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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants arguments that Royo does not teach plurality of detectors and generating multiple different range measurements by single light pulse are not true. Paragraph [0012] explicitly teaches obtainning image using single pulse , and image is more than one point, At the same time Royo explicitly teaches array of detectors Qd which detects according to [0012] during single pulse multiple distances.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 415, 438 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D1 US 20150378023 A1.
Regarding claims 415 and 438 D1 teaches
415. (New) A LIDAR system for detecting objects in a field of view (FOV), the system comprising:
an array of sensors(Qd fig. 2) configured to receive light reflected from respective FOV portions within the FOV(Si), each sensor comprising a respective plurality of detectors;(fig. 2 Three rows of Qd each row includes 3 sensors)
one or more light sources(F) configured to emit multiple beams of pulsed light [0012] [0105] toward the FOV(S)(at least two different beams Be maybe at different time but claim does not specify otherwise also [0137] Explicitly teach that beam Be may be comprising of the plurality of beam portions by controlling the beam divergence), each beam forming a respective beam spot within a respective FOV portion of a respective one of the sensors such that the light reflected from the respective beam spot is imaged onto two or more of the respective plurality of detectors;(fig. 2) and
at least one processor(implicit) configured to process signals output by the detectors in response to the single light pulse [0012]( in the case of pulsed TOF, a complete three-dimensional image can be measured through a single laser pulse ) to generate multiple different range measurements of one or more of the objects within the respective FOV portion of a single one of the sensors.(fig. 3 bottom row includes two sensors which measure at least two different distances) pulse [0012]( in the case of pulsed TOF, a complete three-dimensional image can be measured through a single laser pulse image means more than one point )
416. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 415, wherein the multiple different respective range measurements include at least two differing distances associated with the respective beam spot.(implicit fig. 3 two point at bottom row)
417. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 415, wherein the multiple different respective range measurements include at least two different times of flight associated with the respective beam spot. (implicit fig. 3 two point at bottom row)
418. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 415, wherein the multiple different respective range measurements include at least two directions with respect to the FOV that are associated with the respective beam spot. (implicit fig. 3 two point at bottom row)
436. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 415, wherein a first part of the light reflected from the respective beam spot formed by at least one of the beams impinges on at least one of the respective plurality of light detectors earlier in time than a second part of the light reflected from the respective beam spot.(implicit depending on the spot size the part of the reflected portion comes from closer distance and another part from larger distance see fig. 1)
437. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 415, wherein the multiple different range measurements include at least two differing intensities associated with the respective beam spot.(implicit depending on the range traveled the signal will be absorbed in different amount )
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 419, 420 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D2 US 6057909 A .
Regarding claims 419, 420 D1 does not teach but D2 teaches
419. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 415, wherein each detector of each sensor comprises multiple detection elements, wherein the signals output by the detectors are produced by combining respective outputs of the multiple detection elements. (col 4 line 62- col 5 line 9)
420. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 419, wherein the detection elements of each detector are in a rectangular arrangement.(col 25 line 36-col 25 line 51)
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D2 in order to achieve an optimal trade-off of distance versus lateral resolution.
Claim(s) 421 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D3 US 20170131388 A1.
Regarding claims 421 and bellow D1 teaches
deflect multiple beams toward the FOV (fig. 1)
421. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 415, further comprising a light deflector(Me) configured to:
deflect the multiple beams emitted by the one or more light sources toward the FOV;.(fig. 1)
422. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 421, wherein while the light deflector is configured to scan the multiple beams and the respective FOV portions across the FOV.(fig. 2-9)
425. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 421, wherein the light deflector is configured to deflect the multiple beams toward the FOV via a common area of the light deflector along different outbound paths.(fig. 1)
427. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 421, wherein the light deflector includes a reflector unit configured to pivot along two or more axes.(fig. 1)
428. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 427, wherein the reflector unit includes a MEMS mirror.[0011]
430. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 421, wherein the light deflector is a two-dimensional scanner.[0011 with fig. 2]
but does not teach but D3 teaches
and deflect the light reflected from the respective beam spot within the respective FOV portion of each of the sensors onto the respective plurality of detectors(fig. 1 deflector 118 deflects both transmitted and received light)
423. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 421, wherein the light deflector(118) is configured to deflect the reflected light toward the sensors via a common area of the light deflector along different return paths.(fig. 1)
424. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 423, wherein each beam spot is associated with a corresponding return path among the different return paths.(fig. 1)
426. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 421, wherein the light deflector is configured to deflect the reflected light toward the sensors and the beams toward the FOV via a common area of the light deflector.
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D3 in order to perform scanning and data gathering in many ways commonly practiced in the art.
Claim(s) 431 bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D3 US 20170131388 A1 further in view of D4 US 20170003392 A1.
Regarding claim 431 D1 does not teach but D4 teaches
431. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 421, wherein the light deflector includes a reflector array(1703)[0074], the reflector array including a plurality of reflector units.[0074](fig. 17)
432. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 431, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to select one of the reflector units for an outbound path along which at least some of the multiple beams are directed to the FOV.(D4 claims 7 and fig. 17)
433. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 431, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to select one of the reflector units for a return path along which at least some of the light reflected from the FOV is directed to the array of sensors. .(D4 claims 7 and fig. 17 and D1 fig. 2 mirror is selected to transmit toward the particular sensor)
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D4 in order to scan different regions with different resolution.
Claim(s) 421 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D0 US 20160170202 A1.
Regarding claims bellow D1 teaches
deflect multiple beams toward the FOV (fig. 1)
does not teach but D0 teaches
421. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 415, further comprising a light deflector(13) configured to:deflect the beams emitted by the one or more light sources toward the FOV; and deflect the light reflected from the respective beam spot within the respective FOV portion of each of the sensors onto the respective plurality of detectors.(fig. 1)
431. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 421, wherein the light deflector includes a reflector array, the reflector array including a plurality of reflector units.(fig. 1)
434. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 431, wherein at least two of the plurality of reflector units are configured to pivot synchronously.[0047]
435. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 431, wherein at least two of the plurality of reflector units are configured to pivot asynchronously.[0047]
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D0 in order to imitate large mirror when operate synchronously and work as separate reflectors when beams need to bi directed into different regions at different times.
Claim(s) 429 bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D3 US 20170131388 A1 further in view of D5 US 20160041266 A1.
Regarding claim 431 D1 does not teach but D5 teaches
429. (New) The LIDAR system of claim 421, wherein the light deflector includes a mechanical scanning polygon.[0088]
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D5 in order to alternative scanning means commonly used in the art.
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 HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7845. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7am - 5 pm.
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.
/HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights