DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/18/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The following addresses applicant’s remarks/amendments dated 18 December 2025.
Claims 1, 2, 29, and 30 were amended. No claim was cancelled. No new claims were added. Therefore, claims 1-30 are currently pending in the current application and are addressed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-10 of the Remarks, filed 12/18/2025, with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 29, and 30 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Donovan et al., US 20200386868 A1 in view of Jin et al., US 20210144325 A1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-10, 14-17, and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donovan et al., US 20200386868 A1 ("Donovan") in view of Jin et al., US 20210144325 A1 (“Jin”).
Regarding claim 1, Donovan discloses a lidar system comprising: a photodetector circuit, the photodetector circuit comprising an array of pixels for sensing incident light (Fig. 1A, detector array 114, Paragraph [0028]); and a control circuit (Paragraph [0039]-[0040]: mentions controller and its functions pertaining to the laser and detector), wherein the control circuit (1) processes a shot list, the shot list comprising data that defines a plurality of laser pulse shots that target a plurality of range points in a field of view (Paragraph [0039]; Fig. 7: step 704, Paragraph [0062]; Fig. 8: laser FOVs 802, 802′, 802″, 802′″, and 802″″, Paragraph [0065-[0066]) and (2) [..], the respective detection intervals for detecting returns from their associated laser pulse shots (Paragraph [0040]; Fig. 7, step 708-710, Paragraph [0062]-[0063]; Fig. 8: ten detector FOVs 804, 804′, 804″, 804′″, 804″″, 804′″″, 804″″″, 804′″″″, 804″″″″, 804′″″″″, Paragraph [0065]-[0066]), and wherein the photodetector circuit selectively starts and stops collections from a plurality of pixels of the array in accordance with the respective determined detection intervals to control the photodetector circuit to sense the returns from the laser pulse shots (Fig. 7: Step 710, Paragraph [0062]-[0063]).
Donovan does not teach: dynamically determines, for each of the plurality of laser pulse shots, a respective detection interval defining when to start and stop collection based on the range point targeted by that laser pulse shot as defined in the processed shot list and based on defined criteria.
However, Jin teaches an operation method for a sensing system where an object is first detected in a wide range mode. Then the processor adjusts the measuring range of the sensor based on the coarse distance calculation to the object. Adjusting the measuring range includes defining the lower and upper limit of the measuring range (Fig. 11, S330, Paragraph [0103]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Donovan’s method for operating a LIDAR system by using Jin’s method of determining the range of the measuring window to determine the duration of Donovan’s detection windows. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the accuracy of the calculated depth of the object, as suggested by Jin (Paragraph [0104]).
Regarding claim 2, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the control circuit, for each of the plurality of laser pulse shots, identifies a pixel set of the array to use for sensing a return from that laser pulse shot (Donovan, Fig. 2B, shaded region 254 corresponding to single laser beam FOV 252, Paragraph [0039]), and wherein the determined detection intervals are associated with corresponding identified pixel sets (Donovan, Fig. 8, sequence A-C-E-B-D, detector FOVs 804, 804′, 804″, 804′″, 804″″, 804′″″, 804″″″, 804′″″″, 804″″″″, 804′″″″″, Paragraph [0065]-[0067]), and wherein the photodetector circuit starts and stops collections from the identified pixel sets in accordance with their associated corresponding determined detection intervals (Jin, Fig. 11, S330, Paragraph [0103]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Donovan’s method for operating a LIDAR system by using Jin’s method of determining the range of the measuring window to determine the duration of Donovan’s detection windows. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the accuracy of the calculated depth of the object, as suggested by Jin (Paragraph [0104]).
Regarding claim 3, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the control circuit identifies the pixel sets based on the range points that are targeted by the laser pulse shots (Donovan, Fig. 2B, shaded region 254 corresponding to single laser beam FOV 252, Paragraph [0039]).
Regarding claim 4, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 3, wherein the shot list identifies the targeted range points for the laser pulse shots by azimuth and elevation angles (Donovan, Fig. 2A, LIDAR system field-of-view 200 spans range of azimuth and elevation angles, FOV of each laser in 4x4 laser array shown by sixteen circles 202, Paragraph [0035]-[0036]).
Regarding claim 5, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 2, wherein each of the identified pixel sets comprises one or more of the pixels of the array (Donovan, Fig. 2B, shaded region 254 corresponding to single laser beam FOV 252, Paragraph [0039]).
Regarding claim 6, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the identified pixel sets follow a pattern that correspond to the range points targeted by the laser pulse shots (Donovan, Fig. 8, detector FOVs 804, 804′, 804″, 804′″, 804″″, 804′″″, 804″″″, 804′″″″, 804″″″″, 804′″″″″, sequence A-C-E-B-D, Paragraph [0065]-[0066]).
Regarding claim 7, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 2, wherein each of a plurality of the determined detection intervals comprises (1) first data that indicates when to start collection from its corresponding identified pixel set (Jin, Fig. 11, S330, Paragraph [0103]) and (2) second data that indicates when to stop collection its corresponding identified pixel set (Jin, Fig. 11, S330, Paragraph [0103]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Donovan’s method for operating a LIDAR system by using Jin’s method of determining the range of the measuring window to determine the duration of Donovan’s detection windows. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the accuracy of the calculated depth of the object, as suggested by Jin (Paragraph [0104]).
Regarding claim 8, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 7, wherein, for each of a plurality of the determined detection intervals, the first and second data comprise estimates of minimum and maximum ranges for the range point targeted by the laser pulse shot associated with that determined detection interval (Jin, Fig. 11, S330, Paragraph [0103]; See also Paragraph [0099]-[0100]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Donovan’s method for operating a LIDAR system by using Jin’s method of determining the range of the measuring window to determine the duration of Donovan’s detection windows. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the accuracy of the calculated depth of the object, as suggested by Jin (Paragraph [0104]).
Regarding claim 9, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 8, wherein the control circuit translates the minimum and maximum range estimates into start and stop collection times for the identified pixel sets associated with the determined detection intervals (Jin, Fig. 11, S330, Paragraph [0103]; See also Paragraph [0099]-[0100]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Donovan’s method for operating a LIDAR system by using Jin’s method of determining the range of the measuring window to determine the duration of Donovan’s detection windows. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the accuracy of the calculated depth of the object, as suggested by Jin (Paragraph [0104]).
Regarding claim 10, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 7, wherein, for each of a plurality of the determined detection intervals, the first and second data comprise start and stop collection times for the identified pixel set associated with that determined detection interval (Jin, Fig. 11, S330, Paragraph [0103]; See also Paragraph [0099]-[0100]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Donovan’s method for operating a LIDAR system by using Jin’s method of determining the range of the measuring window to determine the duration of Donovan’s detection windows. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the accuracy of the calculated depth of the object, as suggested by Jin (Paragraph [0104]).
Regarding claim 14, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the defined criteria comprises data indicative of scheduled fire times for next laser pulse shots from the shot list (Donovan, Fig. 8, five corresponding laser FOVs 802, 802′, 802″, 802′″, and 802″″, Paragraph [0066]).
Regarding claim 15, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of any of claim 1, further comprising: a signal processing circuit that processes sensed signal data from the photodetector circuit to (1) detect the returns within the sensed signal data (Donovan, Paragraph [0040]: controller receive signal from detectors; Fig. 7, Step 712, Paragraph [0063]) and (2) compute return data for the detected returns (Donovan, Fig. 7, Step 714, Paragraph [0063]).
Regarding claim 16, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 15, wherein the signal processing circuit comprises a plurality of processors that share processing of the sensed signal data (Donovan, Fig. 7, Step 712, Step 714, Paragraph [0063]: mentions controller that receives detected pulses and processor that computes TOF).
Regarding claim 17, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 15, wherein the signal processing circuit updates a lidar point cloud with the computed return data (Donovan, Fig. 7, Step 716, Paragraph [0063]).
Regarding claim 28, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the array comprises a two-dimensional (2D) array of pixels (Donovan, Fig. 1B, system field-of-view 150 where field-of-view of an individual detector in array is square 152, Paragraph [0032]).
Claim 29 is a method claim corresponding to apparatus claim 1. It is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 30, Donovan teaches an article of manufacture for controlling a lidar receiver, wherein the lidar receiver comprises a photodetector, the photodetector comprising an array of pixels, the article of manufacture comprising:[…]: process a shot list, the shot list comprising data that defines a plurality of laser pulse shots that target a plurality of range points in a field of view (Paragraph [0039]; Fig. 7: step 704, Paragraph [0062]; Fig. 8: laser FOVs 802, 802′, 802″, 802′″, and 802″″, Paragraph [0065-[0066]); […], the respective detection intervals for detecting returns from their associated laser pulse shots (Paragraph [0040]; Fig. 7, step 708-710, Paragraph [0062]-[0063]; Fig. 8: ten detector FOVs 804, 804′, 804″, 804′″, 804″″, 804′″″, 804″″″, 804′″″″, 804″″″″, 804′″″″″, Paragraph [0065]-[0066]); and selectively start and stop collections from pixels of the array in accordance with the determined detection intervals to control the photodetector to detect the returns from the laser pulse shots.
Donovan does not teach:
machine-readable code that is resident on a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium, wherein the code defines processing operations to be performed by a processor to cause the processor to;
dynamically determine, for each of the plurality of laser shots, a respective detection interval defining when to start and stop collection based on the range point targeted by that laser pulse shot as defined in the processed shot list and based on defined criteria (Fig. 7: Step 710, Paragraph [0062]-[0063]).
However, Jin teaches an operation method for a sensing system where an object is first detected in a wide range mode. Then the processor adjusts the measuring range of the sensor based on the coarse distance calculation to the object. Adjusting the measuring range includes defining the lower and upper limit of the measuring range (Fig. 11, S330, Paragraph [0103]). Jin also teaches that the processor may execute operations defined in code (Paragraph [0034]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Donovan’s method for operating a LIDAR system by using Jin’s method of determining the range of the measuring window to determine the duration of Donovan’s detection windows. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase the accuracy of the calculated depth of the object, as suggested by Jin (Paragraph [0104]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, in further view of Shand et al., US 20190041503 A1 ("Shand").
Regarding claim 11, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 1.
Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, does not disclose the following, however Shand does teach: wherein the determined detection intervals are non-overlapping (Fig. 5A, Detection periods A-G, Paragraph [0107]-[0109]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detection sequence disclosed by Donovan and Jin by having the detection intervals not overlap, which is disclosed by Shand. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to have detection periods established for each emission time, as suggested by Shand (Paragraph [0107]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, in further view of Iguchi et al., US 20200183013 A1 ("Iguchi").
Regarding claim 12, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 1.
Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, does not disclose the following, however Iguchi does teach: wherein the defined criteria comprises data indicative of a settle time for the pixels (Fig. 5, SPAD 180, Paragraph [0067]-[0068]: pixel circuit restores SPADs after deadtime).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector’s collection timing, disclosed by Donovan and Jin, by taking into account pixel deadtime, which is disclosed by Iguchi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow the pixel to be ready to detect the next photon, as suggested by Iguchi (Paragraph [0067]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, in further view of Shand and Iguchi.
Regarding claim 13, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 1.
Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, does not disclose the following, however Shand does teach: wherein the control circuit activates pixels of the array to be used for detecting the returns sufficiently prior to when collections are to start from the activated pixels (Fig. 4B, detection period 408, detection time 410, Paragraph [0103]-[0104]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detection interval disclosed by Donovan and Jin by setting the detection period to start and stop with each emission pulse, which is disclosed by Shand. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to have a detection period that has the duration of the maximum unambiguous range, as suggested by Shand (Paragraph [0103]).
Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, does not disclose the following, however Iguchi does teach: for a pixel settle time to have passed when the collections are to start from the activated pixels (Fig. 5, SPAD 180, Paragraph [0067]-[0068]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the detector’s collection timing, disclosed by Donovan and Jin, by taking into account pixel deadtime, which is disclosed by Iguchi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to allow the pixel to be ready to detect the next photon, as suggested by Iguchi (Paragraph [0067]).
Claims 18-24 and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, in further view of Campbell et al., US 20180275249 A1 ("Campbell).
Regarding claim 18, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising: a lidar transmitter (Donovan, Fig. 1A , laser array 102 and transmitter optics 104, Paragraph [0027]).
Donovan, as modified in view of Jin, does not disclose the following, however Campbell does teach: wherein the lidar transmitter comprises a scannable mirror (Fig. 1, scanner 120, Paragraph [0032]), and wherein the lidar transmitter transmits the laser pulse shots toward the targeted range points via the scannable mirror (Fig. 1, output beam 125, target 130, Paragraph [0032]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the transmitter disclosed by Donovan by adding scanner, which is disclosed by Campbell. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to scan the output beam over an angular range, as suggested by Campbell (Paragraph [0032]).
Regarding claim 19, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, discloses the system of claim 18.
Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, does not disclose the following, however Campbell does teach: wherein the lidar transmitter scans the scannable mirror in a resonant mode (Fig. 2, scan pattern 200, Paragraph [0045]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the emission of light pulses disclosed by Donovan, as modified in view of Campbell, by using the mirror to scan the light back and forth across an angular range, which is disclosed by Campbell. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to “[cover] a ±30° horizontal range with respect to [a] reference line”, as suggested by Campbell (Paragraph [0045]).
Regarding claim 20, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, discloses the system of claim 19, wherein the lidar transmitter scans the scannable mirror in the resonant mode at a scan frequency in a range between 100 Hz and 20 kHz (Campbell, Paragraph [0091]).
Regarding claim 21, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, discloses the system of claim 19, wherein the lidar transmitter scans the scannable mirror in the resonant mode at a scan frequency in a range between 10 kHz and 15 kHz (Campbell, Paragraph [0091]).
Regarding claim 22, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, discloses the system of claim 18.
Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, does not disclose the following, however Campbell does teach: wherein the scannable mirror comprises a first scannable mirror and a second scannable mirror (Fig. 3, mirror 300-1 and mirror 300-2, Paragraph [0053]), wherein the lidar transmitter transmits the laser pulse shots toward the targeted range points via the first and second scannable mirrors (Fig. 3, output beam 125, Paragraph [0053]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the scanner disclosed by Donovan, as modified in view of Campbell, by using two mirrors, which is disclosed by Campbell. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to scan the output beam in both the horizontal and vertical direction, as suggested by Campbell (Paragraph [0053]).
Regarding claim 23, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, discloses the system of claim 22, wherein the lidar transmitter scans the second scannable mirror in a point-to-point mode according to a step function that varies as a function of the range points targeted with the laser pulse shots (Campbell, Paragraph [0057]: vertical actuator can apply a discrete vertical offset).
Regarding claim 24, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, discloses the system of claim 22, wherein the second scannable mirror is optically downstream from the first scannable mirror (Donovan, Fig. 3, mirror 300-1 and mirror 300-2, Paragraph [0053]).
Regarding claim 26, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, discloses the system of claim 18, further comprising a laser source that generates the laser pulse shots (Donovan, Fig. 1, laser array 102, Paragraph [0027]), and wherein the control circuit schedules the laser pulse shots in the shot list according to a laser energy model for the laser source (Donovan, Paragraph [0023]-[0026], Fig. 7, Step 702, Paragraph [0062]).
Regarding claim 27, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, discloses the system of claim 26, wherein the control circuit schedules the laser pulse shots in the shot list according to the laser energy model (Donovan, Paragraph [0023]-[0026], Fig. 7, Step 702, Paragraph [0062]) and a mirror motion model for the scannable mirror (Campbell, Fig. 2, scan pattern 200, Paragraph [0045]).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, and further in view of Smits et al., US 20170176575 A1 ("Smits").
Regarding claim 25, Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell, discloses the system of claim 18.
Donovan, as modified in view of Jin and Campbell does not disclose the following, however Smits does teach: wherein the lidar transmitter and the photodetector circuit are in a bistatic arrangement with respect to each other (Fig. 4, base line 420 that extends between the transmit system 404 and the receive system 412, Paragraph [0121]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the Donavan’s lidar system by placing a distance between the transmitter and receiver, which is disclosed by Smits. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to have a three-dimensional tracking system, as suggested by Smits (Paragraph [0002]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5405. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5:30 pm 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) 270-3603. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RACHEL NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645