UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/388,218
`
`12/22/2016
`
`Weijie LIU
`
`731156.571
`
`9126
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panason1e
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`WINDRICH‘ MARCUS E
`
`ART UNIT
`
`3646
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`10/03/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`US PTOeACtion @ SeedIP .Com
`
`pairlinkdktg @ seedip .eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`0/7709 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/388,218
`Examiner
`MARCUS E WINDRICH
`
`Applicant(s)
`LIU etal.
`Art Unit
`3646
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 8—28—2019.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) 1—4 and 6 is/are rejected.
`
`Claim(s) 5 is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[:1 Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.'sp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10):] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11):] The drawing(s) filed on
`
`is/are: a)C] accepted or b)Ej objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)C] Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)C] All
`
`b)C] Some**
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1C] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2C] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3.[:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) D Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190928
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/388,218
`Art Unit: 3646
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
`
`under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1. 1 14
`
`2.
`
`A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set
`
`forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this
`
`application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set
`
`forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action
`
`has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on
`
`8-28-2019 has been entered.
`
`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 Vl.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`3.
`
`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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/388,218
`Art Unit: 3646
`
`Page 3
`
`rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be
`
`the same under either status.
`
`4.
`
`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.
`
`5.
`
`The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
`
`USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining
`
`obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
`
`1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
`
`2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating
`
`obviousness or no obviousness.
`
`6.
`
`Claims 1-4 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Sharonov, et. al., U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2017/0176590, filed
`
`March 19, 2015 in view of Tsunekawa, U.S. Patent Application Publication Number
`
`2011/0175767, published July 21, 2011 and Bethke, et. al., U.S. Patent Number
`
`5,448,243, published September 5, 1995.
`
`As per claims 1 and 6, Sharonov discloses an object detecting device for
`
`detecting one or more target objects comprising:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/388,218
`Art Unit: 3646
`
`Page 4
`
`a first connection operable to be coupled to a first radar device that senses at
`
`least part of a first side of a target area; a second connection operable to be coupled to
`
`a second radar device that senses at least part of a second side of the target area
`
`(Sharonov, Fig. 1 showing separate connections to R1 and R2 on left and right sides)
`
`first acquisition region extraction circuitry, which in operation, extracts one or
`
`more first acquisition regions from among a plurality of first unit regions corresponding
`
`to a first radar device, each of one or more target objects being likely to be located in
`
`each of the one or more first acquisition regions (Sharonov, 1113 and items 102A and
`
`region 104A);
`
`second acquisition region extraction circuitry, which in operation, extracts one or
`
`more second acquisition regions from among a plurality of second unit regions
`
`corresponding to a second radar device, each of the one or more target objects being
`
`likely to be located in each of the one or more second acquisition regions (Sharonov,
`
`1113 and items 102B and region 104B);
`
`first group formation circuitry, which in operation, forms one or more first groups
`
`each including each of the one or more first acquisition regions; second group formation
`
`circuitry, which in operation, forms one or more second groups each including each of
`
`the one or more second acquisition regions (Sharonov, 1120 and items 230A and B);
`
`pair formation circuitry, which in operation, forms one or more pairs of each of the
`
`one or more first group and an associated second group selected as one or more
`
`pairing target groups by selecting from among the one or more second groups, on a
`
`coordinate system including the one or more first groups, the one or more second
`
`groups, and the first and second radar devices, on the basis of a position of the first
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/388,218
`Art Unit: 3646
`
`Page 5
`
`radar device, a position of the second radar device, and a size of a corresponding first
`
`group of the one or more first groups (Sharonov, 1121 where targets are linked and 1122
`
`where magnitude (i.e. size) is used in linking targets);
`
`object region calculation circuitry, which in operation, calculates, on the
`
`coordinate system, one or more target object regions for each of the one or more pairs;
`
`and (Sharonov, 1134 using position)
`
`object recognition circuitry, which in operation, recognizes, on the coordinate
`
`system, each of the one or more target objects based on each of the one or more target
`
`object regions (Sharonov, 1125 where target validation is performed).
`
`Sharonov fails to disclose use of a coordinate system, using groups in the return
`
`data and having the sensors on different sides.
`
`Tsunekawa teaches the use of a coordinate system and groups in radar return
`
`data (1167 and Fig. 3).
`
`It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`the invention to use groups and common coordinates in order to gain the benefit if
`
`improving analysis of multiple returns, such as the vehicle length consideration of
`
`Sharonov (1)25).
`
`Bethke teaches sensors on opposite sides of the area to be monitored (Fig. 2).
`
`It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`the invention to use opposite sides since it has been held that rearranging parts of an
`
`invention involves only routine skill in the art.
`
`In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70. It is within the
`
`skill of a person in the art to determine the arrangement which works best.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/388,218
`Art Unit: 3646
`
`Page 6
`
`As per claim 2, Sharonov as modified by Tsunekawa and Bethke discloses the
`
`object detecting device according to Claim 1, wherein: the pair formation circuitry
`
`calculates, based on the first radar device, a first line segment representing a size of
`
`each of the one or more first groups (Tsunekawa, Fig. 3 showing the line segment); the
`
`pair formation circuitry sets a search region between a midpoint of the first line segment
`
`and the second radar device; and the pair formation circuitry selects a second group
`
`which at least overlaps the search region from among the one or more second groups
`
`as the one or more pairing target groups (Sharonov, 1120-21 where target linking
`
`includes analysis of data in the overlap region between the radars).
`
`As per claim 3, Sharonov as modified by Tsunekawa and Bethke further
`
`discloses the object detecting device according to Claim 1, comprising: moving velocity
`
`calculation circuitry, which in operation, calculates a velocity of each one or more target
`
`object regions calculated by the object region calculator by using a measurement value
`
`of the one or more first acquisition regions and a measurement value of the one or more
`
`second acquisition regions included in a corresponding target object region (Sharonov,
`
`1115 determining speed),
`
`wherein the object recognition circuitry recognizes each of the one or more target
`
`objects, on the basis of a corresponding target object region and the moving velocity of
`
`the corresponding target object region (Sharonov, 1120 where range and speed data
`
`help to identify targets).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/388,218
`Art Unit: 3646
`
`Page 7
`
`As per claim 4, Sharonov as modified by Tsunekawa and Bethke further
`
`discloses the object detecting device according to Claim 1, comprising: location-point
`
`model memory circuitry, which in operation, stores therein in advance a location-point
`
`model which represents a feature of the one or more target objects detected by the first
`
`and second radar devices at one or more location points of the coordinate system,
`
`wherein the object recognition circuitry recognizes a type of each of the one or more
`
`target objects by checking a feature of a corresponding target object region against the
`
`location-point model (Sharonov, 1125 where vehicle length is used in determining a
`
`target and its validity).
`
`Allowable Subject Matter
`
`7.
`
`Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would
`
`be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base
`
`claim and any intervening claims.
`
`Conclusion
`
`8.
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
`
`applicant's disclosure and is provided on form PTO-892.
`
`9.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to MARCUS E WINDRICH whose telephone number is
`
`(571)272-6417. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F ~7-3:30.
`
`Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video
`
`conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/388,218
`Art Unit: 3646
`
`Page 8
`
`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, Jack Keith can be reached on 5712726878. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571 -273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
`
`Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
`
`published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
`
`you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
`
`/MARCUS E WINDRICH/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646
`
`