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 filed on 03/01/2025 has been considered and placed of record in the file.
Oath/Declaration
The Oath or Declaration is being considered by examiner and complies with PTO requirements.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
There are many equations recited in the Specification; however, the equations are very blurry in which one of ordinary skilled in the art could not read or understand. Furthermore, this issue also yields errors in the publication of the application.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, define “ISAC” in line 1.
Regarding claim 7, define “UAV” in line 3.
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.
Claims 8-20 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 8 appears to be a method claim written as a dependent claim form of independent claim 1, in which independent claim 1 is an apparatus claim. According to MPEP 2173.05(p)(II) states that “[a] single claim in which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)”. It is unclear whether the applicants intended claim 8 to be a method claim or an apparatus, hence, the scope of the claim is unclear and indefinite. Claim 9-20 are rejected under the same scope as being dependent on claim 8.
Examiner suggested to rewrite claim 8 as an independent claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1:
Claim 1 is drawn to A Full Duplex-based ISAC optimization system, comprising: a Full Duplex (FD) massive Multiple-input and Multiple-output (MIMO) Base Station (BS) node configured to operate at mmWave frequencies and having a plurality of transmitter antenna elements (NA TX) and a plurality of receiver antenna elements (M4 RX) configured to communicate in a DownLink (DL) direction with a plurality of mobile users that each have a plurality of antenna receiver elements (L), wherein the plurality of RX antenna elements of the FD massive MIMO BS node are configured to receive DL signals reflected by a plurality of radar targets; and at least one processor configured to detect the plurality of radar targets randomly distributed within a communication environment based on the plurality of reflected DL signals, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to determine an estimation of (i) a Direction of Arrival (DoA), (ii) a range, and (iii) a relative velocity for each of the plurality of radar targets while optimizing a DL communication rate to the plurality of mobile users. Closest prior art, Duan et al. US 2023/0421215, discloses A Full Duplex-based ISAC optimization system, comprising: a Full Duplex (FD) massive Multiple-input and Multiple-output (MIMO) Base Station (BS) node configured to operate at mmWave frequencies and having a plurality of transmitter antenna elements (NA TX) and a plurality of receiver antenna elements (M4 RX) configured to communicate in a DownLink (DL) direction with a plurality of mobile users that each have a plurality of antenna receiver elements (L), wherein the plurality of RX antenna elements of the FD massive MIMO BS node are configured to receive DL signals reflected by a plurality of radar targets; and at least one processor configured to detect the plurality of radar targets randomly distributed within a communication environment based on the plurality of reflected DL signals. However, prior art of record fails to disclose either alone or in combination the details of wherein the at least one processor is further configured to determine an estimation of (i) a Direction of Arrival (DoA), (ii) a range, and (iii) a relative velocity for each of the plurality of radar targets while optimizing a DL communication rate to the plurality of mobile users, as claimed in claim 1, in combination with each and every other limitation in the claim.
Regarding claims 2-7:
Claims 2-7 are allowed as being dependent on claim 1.
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.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Schrattenecker et al. US 2020/0072940; and Duan et al. US 2023/0421215.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANICE N TIEU whose telephone number is (571)270-1888. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:30.
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, Sam Ahn can be reached at (571) 272-3044. 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.
/JANICE N TIEU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights