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 Amendment
The amendment filed February 26th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-4, and 8-19 remain pending in the application. Applicant's amendments to the claims have overcome each and every 112a rejections previously set forth, as well as have overcome the non-statutory double patenting rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final office Action mailed January 30th, 2026.
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 1-4, and 8-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altmann et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20190227149 A1), Altmann, in view of Verheggen et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20160259058), hereinafter Verheggen, further in view of LaChapelle et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20180284277 A1), LaChapelle.
Regarding claim 1, Altmann teaches an airborne multiple pulse in the air laser scanner configured to be arranged on an aircraft for surveying a target along a flight path ([0019] Some aspects of the invention relate to an airborne laser scanner configured to be arranged on an aircraft for surveying a target along a flight path,; [0045] the emitter 21 emits a plurality of consecutive laser pulses 211 towards the target), wherein the airborne laser scanner comprises
an emitter configured for emitting a plurality of consecutive laser pulses towards the ground surface for generating a point cloud of the scanning area ([0045] the emitter 21 emits a plurality of consecutive laser pulses 211 towards the target; [0048] Particularly, a three-dimensional point cloud based on these associations (point measurements) can be generated by an external computer in a post-processing.),
at least one optical element configured for deflecting the laser pulses along pulse paths towards the target ([0044] the optical element 22; [0047] the optical element is deflecting the pulses),
a motor configured for moving the optical element to cause a periodically repeating movement of the pulse paths ([0044] The movement of the optical element 22 induced by the motor may be a continuous or a partial rotatory movement.),
a receiver configured for receiving the laser pulses backscattered from the target ([0045] The pulses 251 backscattered from the target are received by the receiver 25.),
a computer configured for controlling the emitter, the motor, and the receiver ([0046] The computer 26 is connected to the emitter 21, the receiver 25, and the motor 24, and it is configured for controlling these components.),
determining directions of the pulse paths for pulses received outside the blindness window ([0048] In this case, the internal computer 26 is merely configured to collect the data. The data may comprise time stamps of pulse transmission and pulse reception or distance values already calculated by means of said stamps, and transmission/reception direction),
triggering the emitter to emit the laser pulses with a first pulse space variation, overlaying the third pulse space variation, said first pulse space variation being coordinated with the periodically repeating movement of the pulse path ([0050] According to the invention, the laser pulses (or respectively: the laser pulse rate, or the laser pulse spacings) are modulated based on the directional component of the current pulse path; [0029] The computer may be configured for calculating a time-based sequence of the varying pulse spacings; [0066] In particular, any combination of the above mentioned pulse sequences may be applied.),
wherein the computer is further configured for triggering the emitter to emit the laser pulses with a second pulse space variation overlaying with the first pulse space variation, wherein according to the second pulse space variation, pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during a first period of the periodically repeating movement are at least in part modified relative to pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during any of subsequent periods of the periodically repeating movement and thereby reducing and/or spatially distributing the laser pulses not sampled by the receiver ([0029] The computer may be configured for calculating a time-based sequence of the varying pulse spacings; [0066] In particular, any combination of the above mentioned pulse sequences may be applied.),
wherein according to the second pulse space variation, pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during the first period are differing by one of: a proportional value from pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during any of the subsequent periods (Fig. 4a,4b; [0058] In other words, the closer the points of the cloud 5 are to the reverse lines 7, the lower the pulse rate is),
Altman fails to teach the scanner such that at least next pulse is emitted before a precedent pulse arrives back at the laser scanner, and wherein the receiver exhibits blindness windows associated with the emitting of the laser pulses, wherein backscattered pulses received during the blindness windows are not sampled by the receiver, and determining directions for pulses received outside the blindness window
However, Verheggen teaches an airborne scanner such that at least next pulse is emitted before a precedent pulse arrives back at the laser scanner ([0037] FIG. 4 is an example of a timing diagram showing a sequence 401 depicting five sequential laser trigger pulses to the laser and a corresponding sequence 402 of laser output pulses for the case where the laser is triggered before the echo (shown in sequence 403) from the previous pulse has been received. Consequently, under this scenario, there are two optical pulses in the air at the same time.), and
wherein the receiver exhibits blindness windows associated with the emitting of the laser pulses, wherein backscattered pulses received during the blindness windows are not sampled by the receiver, and determining directions for pulses received outside the blindness window (Fig. 3; [0036] The corresponding blind zones (i.e., the time in which the system is blind to incoming signals) are shown as 320, 321 and 322. In a typical system, the width of the laser pulse is 2 or 3 nanoseconds, while the blind zone can extend for tens of nanoseconds, or more.)
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 Altmann to comprise the multiple pulses in the air (MPIA) emitter, and blindness window in which the receiver ignores detections similar to Verheggen, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result improving the scan rate and overlapping field of regard for a more detailed image in the case of the MPIA, and of reducing the amount of noise the detector receives from internal backscattered or other stray light in the case of the blind windows.
Altmann fails to teach the scanner, configured to adjust the pulse rate depending on the momentary direction of the pulse paths, such that the pulse rate drops at an edge of the scanning area, such that the first pulse space variation is periodic and has a period equal that of the periodically repeating movement.
However, Weed teaches wherein the scanner is configured to adjust the pulse rate depending on the momentary direction of the pulse paths, such that the pulse rate drops at an edge of the scanning area ([0035] In some implementations, the controller may compare the scan speed to a threshold speed. Then the controller may provide a control signal to the light source to adjust the pulse rate when the scan speed increases above or decreases below the threshold speed...As the scanner approaches the periphery and is about to change directions the scan speed may drop below the threshold speed and accordingly the pulse rate may decrease back to the first pulse rate of 600 kHz.),
such that the first pulse space variation is periodic and has a period equal that of the periodically repeating movement ([0035] In some implementations, the controller may compare the scan speed to a threshold speed. Then the controller may provide a control signal to the light source to adjust the pulse rate when the scan speed increases above or decreases below the threshold speed...As the scanner approaches the periphery and is about to change directions the scan speed may drop below the threshold speed and accordingly the pulse rate may decrease back to the first pulse rate of 600 kHz.)
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 Patent 11639987 to comprise the pulse space variation and period similar to Weed, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of regulating power use for periphery areas of a scan area, of little or less importance to scan than the center region.
Altmann fails to teach a second pulse space variation differing from a first by one of: a constant value from the pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during any of the subsequent periods, and a random value from the pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during any of the subsequent periods,
However, LaChapelle teaches a second pulse space variation differing from a first by one of: a constant value from the pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during any of the subsequent periods ([0050] As an example, the light source 110 may be a pulsed laser that produces pulses at a substantially constant pulse repetition frequency of approximately 640 kHz (e.g., 640,000 pulses per second), corresponding to a pulse period of approximately 1.56 μs), and
a random value from the pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during any of the subsequent periods ([0138] In one implementation, the controller 622A switches the pump laser 650 off and then back on to initiate a pseudo-random sequence of fast pulses)
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 Altmann to comprise the constant value, or random value period difference similar to LaChapelle, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of generating steady laser pulses with a known variation in the case of a constant value, or of overlapping scans in an unpredictable pattern and thus generating novel results in the case of the random value.
Regarding claim 2, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the second pulse space variation has a digital pattern ([0066] In another embodiment (not shown), the pulse spacing is varied according to a step characteristic, wherein the pulse spacing is kept constant for a step period and then jumps up step by step).
Regarding claim 3, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the second pulse space variation has an analogue pattern ([0066] The pulse spacing may be gradually varied according to a sinusoidal characteristic (FIG. 6a), a linear zig-zag characteristic (FIG. 6b), a wave characteristic (FIG. 6c), or a saw tooth characteristic (FIG. 6d)).
Regarding claim 4, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the second pulse space variation follows a sinusoidal pattern, a linear zig-zag pattern, a wave pattern, a saw tooth pattern, a step pattern, or any combination of the patterns ([0066] The pulse spacing may be gradually varied according to a sinusoidal characteristic (FIG. 6a), a linear zig-zag characteristic (FIG. 6b), a wave characteristic (FIG. 6c), or a saw tooth characteristic (FIG. 6d)).
Regarding claim 8, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1,
Altmann fails to teach the second pulse space variation, the pulse spaces emitted during the subsequent periods are switching between at least two different frequency profiles.
However, LaChapelle teaches the second pulse space variation, the pulse spaces emitted during the subsequent periods are switching between at least two different frequency profiles ([0065] Further, the controller 150 may cause the light source 110 to adjust one or more of the frequency, period, duration, pulse energy, peak power, average power, or wavelength of the optical pulses produced by light source 110).
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 Altmann to comprise the frequency switching of subsequent periods similar to LaChapelle, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of producing a wider frequency ranged scan of a target area.
Regarding claim 9, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the periodically repeating movement is a zig-zag movement, a circular movement, or a stroke movement (Fig.4a,4b; [0058] FIGS. 4a and 4b show the result of pulse modulation according to the invention.).
Regarding claim 10, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the optical element is a plane mirror, a wedge lens, a prism, or a polygon mirror ([0044] A prism 22, in particular a wedge prism, as optical element).
Regarding claim 11, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the optical element is configured for deflecting the laser pulses backscattered from the target towards the receiver (Fig. 2a,2b; [0053] By the oscillating positioning of the mirror 23, the emitted laser pulses 211 are deflected towards the target and back along a pulse path).
Regarding claim 12, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the motor is configured for rotating the optical element around a first rotation axis, resulting in a cone-shaped laser pulse emission pattern, wherein the airborne laser scanner further comprises an angle encoder configured for providing positions of the optical element ([0043] The laser pulse emission pattern 4 is symbolically shown as a pyramid. In reality however it rather appears as a cone or fan; [0044] A prism 22, in particular a wedge prism, as optical element is in operative connection with a motor 24, such that it is rotatable around the rotation axis R).
Regarding claim 13, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the motor is configured for oscillating the optical element around an oscillation axis, resulting in a fan-shaped laser pulse emission pattern ([0043] The laser pulse emission pattern 4 is symbolically shown as a pyramid. In reality however it rather appears as a cone or fan; [0052] the motor 24 does not perform full rotations as positioning, but performs oscillations around an oscillation axis O)
Regarding claim 14, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 13, comprising an oscillation sensor configured for providing positions of the optical element ([0028] The airborne laser scanner according to an embodiment of the invention comprises an oscillation sensor configured for providing positions of the optical element).
Regarding claim 15, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 13, wherein the computer is configured for determining the directions of the pulse paths based on the provided positions of the optical element ([0047] Since the angle by which the optical element is deflecting the pulses and the direction of the pulse path are known and/or determinable (e.g. by an angle encoder), the TOF-distance value can be associated to the direction (e.g. at least one coordinate such as angle(s)) of the current pulse path at a specific measurement time.).
Regarding claim 16, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the computer is configured for determining a current of the motor and the directions of the pulse paths based on the current ([0031] The computer may be configured for determining a current of the motor, and determining the directions of the pulse paths based on the current. In particular, also the defined constant angle is taken into account when determining the directions of the pulse paths.).
Regarding claim 17, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the optical element is embodied as a polygon mirror, the deflection by the rotating polygon mirror resulting in a fan-shaped laser pulse emission pattern ([0043] The laser pulse emission pattern 4 is symbolically shown as a pyramid. In reality however it rather appears as a cone or fan; [0052] the motor 24 does not perform full rotations as positioning, but performs oscillations around an oscillation axis O)
Altmann fails to teach the motor configured for rotating the optical element around a second rotation axis
However, LaChapelle teaches the motor configured for rotating the optical element around a second rotation axis ([0074] In some implementations, the scanner 162 may include one mirror configured to be scanned along two axes...In another example implementation, two actuators scan the output beam 170 along two directions (e.g., horizontal and vertical), where each actuator provides rotational motion along a particular direction or about a particular axis)
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 Altmann to comprise the motor with a second rotational axis similar to LaChapelle, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of scanning over a wider field of view in two primary directions.
Regarding claim 18, Altmann, as modified above, teaches the airborne laser scanner according to claim 1, wherein the optical element is arranged relative to the emitter in such a way that the optical element deflects the laser pulses in a defined constant angle relative to the rotation axis or relative to the oscillation axis ([0030] The optical element may be arranged relative to the emitter in such a way that the optical element deflects the laser pulses in a defined constant angle relative to the rotation axis or the oscillation axis.).
Regarding claim 19, Altmann, as modified above, teaches a computer-implemented method for reducing ranging bias and measurement point drop-outs caused by internal and near range reflections in an airborne laser scanner arranged on an aircraft for surveying a target along a flight path, comprising
triggering an emitter of the airborne laser scanner to emit laser pulses with a first pulse space variation ([0050] According to the invention, the laser pulses (or respectively: the laser pulse rate, or the laser pulse spacings) are modulated based on the directional component of the current pulse path; [0029] The computer may be configured for calculating a time-based sequence of the varying pulse spacings; [0066] In particular, any combination of the above mentioned pulse sequences may be applied.),
deflecting the laser pulses with at least one optical element of the airborne laser scanner along pulse paths towards the target ([0044] the optical element 22; [0047] the optical element is deflecting the pulses),
moving the optical element with a motor of the airborne laser scanner to cause a periodically repeating movement of the pulse paths, said first pulse variation being coordinated with the periodically repeating movement of the pulse path ([0044] The movement of the optical element 22 induced by the motor may be a continuous or a partial rotatory movement.;[0029] The computer may be configured for calculating a time-based sequence of the varying pulse spacings; [0066] In particular, any combination of the above mentioned pulse sequences may be applied; [0050] According to the invention, the laser pulses (or respectively: the laser pulse rate, or the laser pulse spacings) are modulated based on the directional component of the current pulse path),
receiving the laser pulses backscattered from the target with a receiver of the airborne laser scanner ([0045] The pulses 251 backscattered from the target are received by the receiver 25.), and
determining the directions of the pulse paths for pulses ([0048] In this case, the internal computer 26 is merely configured to collect the data. The data may comprise time stamps of pulse transmission and pulse reception or distance values already calculated by means of said stamps, and transmission/reception direction),
wherein the emitter is triggered to emit the laser pulses further with a second pulse space variation overlaying with the first pulse space variation, wherein according to the second pulse space variation, pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during a first period of the periodically repeating movement are at least in part modified relative to pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during any of subsequent periods of the periodically repeating movement, and thereby reducing and/or spatially distributing the non-sampled pulses ([0044] The movement of the optical element 22 induced by the motor may be a continuous or a partial rotatory movement.;[0029] The computer may be configured for calculating a time-based sequence of the varying pulse spacings; [0066] In particular, any combination of the above mentioned pulse sequences may be applied.),
wherein according to the second pulse space variation, pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during the first period are differing from the pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during any of the subsequent periods by one of: a proportional value(Fig. 4a,4b; [0058] In other words, the closer the points of the cloud 5 are to the reverse lines 7, the lower the pulse rate is),
Altmann fails to teach the computer-implemented method wherein the emitting of the laser pulses causes a blindness window, and directions are determined outside of the blindness window.
However, Verheggen teaches the computer-implemented method wherein the emitting of the laser pulses causes a blindness window, and directions are determined outside of the blindness window (Fig. 3; [0036] The corresponding blind zones (i.e., the time in which the system is blind to incoming signals) are shown as 320, 321 and 322. In a typical system, the width of the laser pulse is 2 or 3 nanoseconds, while the blind zone can extend for tens of nanoseconds, or more.)
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 Altmann to comprise the blindness window in which the receiver ignores detections similar to Verheggen, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of reducing the amount of noise the detector receives from internal backscattered or other stray light.
Altmann fails to teach the scanner such that the pulse rate drops at an edge of the scanning area, such that the first pulse space variation is periodic and has a period equal that of the periodically repeating movement.
However, Weed teaches wherein the scanner is configured such that the first pulse space variation is periodic and has a period equal that of the periodically repeating movement ([0035] In some implementations, the controller may compare the scan speed to a threshold speed. Then the controller may provide a control signal to the light source to adjust the pulse rate when the scan speed increases above or decreases below the threshold speed...As the scanner approaches the periphery and is about to change directions the scan speed may drop below the threshold speed and accordingly the pulse rate may decrease back to the first pulse rate of 600 kHz.)
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 Patent 11639987 to comprise the pulse space variation and period similar to Weed, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of regulating power use for periphery areas of a scan area, of little or less importance to scan than the center region.
Altmann fails to teach the pulse spaces as a constant value and a random value.
However, LaChapelle teaches the second pulse space variation, pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during the first period are differing from the pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during any of the subsequent periods by one of:
a constant value ([0050] As an example, the light source 110 may be a pulsed laser that produces pulses at a substantially constant pulse repetition frequency of approximately 640 kHz (e.g., 640,000 pulses per second), corresponding to a pulse period of approximately 1.56 μs)
a random value ([0138] In one implementation, the controller 622A switches the pump laser 650 off and then back on to initiate a pseudo-random sequence of fast pulses)
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 Altmann to comprise the constant and random second pulse space variation similar to LaChapelle, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of giving users the option of both generating steady laser pulses with a known variation, as well as overlapping scans in an unpredictable pattern and thus generating novel results.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 26th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments that the amendments have placed the application in position for allowance, the examiner notes that the double patenting rejection is maintained for reasons stated above, and that while the amendments have changed the limitations of the independent claims, they do not overcome the rejection made above in light of the newly added prior art of Weed, which is necessitated by the amendments made and the reasons for obviousness to combine are given above.
Regarding the argument that Verheggen fails to teach the device wherein according to the second pulse space variation, pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during a first period of the periodically repeating movement are at least in part modified relative to pulse spaces between those pulses emitted during any of subsequent periods of the periodically repeating movement, and thereby reducing an/or spatially distributing the non-sampled pulses, the argument is also not convincing. The prior art of Verheggen is not relied on to teach the claim limitations cited and is instead used in combination with the prior art of Altmann to read on the limitations that Altmann doesn’t teach. Under the broadest reasonable interpretations of the claims by one of reasonable skill in the art, the prior art of Verheggen teaches the blind spots and is obvious to combine with Altmann to arrive at the same invention of the immediate application for reasons provided above and previously. While Verheggen does not teach every limitation in the independent claim, the modification of the primary prior art with that of Verheggen is obvious, and thus the rejection is maintained.
Further, regarding the argument made against LaChapelle failing to teach the space variation between subsequent periods, the prior art must be considered in total. The prior art combination of LaChapelle in addition to Altmann, as one in which the pulse spacing can be varied and has the option to space such pulses as described, teaches the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim limitation to one of reasonable skill in the art. The combination alone is not patently distinct from the combination of the prior arts when taken together when obvious to combine, as argued above, and as such the rejection is maintained in this Final Office Action.
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)272-3745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, Flex Friday, 8:00-5:00 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, HELAL ALGAHAIM can be reached at (571)270-5227. 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
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights