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 .
Examiner’s Note
For applicant’s benefit, portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, including disclosures that teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
“The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain.” In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including non-preferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v.Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005) See MPEP 2123.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 4, 11, and 16 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 recites “wherein the module comprises balanced radar detection for processing the cooperating radar sweep signal, balanced radio detection for processing the cooperating radio signal, or a combination thereof”. The features “balanced radar detection for processing the cooperating radar sweep signal” and “balanced radio detection for processing the cooperating radio signal” are operation/ methods of detection rather than structural component.
Claim 11 recites “the originating radio signal is transmitted to the one more cooperating modules” which appears to a typographical error. It is suggested to be amended to “the originating radio signal is transmitted to the one or more cooperating modules”.
Claim 16 recites “a TDMA method” which is suggested to be amended to “a time-division multiple access (TDMA).
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.
Claim(s) 4-5, 7, 9, and 16 is/are 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 4 recites “the cooperating radio signal data” which renders the claim indefinite because it lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 5 recites “the different first time slots and the different second time slots” which renders the claim indefinite because it lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 7 recites “one of the first time slots” which renders the claim indefinite because it lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 9 recites “the cooperating radio signal data” which renders the claim indefinite because it lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 16 recites “the first time slots and the second time slots” which renders the claim indefinite because it lacks antecedent basis. Claim 10 which claim 16 depends on recites singular “first time slot” and “second time slot”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McKitterick et al. (US 2016/0025844 A1 “MCKITTERICK”).
Regarding claim 1, MCKITTERICK discloses a module comprising: a transmitter for transmitting an originating radar sweep signal to a cooperating module; and a receiver for receiving a cooperating radar sweep signal from the cooperating module (radars 2 and 8 may be FMCW radars that transmit respective signals 16 and 20 to each other using the same frequency ramp parameters [0024]); wherein the module is configured for: processing the cooperating radar sweep signal to determine a distance between the module and the cooperating module (the distance between radars 2 and 8 at the start of a frequency sweep may be expressed as d [0034]) and a velocity of the cooperating module relative to the module (determining values of a plurality of parameters including a first timing offset of the first FMCW radar unit based on a digital difference signal between the first and second signals [claim 1]); (wherein the plurality of parameters comprises one or more of the first timing offset, a clock skew, a relative velocity, the second baseband frequency, and an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) measurement offset [claim 4]).
Regarding claim 6, MCKITTERICK discloses the module of claim 1, wherein the originating and cooperating radar sweep signals are triangular frequency-modulated continuous waves (in equation 1, fb is the baseband frequency, f1 is the rate in megahertz per second (MHz/s) of the frequency ramp, T is the period of the repeated frequency ramp, and tb is the time for the added frequency to return to zero from the peak frequency [0026 & see at least FIG. 3 showing frequency in a triangular shape).
Regarding claim 9, MCKITTERICK discloses the module of claim 1, wherein the cooperating radio signal data comprises beat frequency information of the cooperating radar sweep signal (radars 2 and 8 may mix the received respective signals 18 and 22 from the target with the transmitted respective signals 16 and 20 with a mixer. The output of the mixer may be a beat signal (e.g., a difference signal), where the beat signal is the instantaneous difference of the transmitted respective signals 16 and 20 and received respective signals 18 and 22 [0027]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCKITTERICK, in view of Nohmi (US 2006/0220949 A1 “NOHMI”).
Regarding claim 2, MCKITTERICK discloses (Examiner’s note: What MCKITTERICK does not disclose is ) the module of claim 1,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, NOHMI teaches that an interferometer-type radar according to the embodiment of the present invention includes: a transmitter T consisting of a plurality of transmission modules; and a plurality of receivers R [0032].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of NOHMI, because doing so would improve sensitivity without increasing spatial resolution by a receiving antenna, as recognized by NOHMI.
Claim(s) 3, 10-12, 14, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCKITTERICK, in view of Khlifi (US 2014/0035774 A1 “KHLIFI”).
Regarding claim 3, MCKITTERICK discloses the module of claim 1,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, KHLIFI teaches that the radar sensor 1 is configured so that messages of a car-to-car communication can also be transmitted and received via the antenna arrangement 2 [0037]. Specifically, KHLIFI teaches that time windows 18 for transmitting radar signals alternate with time windows 19 for sending messages of the car-to-car communication [0040 & FIG. 3].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of KHLIFI, because doing so would provide an improved method and system for supplying another vehicle more quickly with data, in particular information about dangerous situations, while at the same time reducing the hardware complexity and the cost, as recognized by KHLIFI.
Regarding claim 10, MCKITTERICK discloses a method comprising: in a first time slot, transmitting an originating radar sweep signal from a module to a cooperating module and sensing for a cooperating radar sweep signal from the cooperating module (radars 2 and 8 may be FMCW radars that transmit respective signals 16 and 20 to each other using the same frequency ramp parameters [0024]);
In a same or similar field of endeavor, KHLIFI teaches that the radar sensor 1 is configured so that messages of a car-to-car communication can also be transmitted and received via the antenna arrangement 2 [0037]. Specifically, KHLIFI teaches that time windows 18 for transmitting radar signals alternate with time windows 19 for sending messages of the car-to-car communication [0040 & FIG. 3]. In the case of reception with the receive antenna 5, filter units 14, 15 may be employed to separate messages of the car-to-car communication from the radar signals (radar echoes). Whereas radar signals are fed to the electronic circuit 6 for further processing, another electronic circuit 16 is also provided for the processing of the messages, with the separated messages from the filter unit 14 being supplied to the electronic circuit 16 [0039].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of KHLIFI, because doing so would provide an improved method and system for supplying another vehicle more quickly with data, in particular information about dangerous situations, while at the same time reducing the hardware complexity and the cost, as recognized by KHLIFI.
Regarding claim 11, MCKITTERICK/ KHLIFI discloses the method of claim 10, wherein: the originating radar sweep signal is transmitted to one or more cooperating modules; the cooperating radar sweep signal is from one cooperating module of the one or more cooperating modules; the originating radio signal is transmitted to the one more cooperating modules; and the cooperating radio signal is from one cooperating module of the one or more cooperating modules (the radar sensor 1 is configured so that messages of a car-to-car communication can also be transmitted and received via the antenna arrangement 2 [KHLIFI 0037], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 10).
Regarding claim 12, MCKITTERICK/ KHLIFI discloses the method of claim 10, further comprising the step of receiving and processing the cooperating radar sweep signal to determine a distance between the module and the cooperating module (the distance between radars 2 and 8 at the start of a frequency sweep may be expressed as d [MCKITTERICK 0034]) and a velocity of the cooperating module relative to the module (determining values of a plurality of parameters including a first timing offset of the first FMCW radar unit based on a digital difference signal between the first and second signals [MCKITTERICK claim 1]); (wherein the plurality of parameters comprises one or more of the first timing offset, a clock skew, a relative velocity, the second baseband frequency, and an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) measurement offset [MCKITTERICK claim 4]).
Regarding claim 14, MCKITTERICK/ KHLIFI discloses the method of claim 10, further comprising the step of receiving and processing the cooperating radio signal to extract cooperating radio signal data (in the case of reception with the receive antenna 5, filter units 14, 15 may be employed to separate messages of the car-to-car communication from the radar signals (radar echoes). Whereas radar signals are fed to the electronic circuit 6 for further processing, another electronic circuit 16 is also provided for the processing of the messages, with the separated messages from the filter unit 14 being supplied to the electronic circuit 16 [KHLIFI 0039], cited and incorporated in the rejection of claim 10).
Regarding claim 17, MCKITTERICK/ KHLIFI discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the originating and cooperating radar sweep signals are triangular frequency-modulated continuous waves (in equation 1, fb is the baseband frequency, f1 is the rate in megahertz per second (MHz/s) of the frequency ramp, T is the period of the repeated frequency ramp, and tb is the time for the added frequency to return to zero from the peak frequency [MCKITTERICK 0026 & see at least FIG. 3 showing frequency in a triangular shape).
Regarding claim 20, MCKITTERICK/ KHLIFI discloses the method of claim 14, wherein the cooperating radio signal data comprises beat frequency information of the cooperating radar sweep signal (radars 2 and 8 may mix the received respective signals 18 and 22 from the target with the transmitted respective signals 16 and 20 with a mixer. The output of the mixer may be a beat signal (e.g., a difference signal), where the beat signal is the instantaneous difference of the transmitted respective signals 16 and 20 and received respective signals 18 and 22 [MCKITTERICK 0027]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCKITTERICK, in view of Borlez (US 2010/0013698 A1 “BORLEZ”).
Regarding claim 4, MCKITTERICK discloses the module of claim 1,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, BORLEZ teaches that the mixer structure 10 has a local oscillator input port LO for output signals from an electric oscillator and an antenna radio frequency input port RF for output signals from an antenna [0045]. The mixer structure 10 has two mixer branches 12 a and 12 b each with a load resistor 22 a and 22 b, decoupling capacitance 24 a and 24 b, series resistor 14 a and 14 b and a series capacitance 16 a and 16 b which are series-connected to a diode 18 a and 18 b. The diodes 18 a and 18 b of the two branches 12 a and 12 b are mounted in opposite direction [0046]. Furthermore, BORLEZ teaches that the mixer branches 12 a and 12 b are connected to the LO port and to the RF port by way of a 180° or 90° hybrid based coupler 20 in such a manner that intermediate signals IF1 and IF2, which are produced in the mixer branches 12 a and 12 b and correspond to a Doppler shift between the LO signal and the RF signal, are processed to the overall IF output signal [0047].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of BORLEZ, because doing so would maximize the desired signal while canceling LO amplitude noise and improving signal-to-noise ratio, as recognized by BORLEZ.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCKITTERICK, in view of Sparrell et al. (US 2005/0190739 A1 “SPARRELL”).
Regarding claim 5, MCKITTERICK discloses the module of claim 1,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, SPARRELL teaches that a Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) system and method that allows sharing a wireless medium which can identify and operate in a variable bit rate environment. The present invention provides a system and method capable of supporting devices with vastly different bandwidth requirements [0035].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of SPARRELL, because doing so would enable rapid and effective communication sharing without complex and expensive system, as recognized by SPARRELL.
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCKITTERICK, in view of Barrick et al. (US 2003/0025629 A1 “BARRICK”).
Regarding claim 7, MCKITTERICK discloses the module of claim 1,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, BARRICK teaches the synchronized timing of the linear frequency modulation sweep start times of multiple radar transmitters operating on the same carrier frequency. Queued from the same GPS common timing signal, they are programmed to start at precisely designated, slightly different times [0038]. The Nth station, where the first station starts at “zero time” and all of the other stations have start times between zero and that of the Nth [0046].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of BARRICK, because doing so would mitigate interference of signals, as recognized by BARRICK.
Regarding claim 8, MCKITTERICK discloses the module of claim 1,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, BARRICK teaches that a number N of radar stations are assigned a number from 0 to N. Consecutive sweep modulation start times are numbered from 0 to N, each numbered sweep time corresponding to a radar station of the same number. Signals are transmitted and received from the radar station as ordered by the corresponding sweep time [0016]. Furthermore, BARRICK teaches that the synchronized timing of the linear frequency modulation sweep start times of multiple radar transmitters operating on the same carrier frequency. Queued from the same GPS common timing signal, they are programmed to start at precisely designated, slightly different times [0038]. The Nth station, where the first station starts at “zero time” and all of the other stations have start times between zero and that of the Nth [0046].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of BARRICK, because doing so would mitigate interference of signals, as recognized by BARRICK.
Claim(s) 13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCKITTERICK, in view of KHLIFI, and further in view of BORLEZ.
Regarding claim 13, MCKITTERICK/ KHLIFI discloses the method of claim 12,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, BORLEZ teaches that the mixer structure 10 has a local oscillator input port LO for output signals from an electric oscillator and an antenna radio frequency input port RF for output signals from an antenna [0045]. The mixer structure 10 has two mixer branches 12 a and 12 b each with a load resistor 22 a and 22 b, decoupling capacitance 24 a and 24 b, series resistor 14 a and 14 b and a series capacitance 16 a and 16 b which are series-connected to a diode 18 a and 18 b. The diodes 18 a and 18 b of the two branches 12 a and 12 b are mounted in opposite direction [0046]. Furthermore, BORLEZ teaches that the mixer branches 12 a and 12 b are connected to the LO port and to the RF port by way of a 180° or 90° hybrid based coupler 20 in such a manner that intermediate signals IF1 and IF2, which are produced in the mixer branches 12 a and 12 b and correspond to a Doppler shift between the LO signal and the RF signal, are processed to the overall IF output signal [0047].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of BORLEZ, because doing so would maximize the desired signal while canceling LO amplitude noise and improving signal-to-noise ratio, as recognized by BORLEZ.
Regarding claim 15, MCKITTERICK/ KHLIFI discloses the method of claim 14,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, BORLEZ teaches that the mixer structure 10 has a local oscillator input port LO for output signals from an electric oscillator and an antenna radio frequency input port RF for output signals from an antenna [0045]. The mixer structure 10 has two mixer branches 12 a and 12 b each with a load resistor 22 a and 22 b, decoupling capacitance 24 a and 24 b, series resistor 14 a and 14 b and a series capacitance 16 a and 16 b which are series-connected to a diode 18 a and 18 b. The diodes 18 a and 18 b of the two branches 12 a and 12 b are mounted in opposite direction [0046]. Furthermore, BORLEZ teaches that the mixer branches 12 a and 12 b are connected to the LO port and to the RF port by way of a 180° or 90° hybrid based coupler 20 in such a manner that intermediate signals IF1 and IF2, which are produced in the mixer branches 12 a and 12 b and correspond to a Doppler shift between the LO signal and the RF signal, are processed to the overall IF output signal [0047].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of BORLEZ, because doing so would maximize the desired signal while canceling LO amplitude noise and improving signal-to-noise ratio, as recognized by BORLEZ.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCKITTERICK, in view of KHLIFI, and further in view of SPARRELL.
Regarding claim 16, MCKITTERICK/ KHLIFI discloses the method of claim 10,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, SPARRELL teaches that a Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) system and method that allows sharing a wireless medium which can identify and operate in a variable bit rate environment. The present invention provides a system and method capable of supporting devices with vastly different bandwidth requirements [0035].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of SPARRELL, because doing so would enable rapid and effective communication sharing without complex and expensive system, as recognized by SPARRELL.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MCKITTERICK, in view of KHLIFI, and further in view of BARRICK.
Regarding claim 18, MCKITTERICK/ KHLIFI discloses the method of claim 10,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, BARRICK teaches the synchronized timing of the linear frequency modulation sweep start times of multiple radar transmitters operating on the same carrier frequency. Queued from the same GPS common timing signal, they are programmed to start at precisely designated, slightly different times [0038]. The Nth station, where the first station starts at “zero time” and all of the other stations have start times between zero and that of the Nth [0046].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of BARRICK, because doing so would mitigate interference of signals, as recognized by BARRICK.
Regarding claim 19, MCKITTERICK/ KHLIFI discloses the method of claim 12,
In a same or similar field of endeavor, BARRICK teaches that a number N of radar stations are assigned a number from 0 to N. Consecutive sweep modulation start times are numbered from 0 to N, each numbered sweep time corresponding to a radar station of the same number. Signals are transmitted and received from the radar station as ordered by the corresponding sweep time [0016]. Furthermore, BARRICK teaches that the synchronized timing of the linear frequency modulation sweep start times of multiple radar transmitters operating on the same carrier frequency. Queued from the same GPS common timing signal, they are programmed to start at precisely designated, slightly different times [0038]. The Nth station, where the first station starts at “zero time” and all of the other stations have start times between zero and that of the Nth [0046].
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 system of MCKITTERICK to include the teachings of BARRICK, because doing so would mitigate interference of signals, as recognized by BARRICK.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tamatsu et al. (US 2003/0156055 A1) is considered pertinent art for the disclosure overall, and in particular the details of the signal processing unit 3 comprising a modulation envelope signal generator (MES GEN.) 32 for generating a modulation envelope signal which is one cycle of triangular wave in response to a transmission control signal C1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAILEY R LE whose telephone number is (571)272-4910. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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.
/Hailey R Le/Examiner, Art Unit 3648 August 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights