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 .
This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s communication filed on September 15, 2025. In virtue of this communication, claims 1-16 are currently presented in the instant application.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/15/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 and 4-10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,436,260.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the above indicated claims of the instant application are either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the above identified claims of the above patent, including:
As claim 1: A radar control device comprising: an antenna device comprising; a non-uniform linear array (NLA) antenna including a first receiving RX antenna, a second RX antenna, a third RX antenna, and a fourth RX antenna which are spaced apart from each other in a 3:2:3 ratio, a first uniform linear array (ULA) antenna including the first RX antenna, a first virtual antenna and the fourth RX antenna, and a second ULA antenna including the first RX antenna and the third RX antenna, a transceiver configured to transmit a transmission signal through the antenna device and receive a reflection signal reflected from an object; and a controller configured to, determine a first angular spectrum (APS) based on the reflection signal associated with the first ULA antenna and a second APS based on the second ULA antenna, and determine an angle of the object by identifying an angle within an overlapping area of the first APS and the second APS (see claims 1-2 of the above patent).
As claim 2: The radar control device of claim 1, wherein the first virtual antenna is disposed between the first RX antenna and the fourth RX antenna (see claim 4 of the above patent).
As claim 3: The radar control device of claim 1, wherein the NLA antenna further comprises a fifth RX antenna arranged to be spaced apart in a 3:2:3:4 ratio (see claim 5 of the above patent).
As claim 4: The radar control device of claim 3, wherein the first ULA antenna further comprises the fifth RX antenna, and the second ULA antenna further comprises a second virtual antenna (see claim 6 of the above patent).
As claim 5: The radar control device of claim 4, wherein the second virtual antenna is disposed on the right side of the third RX antenna (see claim 7 of the above patent).
As claim 6: The radar control device of claim 1, wherein the controller determines an angle at which the object is located in the overlapping area between the first APS and the second APS (see claim 8 of the above patent).
As claim 7: The radar control device of claim 6, wherein the controller determines an angle corresponding to the highest peak power value among the overlapping area between the first APS and the second APS as the angle at which the object is located (see claim 9 of the above patent).
As claim 8: The radar control device of claim 1, wherein, if a difference between an angle corresponding to the highest peak power value in the first APS and an angle corresponding to the highest peak power value in the second APS is less than or equal to a predetermined angle, the controller determines an intermediate value between the angle corresponding to the highest peak power value of the first ULA antenna and an angle corresponding to the highest peak power value of the second ULA antenna as the angle at which the object is located (see claim 10 of the above patent).
As claim 9: The radar control device of claim 1, wherein the controller further determine an APS for the NLA antenna, wherein, if a difference between a first angle corresponding to the highest peak power value of the NLA antenna, a second angle corresponding to the highest peak value of the first ULA antenna, and a third angle corresponding to the highest peak power value of the second ULA antenna is less than or equal to a predetermined angle, the controller determines an average value of the three angles of the first angle, the second angle, and the third angle, as the angle at which the object is located (see claim 10 of the above patent).
As claim 10: The radar control device of claim 1, wherein the antenna device includes one or more transmission antennas and one or more receiving antennas, and each of the one or more transmission antennas and one or more receiving antennas is an array antenna in which one or more radiating elements are connected in series by a feed line. However, this difference is not patentable merit since antenna array having a plurality of radiating elements connected in series by a feed line that would have been deemed obvious to a person skilled in the art (see figure 5A of Ray et al. US 2021/0263139 having a plurality of radiating elements 11 being connected to a feed line thereof).
As claim 11: A radar control device comprising: an antenna device comprising; a non-uniform linear array (NLA) antenna including a first receiving RX antenna, a second RX antenna, a third RX antenna, a fourth RX antenna, a fifth RX antenna, a sixth RX antenna, a seventh RX antenna, and an eighth RX antenna which are spaced apart from each other in a 3:2:3:4:3:2:3 ratio, a first uniform linear array (ULA) antenna including the first RX antenna, a first virtual antenna, the fourth RX antenna, the fifth antenna, a third virtual antenna, and the eighth antenna, and a second ULA antenna including the first RX antenna, the third RX antenna, a second virtual antenna, the sixth RX antenna, and the eighth RX antenna, a transceiver configured to transmit a transmission signal through the antenna device and receive a reflection signal reflected from an object; and a controller configured to, determine a first angular spectrum (APS) based on the reflection signal associated with the first ULA antenna and a second APS based on the second ULA antenna, and determine an angle of the object by identifying an angle within an overlapping area of the first APS and the second APS (see claims 1-2 and 8-9 of the above patent).
As claim 12: The radar control device of claim 11, wherein the controller determines an angle at which the object is located in the overlapping area between the first APS and the second APS (see claim 8 of the above patent).
As claim 13: The radar control device of claim 12, wherein the controller determines an angle corresponding to the highest peak power value among the overlapping area between the first APS and the second APS as the angle at which the object is located (see claim 9 of the above patent).
As claim 14: The radar control device of claim 11, wherein, if a difference between an angle corresponding to the highest peak power value in the first APS and an angle corresponding to the highest peak power value in the second APS is less than or equal to a predetermined angle, the controller determines an intermediate value between the angle corresponding to the highest peak power value of the first ULA antenna and an angle corresponding to the highest peak power value of the second ULA antenna as the angle at which the object is located (see claim 10 of the above patent).
As claim 15: The radar control device of claim 11, wherein the controller further determine an APS for the NLA antenna, wherein, if a difference between a first angle corresponding to the highest peak power value of the NLA antenna, a second angle corresponding to the highest peak value of the first ULA antenna, and a third angle corresponding to the highest peak power value of the second ULA antenna is less than or equal to a predetermined angle, the controller determines an average value of the three angles of the first angle, the second angle, and the third angle, as the angle at which the object is located (see claim 10 of the above patent).
As claim 16: The radar control device of claim 11, wherein the antenna device includes one or more transmission antennas and one or more receiving antennas, and each of the one or more transmission antennas and one or more receiving antennas is an array antenna in which one or more radiating elements are connected in series by a feed line. However, this difference is not patentable merit since antenna array having a plurality of radiating elements connected in series by a feed line that would have been deemed obvious to a person skilled in the art (see figure 5A of Ray et al. US 2021/0263139 having a plurality of radiating elements 11 being connected to a feed line thereof).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Prior art Goda – US 11,061,109
Prior art Kishigami et al. – US 2017/0082730
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUNG X LE whose telephone number is (571)272-6010. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 10am to 6pm.
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, Alexander H. Taningco can be reached at 571-272-8048. 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.
/TUNG X LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845 October 6, 2026
