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 12/11/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/11/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 teach 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 1, 2, 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US Patent Number 6,556,352 B2) in view of Villeneuve (US Patent Publication Number 2017/0153319 A1).
Wang teaches, as claimed in claim 1, an optical system comprising (Fig. 18), a plurality of emitters (LDA emitter), at least one of the emitters (EM) configured to emit a light signal along a transmit path (BM), and a plurality of first optics (L1 & L2) along the transmit path, the plurality of first optics (L1 & L2) comprising a collimator optic1 (L2) having a primary optical power (inherent feature of a lens) along a first axis and one or more transmit optics (L1) having a primary optical power (inherent feature of a lens) along a second axis (slow axis), the one or more transmit optics (L1) positioned between the collimator optic (L2) and the plurality of emitters (EM), wherein the first axis is a fast axis and the second axis is a slow axis (Col 16, lines 1 “L1 is a fast axis collimation lens” and line 7 “L2 collimates the beams in slow axis”), wherein the light signal encounters a lower index of refraction and travels faster through the collimator optic having the primary optical power along the fast axis than through the one or more transmit optics having the primary optical power along the slow axis2, Wang fails to teach a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) system. In a related art, Villeneuve teaches a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) system (100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill of art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the optical system, as taught by Wang, with the Lidar device, as taught by Villeneuve, for the purpose of providing a technology that can be used to measure distances to remote targets (¶0005).
Wang teaches, as claimed in claim 2, wherein the second axis is perpendicular or substantially perpendicular to the first axis (Fig. 1 shows slow axis Yi being perpendicular to fast axis Xi, Col. 7, lines 57-59).
Wang teaches, as claimed in claim 3, wherein the primary optical power of the collimator optic (L2) along the first axis is indicative of a degree to which the collimator optic converges or diverges the light signals along the first axis (Fig. 19 shows light from L2 converging), and the primary optical power of the one or more transmit optics (L1) along the second axis is indicative of a degree to which the one or more transmit optics converge or diverge the light signals along the second axis (Fig. 19 shows light from L1 diverging)3.
Wang teaches, as claimed in claim 10, wherein one or more of the plurality of emitters comprise a laser diode (Fig.1, LDA “laser diode array”).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US Patent Number 6,556,352 B2) in view of Villeneuve (US Patent Publication Number 2017/0153319 A1) and in further view of Lee (US Patent Publication Number 2019/0248302 A1).
Wang and Villeneuve fail to teach, as claimed in claim 5, wherein the one or more transmit optics comprise one or more toroidal shaped optics, the one or more toroidal shaped optics defining a circumferential direction and a radial direction. In a related art, Lee teaches wherein the one or more transmit optics comprise one or more toroidal shaped optics (¶ 0404), the one or more toroidal shaped optics defining a circumferential direction and a radial direction4.
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the Lidar system, as taught by Wang and Villeneuve, with the optics, as taught by Lee, for the purpose of providing a way to magnify an FOV in the horizontal direction and to maintain an FOV in the vertical direction (¶0403).
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US Patent Number 6,556,352 B2) in view of Villeneuve (US Patent Publication Number 2017/0153319 A1) and in further view of Lewis (US Patent Publication Number 2020/0271788 A1).
Wang and Villeneuve fail to teach, as claimed in claim 11, a plurality of second optics and positioned along a receive path such that a plurality of reflected light signals traveling along the receive path pass through the plurality of second optics. In a related art, Lewis teaches a plurality of photodetectors (Fig. 3, 326 and Fig 10), one or more of the photodetectors disposed along a curved surface of a circuit board (324) and a plurality of second optics (314) and positioned along a receive path such that a plurality of reflected light signals traveling along the receive path pass through the plurality of second optics (314).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the Lidar system, as taught by Wang and Villeneuve, with the optics, as taught by Lewis, for the purpose of providing a way to convert the focused directed scanning signal into at least one electronic representation of a two-dimensional image (¶0003).
Wang and Villeneuve fail to teach, as claimed in claim 12, wherein one or more of the plurality of photodetectors comprise an avalanche photodiode. In a related art, Lewis teaches wherein one or more of the plurality of photodetectors comprise an avalanche photodiode (¶0040).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the Lidar system, as taught by Wang, Villeneuve and Lewis, with the avalanche photodiode, as taught by Lewis, for the purpose of providing a way to convert the focused directed scanning signal into at least one electronic representation of a two-dimensional image (¶0003).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US Patent Number 6,556,352 B2) in view of Villeneuve (US Patent Publication Number 2017/0153319 A1) in further view of Lewis (US Patent Publication Number 2020/0271788 A1), and in even further view of Pennecot (US Patent Publication Number 2015/0055117 A1).
Wang and Villeneuve fail to teach, as claimed in claim 15, further comprising a housing that includes a partition wall dividing an interior of the housing into a first cavity and a second cavity, the plurality of emitters and the plurality of first optics disposed within the first cavity, and the plurality of photodetectors and the plurality of second optics disposed within the second cavity. In a related art, Pennecot teaches further comprising a housing (110) that includes a partition wall dividing an interior of the housing into a first cavity and a second cavity (¶0049), the plurality of emitters and the plurality of first optics disposed within the first cavity (120), and the plurality of photodetectors and the plurality of second optics disposed within the second cavity (130, Fig.1, ¶0049).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill of the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the Lidar system, as taught by Wang, Villeneuve and Lewis, with the housing, as taught by Pennecot, for the purpose of providing the exit aperture can be minimized to allow a larger portion of the focused light to reach the wall. (¶0049).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, 7, 9, 13, 14, 16-18 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter
The prior art fails to simultaneously teach all the limitations of claim 4 which includes wherein the primary optical power of the collimator optic along the first axis is greater than the optical power of the collimator optic along any other axis, wherein the primary optical power of the one or more transmit optics along the second axis is greater than the optical power of the transmit optics along any other axis.
The prior art fails to simultaneously teach all the limitations of claim 6 which includes wherein a radius of curvature of the one or more toroidal shaped optics has a constant thickness along the circumferential direction.
The prior art fails to simultaneously teach all the limitations of claim 7 which includes wherein the collimator optic has a first focal length, and the one or more transmit optics have a second focal length, the second focal length being longer than the first focal length.
Regarding claim 9 have dependency upon allowable claim 7.
The prior art fails to simultaneously teach all the limitations of claim 13 which includes wherein the curved surface comprises a Petzval surface.
The prior art fails to simultaneously teach all the limitations of claim 14 which includes wherein the plurality of second optics comprises one or more receive optics, and a plurality of condenser optics, at least one of the condenser optics positioned between the one or more receive optics and a corresponding photodetector of the plurality of photodetectors.
The prior art fails to simultaneously teach all the limitations of claim 16 which includes comprising a mirror positioned along the transmit path such that the mirror is positioned between the one or more transmit optics and the plurality of emitters, the mirror rotatable about the first axis or the second axis.
Regarding claims 17-18 have dependency upon allowable claim 16.
Claims 19 and 20 are allowed.
The prior art fails to simultaneously teach all the limitations of claim 19 which includes wherein the primary optical power of the collimator optic along the first axis is greater than the optical power of the collimator optic along any other axis, wherein the primary optical power of the one or more transmit optics along the second axis is greater than the optical power of the transmit optics along any other axis.
The prior art fails to simultaneously teach all the limitations of claim 20 which includes wherein the collimator optic has a first focal length, and the one or more transmit optics have a second focal length, the second focal length being longer than the first focal length.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOURNEY F SUMLAR whose telephone number is (571)270-0656. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4pm.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached on 571-272-2333. 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.
JOURNEY F. SUMLAR
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
02 January 2026
/RICKY L MACK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872
1 "slow axis cylindrical lens" refers to a type of cylindrical lens specifically designed to collimate light along the slower divergence axis of a laser beam.
2 This limitation is an inherit feature of the fast axis and slow axis. The fast axis in optics refers to the direction in a birefringent material (like crystals or special fibers) where light polarized parallel to it travels at its maximum speed, encountering the lowest refractive index, and thus experiencing the least delay compared to light polarized along the perpendicular slow axis
3 It is understood that all lenses inherently either converge or diverge light.
4 A toroidal shaped lens inherently has a circumferential direction and a radial direction.