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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/26/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges the reply filed on 08/26/2025 in which claims 1-5, 9-11, 13-16, and 22-23 have been amended. No claims have been added or cancelled. Currently claims 1-7 and 9-23 are pending for examination in this application. Based on this reply:
The previous 103 rejections have been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 15, as amended, states the limitation “determining a combination of… such that… of the two or more plurality of light beams are…”. The amendment was clearly intended to not just add “two or more” but to also remove “plurality of” as was otherwise done through much of the amendments. Examination will proceed under this assumption.
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 9-11, 16, and 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.
Regarding claim 9, the amendment to claim 9, which updates “plurality of light beams” to “two or more light beams” leaves the meaning ambiguous. It is unclear whether each of the two or more light beams is intended to cover the whole target area, or whether the collective set of multiple “two or more light beams” is intended to cover the whole target area. As best understood by the examiner, the latter is the intention of the claim, and examination will proceed under that assumption. Note that if this claim is intended to convey that the collective set of multiple two or more light beams emitted across the plurality of unit periods cover the whole target area, as the examiner believes, then the original phrasing of “the plurality of light beams emitted in the plurality of unit periods…” would be sufficient.
Regarding claim 10, a similar ambiguity as to claim 9 is present. It is unclear whether the claim is stating that the processing circuit generates a distance image after each of the two or more light beams are emitted and received, or whether the distance image is generated after the collective set of multiple two or more light beams are emitted and received. Again, as best understood by the examiner, the latter is the intended meaning of the claim, and again the examiner notes that the phrasing prior to this amendment would be sufficient, if so.
Regarding claim 11, the limitation "the two or more light receiving elements” lacks sufficient antecedent basis. The examiner notes that the amendment to claim 11 was likely intended to only apply to “the two or more two or more
Regarding claim 16, Claim 16 recites the limitation "the combination" in the second limitation. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As best understood by the examiner, “the combination” should be in reference to “a combination of two or more light beams” presented in claim 15, but the subsequent phrasing of claim 16 further confuses such an interpretation as it goes on to state that “the controller determines the combination such that paths of the plurality of light beams…”. It is unclear how determination of a single one of the combination of two light beams presented in claim 15 could ensure that the whole plurality of light beams conform to the requirement.
As best understood by the examiner, “the combination” in claim 16 is in reference to “a combination of two or more light beams” presented in claim 15, and the limitation “the plurality of light beams” presented in claim 16 was meant to be amended to “the two or more light beams”. This would keep the claim in form with both the specification as well as similarly presented claim 2 as currently amended. Examination will proceed under this assumption.
Regarding claim 20, Claim 20 recites the limitation "the combination" in the last limitation. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As best understood by the examiner, “the combination” should be in reference to “a combination of two or more light beams” presented in claim 15, but claim 20 otherwise makes reference to “the plurality of light beams” which makes it unclear whether some or all instances of “the plurality of light beams” are intended to have been amended to “the two or more light beams” in line with the likely reference to “the combination of two or more light beams” or whether “the combination” is intended to hold a different meaning in this case. Examination will proceed under the assumption that both “the combination” and all references to “the plurality of light beams” within the context of a single unit period are intended to be a reference to “the two or more light beams”.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries 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 nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 11, 13-20, and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niclass et al. (US 20190004156 A1), hereinafter Niclass.
Regarding claim 1, Niclass teaches:
A distance measurement apparatus ([0007] “There is therefore provided, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention, an optical sensing device”) comprising:
at least one light source that emits a plurality of light beams with different directions towards a scene ([0007] “… including a light source, which is configured to emit one or more beams of light pulses at respective angles toward a target scene.”);
a light receiving device that is an indirect time-of-flight (ToF) sensor and includes a plurality of light receiving elements and that receives reflected light from the scene generated by irradiation of the plurality of light beams at each of a plurality of unit periods, the each of the plurality of unit periods corresponding one cycle of distance measurement by the indirect ToF sensor ([0007] “An array of sensing elements is configured to output signals in response to incidence of photons on the sensing elements.”; [0036] “Although the embodiments shown in the figures and described herein refer to the particular design of depth mapping device 20, the principles of the present invention may similarly be applied, mutatis mutandis, to other sorts of optical sensing devices that use an array of sensing elements, for both depth mapping and other applications. For example, Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans a single beam or an array of multiple beams over the target scene. As another example, Rx camera 24 may contain detectors of other sorts, which may detect reflected light intensity in addition to or instead of time of flight.” Note that a scanner is understood to scan over a range of time periods. Note also that an indirect ToF detector is a known and reasonable consideration for “detectors of other sorts” in the context of lidar.);
a control circuit that performs a control operation on the at least one light source and the light receiving device, the control operation including: determining a combination of two or more light beams, among the plurality of light beams, having different directions from each other to be emitted during each of the plurality of unit periods ([0032] “Tx laser projector 22 comprises an array 30 of emitters, such as a monolithic array of vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers (VCSELs), which concurrently emit respective beams of light pulses. Collimating optics 32 project these beams at different, respective angles, toward corresponding areas of a target scene.”),
such that a plurality of pieces of reflected light generated by irradiation of the two or more light beams are respectively incident on different regions of light receiving elements of the plurality of light receiving elements and the different regions do not overlap from each other during each of the plurality of unit periods (While Niclass does not explicitly state that the regions dictated by each “super-pixel” do not overlap, it is implied by the examples contemplated in the figures, see annotated figure below.),
the combination of two or more light beams differing for each unit period of the plurality of unit periods ([0036] “Although the embodiments shown in the figures and described herein refer to the particular design of depth mapping device 20, the principles of the present invention may similarly be applied, mutatis mutandis, to other sorts of optical sensing devices that use an array of sensing elements, for both depth mapping and other applications. For example, Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans a single beam or an array of multiple beams over the target scene.”), and
causing the at least one light source to emit the two or more light beams toward the scene according to the combination during each of the plurality of unit periods ([0032] “Tx laser projector 22 comprises an array 30 of emitters, such as a monolithic array of vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers (VCSELs), which concurrently emit respective beams of light pulses. Collimating optics 32 project these beams at different, respective angles, toward corresponding areas of a target scene.”); and
a signal processing circuit that generates distance data based on light reception data generated by the light receiving device and outputs the resultant distance data ([0008] “the signals output by the sensing elements are indicative of respective times of arrival of the photons on the sensing elements, and the control circuitry is configured to process the signals in order to compute an indication of the distance to the corresponding area in the target scene based on the times of arrival.”),
wherein a number of the least one light source is less than a number of the light receiving elements in the light receiving device (FIG. 2, projection of light beams is visually less than the number of light receiving elements.).
PNG
media_image1.png
528
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This annotated figure of FIG. 2 of Niclass shows an overlay of a several super-pixels which fully encompasses the full range of possible light returns for their respective beam, based on the range of projections shown in FIGS. 3-5. Note that each super-pixel does not overlap the others.
Regarding claim 2, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the plurality of light receiving elements are two-dimensionally arranged along a light receiving surface of the light receiving device (FIG. 2), and
the control circuit determines the combination of two or more light beams such that paths of the two or more light beams projected onto the light receiving surface do not overlap and do not intersect with each other on the light receiving surface (While Niclass does not explicitly state that the regions dictated by each “super-pixel” do not overlap, it is implied by the examples contemplated in the figures. See annotation of FIG. 2 above.).
Regarding claim 3, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 1, as described above, but does not explicitly teach:
wherein the two or more light beams include a first light beam emitted at a first timing and a second light beam emitted at a second timing different from the first timing.
While Niclass does not explicitly teach that some number of sequentially scanned beams may be contained within the same "unit period" of distance measurement, the nature of the invention of Niclass makes clear that each super-pixel has the flexibility to be operated with individual timing, which could include beams emitted in rapid succession, as opposed to beams emitted simultaneously. Such a timing arrangement simply requires a longer wait time or a decreased return time window.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have grouped two sequentially emitted light beams into a single distance readout cycle, as one predictable choice of beam emission and readout.
Regarding claim 4, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the two or more light beams are emitted simultaneously ([0032] “Tx laser projector 22 comprises an array 30 of emitters… which concurrently emit respective beams of light pulses.”).
Regarding claim 5, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 1, as described above, but does not explicitly teach:
wherein the two or more light beams include a first light beam group emitted simultaneously at a first timing and a second light beam group emitted simultaneously at a second timing different from the first timing.
While Niclass does not explicitly teach that some number of sequentially scanned beams may be contained within the same "unit period" of distance measurement, the nature of the invention of Niclass makes clear that each super-pixel has the flexibility to be operated with individual timing, which could include beams emitted in rapid succession, as opposed to beams emitted simultaneously. Such a timing arrangement simply requires a longer wait time or a decreased return time window. Similarly, as both simultaneous emission and rapid sequential emission are reasonably contemplated, so too is the combination, which is to say rapid sequential emission of multiple simultaneous beams of light.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have grouped two groups of sequentially emitted light beams into a single distance readout cycle, as one predictable choice of beam emission and readout.
Regarding claim 6, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 1, as described above, but does not explicitly teach:
wherein the at least one light source is a single light source, and the control circuit controls the light source to emit the plurality of light beams sequentially ([0036] “Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans a single beam… over the target scene.”).
While Niclass does not explicitly teach that some number of sequentially scanned beams may be contained within the same "unit period" of distance measurement, the nature of the invention of Niclass makes clear that each super-pixel has the flexibility to be operated with individual timing, which could include beams emitted in rapid succession, as opposed to beams emitted simultaneously. Such a timing arrangement simply requires a longer wait time or a decreased return time window.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have grouped two sequentially emitted light beams into a single distance readout cycle, as one predictable choice of beam emission and readout.
Regarding claim 7, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the at least one light source includes a plurality of light sources, and the control circuit controls the plurality of light sources to emit at least part of the plurality of light beams simultaneously ([0032] “Tx laser projector 22 comprises an array 30 of emitters… which concurrently emit respective beams of light pulses.”).
Regarding claim 9, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the two or more light beams emitted in the plurality of unit periods cover, as a whole, a whole distance measurement target area (0036] “For example, Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans a single beam or an array of multiple beams over the target scene.” The contemplation of a scanning system implies that the beams are scanned across the whole target area.).
Regarding claim 11, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the control circuit performs control such that at least part of the [plurality of] light receiving elements detect, in a same exposure period, the reflected light generated by the two or more plurality of light beams ([0024] “The super-pixels that are actuated at any given time are those on which reflected photons from a given transmitted pulse are expected to be incident.”).
Regarding claim 13, the scope of the claim matches that of claim 1 in method form, with instructions simply stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected as described in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 14, the scope of this claim matches that of claim 1, put into method form. Therefore, claim 14 is rejected as described in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 15, Niclass teaches:
A distance measurement apparatus ([0007] “There is therefore provided, in accordance with an embodiment of the invention, an optical sensing device”) comprising:
at least one light source that emits a plurality of light beams with different directions towards a scene ([0007] “… including a light source, which is configured to emit one or more beams of light pulses at respective angles toward a target scene.”);
a light receiving device that is a direct time-of-flight (ToF) sensor and includes a plurality of light receiving elements and that receives reflected light from the scene generated by irradiation of the plurality of light beams at each of a plurality of unit periods, the each of the plurality of unit periods corresponding one cycle of distance measurement by the direct ToF sensor ([0033] “Rx camera 24 comprises an array 40 of sensing elements, which output signals in response to incident photons… the output signals are indicative of respective times of arrival of photons on the sensing elements.”; [0036] “Although the embodiments shown in the figures and described herein refer to the particular design of depth mapping device 20, the principles of the present invention may similarly be applied, mutatis mutandis, to other sorts of optical sensing devices that use an array of sensing elements, for both depth mapping and other applications. For example, Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans a single beam or an array of multiple beams over the target scene.” Note that a scanner is understood to scan over a range of time periods.);
a control circuit that performs a control operation on the at least one light source and the light receiving device, the control operation including: determining a combination of two or more light beams, among the plurality of light beams, having different directions from each other to be emitted during each of the plurality of unit periods ([0032] “Tx laser projector 22 comprises an array 30 of emitters, such as a monolithic array of vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers (VCSELs), which concurrently emit respective beams of light pulses. Collimating optics 32 project these beams at different, respective angles, toward corresponding areas of a target scene.”),
such that a plurality of pieces of reflected light generated by irradiation of the two or more [(While Niclass does not explicitly state that the regions dictated by each “super-pixel” do not overlap, it is implied by the examples contemplated in the figures, see annotated figure below.),
the combination of two or more light beams differing for each unit period of the plurality of unit periods ([0036] “Although the embodiments shown in the figures and described herein refer to the particular design of depth mapping device 20, the principles of the present invention may similarly be applied, mutatis mutandis, to other sorts of optical sensing devices that use an array of sensing elements, for both depth mapping and other applications. For example, Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans a single beam or an array of multiple beams over the target scene.”), and
causing the at least one light source to emit the two or more light beams toward the scene according to the combination during each of the plurality of unit periods ([0032] “Tx laser projector 22 comprises an array 30 of emitters, such as a monolithic array of vertical-cavity surface-emitting lasers (VCSELs), which concurrently emit respective beams of light pulses. Collimating optics 32 project these beams at different, respective angles, toward corresponding areas of a target scene.”); and
a signal processing circuit that generates distance data based on light reception data generated by the light receiving device and outputs the resultant distance data ([0008] “the signals output by the sensing elements are indicative of respective times of arrival of the photons on the sensing elements, and the control circuitry is configured to process the signals in order to compute an indication of the distance to the corresponding area in the target scene based on the times of arrival.”),
wherein a number of the least one light source is less than a number of the light receiving elements in the light receiving device (FIG. 2, projection of light beams is visually less than the number of light receiving elements.).
PNG
media_image1.png
528
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
This annotated figure of FIG. 2 of Niclass shows an overlay of a several super-pixels which fully encompasses the full range of possible light returns for their respective beam, based on the range of projections shown in FIGS. 3-5. Note that each super-pixel does not overlap the others.
Regarding claim 16, as best understood by the examiner in view of the 112(b) rejection above, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 15, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the plurality of light receiving elements are two-dimensionally arranged along a light receiving surface of the light receiving device (FIG. 2), and
the control circuit determines the combination [of two or more light beams] such that paths of the [two or more light beams] projected onto the light receiving surface do not overlap and do not intersect with each other on the light receiving surface (While Niclass does not explicitly state that the regions dictated by each “super-pixel” do not overlap, it is implied by the examples contemplated in the figures. See annotation of FIG. 2 above.).
Regarding claim 17, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 15, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the plurality of light beams include a first light beam emitted at a first timing and a second light beam emitted at a second timing different from the first timing ([0036] “Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans a single beam or an array of multiple beams over the target scene.”).
Regarding claim 18, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 15, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the plurality of light beams include a first light beam group emitted simultaneously at a first timing and a second light beam group emitted simultaneously at a second timing different from the first timing ([0036] “Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans… an array of multiple beams over the target scene.”).
Regarding claim 19, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 15, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the at least one light source is a single light source, and the control circuit controls the light source to emit the plurality of light beams sequentially ([0036] “Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans a single beam… over the target scene.”).
Regarding claim 20, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 15, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein in each of a plurality of unit periods each including at least one exposure operation, the control circuit causes the at least one light source to emit the [two or more]light beams ([0036] “Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans… an array of multiple beams over the target scene.” Note that an exposure operation is implied by the collection of photons by the sensing elements.), and
at least part of the plurality of light receiving elements to receive the reflected light from the scene generated as a result of irradiation of the [two or more] light beams ([0033] “Rx camera 24 comprises an array 40 of sensing elements, which output signals in response to incident photons… the output signals are indicative of respective times of arrival of photons on the sensing elements.”), wherein the combination differs for each unit period ([0036] “Tx laser projector 22 may comprise a scanner, which scans… an array of multiple beams over the target scene.”).
Regarding claim 22, the scope of the claim matches that of claim 15 in method form, with instructions simply stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium. Therefore, claim 22 is rejected as described in the rejection of claim 15 above.
Regarding claim 23, the scope of this claim matches that of claim 15, put into method form. Therefore, claim 23 is rejected as described in the rejection of claim 15 above.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niclass in view of Official Notice.
Regarding claim 10, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 9, as described above, but does not explicitly teach:
wherein the signal processing circuit generates distance image data of the distance measurement target area after the emission and reception of the two or more light beams in the plurality of unit periods are completed.
However, the examiner takes official notice of the fact that outputting a distance image, particularly after completing measurement of a whole target area, is a well-known operation in the field of lidar.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to output the individual distance measurements of Niclass in the form of a distance image for interpretability.
Claim(s) 12 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Niclass in view of Jin et al. (US 20200185439 A1), hereinafter Jin.
Regarding claim 12, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 1, as described above, but does not explicitly teach:
wherein the plurality of light receiving elements include a global shutter type electronic shutter.
Jin, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the plurality of light receiving elements include a global shutter type electronic shutter ([0071] "For example, the image sensor 100 may read and output a light signal, based on a global shutter manner.").
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the range imaging system of Niclass with the global shutter of Jin to provide ease of global control along with the individual actuation of Niclass.
Regarding claim 21, Niclass teaches the distance measurement apparatus of claim 15, as described above, but does not teach:
wherein the plurality of light receiving elements include a global shutter type electronic shutter.
Jin, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the plurality of light receiving elements include a global shutter type electronic shutter ([0071] "For example, the image sensor 100 may read and output a light signal, based on a global shutter manner.").
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the range imaging system of Niclass with the global shutter of Jin to provide ease of global control along with the individual actuation of Niclass.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Retterath et al. (US 10203399 B2) teaches isolated emitter-receiver pairs.
Brady et al. (US 20200264308 A1) and Kamon et al. (US 20010046317 A1) teach a variety of charge gate transfer timings and implementations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN C. GRANT whose telephone number is (571)272-0402. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571)270-3603. 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.
/SEAN C. GRANT/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645