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 .
Response to Amendments
The Amendment filed May 6th, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-11, and 13-26 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Specification and Claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed February 25th, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 9-13, 15-22, and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crouch et al. (United States Patent Application 20200166647), hereinafter Crouch.
Regarding claim 1, Crouch teaches a lidar apparatus ([0072] LIDAR system 200) comprising:
at least one light source configured to provide a light beam ([0072] A laser source 212 emits a carrier wave 201); and
a beam steering arrangement configured to scan the light beam up to a first range in a first directional field of view and to scan the light beam up to a second range in a second directional field of view that is perpendicular to the first directional field of view ([0134] The hi-res Doppler LIDAR uses a scanning beam 322 that sweeps from one side to another side, represented by future beam 323, through an azimuthal field of view 324, as well as through vertical angles (FIG. 3B)), the beam steering arrangement including a lens arrangement, the lens arrangement having a first lens and a second lens separated by an air gap (Fig. 2F; [0085] the collimating optics 229 in a refractive collimator 231 includes one or more refractive lens elements)
Regarding claim 2, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 1, wherein:
the first directional field of view is a horizontal directional field of view and the first range is 360 degrees, and the second directional field of view is a vertical directional field of view and the second range is approximately 20 degrees ([0077] The scan sweeps through a range of azimuth angles (horizontally) and inclination angles (vertically above and below a level direction at zero inclination); [0134] In some embodiments, the field of view is 360 degrees of azimuth. In some embodiments the inclination angle field of view is from about +10 degrees to about −10 degrees or a subset thereof.).
Regarding claim 6, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 2, wherein the beam steering arrangement includes:
a polygon mirror having a plurality of faces and configured to receive a light beam from the at least one light source, the polygon mirror arranged to be rotated about a central axis of the polygon mirror to scan the light beam in the vertical directional field of view, and to be rotated about a vertical axis to scan the light beam in the horizontal directional field of view (Fig. 2G; Fig. 2H; [0094] As the polygon scanner 244 and facet 245a rotate, the fan 233″ is redirected within the second plane from the first angle to the second angle to perform a swipe of the beam. ).
Regarding claim 7, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 2, wherein the beam steering arrangement includes:
a polygon mirror having a plurality of faces, the polygon mirror arranged to be rotated about a vertical axis to scan light beams in the horizontal directional field of view ([0094] As the polygon scanner 244 and facet 245a rotate, the fan 233″ is redirected within the second plane from the first angle to the second angle to perform a swipe of the beam.); and
a splitter and circulator arrangement configured to receive the light beam from the at least one light source to split the light beam according to a beam splitting ratio to generate multiple output beams ([0081] the beam 201 from the source 212 is divided by a splitter into multiple waveguides 225a, 225b, 225c, 225d along the transmission path 222 to multiple circulators 226), wherein the
lens arrangement is configured to receive the multiple output beams to launch multiple propagated light beams at different angles so that the multiple propagated light beams span the second range of the vertical directional field of view, towards the polygon mirror (Fig 2E; [0085] the collimating optics 229 in a reflective collimator 231 is a parabolic mirror; Fig. 2G).
Regarding claim 9, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 7, wherein the splitter and circulator arrangement includes:
a waveguide and/or fiber array configured to generate the multiple output beams from the light beam ([0081] to multiple circulators 226 that direct the beam 201 to the tips 217 of the waveguides 225a, 225b, 225c, 225d).
Regarding claim 10, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 9, wherein the splitter and circulator arrangement includes:
a splitter configured to receive the light beam from the at least one light source and split the light beam ([0072] A laser source 212 emits a carrier wave 201 that is phase or frequency modulated in modulator 282a, before or after splitter 216, to produce a phase coded or chirped optical signal 203);
a phase modulator configured to receive at least a portion of the light beam split by the splitter, the phase modulator configured to phase modulate the portion of the light beam split by the splitter to output a phase modulated split beam ([0072] A splitter 216 splits the modulated (or, as shown, the unmodulated) optical signal);
a fiber amplifier configured to receive and amplify the phase modulated split beam and to output an amplified phase modulated split beam (Fig. 2A; [0076] as modulator 282b on the local oscillator (LO, also called the reference path) side or on the transmit side (before the optical amplifier));
a plane light-wave circuit splitter configured to divide the amplified phase modulated split beam into multiple beams ([0075] Optical coupling to flood or focus on a target or focus past the pupil plane are not depicted. As used herein, an optical coupler is any component that affects the propagation of light within spatial coordinates to direct light from one component to another component, such as a vacuum, air, glass, crystal, mirror, lens, optical circulator, beam splitter, phase plate, polarizer, optical fiber, optical mixer, among others, alone or in some combination.); and
an independent circulator arrangement configured to route the multiple beams to a fiber channel/physical contact connector that couples the multiple beams to individual waveguides or fibers of the waveguide and/or fiber array ([0079] a circulator 226 and out a tip 217 of the single-mode optical waveguide that is positioned in a focal plane of a collimating optic 219).
Regarding claim 11, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 10, wherein the lens arrangement comprises:
a combination of multiple lenses including the first lens and second lens, the multiple lenses configured to collimate different light beams output by the waveguide and/or fiber array, the multiple lenses aligned such that each of the multiple output beams passes through all of the multiple lenses (Fig. 2F [0085] the collimating optics 229 in a refractive collimator 231 includes one or more refractive lens elements).
Regarding claim 13, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 2, wherein the beam steering arrangement includes:
a galvanometer mirror configured receive the light beam from the at least one light source and to be rotated about a center horizontal axis to scan the light beam in the vertical directional field of view ([0090] In an example embodiment, the scanner 241 is a galvanometer); and
a polygon mirror configured to receive a reflected light beam from the galvanometer mirror and configured to be rotated about a center vertical axis to scan the light beam in the horizontal directional field of view (Fig. 2H; [0092] In one embodiment, the second scanner is a polygon scanner 244 with a plurality of facets 245a, 245b that rotates with an angular velocity 249 about an axis of rotation 243).
Regarding claim 15, Crouch teaches a lidar apparatus comprising:
at least one light source configured to provide a light beam ([0072] A laser source 212 emits a carrier wave 201);
a splitter and circulator arrangement configured to receive the light beam from the at least one light source to split the light beam according to a beam splitting ratio to generate multiple output beams ([0081]the beam 201 from the source 212 is divided by a splitter into multiple waveguides 225a, 225b, 225c, 225d along the transmission path 222 to multiple circulators 226 that direct the beam 201 to the tips 217 of the waveguides 225a, 225b, 225c, 225d); and
a lens arrangement configured to receive the multiple output beams to launch multiple propagated light beams at different angles so that the multiple propagated light beams span a range of a vertical directional field of view, wherein the lens arrangement includes a first lens and a second lens separated by an air gap ([0082] In an embodiment, the fan of individual collimated beams 233 is generated by passing the diverging beam 201 from the tips 217 of the array 215 through a single collimating optic 229; [0085] the collimating optics 229 in a refractive collimator 231 includes one or more refractive lens elements).
Regarding claim 16, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 15, wherein the splitter and circulator arrangement includes:
a waveguide and/or fiber array configured to generate the multiple output beams from the light beam (Fig. 2E; [0082] emerge from the collimator 231 as the separately collimated beams 236).
Regarding claim 17, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 16, wherein the splitter and circulator arrangement includes:
a splitter configured to receive the light beam from the at least one light source and split the light beam into multiple light beams ([0072] A laser source 212 emits a carrier wave 201 that is phase or frequency modulated in modulator 282a, before or after splitter 216, to produce a phase coded or chirped optical signal 203);
a phase modulator configured to receive one light beam of the multiple light beams split by the splitter, the phase modulator configured to phase modulate the one light beam split by the splitter to output a phase modulated split beam ([0072] A splitter 216 splits the modulated (or, as shown, the unmodulated) optical signal);
a fiber amplifier configured to receive and amplify the phase modulated split beam and to output an amplified phase modulated split beam (Fig. 2A; [0076] as modulator 282b on the local oscillator (LO, also called the reference path) side or on the transmit side (before the optical amplifier));
a plane light-wave circuit splitter configured to divide the amplified phase modulated split beam into multiple beams ([0075] Optical coupling to flood or focus on a target or focus past the pupil plane are not depicted. As used herein, an optical coupler is any component that affects the propagation of light within spatial coordinates to direct light from one component to another component, such as a vacuum, air, glass, crystal, mirror, lens, optical circulator, beam splitter, phase plate, polarizer, optical fiber, optical mixer, among others, alone or in some combination.); and
an independent circulator arrangement configured to route the multiple beams to a fiber channel/physical contact connector that couples the multiple beams to individual waveguides or fibers of the waveguide and/or fiber array ([0079] a circulator 226 and out a tip 217 of the single-mode optical waveguide that is positioned in a focal plane of a collimating optic 219).
Regarding claim 18, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 16, wherein the splitter and circulator arrangement includes:
a first splitter configured to split the light beam into a first light beam and a second light beam ([0072] A laser source 212 emits a carrier wave 201 that is phase or frequency modulated in modulator 282a, before or after splitter 216, to produce a phase coded or chirped optical signal 203);
an electro-optical modulator configured to receive the first light beam and modulate the first light beam to produce a modulated light beam ([0072] A splitter 216 splits the modulated (or, as shown, the unmodulated) optical signal);
an optical amplifier configured to amplify the modulated light beam to produce an amplified modulated light beam (Fig. 2A; [0076] as modulator 282b on the local oscillator (LO, also called the reference path) side or on the transmit side (before the optical amplifier));
a second splitter configured to split the amplified modulated light beam into a plurality of amplified modulated light beams ([0075] Optical coupling to flood or focus on a target or focus past the pupil plane are not depicted. As used herein, an optical coupler is any component that affects the propagation of light within spatial coordinates to direct light from one component to another component, such as a vacuum, air, glass, crystal, mirror, lens, optical circulator, beam splitter, phase plate, polarizer, optical fiber, optical mixer, among others, alone or in some combination.); and
a bank of independent circulators configured to route the plurality of amplified modulated light beams to waveguides or fibers of a waveguide and/or fiber array, which in turn direct the plurality of amplified modulated light beams to the lens arrangement ([0080] In one embodiment, each waveguide of the waveguide array has a respective circulator 226 and a respective optical mixer 284).
Regarding claim 19, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 18, wherein the lens arrangement comprises:
a single lens or a combination of multiple lenses including the first lens and the second lens, the multiple lenses configured to collimate different light beams output by the waveguide and/or fiber array, the multiple lenses aligned such that each of the multiple output beams passes through all of the multiple lenses (Fig. 2F; [0085] the collimating optics 229 in a refractive collimator 231 includes one or more refractive lens elements).
Regarding claim 20, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 18, further comprising:
a polygon mirror having a plurality of faces, the polygon mirror arranged to be rotated about a vertical axis and to receive the multiple propagated light beams output by the lens arrangement to scan the multiple propagated light beams in a horizontal directional field of view (Fig. 2H; [0092] the second scanner is a polygon scanner 244 with a plurality of facets 245a, 245b that rotates with an angular velocity 249 about an axis of rotation 243).
Regarding claim 21, Crouch teaches a method for scanning a light beam in a lidar system, the method comprising:
obtaining a light beam from a light source ([0072] A laser source 212 emits a carrier wave 201);
modulating the light beam to produce a modulated light beam ([0072] that is phase or frequency modulated in modulator 282a);
scanning the modulated light beam up to a first range in a first directional field of view and up to a second range in a second directional field of view that is perpendicular to the first directional field of view ([0077] The scan sweeps through a range of azimuth angles (horizontally) and inclination angles (vertically above and below a level direction at zero inclination)); and
capturing reflected light along the first directional field of view and the second directional field of view ([0073] The reference beam 207b and returned beam 291 are combined in zero or more optical mixers 284 to produce an optical signal of characteristics to be properly detected; [0077] FIG. 2B is a block diagram that illustrates a simple saw tooth scan pattern for a hi-res Doppler system, used in some prior art embodiments. The scan sweeps through a range of azimuth angles (horizontally) and inclination angles (vertically above and below a level direction at zero inclination)).
Regarding claim 22, Crouch teaches the method of claim 21, wherein:
the first directional field of view is a horizontal directional field of view and the first range is 360 degrees, and the second directional field of view is a vertical directional field of view and the second range is approximately 20 degrees ([0077]The scan sweeps through a range of azimuth angles (horizontally) and inclination angles (vertically above and below a level direction at zero inclination); [0134] In some embodiments, the field of view is 360 degrees of azimuth. In some embodiments the inclination angle field of view is from about +10 degrees to about −10 degrees or a subset thereof.).
Regarding claim 24, Crouch teaches the method of claim 22, wherein scanning comprises:
splitting the light beam ([0072] A laser source 212 emits a carrier wave 201 that is phase or frequency modulated in modulator 282a, before or after splitter 216, to produce a phase coded or chirped optical signal 203);
phase modulating a portion of the light beam split by the splitting to provide a phase modulated split beam (Fig. 2A; [0072] A splitter 216 splits the modulated (or, as shown, the unmodulated) optical signal);
amplifying the phase modulated split beam and to provide an amplified phase modulated split beam (Fig. 2A; [0076] as modulator 282b on the local oscillator (LO, also called the reference path) side or on the transmit side (before the optical amplifier));
dividing the amplified phase modulated split beam into multiple beams ([0075] Optical coupling to flood or focus on a target or focus past the pupil plane are not depicted. As used herein, an optical coupler is any component that affects the propagation of light within spatial coordinates to direct light from one component to another component, such as a vacuum, air, glass, crystal, mirror, lens, optical circulator, beam splitter, phase plate, polarizer, optical fiber, optical mixer, among others, alone or in some combination.); and
routing the multiple beams to individual waveguides or fibers of a waveguide and/or fiber array ([0079] a circulator 226 and out a tip 217 of the single-mode optical waveguide that is positioned in a focal plane of a collimating optic 219).
Regarding claim 25, Crouch teaches the method of claim 22, where scanning comprises:
rotating a galvanometer mirror about a center horizontal axis to scan the light beam in the vertical directional field of view ([0090] In an example embodiment, the scanner 241 is a galvanometer);
receiving at a polygon mirror a reflected light beam from the galvanometer mirror (Fig. 2H; [0090] the scanner 241 is a galvanometer); and
rotating the polygon mirror about a center vertical axis to scan the light beam in the horizontal directional field of view (Fig. 2H; [0092] In one embodiment, the second scanner is a polygon scanner 244 with a plurality of facets 245a, 245b that rotates with an angular velocity 249 about an axis of rotation 243).
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 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.
Claims 3 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crouch in view of Greiner (US Patent Application Publication 20200386865), hereinafter Greiner.
Regarding claim 3, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 2, wherein the beam steering arrangement includes:
a beam splitter configured to split a reflected light beam from the reflective optical element to produce a plurality of light beams ([0072] A laser source 212 emits a carrier wave 201 that is phase or frequency modulated in modulator 282a, before or after splitter 216, to produce a phase coded or chirped optical signal 203); and
the lens arrangement is configured to receive the plurality of light beams and direct the plurality of light beams spanning the second range in the second directional field of view (Fig 2E; [0085] the collimating optics 229 in a reflective collimator 231 is a parabolic mirror; Fig. 2G);
Crouch fails to teach a reflective optical element arranged to reflect the light beam from the at least one light source; and the reflective optical element, the beam splitter and the lens arrangement are mounted to be rotated about an axis substantially perpendicular to the first directional field of view up to the first range to scan the plurality of light beams in the first directional field of view.
However, Greiner teaches a reflective optical element arranged to reflect the light beam from the at least one light source ([0044] Transmitting unit 301 may include optical elements 308 in the optical path of emitted laser beams 303-1-1 through 303-1-n. Such optical elements may be optical lenses, mirrors and the like);
wherein the reflective optical element, the beam splitter and the lens arrangement are mounted to be rotated about an axis substantially perpendicular to the first directional field of view up to the first range to scan the plurality of light beams in the first directional field of view (Fig. 1; [0027] LIDAR system 100 is designed to detect objects in an overall detection area 102 of 360°...LIDAR system 100 includes a rotor 106 mounted rotatably about a rotation axis 104).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the reflective optical element incident on the beam splitter and the arrangement of all the components mounted to be rotated similar to Greiner, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of focusing the source beam and achieving the full range in the horizontal field of view as stated in previous limitations.
Regarding claim 23, Crouch teaches the method of claim 22, wherein scanning comprises:
splitting the light beam from the light source with a beam splitter to produce a plurality of light beams ([0081]the beam 201 from the source 212 is divided by a splitter into multiple waveguides 225a, 225b, 225c, 225d along the transmission path 222 to multiple circulators 226 that direct the beam 201 to the tips 217 of the waveguides 225a, 225b, 225c, 225d); and
directing the plurality of light beams with a lens arrangement to span the second range in the second directional field of view, the lens arrangement including a first lens and a second lens separated by an air gap ([0082] In an embodiment, the fan of individual collimated beams 233 is generated by passing the diverging beam 201 from the tips 217 of the array 215 through a single collimating optic 229; [0085] the collimating optics 229 in a refractive collimator 231 includes one or more refractive lens elements);
Crouch fails to teach the method of rotating the beam splitter and the lens arrangement about an axis substantially perpendicular to the first directional field of view up to the first range to scan the plurality of light beams in the first directional field of view.
However, Greiner teaches the method of rotating the beam splitter and the lens arrangement about an axis substantially perpendicular to the first directional field of view up to the first range to scan the plurality of light beams in the first directional field of view (Fig. 1; [0027] LIDAR system 100 is designed to detect objects in an overall detection area 102 of 360°...LIDAR system 100 includes a rotor 106 mounted rotatably about a rotation axis 104).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the arrangement of all the components mounted to be rotated similar to Greiner, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of focusing achieving the full range in the horizontal field of view as stated in previous limitations.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crouch in view of Greiner and further in view of Sun et al. (US Patent Application Publication 20200191921), hereinafter Sun.
Regarding claim 4, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 3.
Crouch fails to teach the further limitations of claim 4.
However, Greiner teaches the arrangement wherein the beam steering arrangement includes:
a first diverse optical element arranged to receive light reflected by a first reflective face to diverge light to create the second directional field of view ([0044] Transceiver unit 108 includes transmitting unit 301...Transmitting unit 301 may include optical elements 308...Such optical elements may be optical lenses, mirrors and the like, for example; [0045] Transceiver unit 108 furthermore includes beam duplication unit 305. Beam duplication unit 305 may be designed as a diffractive optical element);
Greiner still fails to teach a reflective optical element having first reflective face and a second reflective face at a right-angle to each other, the first reflective face configured to reflect the light beam from the at least one light source and the second reflective face configured to reflect incoming light; a second diverse optical element configured to receive incoming light reflected by one or more targets and to direct the incoming light to the second reflective face of the reflective optical element; or the reflective optical element, the first diverse optical element and the second diverse optical element are mounted to be rotated about an axis substantially perpendicular to the first directional field of view up to the first range to scan the plurality of light beams in the first directional field of view.
However, Sun teaches a reflective optical element having first reflective face and a second reflective face at a right-angle to each other, the first reflective face configured to reflect the light beam from the at least one light source and the second reflective face configured to reflect incoming light ([0050] The reflective surfaces 502 tilt from the bottom base face at different angles. In the example shown, the angles formed between the reflective surfaces 502 and the bottom base face are 89 degrees, 90 degrees, and 91 degrees, respectively. It should be appreciated that the exact angles do not limit the disclosure...a second reflective surface may form a right angle (90 degrees) with the bottom base face; [0052] Light beams transmitted by the light transmitters 710 pass through a converging lens 732, and are then deflected by a small mirror 730 toward the rotating mirror assembly 501. Next, the mirror assembly 501 deflects the light beams toward the target 402. Light reflected from the target 402 travels toward the mirror assembly 501, and is then deflected by the mirror assembly 501 toward the light detectors 720; Fig. 5; Fig. 7a);
a second diverse optical element configured to receive incoming light reflected by one or more targets and to direct the incoming light to the second reflective face of the reflective optical element ([0052] Before the reflected light reaches the light detectors 720, it passes through a converging lens 736);
wherein the reflective optical element, the first diverse optical element and the second diverse optical element are mounted to be rotated about an axis substantially perpendicular to the first directional field of view up to the first range to scan the plurality of light beams in the first directional field of view ([0050] adjoined to a rotatable platform 503; Fig. 7a).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the first diverse optical element similar to Greiner and the reflective optical element, second diverse optical element and the mounting of the elements similar to Sun, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of directing the light beam in a predictable way that would achieve the visual range outlined in previous limitations.
Regarding claim 5, Crouch, as modified above, teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 4
Crouch fails to teach the reflective optical element as a right- angle mirror or a prism, and the first diverse optical element and second diverse optical element are an optical lens, diffractive optical element or prism.
However, Greiner teaches the first diverse optical element as an optical lens, diffractive optical element or prism ([0045] Transceiver unit 108 furthermore includes beam duplication unit 305. Beam duplication unit 305 may be designed as a diffractive optical element)
Greiner still fails to teach the reflective optical element is a right- angle mirror or a prism, and the second diverse optical element are an optical lens, diffractive optical element or prism.
However, Sun teaches the reflective optical element is a right- angle mirror or a prism ([0050] A triangular prism-shaped mirror assembly 501), and the second diverse optical element are an optical lens, diffractive optical element or prism ([0052] a converging lens 736).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the first diverse optics as an optical lens, diffractive optical element or prism similar to Greiner, or the reflective optical element as a right-angle mirror or prism and the second diverse optical element as an optical lens, diffractive optical element or prism similar to Sun, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of directing the light beam to the target with an idealized reflective or transmission level.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crouch in view of Sun.
Regarding claim 8, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 7.
Crouch fails to teach the polygon mirror wherein the polygon mirror is an irregular polygon mirror, and wherein the plurality of faces of the polygon mirror are tilted by a predetermined amount.
However, Sun teaches the polygon mirror wherein the polygon mirror is an irregular polygon mirror, and wherein the plurality of faces of the polygon mirror is are tilted by a predetermined amount ([0050] A triangular prism-shaped mirror assembly 501 is provided, comprising a bottom base face (not shown) adjoined to a rotatable platform 503 and three joining faces acting as reflective surfaces 502...In the example shown, the angles formed between the reflective surfaces 502 and the bottom base face are 89 degrees, 90 degrees, and 91 degrees, respectively).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the irregular polygon mirror shape similar to Sun, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of specifically directing the incident beam.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crouch in view of Nicolaescu (US Patent Application Publication 20190391243), hereinafter Nicolaescu.
Regarding claim 14, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 2
Crouch fails to teach a plurality of beam steering arrangements each configured to scan in overlapping or non-overlapping portions of 360 degrees in the horizontal directional field of view.
However, Nicolaescu teaches a lidar apparatus comprising a plurality of beam steering arrangements each configured to scan in overlapping or non-overlapping portions of 360 degrees in the horizontal directional field of view ([0096] a plurality of beam steering modules; [0108] the horizontal angle range can be 40 deg; [0192] The optimal number of channels depends on the overall system parameters and more specifically the number of modules that are needed to provide full 360 degree coverage).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the plurality of beam steering modules similar to Nicolaescu, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of ensuring a full range in the horizontal field of view, as outlined by the previous claim limitation.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crouch in view of Sandborn et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20200142066 A1), hereinafter Sandborn.
Regarding Claim 26, Crouch teaches the lidar apparatus of claim 1, wherein the lidar unit includes a waveguide or fiber array ([0081] the beam 201 from the source 212 is divided by a splitter into multiple waveguides 225a, 225b, 225c, 225d along the transmission path 222 to multiple circulators 226)
Crouch fails to teach an FMCW lidar unit with multiple beams in which the beams are refracted at different angles each.
However, Sandborn teaches a frequency-modulated continuous wave (FMCW) lidar unit ([0029] FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing an example of the FMCW LIDAR system),
wherein the at least one light source configured to provide the light beam is included in the FMCW lidar unit, the light beam being a first light beam, the at least one light source further being configured to provide a second light beam ([0039] FIG. 9 is a diagram of an example multi-channel FMCW LIDAR system, according to one aspect of the present disclosure. In one aspect, the system can include a laser module 211 with N laser diodes 212, where N is an integer ≥2, coupled to a photonics assembly 228. In the illustrated example, the system includes a single pair of laser diodes 212 (i.e., N=2)),
the first light beam and the second light beam configured to illuminate the lens arrangement such that the first light beam is refracted at a different angle than the second light beam ([0039] The optical power tap 214 is configured to direct the light output received from the laser diodes 212 along a “target” path 221 (at a first port of the optical power tap 214) leading to the beam steering module 229; [0041] FIGS. 10A and 10B illustrates two examples of alternative arrangements for the beam steering module 229...In this aspect shown in FIG. 10A, the beam steering module 229 comprises a bundle of free-space interfaces 37 configured to receive the laser beams... With the aid of the optical lens system 35, the different beams may cover an extended FOV, in either 1- or 2-dimensions. In one aspect, the free-space interfaces 37 are placed at the focal plane of the optical lens system 35 and are configured to send and receive optical signals at the same angles or different angles).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Crouch to comprise the multi-beam FMCW lidar unit with beam steering similar to Sandborn, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of creating a wide field-of-view lidar scanning unit with coherent modulated emission.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 6th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., an air gap between lenses as describe in the amended claim 1) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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 there is no reference made to a lens arrangement having a first lens and a second lens separated by an air gap, however, in the claim that this claim was originally dependent on, claim 10, collimating optics 229 and refractive collimator 231 were stated as including one or more refractive lenses. Without specification of any extra component between these elements, the default configuration would either include an air gap or a no-air gap, and thus would read as relevant reference made on the limitation of the claim. The rejection of this claim limitation was amended to reflect this specific combination in this rejection.
Regarding Applicant’s argument that a first and second optical element mounted to a rotatable axis perpendicular to the field of view not being taught in Crouch or Sun, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). A first optical element is outlined by the prior art of Greiner in the non-final rejection of claim 4, and is then combined with the rejection of second optical element as taught by Sun. A statement of obviousness is then presented for the combination of the optical elements and as such the rejection as a combination of multiple prior arts still reads on the claim limitation.
Regarding the argument that Crouch does not teach capturing reflected light in a first and second directional field of view as outlined in claim 21, it is noted that the vocabulary of the claim does not expressly state what configuration of directional field of view scans must be incorporated, only that they must be perpendicular to each other, as is described in the two-dimensional scan performed by Crouch. Further, in the prior art reference immediately following the citation made previously, and in the same embodiment, Crouch teaches that “[0078] Each pixel in the image represents a point in the point cloud which indicates range or intensity or relative speed or some combination at the inclination angle and azimuth angle associated with the pixel” and as such clearly outlines the capturing of light in the first and second directional field of view of the limitation, and is considered an extension of the citation as it pertains to the embodiment.
Finally, regarding the applicant’s argument regarding the rejection of claim 25, that the configuration of the galvanometer mirror and polygonal mirror of Crouch do not match the configuration of that outlined by the claim limitation, it is pointed out that Fig. 2G outlines a scanner and polygon mirror that matches the claim limitations of the beginning of the claim. Further, as described in the prior art, the galvanometer’s configuration, although not stated in the specification, would only be reasonable as matching the configuration as described in the claim, especially when combined with the polygonal mirror. This two mirror system is regularly combined to increase the vertical and horizontal field of view and as such is assumed to be standard as taught in the art and in the prior art of Crouch.
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 ROBERT WILLIAM VASQUEZ JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3770. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, Flex Friday, 7:00-4:00 PST.
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, Robert Hodge can be reached at (571) 272 - 2097. 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.
/ROBERT W VASQUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ROBERT W HODGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights