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 Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 11, 15, 17, 19, and 21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed invention is directed towards a computer program product which can be reasonably interpreted as being representative of software per se which is not one of the statutory categories.
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.
Claims 1-11 and 14-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “e) evaluating first and second segmented ambiguity functions” which is indefinite for lack of proper antecedent basis. Do the ambiguity functions already exist before they are evaluated, or does the evaluation step create the ambiguity functions? How do the ambiguity functions actually relate to the received communication signal matrices and reference signal matrices? Dependent claims 2-11 and 14-21 fail to cure the deficiency.
Claim 1 recites “f) obtaining…first and second range estimates and first and second velocity estimates, for one or more targets” which is indefinite, because it is unclear how or why the range and velocity estimates would relate to any particular target, given that the reflected communication signal as previously claimed is not necessarily being reflected off of said one more targets, or any other claimed element of the invention. Dependent claims 2-11 and 14-21 fail to cure the deficiency.
Claim 1 recites “h) outputting the obtained or resolved range and velocity estimates” which is indefinite for lack of proper antecedent basis. Would resolving the ghost signals in part g) necessarily create resolved range and velocity estimates? If so, it should be explicitly claimed.
Claim 1 recites “i) iteratively repeating steps e) to h) until a termination criterion is met” which is indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. Specifically, it is unclear how the termination criterion relates to the rest of the claim. Does the termination criterion necessarily relate to some claim element, or does it encompass criteria that are completely exterior to the invention?
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10, 14, 16, 18, and 20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action.
Specifically, with regard to claim 1, Guan et al. (WO 2021/251902 A1) does not teach a second segment number of second-length segments; wherein i) iteratively repeating steps e) to h) until a termination criterion is met wherein, in the second and each further iteration a respective remaining left-most non-zero column of the first and second received communication signal matrices are removed, and a right-most zero-column is appended.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADY W FRAZIER whose telephone number is (469)295-9263. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm CT.
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.
/BRADY W FRAZIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights