DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 8 Paragraph 2, filed 10/28/2025, with respect to the rejection of Claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of LIU (CN 201220618478 U).
Applicant's arguments, see Page 8 Paragraph 3, filed 10/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner notes that no limitations exist in amended 1 which describe light suppression properties of the mounting groove, only of the, presumably separate, light blocking groove. In the absence of any such limitations, it is reasonable under the broadest reasonable interpretation of ‘mounting groove’ to interpret the mounting groove as being solely for the purpose of mechanical mounting of the plate.
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, 4, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terui (US 2002/0008876 A1) in view of Chua (US 2020/0057158 A1) and further in view of Toyama (US 2020/0355800 A1) and further in view of LIU (CN 201220618478 U) and further in view of Lys (US 2020/0236862 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Terui teaches a flash LiDAR, comprising:
an emitting assembly, comprising at least one light-emitting element, wherein the at least one light-emitting element is arranged in an array and configured to emit an outgoing laser to a detection region ([0027]: “The lens unit 10 includes, as shown in FIGS. 2 and 3, a laser diode 12, a diode driver 13, a collimating lens 14, a unit casing 16. The diode driver 13 supplies the power to the laser diode 12 to emit a laser beam in an infrared region in the form of a pulse.”; [0030]: “The laser beam from the polygon mirror 30 is radiated from the exit window 102.”);
a receiving assembly, configured to receive a reflected laser returning after being reflected by an object in the detection region ([0041]: “If there is an object within the scan range, the laser beam is reflected thereby, so that a return of the laser beam enters the reflection measuring apparatus 2 through the entrance window 104. The laser return then passes through the protector plate 130 and travels to the photo diode 50 through the light-receiving lens 40.”),
a light blocking element, configured to block stray light directed to the receiving assembly ([0038]: “The partition wall 112 of this embodiment, as described above, has the tapered surface 118b oriented outward (i.e., in an advancing direction of the laser beam). The stray light emerging from the lens unit 10 is, thus, reflected, as indicated by broken lines illustrated in an upper portion of FIG. 6 by the inner surface of the partition wall 112 without being reflected outward by the surface 118b of the partition wall 112, thereby avoiding the leakage of the stray light outside the reflection measuring apparatus 2.”); and
a control assembly, electrically connected with the emitting assembly and the receiving assembly ([0028]: “The control circuit 80 actuates electronic components of the diode driver 13 and motor driver 60 to perform a scanning operation of the optical system and analyzes the optical signal from the optical signal converter 70 to determine the position and relative speed of an object present in the scan range (i.e., a radar detectable range). Thus, the control circuit must be electrically connected to both the emitting assembly and the receiving assembly), wherein the emitting assembly further comprises an emitting board, wherein the light-emitting element is arranged on the emission board (Figure 5 shows the emitter assembly, and evidently shows the pins of the laser diode protruding through the emitting board), and
wherein the receiving assembly comprises: a receiving lens, a receiver, and a receiving board, wherein the receiver is arranged on the receiving board, and wherein the receiving lens is arranged on a front side of the receiver ([0028]: “The optical signal converter 70 includes a photo diode 50 which converts an input light into an electric signal and adjusts the electric signal in amplitude and waveform to provide an optical signal.” The optical signal converter is a board which is visible in Figure 2, which evidently shows that the photo diode is attached to it.; [0041]: “The laser return then passes through the protector plate 130 and travels to the photo diode 50 through the light-receiving lens 40.”).
Terui does not teach and Chua does teach wherein the emitting assembly and the receiving assembly are arranged abreast (Figure 2 shows the light blocking partition structure between the sensing assembly 4 and the light emitter 3, which are disposed side-by-side and are facing the same way);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reflection measuring apparatus of Terui with the teaching of Chua to place the emitting assembly and the receiving assembly abreast to each other. Substituting the horizontally disposed assemblies of Chua for the vertically disposed assemblies of Terui would have yielded predictable results. A skilled worker in the LiDAR arts would have been able to predict the consequences of this substitution with the aid of common and commercially available ray tracing software.
Terui in view of Chua does not teach and Toyama does teach wherein the light blocking element is a light blocking plate (Figure 3, element 44), and arranged between the emitting assembly (Figure 3, element 11) and the receiving assembly (Figure 3, element 31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Terui in view of Chua with the teaching of Toyama for a light blocking plate to pass between the receiver and emitter assemblies. Toyama notes in [0019] that leakage of light between a light projector and a light receiver can result in a decrease in detection performance. Therefore, efforts to mitigate that leakage will result in better performance of the lidar apparatus.
Terui in view of Chua in view of Toyama does not teach and LIU does teach wherein the emitting board is provided with a first light blocking groove, and wherein the light blocking plate is inserted into the first light blocking groove and protrudes from the surface of the emission board (Figure 4 shows grooves 12 in the light emitting board (elements 11 are light emitters) which are meant to accept the light resistance plates 22. Figure 5 shows the plates protruding from the emitter board 11 when they are inserted; [0042]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of LIU into the device of Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama. Liu notes in [0016] that the “shielding structure can achieve excellent light leakage-proof effect,” which is a highly desirable characteristic in any device in which light leakage could cause problems in other components or subsystems.
Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU teaches mounting a light blocking plate as described in the analysis above.
Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU does not teach and Lys does teach wherein an inner surface of the housing is provided with a mounting groove, and wherein the mounting groove is located on two opposite side walls of the housing (Figure 7C shows mounting grooves 1014 on opposite inside walls of the housing 1004. These grooves hold control circuit boards 100, 200, 300 in the figure; [0087]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to mount the light blocking element of Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama using the mounting grooves taught in Lys. Although Lys uses the grooves to mount a control circuit board, this disclosure solves the same problem as that posed by mounting a light blocking plate, that is, how does a skilled worker secure the plate internally to the housing of the lidar device. Given that the plate and the circuit boards are similarly dimensioned, that is, they are comparable to the inner dimensions of the housing, a skilled worker in the art would recognize Lys’s solution to mounting a circuit board as a viable solution for mounting a light blocking plate.
Regarding Claim 4, which depends from rejected Claim 1, Terui furthers teaches that the LiDAR device comprises a housing and a front cover (These components are equivalent to the front casing 100 and the rear plat 120 disclosed in [0029]), wherein the housing and the front cover are assembled to form a sealed ([0032]: “Disposed between the front casing 100 and the rear plate 120 is an O-ring 146 to seal a gap between the front casing 100 and the rear plate 120 hermetically for avoiding the ingress of water.”) accommodating groove, and
wherein the emitting assembly, the receiving assembly, and the light blocking element are all arranged in the accommodating groove ([0029]: “The reflecting measuring apparatus 2 also has a physical structure for retaining and protecting the above component parts which consists of a front casing 100, an inner casing 110, and a rear plate 120.” The ‘above component parts’ refers to the emitting assembly, receiving assembly, and light blocking element).
Regarding Claim 13, which depends from rejected Claim 4, Terui further teaches wherein the front cover is provided with an emitting window corresponding to the emitting assembly and a receiving window corresponding to the receiving assembly, and both the emitting window and the receiving window are provided with the transparent sheet (Figure 1; [0030]: “The front casing 100 has an exit window 102 and an entrance window 104 formed in a front wall thereof.”)
Regarding Claim 16, which depends from rejected Claim 3, Terui further teaches wherein the control assembly comprises:
a main control circuit board (Figure 1, element 80), and
a data processing circuit board electrically connected to the main control circuit board ([0028] states that the control circuit 80 contains a data processing circuit as evidenced by the statement that it “analyzes the optical signal from the optical signal converter 70 to determine the position and relative speed of an object present in the scan range (i.e., a radar detectable range).”), wherein the receiving board of the receiving assembly is electrically connected to the data processing circuit board and
wherein the receiving board is configured to convert the reflected laser into an electrical signal and then transmit the electrical signal to the data processing circuit board ([0028]: “The optical signal converter 70 includes a photo diode 50 which converts an input light into an electric signal and adjusts the electric signal in amplitude and waveform to provide an optical signal.”).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Tang (CN 109737868 A).
Regarding Claim 5, which depends from rejected Claim 1, Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys does not teach and Tang does teach wherein an incident end of the receiving lens protrudes from a plane in which a surface of the emitting board is located (Figure 7 shows that the receiving lens 213 protrudes through the substrate 11 upon which the emitter is mounted; [0123]; [0126]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys with the configuration presented in Tang in which the receiving lens protrudes through the plane in which a surface of the emitting board resides. Combining these prior art elements would have yielded predictable results to one skilled in the arts. The consequences and implications of spacing the emitter board and the receiving lens assembly as shown in Tang could easily have been determined with the aid of common, commercially available ray tracing software.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Akimoto (US 11,609,309 B2).
Regarding Claim 7, which depends from rejected Claim 6, Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys does not teach and Akimoto does teach wherein a cross section of the light blocking plate is T-shaped (Figure 8, elements 37 and 32b; Column 7, lines 43-46: “the outwardly protruded part 323 of the propagation suppressing member 32b is formed into a simple plate shape, but the present disclosure is not limited 45 thereto.”; Column 7, Lines 49-50: “Also, there may be used a window member 37 having a T-shaped cross sectional shape”.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys with the teaching of Akimoto to use a ‘propagation suppressing member’ or light blocking element with a T-shaped cross section. As Akimoto shows in Figure 8, and notes in Column 7 lines 47-61, there are a variety of cross sections which can be used to secure the light blocking element, and choosing one of these known elements from the prior art over another would yield predictable results.
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen (US 11,493,605 B2).
Regarding Claim 11, which depends from rejected Claim 3, Terui in view of Chua in view of Toyama in view of LIU in view of Lys does not teach and Chen does teach a mounting plate (Figure 1, element 122) extending along the emitting board (Column 10, Lines 34-36: “The base body 12 further includes a carrying portion 122, 35 and the projection unit 21 is located on the upper surface of the carrying portion 122.”) toward a side of the receiving assembly (Column 10, Lines 4-8: “The photosensitive element 31 is disposed on the base assembly 10 and electrically connected to the circuit board 11 of the base assembly 10. The reflected laser sequentially passes through the optical lens assembly 33 and the optical filtering element 32,”), wherein the emitting board and the mounting plate are located on the same plane (Figure 1, the top surface of the mounting plate 122 and the bottom surface of the projection unit 21 meet at the same plane), wherein the mounting plate is provided with a spacing hole corresponding to the receiving assembly (Column 10, Lines 29-33: “The reflected laser may be projected to the photosensitive element 31 through the opening 121, that is, the opening 121 is located on the photosensitive path of the photosensitive element.”), and wherein the spacing hole and the emitting assembly are respectively located on two sides of the light blocking element (Figure 1 shows that the spacing hole 121 is located below the light blocking assembly 32, and the emitter assembly is located to the right of it.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys with the teaching to dispose the elements as shown in Chen. Chen notes in Column 1, Lines 59-62 that “The depth information camera module adjusts the installation layout of the projection assembly and the receiving assembly through the base assembly to improve the space utilization of the TOF depth information camera module.”
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys as applied to Claim 4 above, and further in view of Yamamoto (US 2021/0373134 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, which depends from rejected Claim 4, Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys does not teach and Yamamoto does teach wherein a second light blocking groove is provided on an inner side of the front cover, and wherein the light blocking element is inserted into the second light blocking groove and protrudes from a surface of the front cover (Figure 4, the light blocking groove is evident between elements 51 and 57. The light blocking plate 49 fits into the groove between the two elements and protrudes inward from the inner surface of the front cover; [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to mount a light blocking element in a groove provided on the front cover of lidar device. Using grooves or slots to mount plates or other board-like components inside a housing is well known in the LiDAR arts and indeed in any art that utilizes computers or electronics. A worker skilled in the arts would be able to combine the prior art elements of a front cover and a light blocking plate by using a grooved mounting slot and would be reasonable assured of a predictable outcome of the designed combination.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys as applied to Claim 4 above, and further in view of Wang (US 2015/0015713 A1).
Regarding Claim 15, which depends from rejected Claim 4, Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys and Wang does teach wherein a flexible element is provided between the front cover and the light blocking element, and wherein two sides of the flexible element abut the front cover and the light blocking element respectively ([0116]: “Thus, when the light shield and bracket abut against the windshield, the aperture of the frit allows light to pass through the windshield, while the walls of the pocket of the light shield abut the windshield (with a gasket or seal disposed therebetween) to block light emanating from inside vehicle from being received by the imager.”; A gasket in this context can reasonable constitute a ‘flexible element’).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Wang to mount the light blocking element with the aid of a flexible element such as a gasket into the device of Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys. Wang notes in [0116] that “while the walls of the pocket of the light shield abut the windshield (with a gasket or seal disposed therebetween) to block light emanating from inside vehicle from being received by the imager.” This insight could have been used by one skilled in the art to further optically isolate the receiving and transmitting sides of a lidar system from each other.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys as applied to Claim 16 above, and further in view of Atala (US 2020/0292297 A1).
Regarding Claim 17, which depends from rejected Claim 16, Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys does not teach and Atala does teach wherein the data processing circuit board is fastened and connected to the main control circuit board, wherein the data processing circuit board is provided with a first connector, and wherein the receiving board is provided with a second connector that matches with the first connector (Figures 5A and 5B show The camera 500 includes a camera board 510 having a photosensitive array 512, a circuit board with supporting electrical components 514, and a ribbon cable 516.; [0094]; [0122]: “Signals from the infrared (IR) cameras 610A, 610B and the registration camera 612 are fed from the camera boards 510 through ribbon cables 516 to connectors 945 (FIG. 9C).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect the circuit boards of Terui in view of Chua using the teaching Atala to connect the boards with connectors and a cable. One skilled in the art would be familiar various methods of connecting circuit boards, and the results of connecting two together with connectors and a cable would be predictable.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys as applied to Claim 4 above, and further in view of Drummer (US 10,340,651 B1) and further in view of Kunze (US 2019/0146066 A1).
Regarding Claim 18, which depends from rejected Claim 4, Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys not teach wherein the emitting board and the inner surface of the housing are laminated, and wherein an outer surface of the housing is provided with a plurality of heat sink ribs.
Drummer teaches wherein the emitting board and the inner surface of the housing are laminated (Column 29, lines 43-47: “For example, at least part of the interior surface of a housing 650 may include optical baffling features, such as for example, a coating or a surface texture ( e.g., a sawtooth structure) that blocks, diverts, or absorbs off-axis stray light.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Drummer to coat the interior of a lidar device with a coating that absorbs off-axis stray light. Drummer notes in Column 29 Lines 47-51 that stray light can be coupled into a receiver. This would degrade the retrieval characteristics of the device, so suppressing this stray light would be advantageous to the system’s performance.
Kunze teaches wherein an outer surface of the housing is provide with a plurality of heat sink ribs (e.g., Figure 11; [0033]: “The housing sidewall may include a plurality of fins or heat sink elements”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention modify the device of Terui in view of Chua with the teaching of Kunze include heat sink ribs on an outside surface of the housing. Kunze notes in [0039] that “the side wall of the housing may comprise a plurality of heat sinks or fins or the like to enhance cooling of the power PCB.” Thus, the heat sink can be used to effectively dissipate heat from components which may become too hot otherwise.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys as applied to Claim 13 above, and further in view of Gassend (US 2020/0132851 A1).
Regarding Claim 19, which depends from Rejected Claim 13, Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys does not teach and Gassend does teach wherein the transparent sheet is coated with an anti-reflection layer ([0152]: “An additional technique for mitigating reflections off of interior sides of optical windows (e.g., off of an interior side of the first optical window 802 and/or an interior side of the second optical window 804) may include the use of one or more anti-reflection coatings. FIG. 10A is an illustration of a LIDAR system 1000, according to example embodiments, that may include anti-reflection coatings 1002 to attenuate or eliminate internal reflections within the LIDAR system 1000.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Gassend to apply anti-reflective coating to the windows of the device of Terui in view of Chua and further in view of Toyama and further in view of LIU and further in view of Lys. Gassend notes that so-called ‘ghost reflections’ off of the interior surfaces of the device windows can be a significant source of error ([0044]: “the detected ghost signal might lead to errors in determined target distances. For example, a three-dimensional point cloud intended to be representative of a scene could be inaccurate based on the detection of ghost signals.”) Mitigating these spurious signals can therefore improve the quality of the device’s distance retrievals.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN WADE CLOUSER whose telephone number is (571)272-0378. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 5:00.
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, ISAM ALSOMIRI can be reached at (571) 272-6970. 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.
/B.W.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ISAM A ALSOMIRI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645