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 April 13th, 2026 have been entered. Claims 1-19 and 21 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every 112(a) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed December 18th, 2025.
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:
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;
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
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.
Such claim limitations are:
Claim 4, “assembly is fixed to the protective housing by reversable fastening means”. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing the fixing of the assembly to the protective housing is screws, glue beads, or any other suitable material ([0062] The assembly 8 is then fixed to the protective housing 3 by reversible fastening means 9 such as screws, glue beads or any suitable material.)
Claim 12, “assembly is fixed to the protective housing by reversable fastening means”. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for performing the fixing of the assembly to the protective housing is screws, glue beads, or any other suitable material ([0062] The assembly 8 is then fixed to the protective housing 3 by reversible fastening means 9 such as screws, glue beads or any suitable material.)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1-18, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heitzer et al. (US Patent Application Publication 20190049716 A1), hereinafter Heitzer, in view of Lambricht et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20180194667 A1), hereinafter Lambricht, and further in view of Yeo et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20190100167 A1), hereinafter Yeo, further in view of Byrne et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20160264064 A1), hereinafter Byrne.
Regarding claim 1, Heitzer teaches a detection device comprising:
A lidar sensing device ([0024] FIG. 1 illustrates a LIDAR scanning system 100)
a protective housing enclosing the LiDAR sensing device ([0028] Inside the packaging, in a cavity 204, a MEMS device 205 is bonded to the substrate 201 by a die attach layer 206. The MEMS device 205; [0031] The encapsulation component 202 forms part of a protective housing around at least part of the MEMS device 205);
one cover lens, the cover lens being fixed to the protective housing ([0032] The glass substrate 203 is a plane of glass, such as a glass cover or lid, disposed on the encapsulation component 202 and is adhered thereto by an adhesive or solder)
wherein, a cover lens is encapsulated (Fig. 2; [0031] The encapsulation component 202), and
Heitzer fails to teach at least one cover lens; made of at least one glass sheet having an absorption coefficient lower than 5 m−1 in a wavelength range from 750 to 1650 nm
However, Lambricht teaches at least one cover lens; made of at least one glass sheet having an absorption coefficient lower than 5 m−1 in a wavelength range from 750 to 1650 nm, ([0128] Advantageously again, the glass sheet according to the first main embodiment of the invention has a coefficient of absorption at the wavelength of 850 nm of less than 5 m−1. Preferably, it has a coefficient of absorption at the wavelength of 850 nm of less than or equal to 2 m−1. Very preferably, it has a coefficient of absorption at the wavelength of 850 nm of less than or equal to 1 m−1.),
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 Heitzer to comprise the low absorption glass formatted for light in the infrared range similar to Lambricht, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of creating a more coherent signal in the infrared range that is not reflected back by the protective housing unit.
Heitzer fails to teach a protective housing enclosing a LiDAR sensing device where the LiDAR sensing device includes a sensing system.
However, Yeo teaches a protective housing enclosing a LiDAR sensing device with an encapsulated cover lens([0027] In the illustrated example of FIG. 3, the cover 40 near the sensor portion 30 is shown separate from the cover of the headlamp portion of the assembly. In other embodiments the sensor portion 30 is situated in the headlamp housing and the cover 40 is the cover for the entire headlamp assembly 60.; [0016] the cover 40 between the reflecting surfaces 46 and 48)
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 Heitzer to comprise the protective housing covering the sensing device similar to Yeo, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of ensuring the sensing device is completely protected from outside environments.
Heitzer fails to teach the cover lens encapsulated by a plastic injection process injecting plastic material, and wherein the cover lens is in direct contact with the injection plastic material.
However, Byrne teaches the cover lens encapsulated by a plastic injection process injecting plastic material ([0019] The cover is configured to cover and protect the camera lens...The cover may be formed by plastic injection molding to provide a unitarily formed cover.), and
wherein the cover lens is in direct contact with the injection plastic material ([0019] The cover may be formed by plastic injection molding to provide a unitarily formed cover; [Fig. 2]).
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 Heitzer, as modified, to comprise the plastic injection process similar to Byrne, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of creating a permanent cover easily manufactured for an efficient production process.
Regarding claim 2, Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the cover lens is a removable cover ([0032] The glass substrate 203 is a plane of glass, such as a glass cover or lid, disposed on the encapsulation component 202 and is adhered thereto by an adhesive or solder).
Regarding claim 3, Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the cover lens is encapsulated to a metallic or plastic frame to form an assembly ([0031] The encapsulation component 202 forms part of a protective housing around at least part of the MEMS device 205 and may be a metal, plastic (e.g., mold resin), glass or ceramic casing.).
Regarding claim 4, Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the detection device according to claim 3, wherein the assembly is fixed to the protective housing by a reversible fastening means ([0032] The glass substrate 203 is a plane of glass, such as a glass cover or lid, disposed on the encapsulation component 202 and is adhered thereto by an adhesive or solder).
Regarding claim 5, a second embodiment of Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the cover lens is encapsulated in soft material, wherein the soft material surrounds a periphery of the cover lens (Fig. 3A; [0042] For example, the housing 302 may be a metal cap with an integrated glass substrate 303).
Heitzer fails to teach the device where the soft encapsulating material is different from a material of the protective housing.
However, Byrne teaches the device where the soft encapsulating material is different from a material of the protective housing ([0019] The cover is configured to cover and protect the camera lens...The cover may be formed by plastic injection molding to provide a unitarily formed cover.)
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 Heitzer to comprise the separate soft material encapsulation from the housing similar to Byrne, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of ensuring that components are easily replaceable and that the device can be otherwise modified after construction.
Regarding claim 6, a second embodiment of Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the detection device according to claim 5, wherein the cover lens is fixed to the protective housing by encapsulation forming one piece (Fig. 3A; [0042] For example, the housing 302 may be a metal cap with an integrated glass substrate 303).
Regarding claim 7, Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the detection device according to claim 1,
Heitzer fails to teach the arrangement wherein the detection device is positioned on a vehicle.
However, Yeo teaches the arrangement wherein the detection device is positioned on a vehicle ([0014] As schematically shown in FIG. 1, two of the detector devices 22 are associated with a headlamp 24 of the vehicle 20. At least one other detector device 22 is separate from a light source on the vehicle 20. A variety of placements of detector devices 22 on a vehicle are possible).
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 Heitzer to comprise the placement of the detection device on a vehicle similar to Yeo, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of allowing for the detection of external objects in the use of operating a vehicle.
Regarding claim 8, Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the LIDAR sensing device is a scanning, rotating, flashing or solid state LiDAR device enabling 3D mapping, and emitting a laser beam of wavelength ranging between 750 and 1650 nm ([0023] The tilted chip assembly may be incorporated in a chip package and may be used in Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) applications; [0021] Embodiments relate to optical sensors and optical sensor systems and to obtaining information about optical sensors and optical sensor systems. A sensor may refer to a component which converts a physical quantity to be measured to an electric signal, for example a current signal or a voltage signal. The physical quantity may, for example, comprise electromagnetic radiation, such as visible light, infrared (IR) radiation).
Regarding claim 9, Heitzer, as modified above, teaches a process to manufacture a LiDAR device according to claim 1, comprising:
Providing the protective housing ([0028] Inside the packaging, in a cavity 204, a MEMS device 205 is bonded to the substrate 201 by a die attach layer 206. The MEMS device 205),
Encapsulating at least one part of the cover lens ([0031] The encapsulation component 202 forms part of a protective housing around at least part of the MEMS device 205), and
Fixing the encapsulated cover lens to the protective housing ([0032] The glass substrate 203 is a plane of glass, such as a glass cover or lid, disposed on the encapsulation component 202 and is adhered thereto by an adhesive or solder).
Regarding claim 10, a second embodiment of Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the process according to claim 9, wherein the protective housing and the cover lens are encapsulated together in an encapsulation mould to form one piece (Fig. 3A; [0042] For example, the housing 302 may be a metal cap with an integrated glass substrate 303).
Regarding claim 11, a second embodiment of Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the process according to claim 9, wherein the cover lens is flush with peripheral edges of the protective housing (Fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 12, a second embodiment of Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the process according to claim 9, wherein the cover lens is encapsulated into a frame made of metal and/or soft material to form an assembly, wherein the assembly is fixed to the protective housing by a reversible fastening means (Fig. 3A; [0042] For example, the housing 302 may be a metal cap with an integrated glass substrate 303. The metal cap may be attached to the substrate 301 by soldering).
Regarding claim 13, a second embodiment of Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the process according to claim 12, wherein the assembly comprises a transparent wall facing an external environment to protect the cover lens ([0042] the glass substrate 303 provides a window for light from the LIDAR light sources and reflected light from the MEMS mirror to pass therethrough.).
Regarding claim 14, Heitzer, as modified above teaches the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the LIDAR sensing device is a scanning, rotating, flashing or solid state LiDAR device enabling 3D mapping, and emitting a laser beam of wavelength ranging between 750 and 1050 nm ([0023] The tilted chip assembly may be incorporated in a chip package and may be used in Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) applications; [0021] Embodiments relate to optical sensors and optical sensor systems and to obtaining information about optical sensors and optical sensor systems. A sensor may refer to a component which converts a physical quantity to be measured to an electric signal, for example a current signal or a voltage signal. The physical quantity may, for example, comprise electromagnetic radiation, such as visible light, infrared (IR) radiation).
Regarding claim 15, Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the detection device comprises at least one cover lens made of at least one glass sheet ([0027] an encapsulation component 202 and a glass substrate 203 that make up the packaging of the sensor package 200, where there glass substrate 203 may be a glass cover, glass lid, or the like)
Heitzer fails to teach a glass having an absorption coefficient lower than 5 m−1 in a wavelength range of 750 to 1050 nm.
However, Lambricht teaches a glass having an absorption coefficient lower than 5 m−1 in a wavelength range of 750 to 1050 nm ([0128] Advantageously again, the glass sheet according to the first main embodiment of the invention has a coefficient of absorption at the wavelength of 850 nm of less than 5 m−1. Preferably, it has a coefficient of absorption at the wavelength of 850 nm of less than or equal to 2 m−1. Very preferably, it has a coefficient of absorption at the wavelength of 850 nm of less than or equal to 1 m−1.).
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 Heitzer to comprise the low absorption glass formatted for light in the infrared range similar to Lambricht, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of creating a more coherent signal in the infrared range that is not reflected back by the protective housing unit.
Regarding claim 16, Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the detection device comprises at least one cover lens made of at least one glass sheet ([0027] an encapsulation component 202 and a glass substrate 203 that make up the packaging of the sensor package 200, where there glass substrate 203 may be a glass cover, glass lid, or the like)
Heitzer fails to teach a glass having an absorption coefficient lower than 5 m−1 in a wavelength range of 750 to 950 nm.
However, Lambricht teaches a glass having an absorption coefficient lower than 5 m−1 in a wavelength range of 750 to 950 nm ([0128] Advantageously again, the glass sheet according to the first main embodiment of the invention has a coefficient of absorption at the wavelength of 850 nm of less than 5 m−1. Preferably, it has a coefficient of absorption at the wavelength of 850 nm of less than or equal to 2 m−1. Very preferably, it has a coefficient of absorption at the wavelength of 850 nm of less than or equal to 1 m−1.).
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 Heitzer to comprise the low absorption glass formatted for light in the infrared range similar to Aitken, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of creating a more coherent signal in the narrow infrared range that is not reflected back by the protective housing unit.
Regarding claim 17, Heitzer, as modified above, teaches the detection device according to claim 7,
Heitzer fails to teach the arrangement wherein the detection device is positioned on the vehicle's bumpers, applique, or roof.
However, Yeo teaches the arrangement wherein the detection device is positioned on the vehicle's bumpers, applique, or roof ([0014] As schematically shown in FIG. 1, two of the detector devices 22 are associated with a headlamp 24 of the vehicle 20. At least one other detector device 22 is separate from a light source on the vehicle 20. A variety of placements of detector devices 22 on a vehicle are possible.).
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 Heitzer to comprise the placement of the detection device on a vehicle similar to Yeo, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of allowing for the detection of external objects in the use of operating a vehicle.
Regarding claim 18, Heitzer, as modified above teaches the detection device according to claim 5, wherein the soft material comprises a thermoplastic polymer, a thermoplastic elastomer, polyurethan, polyamide, or silicone ([0031] The encapsulation component 202 forms part of a protective housing around at least part of the MEMS device 205 and may be a metal, plastic (e.g., mold resin), glass or ceramic casing.).
Regarding claim 21, Heitzer, as modified, teaches the detection device according to claim 1, wherein the cover lens is not glued to the protective housing ([0032] The glass substrate 203 is a plane of glass, such as a glass cover or lid, disposed on the encapsulation component 202 and is adhered thereto by an adhesive or solder).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heitzer in view of Lambricht, Yeo, Byrne and further in view of Cotores et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20200133095 A1), hereinafter Cotores.
Regarding claim 19, Heitzer, as modified above teaches the detection device according to claim 4,
Heitzer fails to teach the device wherein the reversible fastening means includes a snap-fit assembly, a bayonet, or a threading assembly.
However, Cotores teaches the device wherein the reversible fastening means includes a snap-fit assembly, a bayonet, or a threading assembly ([0027] Different techniques may be used to align a replaceable outer lens with the optics (e.g., one or more inner lenses) of a lens barrel and/or an image sensor at the other end of the lens barrel. For example, press-fit, transition-fit, clearance-fit, conical, and/or threaded techniques may be used for alignment of an outer lens. Different mechanisms, such as screw thread, bayonet, and/or snap-in mechanisms, can be used for fastening an outer lens in a position covering an end of a lens barrel.).
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 Heitzer to comprise the mechanical reversible fastening means similar to Cotores, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of utilizing a method of mechanical reversible fastening for the lens assembly that is known in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed April 13th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments that argument that the prior art of record fails to teach the new amendments, the examiner notes that while the prior art of record fails to teach the amended claims of a plastic injection process, the newly discovered prior art, necessitated by the amendments, includes such a process, with a reason for combining being obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art presented above. As such the rejection grounds are 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