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 .
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.
Response to Amendment
The following addresses applicant’s remarks/amendments dated 21st November, 2025.
Claims 1, 3, 5 and 10 were amended; no claims were cancel; no new Claims were added; therefore, claims 1-6 and 8-10 are pending in current application and are addressed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 21st November, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-6 and 8-10 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the specific combination of the references being used in the current rejection.
In response to applicant’s argument that references fail to show certain features of applicant’s invention, it is noted that features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range”) are not recited in the rejected claims. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). [[Here, Applicant argues that Ueno does not disclosed “wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range”.]] However, these claim limitations were not present in the original independent claims and were presented by amendment on 21st November, 2025. Therefore, the issue of whether Ueno addresses these limitations are not relevant. These amended claims containing new limitations have been addressed by Masuda in the present Office Action.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueno et al. (US 20220268896 A1, hereinafter “Ueno”), modified in view of Masuda et al. (JP 2016033482 A, hereinafter “Masuda”).
Regarding claim 1, Ueno teaches a method for calibrating a LIDAR device, comprising the following steps:
generating and emitting beams by a beam source (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0035] line 1-3, light emitting unit 40, laser light DL);
receiving, by a detector, beams reflected and/or backscattered by objects in a scanning range of the LIDAR device (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0038] line7-11, light receiving unit 60, a scanning range RA, reflected light RL), and beams reflected and/or backscattered by a reflection structure applied on a glass cover of the LIDAR device (Ueno; [0118] line 3-8, Beam DL backscattered by electrodes 84 and 85 on window 82);
ascertaining a reflection pattern based on the beams reflected and/or backscattered by the reflection structure applied on the glass cover, and comparing the ascertained reflection pattern to a reference pattern (Ueno; Fig. 19, [0117], [0118] line 8-14, discloses comparing the deviation amount of the rotation angle (based on the reflected light [0095]-[0100] and Fig. 15) to a reference rotation angle); and
based on a deviation between the ascertained reflection pattern and the reference pattern, taking at least one corrective measure for calibrating the LIDAR device (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0039], [0046], Fig. 4, [0052], [0061], [0063], step S80, step S90, Fig. 19, [0092], [0101], [0109], [0117], [0118]; please also see above “the response to the arguments part 1”).
Ueno does not teach,
wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range.
Masuda teaches,
wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range (Masuda; Fig. 1, [0031], the laser light emitted from the light source 10 is scanned within a predetermined range (area A-C). A reflector 52 is provided in a part of the specified range (area B-C). The laser light that is emitted to the outside of the laser range finder 1 is the laser light that is emitted to other parts of the specified range (area A-B). the area A-C is referred to as a mirror scan area (scanning area), the area A-B as a distance measurement area and the area B-C as a reference position detection area; Fig. 3, [0056], reflector 52 is disposed outside the measurement area (measurement area is A-B and outside the measurement area is B-C) and within the mirror scan area (area A-C)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the method taught by Ueno to include wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range taught by Masuda with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is to position the reflector outside the distance measurement area to prevent the reflected light from the ranging area from being mistakenly recognized as reflected light from the reference position, thereby reducing malfunction of the laser range finder that may occur due to such misrecognition, such as erroneous angle recognition of the object and unexpected calibration operations (Masuda; [0006]-[0010]).
Regarding claim 2, Ueno as modified above teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the reflection pattern is ascertained from the beams reflected and/or backscattered by the reflection structure in the form of a heating structure (Ueno; Fig. 19, [0117] line 3-10 and [0118] line 1-3, the heater 83 includes electrodes 84 and 85).
Regarding claim 5, Ueno teaches a LIDAR device for scanning a scanning range, comprising:
at least one beam source configured to generate beams and to emit the beams into the scanning range (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0035] line 1-8 and [0038] line 1-3, light emitting unit 40, laser light DL, a scanning range RA);
at least one detector configured to receive beams reflected and/or backscattered from the scanning range, the at least one beam source and the at least one detector being situated so as to be protected by a glass cover (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0038] line 7-11, light receiving unit 60, a scanning range RA, window 82);
a control unit configured to control the at least one beam source and to evaluate the at least one detector (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0042], control unit 110);
wherein the LIDAR device is configured to:
generate and emit beams by the at least one beam source (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0042] line 1-6, light emitting unit 40, laser light DL);
receive, by the at least one detector, beams reflected and/or backscattered by objects in the scanning range of the LIDAR device (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0042] line 6-10, light receiving unit 60, a scanning range RA, reflected light RL), and beams reflected and/or backscattered by a reflection structure applied on the glass cover of the LIDAR device (Ueno; [0118] line 3-8, Beam DL backscattered by electrodes 84 and 85 on window 82);
ascertain a reflection pattern based on the beams reflected and/or backscattered by the reflection structure applied on the glass cover (Ueno; Fig. 19, [0117] line 3-10 and [0118] line 1-3, the heater 83 includes electrodes 84 and 85), and comparing the ascertained reflection pattern to a reference pattern (Ueno; [0118] line 8-14, discloses comparing the deviation amount of the rotation angle (based on the reflected light [0095]-[0100] and Fig. 15); and
based on a deviation between the ascertained reflection pattern and the reference pattern, take at least one corrective measure for calibrating the LIDAR device (Fig. 1, [0039], [0046], Fig. 4, [0052], [0061], [0063], step S80, step S90, Fig. 19, [0092], [0101], [0109], [0117], [0118]; please also see above “the response to the arguments part 1”).
Ueno does not teach,
wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range.
Masuda teaches,
wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range (Masuda; Fig. 1, [0031], the laser light emitted from the light source 10 is scanned within a predetermined range (area A-C). A reflector 52 is provided in a part of the specified range (area B-C). The laser light that is emitted to the outside of the laser range finder 1 is the laser light that is emitted to other parts of the specified range (area A-B). the area A-C is referred to as a mirror scan area (scanning area), the area A-B as a distance measurement area and the area B-C as a reference position detection area; Fig. 3, [0056], reflector 52 is disposed outside the measurement area (measurement area is A-B and outside the measurement area is B-C) and within the mirror scan area (area A-C)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the LIDAR device taught by Ueno to include wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range taught by Masuda with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is to position the reflector outside the distance measurement area to prevent the reflected light from the ranging area from being mistakenly recognized as reflected light from the reference position, thereby reducing malfunction of the laser range finder that may occur due to such misrecognition, such as erroneous angle recognition of the object and unexpected calibration operations (Masuda; [0006]-[0010]).
Regarding claim 8, Ueno as modified above teaches the LIDAR device as recited in claim 5, wherein the reflection structure is in the form of a heating structure, the reflection structure in the form of the heating structure including multiple electric heating lines and/or supply lines to the heating lines (Ueno; Fig. 19, [0117] line 3-13, [0118], the heater 83 includes electrodes 84 and 85 which are arranged to be parallel to each other).
Regarding claim 9, Ueno as modified above teaches the LIDAR device as recited in claim 8, wherein the electric heating lines and/or supply lines to the heating lines run in a vertical direction, and/or in a horizontal direction and/or diagonally along the glass cover (Ueno; Fig. 19, [0117] line 3-13, the heater 83 includes electrodes 84 and 85 which are arranged to be parallel to each other).
Claim(s) 3-4, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueno, modified in view of Masuda, in view of Harris et al. (US 20080210881 A1, hereinafter “Harris”).
Regarding claim 3, Ueno teaches a method for ascertaining a fogged glass cover of a LIDAR device, comprising the following steps:
generating and emitting beams by a beam source of the LIDAR device (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0035] line 1-3, light emitting unit 40, laser light DL);
receiving, by a detector, beams reflected and/or backscattered by objects in a scanning range of the LIDAR device (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0038] line 7-11, light receiving unit 60, a scanning range RA, reflected light RL) and beams reflected and/or backscattered by a reflection structure applied on a glass cover of the LIDAR device (Ueno; [0118] line 3-8, Beam DL backscattered by electrodes 84 and 85 on window 82);
ascertaining, based on the received beams, a reflectivity distribution of the reflection structure and of at least one reflectivity of the objects in the scanning range (Ueno; [0118] line 8-14, discloses comparing the deviation amount of the rotation angle (based on the reflected light [0095]-[0100] and Fig. 15) to a reference rotation angle);
comparing the reflectivity distribution to a reference distribution (Same as above);
Ueno does not teach
ascertaining the fogged glass cover based on a deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution, wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range.
Masuda teaches,
wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range (Masuda; Fig. 1, [0031], the laser light emitted from the light source 10 is scanned within a predetermined range (area A-C). A reflector 52 is provided in a part of the specified range (area B-C). The laser light that is emitted to the outside of the laser range finder 1 is the laser light that is emitted to other parts of the specified range (area A-B). the area A-C is referred to as a mirror scan area (scanning area), the area A-B as a distance measurement area and the area B-C as a reference position detection area; Fig. 3, [0056], reflector 52 is disposed outside the measurement area (measurement area is A-B and outside the measurement area is B-C) and within the mirror scan area (area A-C)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the LIDAR device taught by Ueno to include wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range taught by Masuda with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is to position the reflector outside the distance measurement area to prevent the reflected light from the ranging area from being mistakenly recognized as reflected light from the reference position, thereby reducing malfunction of the laser range finder that may occur due to such misrecognition, such as erroneous angle recognition of the object and unexpected calibration operations (Masuda; [0006]-[0010]).
However, Ueno modified in view of Masuda still not teach,
ascertaining the fogged glass cover based on a deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution
Harris teaches ascertaining a fogged glass cover based on a deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution (Harris; Figs. 7-8, [0068]-[0070], disclosed the average signal power for different sections (A-H) and power is determined by detected return radiation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the method taught by Ueno to include wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range taught by Masuda, include ascertaining a fogged glass cover based on a deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution taught by Harris with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is it would have the predictable result of helping indicate a contamination on the window portion (dirt or the like) by monitoring the retuned “back-scattered” radiation for any changes that indicate a reduction of transmission through the window (Harris; [0008] line 1-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Ueno’s method, in view of Harris’s teach, to also detect “fogged glass cover” as “[k]now work in one filed of endeavor may prompt variation of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variation are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art” (See MPEP§ 2143). Here, a method used for detecting dirt can be varied to detect “fogged glass cover” as doing so produce the predictable result of detecting deviation of reflectivity distribution due to obstructed or interfered light path through a glass cover.
Regarding claim 4, Ueno as modified above teaches the method as recited in claim 3 as detailed before.
Ueno doesn’t teach wherein a heating structure of the glass cover is activated and/or controlled as a function of a degree of deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution.
Harris teaches method of LIDAR device, and the window cleaning is activated as a function of a degree of the deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution (Harris; Fig. 8, [0069], [0070], describe the average signal power for different sections (A-H) and power is determined by detected return radiation).
Additionally, Ueno teaches heating structure can be used to prevent condensation (Ueno; Fig. 19, [117] line 4-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the method taught by Ueno to include wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range taught by Masuda, include ascertaining a fogged glass cover based on a deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution and to include activating the heating structure of Ueno as a function of a degree of deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution similar to Harris with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is that by using the cleaning activation signal taught by Harris and connected the signal to the heating structure taught by Ueno would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system including LIDAR calibration and dirt/fog detection at the same time and the ability to remove the dirt/fog on the window.
Regarding claim 10, Ueno teaches a LIDAR device for scanning a scanning range, comprising:
at least one beam source configured to generate beams and to emit the beams into the scanning range (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0035] line 1-8 and [0038] line 1-3, light emitting unit 40, laser light DL, a scanning range RA);
at least one detector configured to received beams reflected and/or backscattered from the scanning range, the at least one beam source and the at least one detector being situated so as to be protected by a glass cover (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0038] line 7-11, light receiving unit 60, a scanning range RA, window 82);
a control unit configured to control the at least one beam source and to evaluate the at least one detector (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0042], control unit 110);
wherein the LIDAR device is configured to:
generate and emit beams using the at least one beam source (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0042] line 1-6, light emitting unit 40, laser light DL);
receive, using the at least one detector, beams reflected and/or backscattered by objects in the scanning range of the LIDAR device (Ueno; Fig. 1, [0042] line 6-10, light receiving unit 60, a scanning range RA, reflected light RL) and beams reflected and/or backscattered by a reflection structure applied on the glass cover of the LIDAR device (Ueno; [0118] line 3-8, Beam DL backscattered by electrodes 84 and 85 on window 82);
ascertain, based on the received beams, a reflectivity distribution of the reflection structure and of at least one reflectivity of the objects in the scanning range (Ueno; [0118] line 8-14, discloses comparing the deviation amount of the rotation angle (based on the reflected light [0095]-[0100] and Fig. 15) to a reference rotation angle);
compare the reflectivity distribution to a reference distribution (Same as above); and
Ueno does not teach
ascertain a fogged glass cover based on a deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution, wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range.
Masuda teaches,
wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range (Masuda; Fig. 1, [0031], the laser light emitted from the light source 10 is scanned within a predetermined range (area A-C). A reflector 52 is provided in a part of the specified range (area B-C). The laser light that is emitted to the outside of the laser range finder 1 is the laser light that is emitted to other parts of the specified range (area A-B). the area A-C is referred to as a mirror scan area (scanning area), the area A-B as a distance measurement area and the area B-C as a reference position detection area; Fig. 3, [0056], reflector 52 is disposed outside the measurement area (measurement area is A-B and outside the measurement area is B-C) and within the mirror scan area (area A-C)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the LIDAR device taught by Ueno to include wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range taught by Masuda with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is to position the reflector outside the distance measurement area to prevent the reflected light from the ranging area from being mistakenly recognized as reflected light from the reference position, thereby reducing malfunction of the laser range finder that may occur due to such misrecognition, such as erroneous angle recognition of the object and unexpected calibration operations (Masuda; [0006]-[0010]).
However, Ueno modified in view of Masuda still not teach,
Harris teaches ascertaining a fogged glass cover based on a deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution (Harris; Fig. 8, [0069], [0070], describe the average signal power for different sections (A-H) and power is determined by detected return radiation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the LIDAR device taught by Ueno to include wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range taught by Masuda include ascertaining a fogged glass cover based on a deviation of the reflectivity distribution from the reference distribution taught by Harris with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is it would have the predictable result of helping indicate a contamination on the window portion (dirt/fog) by monitoring the retuned “back-scattered” radiation for any changes that indicate a reduction of transmission through the window (Harris; [0008] line 1-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Ueno’s method, in view of Harris’s teach, to also detect “fogged glass cover” as “[k]now work in one filed of endeavor may prompt variation of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variation are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art” (See MPEP§ 2143). Here, a method used for detecting dirt can be varied to detect “fogged glass cover” as doing so produce the predictable result of detecting deviation of reflectivity distribution due to obstructed or interfered light path through a glass cover.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueno, modified in view of Masuda, in view of Pastor et al. (US 20200110259 A1, hereinafter “Pastor”).
Regarding claim 6, Ueno as modified above teaches the LIDAR device as recited in claim 5 as detailed before.
Ueno doesn’t teach the LIDAR device, wherein the reflection structure is situated on an inner surface of the glass cover or between a first glass cover layer and a second glass cover layer.
Pastor teaches the LIDAR device, wherein the reflection structure is situated on an inner surface of the glass cover or between a first glass cover layer and a second glass cover layer (Pastor; Fig. 1, [0057]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the LIDAR device taught by Ueno to include wherein the reflection structure is situated in a section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device outside of the section of the glass cover of the LIDAR device used for scanning the scanning range taught by Masuda, include the reflection structure is situated on the inner surface of the glass cover taught by Pastor with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is it would have the predictable result of helping prevent the collecting of the dust/dirt from the environment when disposed the reflection structure is situated on an inner surface of the glass cover/window.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIA-LING CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1047. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8-5 ET.
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)270-3630. 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.
/CHIA-LING CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645