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 Amendment
Examiner acknowledges amending of claims 1-6, 8-12. 112f interpretation of “electric means for accumulating” in claim 12 rendered moot. All 112b rejections withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues Colles does not disclose a time period from a time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state to a time at which the second switching unit becomes the conduction state is determined in accordance with a distance to a target object as a detection target (Remarks pgs. 13-14).
Examiner agrees. This limitation is taught by Hines, not Colles.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 10, 12 (wherein the charging of the capacitor is completed is determined based on a time period from light emission of the light emitting device to light reception of a light receiving unit) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument (Remarks pgs. 15-16). New reference Lenius (US-9368936-B1) used to teach this limitation.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim 12 is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). A “first switching means” in line 10 is interpreted as Applicant’s FIG.2 element 16 or a “first switching unit” (instant application specification 0018 lines 1-5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-9, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colles (US-20210305770-A1) in view of Hines (US-5933224-A) and Lenius (US-9368936-B1).
Note: Colles fig. 13A equivalent to fig. 1A in structure and function except for use of switch MS (fig. 13A) instead of resistor RS (fig. 1A), 0086.
Regarding claim 1, Colles discloses a light emitting device comprising: a resonant circuit that comprises a capacitor accumulating electric charge and generates a current by resonance occurred in the resonant circuit (fig. 13A resonant circuit CS + LS + LDL + CBP comprises capacitor CS and generates resonance current 223’, fig. 2C graph 206 shows significant resonance current 223’ generated when GATEBP signal not asserted in inferior (but sufficiently disclosed) embodiment, 0030, 0043); a light emitting element that emits pulsed light at resonance frequency in response to receiving the current generated by the resonance occurred in the resonant circuit (fig. 13A light emitting element DL emits at resonance frequency shown in plot of 223’ in fig. 2C plot 206 in response to receiving iDL from resonant circuit), wherein the resonance frequency of the pulsed light emitted from the light emitting element is calculated in accordance with an inductance of the resonant circuit and a capacitance of the resonant circuit (resonance frequency depends on inductance and capacitance of resonant circuit, f=1/2*pi*sqrt(LC), see also 0035); and a first switching unit that is connected to a circuit between a power supply that supplies electric charge to the capacitor and the resonant circuit (fig. 13A first switching unit MS connected to a circuit (from Vin to node 110) between power supply Vin and resonant circuit, 0085-0086), and switches between a conduction state in which the circuit from the power supply to the resonant circuit is conductive and a non-conduction state in which the circuit is not conductive (fig. 13A MS switches between conductive and non-conductive states in which circuit not conductive, 0085-0086), a second switching unit that switches between a conduction state in which the resonant circuit is conductive and a non-conduction state in which the resonant circuit is not conductive (fig. 13A second switching unit MDL switches conduction state when resonant circuit ON and non conduction with resonant OFF, fig. 3 steps 302-304 circuit + switch both conductive, 301 + 305 both nonconductive, 0045-0048), wherein in an electric path from the power supply to the resonant circuit, a lower limit value of an electric resistance necessary to suppress attenuation of the resonance is a first electric resistance (fig. 13A open/OFF switch MS provides infinite (first) resistance in electric path to “suppress attenuation” of the resonance, as implicitly defined by applicant’s specification 0057… alternatively, “lower limit value” must necessarily be some value greater than 0 to suppress attenuation), and an electric resistance of the electric path from the power supply to the resonant circuit in a case where the first switching unit is in the conduction state is a second electric resistance smaller than the first electric resistance (fig. 13A (second) resistance of electric path from Vin to resonant circuit where MS closed/ON is 0, “second electric resistance” 0 smaller than either infinite “first electric resistance” or nonzero finite “first electric resistance”), wherein the second switching unit switches from the non-conduction state to the conduction state after charging of the capacitor is completed (0079, MDL ON after CS charged, steps 301 + 302 in fig. 3).
Colles does not disclose wherein a time period from a time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state to a time at which the second switching unit becomes the conduction state is determined in accordance with a distance to a target object as a detection target.
Hines discloses a distance-measurement apparatus with a laser range finder that transmits a
single light pulse and waits until a full measurement cycle is complete before transmitting any
subsequent light pulse (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 10-15 + col. 7 line 38-40 + col. 7 line 52 to col. 8 line 10), thus
determining the pulse timing in accordance with a distance to a target object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to determine a time period from a time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state to a time at which the second switching unit becomes the
conduction state in accordance with the distance to the target object that is set as a detection target to allow for sufficient cooldown and recharge time for the capacitor. Using only one pulse per measurement cycle would also reduce the complexity required within the device’s distance calculation system. Finally, firing one pulse per cycle would reduce wasted energy in the case of misses or unusable data (Hines col. 8 line 55 – col. 9 line 10).
Modified Colles does not disclose wherein the charging of the capacitor is completed is determined based on a time period from light emission of the light emitting device to light reception of a light receiving unit.
Lenius discloses a laser diode firing circuit for a LiDAR device that begins charging capacitor after light emission and finishes charging capacitor before light reception (fig. 5a+b, Vcap/516 discharges at light emission TON and charges/returns to max before reception TRx, col. 19 line 15 – col. 20 line 5, col. 21 line 50 – col. 22 line 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the charging of the capacitor is completed is determined based on a time period from light emission of the light emitting device to light reception of a light receiving unit to allow for the circuit to be recharged and ready to emit a subsequent pulse faster than an alternative configuration + decrease lag time (Lenius col. 21 line 60 – col. 22 line 10).
Regarding claim 2, modified Colles discloses the light emitting device according to claim 1, wherein the first switching unit is in the non-conduction state in a case where the capacitor supplies a current to the light emitting element (fig. 13A MS nonconductive when capacitor CS supplies current to DL, 0085 final sentence + fig. 3).
Regarding claim 3, modified Colles discloses the light emitting device according to claim 2, further comprising: a switching control unit that switches the first switching unit to the non-conduction state before the second switching unit is switched to the conduction state in a case where the first switching unit is in the conduction state and the second switching unit is in the non- conduction state (fig. 13A switching control unit 120 switches MS OFF before MDL ON when MS is ON and MDL is OFF, not on/off simultaneously, 0038, 0045-0048, 0085 final sentence, 0086).
Regarding claim 4, modified Colles discloses the light emitting device according to claim 1, wherein the first switching unit is in the conduction state in a case where the capacitor does not supply a current to the light emitting element (fig. 13A MS ON when CS not supplying current to DL, only during pre-charge fig. 3 301, 0085 final sentence).
Regarding claim 5, modified Colles discloses the light emitting device according to claim 4, further comprising a switching control unit that switches the first switching unit to the conduction state after the second switching unit is switched to the non-conduction state in a case where the first switching unit is in the non-conduction state and the second switching unit is in the conduction state (fig. 13A switching control unit 120 switches MS ON after MDL OFF when MS OFF and MDL ON, not on/off simultaneously, 0038, 0045-0048, 0085-0086, fig. 3).
Regarding claim 6, modified Colles discloses the light emitting device according to claim 1, further comprising: a switching control unit that switches the first switching unit between the conduction state and the non-conduction state (fig. 13A switching control unit 120 switches MS between ON and OFF, 0038, 0045-0048, 0085 final sentence, 0086), wherein a time at which the second switching unit becomes the conduction state and a time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state are predetermined (fig. 13A 120 predetermines the second switching unit state/timing), and a time at which the switching control unit puts the first switching unit into the non- conduction state is determined, depending on the time at which the second switching unit becomes the conduction state (fig. 13A 120 turns MS OFF at time depending on time when MDL turned ON, MS turns OFF at some time prior to MDL ON, therefore MS OFF depends on MDL ON), and a time at which the switching control unit puts the first switching unit into the conduction state is determined, depending on the time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state (fig. 13A MS ON time depends on MDL OFF time, fig. 3 precharge step 305, MS ON occurs after + depends on MDL OFF).
Regarding claim 8, modified Colles discloses the light emitting device according to claim 1, wherein in a case where the electric resistance of the electric path from the power supply to the resonant circuit is the first electric resistance (infinite or nonzero finite value between Vin and resonant circuit), a time period necessary to supply a first amount of electric charge from the power supply to the capacitor is a first time period (first time period to supply first amount of charge from Vin to CS either infinite or nonzero finite value, depending on if infinite or nonzero finite resistance), the first amount of electric charge is an amount of electric charge necessary to be accumulated in the capacitor in order for the light emitting element to emit light by causing the capacitor to supply a current to the light emitting element (first amount of electric charge = nonzero finite charge accumulating in CS to be supplied to DL), in a case where light emission of the light emitting element is completed, the first amount of electric charge is supplied from the power supply to the capacitor via the first switching unit in the conduction state (fig. 13a after DL light emission completed, nonzero finite charge supplied from Vin to CS via switch MS ON, fig. 3 precharge 305, 0045-0048, 0085 final sentence), the light emitting element re-emits light in a case where a current in the resonant circuit is supplied from the capacitor (fig. 3 subsequent cycle 301-305 DL re-emits light when current in resonant circuit supplied from CS), and in a case where the electric resistance of the electric path from the power supply to the resonant circuit is the second electric resistance (i.e. zero), a time period from an end of the light emission of the light emitting element to the light re-emission of the light emitting element is shorter than the first time period (time period with 0 resistance shorter than time period with first resistance (infinite or nonzero finite)).
Regarding claim 9, modified Colles discloses a detection apparatus comprising: the light emitting device according to claim 1 (claim 1 rejection), wherein the first switching unit switches to the conduction state, in a case where a current necessary for light emission of the light emitting element is supplied from the capacitor to the light emitting element in the non-conduction state (fig. 13A + 3, MS in conduction state when current from CS to DL not conducting, step 301 + 305, 0045-0048), an amount of electric charge necessary for supply of a current for causing the light emitting element to emit light is accumulated in the capacitor (fig. 13a charge for DL emission accumulated in CS, fig. 3 step 301 + 305).
Modified Colles does not disclose a light receiving unit that receives light based on irradiation of a target object with light emitted from the light emitting device; and a detection unit that detects a distance to the target object on the basis of light reception of the light receiving unit, after a current necessary for light emission of the light emitting element is supplied from the capacitor until the light receiving unit receives light on the basis of the light emission, and a detection target includes a distance of 10 m as a distance to the target object.
Hines discloses a distance-measurement apparatus with a light receiving unit (fig. 3 receiving unit 118, col. 7 line 35 – col. 8 line 25), light detection unit (fig. 3 detection unit 122 determines distance based on 118 input) + laser range finder that transmits a single light pulse and waits until a full measurement cycle is complete before transmitting any subsequent light pulse (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 10-15 + col. 7 line 38-40 + col. 7 line 52 to col. 8 line 10), thus determining the pulse timing in accordance with a distance to a target object, and a maximum distance of 300 yards (col. 10 lines 45-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a light receiving unit that receives light based on irradiation of a target object with light emitted from the light emitting device; and a detection unit that detects a distance to the target object on the basis of light reception of the light receiving unit, after a current necessary for light emission of the light emitting element is supplied from the capacitor until the light receiving unit receives light on the basis of the light emission, and a detection target includes a distance of 10 m as a distance to the target object to add ranging/distance measurement functionality to the Colles device (Hines col. 1 lines 10-15), to allow for sufficient cooldown and recharge time for the electric accumulator. Using only one pulse per measurement cycle would also reduce the complexity required within the device’s distance calculation system. Finally, firing one pulse per cycle would reduce wasted energy in the case of misses or unusable data (Hines col. 8 line 55 – col. 9 line 10), and to allow for distance measurements of objects that are exactly 10 meters away.
Regarding claim 12, Colles discloses a light emitting device comprising: a resonant circuit that comprises a capacitor accumulating electric charge and generates a current by resonance occurred in the resonant circuit (fig. 13A resonant circuit CS + LS + LDL + CBP comprises capacitor CS and generates resonance current 223’, fig. 2C graph 206 shows significant resonance current 223’ generated when GATEBP signal not asserted in inferior (but sufficiently disclosed) embodiment, 0030, 0043); a light emitting element that emits pulsed light at resonance frequency in response to receiving the current generated by the resonance occurred in the resonant circuit (fig. 13A light emitting element DL emits at resonance frequency shown in plot of 223’ in fig. 2C plot 206 in response to receiving iDL from resonant circuit), wherein the resonance frequency of the pulsed light emitted from the light emitting element is calculated in accordance with an inductance of the resonant circuit and a capacitance of the resonant circuit (resonance frequency depends on inductance and capacitance of resonant circuit, f=1/2*pi*sqrt(LC), see also 0035); and a first switching means that is connected to a circuit between a power supply that supplies electric charge to the electric means for accumulating and the resonant circuit (fig. 13A first switching means MS connected to a circuit (from Vin to node 110) between power supply Vin and resonant circuit + supplies charge to capacitor CS, 0085-0086), and for switching between a conduction state in which the circuit from the power supply to the resonant circuit is conductive and a non-conduction state in which the circuit is not conductive (fig. 13A MS switches between conductive and non-conductive states in which circuit not conductive, 0085-0086), a second switching unit that switches between a conduction state in which the resonant circuit is conductive and a non-conduction state in which the resonant circuit is not conductive (fig. 13A second switching unit MDL switches conduction state when resonant circuit ON and non conduction with resonant OFF, fig. 3 steps 302-304 circuit + switch both conductive, 301 + 305 both nonconductive, 0045-0048), wherein in an electric path from the power supply to the resonant circuit, a lower limit value of an electric resistance necessary to suppress attenuation of the resonance is a first electric resistance (fig. 13A open/OFF switch MS provides effectively infinite (first) resistance in electric path to “suppress attenuation” of the resonance, as implicitly defined by applicant’s specification 0057), and an electric resistance of the electric path from the power supply to the resonant circuit in a case where the first switching means is in the conduction state is a second electric resistance smaller than the first electric resistance (fig. 13A resistance of electric path from Vin to resonant circuit where MS closed/ON is some other finite (second) resistance value smaller than effectively infinite first resistance), wherein the second switching unit switches from the non-conduction state to the conduction state after charging of the capacitor is completed (0079, MDL ON after CS charged, steps 301 + 302 in fig. 3).
Colles does not disclose wherein a time period from a time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state to a time at which the second switching unit becomes the conduction state is determined in accordance with a distance to a target object as a detection target.
Hines discloses a distance-measurement apparatus with a laser range finder that transmits a
single light pulse and waits until a full measurement cycle is complete before transmitting any
subsequent light pulse (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 10-15 + col. 7 line 38-40 + col. 7 line 52 to col. 8 line 10), thus
determining the pulse timing in accordance with a distance to a target object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to determine a time period from a time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state to a time at which the second switching unit becomes the
conduction state in accordance with the distance to the target object that is set as a detection target to allow for sufficient cooldown and recharge time for the capacitor. Using only one pulse per measurement cycle would also reduce the complexity required within the device’s distance calculation system. Finally, firing one pulse per cycle would reduce wasted energy in the case of misses or unusable data (Hines col. 8 line 55 – col. 9 line 10).
Modified Colles does not disclose wherein the charging of the capacitor is completed is determined based on a time period from light emission of the light emitting device to light reception of a light receiving unit.
Lenius discloses a laser diode firing circuit for a LiDAR device that begins charging capacitor after light emission and finishes charging capacitor before light reception (fig. 5a+b, Vcap/516 discharges at light emission TON and charges/returns to max before reception TRx, col. 19 line 15 – col. 20 line 5, col. 21 line 50 – col. 22 line 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the charging of the capacitor is completed is determined based on a time period from light emission of the light emitting device to light reception of a light receiving unit to allow for the circuit to be recharged and ready to emit a subsequent pulse faster than an alternative configuration + decrease lag time (Lenius col. 21 line 60 – col. 22 line 10).
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Colles in view of Hines, Lenius, and Moeneclaey (US-20170070029-A1).
Regarding claim 10, Colles discloses a light emitting device comprising: a resonant circuit that comprises a capacitor accumulating electric charge and generates a current by resonance occurred in the resonant circuit (fig. 13A resonant circuit CS + LS + LDL + CBP comprises capacitor CS and generates resonance current 223’, fig. 2C graph 206 shows significant resonance current 223’ generated when GATEBP signal not asserted in inferior (but sufficiently disclosed) embodiment, 0030, 0043); a light emitting element that emits pulsed light at resonance frequency in response to receiving the current generated by the resonance occurred in the resonant circuit (fig. 13A light emitting element DL emits at resonance frequency shown in plot of 223’ in fig. 2C plot 206 in response to receiving iDL from resonant circuit), wherein the resonance frequency of the pulsed light emitted from the light emitting element is calculated in accordance with an inductance of the resonant circuit and a capacitance of the resonant circuit (resonance frequency depends on inductance and capacitance of resonant circuit, f=1/2*pi*sqrt(LC), see also 0035); and a first switching unit that is connected to an electric path between a power supply that supplies electric charge to the capacitor and the resonant circuit (fig. 13A first switching unit MS connected to an electric path (from Vin to node 110) between power supply Vin and resonant circuit, 0085-0086), and switches between a conduction state in which a circuit from the power supply to the resonant circuit is conductive and a non-conduction state in which the circuit is not conductive (fig. 13A MS switches between conductive and non-conductive states in which circuit not conductive, 0085-0086), a second switching unit that switches between a conduction state in which the resonant circuit is conductive and a non-conduction state in which the resonant circuit is not conductive (fig. 13A second switching unit MDL switches conduction state when resonant circuit ON and non conduction with resonant OFF, fig. 3 steps 302-304 circuit + switch both conductive, 301 + 305 both nonconductive, 0045-0048), wherein in the electric path from the power supply to the resonant circuit, a lower limit value of an electric resistance necessary to suppress attenuation of the resonance is a first electric resistance (fig. 13A open/OFF switch MS provides effectively infinite (first) resistance in electric path to “suppress attenuation” of the resonance, as implicitly defined by applicant’s specification 0057), and an electric resistance of the electric path from the power supply to the resonant circuit in a case where the first switching unit is in the conduction state is a second electric resistance smaller than the first electric resistance (fig. 13A resistance of electric path from Vin to resonant circuit where MS closed/ON is some other finite (second) resistance value smaller than effectively infinite first resistance), wherein the second switching unit switches from the non-conduction state to the conduction state after charging of the capacitor is completed (0079, MDL ON after CS charged, steps 301 + 302 in fig. 3).
Colles does not disclose wherein a time period from a time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state to a time at which the second switching unit becomes the conduction state is determined in accordance with a distance to a target object as a detection target.
Hines discloses a distance-measurement apparatus with a laser range finder that transmits a
single light pulse and waits until a full measurement cycle is complete before transmitting any
subsequent light pulse (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 10-15 + col. 7 line 38-40 + col. 7 line 52 to col. 8 line 10), thus
determining the pulse timing in accordance with a distance to a target object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to determine a time period from a time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state to a time at which the second switching unit becomes the
conduction state in accordance with the distance to the target object that is set as a detection target in to allow for sufficient cooldown and recharge time for the capacitor. Using only one pulse per measurement cycle would also reduce the complexity required within the device’s distance calculation system. Finally, firing one pulse per cycle would reduce wasted energy in the case of misses or unusable data (Hines col. 8 line 55 – col. 9 line 10).
Modified Colles does not disclose wherein the charging of the capacitor is completed is determined based on a time period from light emission of the light emitting device to light reception of a light receiving unit.
Lenius discloses a laser diode firing circuit for a LiDAR device that begins charging capacitor after light emission and finishes charging capacitor before light reception (fig. 5a+b, Vcap/516 discharges at light emission TON and charges/returns to max before reception TRx, col. 19 line 15 – col. 20 line 5, col. 21 line 50 – col. 22 line 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the charging of the capacitor is completed is determined based on a time period from light emission of the light emitting device to light reception of a light receiving unit to allow for the circuit to be recharged and ready to emit a subsequent pulse faster than an alternative configuration + decrease lag time (Lenius col. 21 line 60 – col. 22 line 10).
Modified Colles does not disclose a light receiving unit that receives light based on irradiation of a target object with light emitted from the light emitting element; and a detection unit that detects a distance to the target object on the basis of light reception of the light receiving unit.
Moeneclaey discloses a light receiving unit (fig. 7 706) that receives light based on irradiation of a target object with light emitted from a light emitting element (0049-0050); and a detection unit (fig. 7 708) that detects a distance to the target object on the basis of light reception of the light receiving unit (0051-0052).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a light receiving unit that receives light based on irradiation of a target object with light emitted from the light emitting element; and a detection unit that detects a distance to the target object on the basis of light reception of the light receiving unit to add ranging/distance measurement functionality to the device (Moeneclaey 0003, 0051).
Regarding claim 11, modified Colles discloses the detection apparatus according to claim 10.
Modified Colles does not disclose wherein a time period from a time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state to a time at which the second switching unit becomes the conduction state is determined in accordance with the distance to the target object that is set as a detection target in the detection apparatus.
Hines discloses a distance-measurement apparatus with a laser range finder that transmits a
single light pulse and waits until a full measurement cycle is complete before transmitting any
subsequent light pulse (fig. 1, col. 1 lines 10-15 + col. 7 line 38-40 + col. 7 line 52 to col. 8 line 10), thus
determining the pulse timing in accordance with a distance to a target object.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention to determine a time period from a time at which the second switching unit becomes the non-conduction state to a time at which the second switching unit becomes the
conduction state in accordance with the distance to the target object that is set as a detection target in
the detection apparatus to allow for sufficient cooldown and recharge time for the capacitor. Using only one pulse per measurement cycle would also reduce the complexity required within the device’s distance calculation system. Finally, firing one pulse per cycle would reduce wasted energy in the case of misses or unusable data (Hines col. 8 line 55 – col. 9 line 10).
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 Alex Ehrlich whose telephone number is (703)756-5716. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, MinSun Harvey can be reached on (571) 272-1835. 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.
/A.E./ Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/MINSUN O HARVEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights