurable to determine, in a frequency domain, a Doppler representation based on reflected signals that are reflected from one or more objects (Fig. 2; ¶26; ¶68) [where there may be a single object] contacted by one or more chirps of the transmitted sets of chirps, in which the Doppler representation includes multiple spectrum bands including one or more empty spectrum bands determined by the programmed spin frequency[/phase] function, wherein none of the one or more objects appears in any of the one or more empty spectrum bands (Fig. 11; ¶23; ¶26; ¶67) [where, in Fig. 11, there are different spectrum bands/bins filled and spectrum bands/bins empty depending on whether the object reflecting the signals have a relative velocity of zero or not. For example, the band/bin corresponding to v=0 is filled in the top graph but is empty in the bottom graph.]. In regard to claims 3, 11, and 17 , Takayama further discloses using the one or more empty spectrum bands to determine a velocity of at least one object of the one or more objects (Fig. 11; ¶70; ¶73). In regard to claims 4, 12, and 18 , the limitation(s) recited is not required to be part of the claimed invention. Parent claims 1, 8, or 15 teaches alternative limitations, i.e., "one or more objects". If a parent claim includes alternative limitations, and the reference teaches one of them, further limitations to the other alternative(s) in dependent claims are not required limitations. See Ex parte Werner , Appeal 2019-001448, Application No. 15/109,888, March 23, 2020, 15 pages. Here, Takayama teaches an embodiment with one object, as detailed in the rejection of claims 1, 8, and 15. Claims 4, 12, and 18 is based on another alternative/other alternatives, i.e., there being more than one object. Although it is not required, it is noted that Takayama further discloses distinguishing between two of the one or more objects in which the two objects are detected to be at a same range and have different velocities (Fig. 11; ¶34) [where the signal from reflections from different objects traveling at different velocities will have different spectrums]. In regard to claim 10 , Takayama further discloses the programmed spin frequency[/phase] is determined to cause a number of the multiple spectrum bands to be greater than a number of the plurality of transmitters (Fig. 11) [where there are four transmitters but more than four band/bin signals can be distinguished (eight are shown)]. In regard to claim 13 , Takayama further discloses the processor is a digital signal processor (6, Fig. 1; ¶53) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takayama , as applied to claim 8 , above, and further in view of Wu (US 2020/0300965 A1) . Takayama fails to disclose the radar system is embodied in an integrated circuit that includes the plurality of transmitters, the controller, and the processor. Wu teaches a plurality of transmitters, controller, and processor of a radar system embodied in an integrated circuit (Fig. 1; ¶16). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include this feature into the combination with a reasonable expectation of success in order to make the radar system more compact and cheaper to manufacture. Additionally, this is a combining of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, the predictable result being that a less expensive and more compact radar system is produced. The following reference(s) is/are also found relevant: Dictionary of Industrial Terms (Frequency Bin), which defines "frequency bin" as encompassing a frequency range. Focal Dictionary of Telecommunications (frequency band), which defines "frequency band" as encompassing a range of frequencies. Applicant is encouraged to consider these documents in formulating their response (if one is required) to this Office Action, in order to expedite prosecution of this application. Allowable Subject Matter Claim(s) 2, 5-7, 9, 16, and 19-20 would be allowable if amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 USC 112, set forth in this Office Action, without the addition of new matter, and if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Reasons for Allowance/Allowable Subject Matter The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance/allowable subject matter: The references cited, alone or in combination, do not teach or make obvious the following limitation(s): quoted from claim 2, in combination with the claim as a whole: "wherein the function determining the specific spin frequency[/phase] is 2 π ( k - a ) ( N + r ) , where k is an index integer value identifying the corresponding transmitter, N is an integer indicative of a number of the plurality of transmitters, a is a constant integer, and r is an integer indicative of a number of empty spectrum bands in the Doppler representation". quoted from claim 9, in combination with the claim as a whole: "wherein the function of the programmed spin frequency[/phase] is 2 π ( k - a ) ( N + r ) , where k is an index integer value identifying the corresponding transmitter, N is an integer indicative of a number of the plurality of transmitters, a is a constant integer, and r is an integer indicative of a number of empty spectrum bands in the Doppler representation". quoted from claim 16, in combination with the claim as a whole: "wherein the function determining the specific spin frequency[/phase] is 2 π ( k - a ) ( N + r ) , where k is an index integer value identifying the corresponding transmitter, N is an integer indicative of a number of the plurality of transmitters, a is a constant integer, and r is an integer indicative of a number of empty spectrum bands in the Doppler representation". 13-03 Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled "Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance". Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fred H. Mull whose telephone number is 571-272-6975. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from approximately 9-5:30 Eastern Time. Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 https://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Resha Desai, can be reached at 571-270-7792. 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. Fred H. Mull Examiner Art Unit 3648 /F. H. M./ Examiner, Art Unit 3648 /BERNARR E GREGORY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/937,386 Page 2 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/937,386 Page 3 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/937,386 Page 4 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/937,386 Page 5 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/937,386 Page 6 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/937,386 Page 7 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/937,386 Page 8 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/937,386 Page 9 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/937,386 Page 10 Art Unit: 3648 Application/Control Number: 18/937,386 Page 11 Art Unit: 3648
Prosecution Insights