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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1 – 3, 5 – 12, 14 – 15 and 17 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Alland (US 20180149736 A1).
As to claims 1, 10 and 17, Alland discloses a radar system comprising:
a physical radar array comprising:
a plurality of physical transmit antennas (Fig. 4), each configured to transmit a respective signal having a wavelength λ (Yes. See also Para. 60); and
a plurality of physical receive antennas, each configured to receive each of the respective signals, wherein at least a first physical receive antenna of the plurality of physical receive antennas is at an elevation that is different than a second physical receive antenna of the plurality of receive antennas (Fig. 5A shows receive antenna in two dimensions. See also Paragraph 64 “vertical orientation.”).
As to claim 2, 11 and 18 Alland discloses a radar system of claim 1, 10 & 17 further comprising a processor arranged to receive data from the physical radar array and to generate data for a two- dimensional virtual antenna array, wherein a spacing between a first and a second virtual antenna of the virtual antenna array is greater than λ/2 (Fig. 6B wherein the holes would make for greater than λ/2 spacing. Fig. 7B shows N λ/2. Fig. 9A shows 1.5 λ. Other figures show similar configurations.).
As to claim 3, Alland discloses the radar system of claim 2, wherein the processor is further arranged to generate data for a supplemental virtual antenna positioned between the first and the second virtual antenna (Para. 63 “fill the resulting holes produced through the non-uniform spacings and extend the length of the portion of the virtual receive sub-array with uniform spacing of virtual antennas via array interpolation techniques.”).
As to claim 5, 12 and 19, Alland discloses the radar system of claim 3, 11 wherein a distance between the first virtual antenna and the supplemental virtual antenna is λ/2 and wherein a distance between the second virtual antenna and the supplemental virtual antenna is λ/2 (at least Figs. 9b and 12).
As to claim 6, Alland discloses the radar system of claim 1, wherein at least a first physical transmit antenna of the plurality of physical transmit antennas is at an elevation that is different than a second physical transmit antenna of the plurality of physical transmit antennas (at least Figs. 5a and 9a).
As to claim 7, Alland discloses the radar system of claim 1, further comprising a processor arranged to receive data from the physical radar array and to generate data for a two- dimensional emulated virtual antenna array (Fig. 3 shows RADAR ASIC. At least Fig. 7B shows a two-dimensional virtual array.)
As to claim 8, Alland discloses the radar system of claim 7, wherein a vertical distance between each adjacent row of virtual antennas of the emulated virtual antenna array is equal (at least Fig. 16B).
As to claim 9, Alland in view of Meuter teaches the radar system of claim 1 further comprising a processor arranged to receive data from the physical radar array and to generate data for a two- dimensional virtual antenna array, wherein a vertical spacing between each adjacent row of virtual antennas of the virtual antenna array is equal (Alland Fig. 16B).
As to claim 14, Alland discloses the radar system of claim 12, wherein a first vertical distance between the first virtual antenna and the supplemental virtual antenna is equal and wherein a second vertical distance between the second virtual antenna and the supplemental virtual antenna (At least Fig. 16B).
As to claim 15, Alland discloses the radar system of claim 10, further comprising a processor arranged to receive data from the first physical receive antenna and from the second physical receive antenna, the processor further arranged to generate data for a two-dimensional emulated virtual antenna array (At least Figs. 16A-B).
As to claim 20, Alland discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the method further comprises, generating, using a processor, data corresponding to an emulated virtual antenna array, wherein a vertical distance between each adjacent row of virtual antennas of the emulated virtual antenna array is equal (at least Fig. 16B).
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 4, 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Alland in view of Meuter (US 20220026568 A1).
As to claim 4 and 13 Alland teaches a radar system of claim 3, wherein the processor employs a trained
Applicant may argue that “linear prediction methods” do not constitute “neural” as claimed. In order to expedite prosecution, another reference is supplied.
In the same field of endeavor, Meuter teaches “The method for estimation of direction of arrival may use a neural network architecture as an angle estimation method. It may be noted note that all classical signal processing methods to some degree rely on a pre-defined model to estimate parameters whereas the neural network according to various embodiments may be fully data dependent. This model may also include availability of uniformly sampled data in the spatial domain (e.g. DFT (discrete Fourier transform) based methods) which may require a Uniform Linear Array (ULA) or alternatively, interpolation algorithms to fill in in the missing array positions shall the uniformity not be met. In other cases, a non-uniform sensor array layout can be used but exact positions of the elements in the array may be desired and often calibration processes have to be carried out to correct for the non-idealities of this requirement, including degradation over time. The method according to various embodiments deals with this particular issue in the sense that it may be applied to any array geometry and would even be applicable to uncalibrated arrays (Para. 98).”
In view of the teachings of Meuter, it would have been obvious to the ordinarily skilled artisan before filing to apply neural networks to transform non-uniform arrays with uniform arrays wherein the motivation would be reduced non-idealities and reducing reliance on calibration.
As to claim 16, Alland discloses the radar system of claim 15 wherein the processor employs a trained neural network to generate the data such that a vertical distance between each adjacent row of virtual antennas of the emulated virtual antenna array is equal (at least Fig. 9B of Alland. Alland is modified by Meuter to teach neural networks.).
The locations of the physical antennae determine the locations of the virtual antenna elements wherein some gaps exist instead of the antenna element. Filling in the gaps would make the distance between the antenna in adjacent arrays equal as taught by Meuter. The motivation to combine is the same as in claim 4. Looking at Fig. 9B of Meuter, the filling in of the holes would make the distance between all elements x from one row to the next equal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL W JUSTICE whose telephone number is (571)270-7029. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 - 5:30 M-F.
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, William Kelleher can be reached at 571-272-7753. 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.
/MICHAEL W JUSTICE/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
