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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-22 are currently pending.
Dependent claims 11, 14-15 and 19 have been amended by applicant’s amendments received 20 January 2026. No new matter has been introduced.
Prior objections of the drawings have been overcome by amendment and are therefore withdrawn.
Prior objections of claims 14 and 19 have been overcome by amendment and are therefore withdrawn.
Prior rejections of claim 11 under USC § 112(d) have been overcome by amendment and are therefore withdrawn.
Prior rejections of claim 15 under USC § 112(b) have been overcome by amendment and are therefore withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 20 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Pacala (US 20190011561 A1) cannot anticipate claims 1, 15 and 20 as a capacitor used for storing charge in the detector is never explicitly discussed by Pacala (Remarks pg. 8, line 13 to pg. 9, line 2). Pacala is directed to a system which synchronizes and maps emission and detection sequences, and discusses the emission control including the use of various capacitors within the emitter array ([0111]), and further includes possible detectors as avalanche photodiodes (APDs) and single-photon avalanche photodiodes (SPADs) ([0074]). To one of ordinary skill in the art with knowledge of these types of sensors, there is inherently, or at least obviously, inclusion of capacitors within these detector arrays for the use of storing charge before readout processes occur. Additionally, the specification of the instant application notes that the use of the claimed “capacitively stored and sampled range-snapshot detectors can be replaced with more electronically demanding time and space-sampled photo-amplified (APD or SPAD) detector arrays.” ([0035]), which may be read that the explicitly stated capacitor is not critical to the system, the ability to store and readout charges is. Therefore, through use of sensors such as APDs or SPADs in an array, which store charge and are readout accordingly, Pacala would anticipate the systems of claims 1, 15 and 20 as currently claimed.
Next, the applicant argues that Pacala does not teach an electrically adjustable aperture (Remarks pg. 9, lines 3-15), which may modify the used number of elements, size of selected elements, position of elements, and shape of the selected elements as claimed in dependent claim 2 and independent claims 15 and 20. In addition to the previously noted paragraph [0013], which explicitly states that the position of specific detector elements may be selected as well as the size and geometry of the detector sensing pattern, Pacala discusses that the number of sensors selected may match the number of emitters and can be varied for each scan ([0135]). To one of ordinary skill in the art, a processor or controller (Fig. 1, processor (122) and sensor controller (125)) would be used to determine all of these parameters per scan, therefore enacting an electronically adjustable aperture, or selection of specific detector elements to mask, reduce cross-talk or background noise, based on scan needs. Physical apertures (Fig. 5, apertures (511) are additionally included in the system to further constrain specific pixel field of views (FOVs) to match those of emitter FOVs ([0103] – [0104]). Based on this and as the limitations are currently claimed, Pacala anticipates these limitations of claims 2, 15 and 20.
Applicant also argues that Yeruhami (US 20200249354 A1) cannot anticipate claims 1, 15 and 20 as a capacitor used for storing charge in the detector is never explicitly discussed by Yeruhami (Remarks pg. 9, line 16 to pg. 10, line 6). Yeruhami is directed to a LIDAR system which utilizes binning and non-binning techniques, and further includes possible detectors as avalanche photodiodes (APDs) ([0164]) and single-photon avalanche photodiodes (SPADs) ([0158]). To one of ordinary skill in the art with knowledge of these types of sensors, and based on similar arguments to those raised for Pacala, to one of ordinary skill in the art there is inherently, or at least obviously, inclusion of capacitors within these detector arrays for the use of storing charge before readout processes occur and Yeruhami would anticipate the systems of claims 1, 15 and 20 as currently claimed.
The applicant further argues that Yeruhami does not teach an electrically adjustable aperture (Remarks pg. 10, lines 7-20), which may modify the used number of elements, size of selected elements, position of elements, and shape of the selected elements as claimed in dependent claim 2 and independent claims 15 and 20. In the previously noted paragraphs ([0154] - [0158], [0222]) Yeruhami explicitly states that the number of sensors in a pixel, the size of the pixel and the orientation of groups of pixels may be selected ([0157]), and that the regions of sensor groups (pixels) may have any number of geometric shapes and locations on the sensor as a whole ([0154]). Again, similar arguments to those raised for Pacala may be made here, that to one of ordinary skill in the art, a processing unit or controller (Fig. 1A, processing unit (108)) would be used to determine all of these parameters per scan, therefore enacting an electronically adjustable aperture, or selection of specific detector elements to mask, reduce cross-talk or background noise, based on scan needs. Based on this and as the limitations are currently claimed, Yeruhami anticipates these limitations of claims 2, 15 and 20.
Lastly, applicant argues that Durini Romero (US 20130092824 A1) (Remarks pg. 10 line 21 - pg. 11 line 11) does not teach a non-destructive readout process for the sensor because a capacitor within the sensor is never explicitly described. Examiner respectfully notes that Durini Romero is used in a rejection of claim 6 under 35 USC § 103 to teach the readout process on a detector already described in either Pacala or Yeruhami. However, Durini Romero does teach a schematic for a known semiconductor detector (Fig. 7, detector (700) which explicitly includes a capacitor (SF) on the schematic diagram, where this detector is used in the readout process.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “processing electronics for controlling the light source and processing the image” in claim 1.
The term ’processing electronics’ is a generic or nonce term which is modified by the functional language ‘controlling... and processing’, which is not modified by sufficient structure within the claim limitation. However, based on information in the specification the BRI is that of a generic processor which is generally utilized or claimed in lidar for processing distance or object information, and is interpreted as such for examination purposes.
Dependent claim 2 introduces sufficient structure as ‘an electronically adjustable aperture’ within the claim limitation to modify claim 1. This additional structure is included in similar limitations of “processing electronics for controlling the light source and processing the image” in claims 15 and 20, and therefore claims 15 and 20 both pass step (C) of the three-prong test.
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 § 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 14-16, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Pacala et al. (hereinafter Pacala, US 20190011561 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Pacala anticipates an optical instrument for determining the distance to at least one target, said instrument comprising:
a light source for emitting a pulsed light beam ([0108]; Fig. 5, light emitters (524));
a lens responsive to the light beam and projecting the pulsed light beam on the at least one target ([0108]; Fig. 5, bulk transmitter optics (520));
an imaging lens responsive to a reflected beam from the projected light beam on the at least one target ([0108]; Fig. 5, bulk receiver optics (502));
a time-of-flight (TOF) sensor including a photodetector array having an array of detector elements ([0103]; Fig. 5, photosensors (516)), where each detector element includes at least one time-gated capacitor for storing charge ([0081], [0091]) , said imaging lens focusing an image of the projected light beam on a group of the detector elements in the array (Fig. 5);
and processing electronics for controlling the light source and processing the image of the projected light beam on the array, said processing electronics determining a time from when the pulsed light beam is emitted and the image of the projected beam is created on the array so as to determine the distance to or strength of the at least one target ([0076], [0082], [0099]; Fig. 1, ranging system controller (104) includes processor (130) which determine a time of flight and can determine amplitude of reflected signal).
Regarding claim 2, Pacala anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the processing electronics include an electronically adjustable aperture that selects a number of the detector elements, a size of the selected detector elements, a position of the selected detector elements on the array, a shape of the selected detector elements and a weighting of the selected detector elements ([0013]).
Regarding claim 3, Pacala anticipates the instrument according to claim 2 wherein
the electronically adjustable aperture selects certain detector elements on different regions of the array depending on the distance to the at least one target ([0017], where sensors have a sensing pattern in the field that substantially matches, in size and geometry across a range of distances from the system, the two-dimensional illumination pattern) .
Regarding claim 7, Pacala anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the TOF sensor and the processing electronics process multiple sequential images of the projected light beam on the array as the at least one target moves in time so as to determine a velocity of the at least one target ([0098]).
Regarding claim 14, Pacala anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the light source is a laser or an LED ([0073]).
Regarding claim 15, Pacala anticipates an optical instrument for determining the distance to at least one target, said instrument comprising:
a light source for emitting a pulsed light beam ([0108]; Fig. 5, light emitters (524));
a lens responsive to the light beam and projecting the pulsed light beam on the at least one target ([0108]; Fig. 5, bulk transmitter optics (520));
an imaging lens responsive to a reflected beam from the projected light beam on the at least one target ([0108]; Fig. 5, bulk receiver optics (502));
a sensor including a photodetector array having an array of detector elements ([0103]; Fig. 5, photosensors (516)), said imaging lens focusing an image of the projected light beam on a group of the detector elements in the array (Fig. 5);
and processing electronics for controlling the light source and processing the image of the projected light beam on the array (Fig. 1, ranging system controller (104) includes processor (130)), said processing electronics including an electronically adjustable aperture that selects a number of the detector elements, a size of the selected detector elements, a position of the selected detector elements on the array and a shape of the selected detector elements ([0013]),
said processing electronics determining a time from when the pulsed light beam is emitted and the image of the projected light beam is created on the array so as to determine the distance to the at least one target ([0076], [0082], [0099]; Fig. 1, ranging system controller (104) includes processor (130) which determine a time of flight).
Regarding claim 16, Pacala anticipates the instrument according to claim 15 wherein
the electronically adjustable aperture selects certain detector elements on different regions of the array depending on the distance to the at least one target ([0017], where sensors have a sensing pattern in the field that substantially matches, in size and geometry across a range of distances from the system, the two-dimensional illumination pattern) .
Regarding claim 19, Pacala anticipates the instrument according to claim 15 wherein
the light source is a laser or an LED ([0073]).
Regarding claim 20, Pacala anticipates an optical instrument for determining an atmospheric condition in a sampling volume in the atmosphere, said instrument comprising:
a light source for emitting a pulsed light beam into the sampling volume ([0108]; Fig. 5, light emitters (524));
a time-of-flight (TOF) sensor including a photodetector array having an array of detector elements, where each detector element includes at least one time-gated capacitor for storing charge, ([0103]; Fig. 5, photosensors (516)), where each detector element includes at least one time-gated capacitor for storing charge ([0081], [0091]) said sensor receiving scattered light from the sampling volume (Fig. 5);
and processing electronics for controlling the light source and processing the scattered light on the array (Fig. 1, ranging system controller (104) includes processor (130)),
said processing electronics including an electronically adjustable aperture that selects a number of the detector elements, a size of the selected detector elements, a position of the selected detector elements on the array and a shape of the selected detector elements ([0013]) so as to process the scattered light and determine the condition.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Yeruhami et al. (hereinafter Yeruhami, US 20200249354 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yeruhami anticipates an optical instrument for determining the distance to at least one target, said instrument comprising:
a light source for emitting a pulsed light beam ([0123], [0136]; Fig. 2E, sources (112A)-(112F) emit pulsed light);
a lens responsive to the light beam and projecting the pulsed light beam on the at least one target ([0112], [0136]; Fig. 2E, optical window (124A) may be a lens);
an imaging lens responsive to a reflected beam from the projected light beam on the at least one target ([0112], [0136]; Fig. 2E, optical window (124B) may be a lens);
a time-of-flight (TOF) sensor including a photodetector array having an array of detector elements ([0136]; Fig. 2E, sensor (116)), where each detector element includes at least one time-gated capacitor for storing charge ([0017], [0151] - [0158], where sensors such as SPADs collect data in scanning cycles), said imaging lens focusing an image of the projected light beam on a group of the detector elements in the array ([0136]; Fig. 2E);
and processing electronics for controlling the light source and processing the image of the projected light beam on the array, said processing electronics determining a time from when the pulsed light beam is emitted and the image of the projected beam is created on the array so as to determine the distance to or strength of the at least one target ([0123], [0136], [0156]; Fig. 2E, processor (118) may determine time of flight for reflected light and may analyze average power over returned light).
Regarding claim 2, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the processing electronics include an electronically adjustable aperture that selects a number of the detector elements, a size of the selected detector elements, a position of the selected detector elements on the array, a shape of the selected detector elements and a weighting of the selected detector elements ([0154] - [0158], [0222]).
Regarding claim 3, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 2 wherein
the electronically adjustable aperture selects certain detector elements on different regions of the array depending on the distance to the at least one target ([0423]).
Regarding claim 4, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 3 wherein
the electronically adjustable aperture selects a relatively large number of the detector elements at one location on the array for a relatively close target, selects a relatively medium number of the detector elements at another location on the array for a relatively medium range target, and selects a relatively small number of the detector elements at another location on the array for a relatively far target ([0191], [0338]; processing unit 108 may allocate detector resources based on the identification of the at least one region of interest and may assign a number of detectors based on range).
Regarding claim 5, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the at least one target is multiple targets at different distances from the instrument and wherein the instrument determines the distance to the multiple targets and the targets scattering strength simultaneously from position and magnitude of the imaged projected light beam on the array ([0308]-[0311]; Fig. 14A, multiple targets occur in field of view where FOV pixels may be defined by adjacent portions of the detector and/or by adjacent detection elements on the detector).
Regarding claim 7, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the TOF sensor and the processing electronics process multiple sequential images of the projected light beam on the array as the at least one target moves in time so as to determine a velocity of the at least one target ([0341]; Fig. 15, where method (1500) may further use plurality of scans to determine velocity of the at least first target).
Regarding claim 8, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the TOF sensor and the processing electronics process multiple sequential images of the projected light beam on the array and an ambient light spot on the at least one target as the at least one target moves in time so as to remove the ambient light from backscatter measurements ([0215]).
Regarding claim 9, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
an axis of the reflected beam is angularly and laterally offset from an axis of the emitted light beam ([0136]; Fig. 2E, shows a bistatic configuration of a LIDAR system where transmission and receiving beams do not share optical pathways).
Regarding claim 10, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the at least one target is selected from the group consisting of a cloud, rain, snow, ice, particles and aerosols ([0100], [0147]).
Regarding claim 12, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the instrument determines forward scatter from particles in the atmosphere for visibility and/or present weather detection purposes ([0100], [0190], [0258]-[0261], where software modules may be implemented for detecting blockages and/or impaired sensing and reflection signals may refer to light originating from outside the protective window and passing into the LIDAR system through the protective window. The system may monitor and detect areas of reduced light transmission).
Regarding claim 13, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the instrument measures light attenuation within a sampling volume ([0123], where sensing units may also detect intensity of returned light and compare to emitted light).
Regarding claim 14, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 1 wherein
the light source is a laser or an LED ([0105]).
Regarding claim 15, Yeruhami anticipates an optical instrument for determining the distance to at least one target, said instrument comprising:
a light source for emitting a pulsed light beam ([0123], [0136]; Fig. 2E, sources (112A)-(112F) emit pulsed light);
a lens responsive to the light beam and projecting the pulsed light beam on the at least one target ([0112], [0136]; Fig. 2E, optical window (124A) may be a lens);
an imaging lens responsive to a reflected beam from the projected light beam on the at least one target ([0112], [0136]; Fig. 2E, optical window (124B) may be a lens);
a sensor including a photodetector array having an array of detector elements ([0136]; Fig. 2E, sensor (116)), where each detector element includes at least one time-gated capacitor for storing charge ([0017], [0151] - [0158], where sensors such as SPADs collect data in scanning cycles), said imaging lens focusing an image of the projected light beam on a group of the detector elements in the array ([0136]; Fig. 2E);
and processing electronics for controlling the light source and processing the image of the projected light beam on the array ([0123], [0136], [0156]; Fig. 2E, processor (118)), said processing electronics include an electronically adjustable aperture that selects a number of the detector elements, a size of the selected detector elements, a position of the selected detector elements on the array, and a shape of the selected detector elements ([0154] - [0158]).
said processing electronics determining a time from when the pulsed light beam is emitted and the image of the projected beam is created on the array so as to determine the distance to the at least one target ([0123], [0136]; Fig. 2E, processor (118) may determine time of flight for reflected light).
Regarding claim 16, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 15 wherein
the electronically adjustable aperture selects certain detector elements on different regions of the array depending on the distance to the at least one target ([0423]).
Regarding claim 17, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 15 wherein
the electronically adjustable aperture selects a relatively large number of the detector elements at one location on the array for a relatively close target, selects a relatively medium number of the detector elements at another location on the array for a relatively medium range target, and selects a relatively small number of the detector elements at another location on the array for a relatively far target ([0191], [0338]; processing unit 108 may allocate detector resources based on the identification of the at least one region of interest and may assign a number of detectors based on range).
Regarding claim 18, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 15 wherein
the at least one target is multiple targets at different distances from the instrument and wherein the instrument determines the distance to the multiple targets and the targets scattering strength simultaneously from position and magnitude of the imaged projected light beam on the array ([0308]-[0311]; Fig. 14A, multiple targets occur in field of view where FOV pixels may be defined by adjacent portions of the detector and/or by adjacent detection elements on the detector).
Regarding claim 19, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 15 wherein
the light source is a laser or an LED ([0105]).
Regarding claim 20, Yeruhami anticipates an optical instrument for determining an atmospheric condition in a sampling volume in the atmosphere, said instrument comprising:
a light source for emitting a pulsed light beam into the sampling volume ([0123], [0136]; Fig. 2E, sources (112A)-(112F) emit pulsed light);
a time-of-flight (TOF) sensor including a photodetector array having an array of detector elements, where each detector element includes at least one time-gated capacitor for storing charge, said sensor receiving scattered light from the sampling volume ([0136]; Fig. 2E, sensor (116)), where each detector element includes at least one time-gated capacitor for storing charge ([0017], [0151] - [0158], where sensors such as SPADs collect data in scanning cycles);
and processing electronics for controlling the light source and processing the scattered light on the array ([0123], [0136], [0156]; Fig. 2E, processor (118) may determine time of flight for reflected light),
said processing electronics including an electronically adjustable aperture that selects a number of the detector elements, a size of the selected detector elements, a position of the selected detector elements on the array and a shape of the selected detector elements so as to process the scattered light ([0154] - [0158]) and determine the condition ([0190]).
Regarding claim 21, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 20 wherein
the instrument determines forward scatter from particles in the atmosphere for visibility and/or present weather detection purposes ([0100], [0190], [0258]-[0261], where software modules may be implemented for detecting blockages and/or impaired sensing and reflection signals may refer to light originating from outside the protective window and passing into the LIDAR system through the protective window. The system may monitor and detect areas of reduced light transmission).
Regarding claim 22, Yeruhami anticipates the instrument according to claim 20 wherein
the instrument measures light attenuation within a sampling volume ([0123], where sensing units may also detect intensity of returned light and compare to emitted light).
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pacala et al. (hereinafter Pacala, US 20190011561 A1), and in view of Durini Romero et al. (hereinafter Durini Romero, US 20130092824 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Pacala teaches the instrument according to claim 1, where the photodetector may be a CMOS photodetector ([0079]), but does not explicitly teach a TOF sensor which reads charge in a non-destructive readout manner.
Durini Romero teaches a TOF sensor ([0030]; Fig. 1a detector (100) with detection region (124)) which reads charge from the capacitors in a non-destructive readout (NDR) manner ([0006], where NDR methods lead to improved noise suppression and noise at the pixel output here is not dependent on the capacity of the CMOS photodetector, but the much smaller capacity of the readout node).
To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious prima facie to modify Pacala to incorporate the teachings of Durini Romero, where the sensor in a TOF system which is utilizing a CMOS photodetector is read out in a non-destructive readout manner with a reasonable expectation of success of signal detection without pixel saturation. Use of the readout method of Durini Romero in the system of Pacala would have a predictable result of establishing signal processing techniques which are less susceptible to pulse shape distortion due to saturation of the photodetectors, as noted by Pacala ([0079], [0081]) and further allows for fast response and/or short response times while providing better signal-to-noise ratios (Durini Romero, [0017]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeruhami et al. (hereinafter Yeruhami, US 20200249354 A1), and in view of Durini Romero et al. (hereinafter Durini Romero, US 20130092824 A1).
Yeruhami teaches the instrument according to claim 1, where the photodetector may be a CMOS photodetector ([0164]), but does not explicitly teach a TOF sensor which reads charge in a non-destructive readout manner.
Durini Romero teaches a TOF sensor ([0030]; Fig. 1a detector (100) with detection region (124)) which reads charge from the capacitors in a non-destructive readout (NDR) manner ([0006], where NDR methods lead to improved noise suppression and noise at the pixel output here is not dependent on the capacity of the CMOS photodetector, but the much smaller capacity of the readout node).
To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious prima facie to modify Yeruhami to incorporate the teachings of Durini Romero, where the sensor in a TOF system which is utilizing a CMOS photodetector is read out in a non-destructive readout manner with a reasonable expectation of success of signal detection without pixel saturation. Use of the readout method of Durini Romero in the system of Yeruhami would have a predictable result of further control of a detection plan for sensing units in a TOF sensor where the detection plan may be defined by detector sensitivity or responsivity (Yeruhami, [0190]) and further allows for fast response and/or short response times while providing better signal-to-noise ratios (Durini Romero, [0017]).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pacala et al. (hereinafter Pacala, US 20190011561 A1), and in view of Rettger et al. (hereinafter Rettger, US 20100198420 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Pacala teaches the instrument according to claim 1, but does not explicitly teach use of the system to measure cloud height and sky coverage.
Rettger teaches that one application of LIDAR is operation as a ceilometer that measures cloud height and sky coverage of clouds ([0053] – [0055]).
To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious prima facie to utilize the LIDAR system of Pacala as a ceilometer per the teachings of Rettger with a reasonable expectation of success of signal detection without pixel saturation. As Rettger establishes, use of LIDAR over other non-LIDAR ceilometers allows for additional measurements and larger angle coverage, and is useful in numerous systems where cloud coverage information is important ([0055]).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yeruhami et al. (hereinafter Yeruhami, US 20200249354 A1), and in view of Rettger et al. (hereinafter Rettger, US 20100198420 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Yeruhami teaches the instrument according to claim 1, but does not explicitly teach use of the system to measure cloud height and sky coverage.
Rettger teaches that one application of LIDAR is operation as a ceilometer that measures cloud height and sky coverage of clouds ([0053] – [0055]).
To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious prima facie to utilize the LIDAR system of Yeruhami as a ceilometer per the teachings of Rettger with a reasonable expectation of success of signal detection without pixel saturation. As Rettger establishes, use of LIDAR over other non-LIDAR ceilometers allows for additional measurements and larger angle coverage, and is useful in numerous systems where cloud coverage information is important ([0055]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Baldwin et al. (US 9677986 B1) teaches a system for determining presence of airborne particles using one or more sensors, which includes a time-of-flight sensor which utilizes pulses of emitted light to gather distance data.
Keilaf et al. (US 20190271767 A1) teaches a time-of-flight lidar system which dynamically allocates detection elements 2 different groups, where the number of detection elements within groups is variable for object tracking and detection.
Roy (US 20180302582 A1) teaches time-of-flight detection and pixels which utilizes charge storage and readout circuits to nondestructively measure quantity of charges due to periodic lights.
Richard et al (US 20040159776 A1) teaches a compact integrated avalanche photodiodes (APD) device, which uses on chip capacitors to store charge during the APD’s use as detectors.
Hunt et al. (US 5162885 A) teaches a charge transport imager where an array of avalanche photodiodes (APD), and discusses that APD charges are inherently stored within the capacitance of the emitter, but other options for storing charge such as a diode or parallel plate capacitor are well known options.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Kara Richter whose telephone number is (571)272-2763. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8A-5P EST, Fridays are variable.
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.
/K.M.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645