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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/11/25 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 2/6/2026, is in compliance with the
Provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges the amending of claims 1, 21-22 and addition of new claim 23.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 21-22 (first time difference determined by a first controller) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument (Remarks pgs. 8-9). New reference Nagai (US-20080285602-A1)
Note, new claim 23 is incorrectly referred to as an independent claim. Additionally, the applicant states that claim 23 incorporates claim 1, which is a statement typically reserved for new independent claims and is redundant for dependent claim 23 (Remarks pg. 9). The language suggests that the applicant may have intended for claim 23 to be independent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams et al. (US-20200358246-A1) in view of Waarts (EP-1113540-A1) and Nagai (US-20080285602-A1).
.
Regarding claim 1, Williams discloses a method for performing dynamic pulse control of a fiber laser in a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) scanning system (figs. 1 + 5, 0005 lines 1-3, 0006), comprising: switching pump power that is deliverable to a first power amplification medium (fig. 5 16 deliverable to 14, 0021 lines 15-19, 0024 lines 1-7), the first power amplification medium carrying seed laser light having a first triggering frequency (fig. 5 14 carries SEED PULSES from 12 w/ a first frequency fig. 2 PRI2 (pulse repetition interval), 0017 lines 13-14, 0019, 0022); and adjusting the seed laser light to have a second triggering frequency different from the first triggering frequency (figs. 2+5 12 adjusted to have second frequency PRI3 different from PRI2), wherein switching the pump power and adjusting the seed laser light are timed to occur at different times having a first time difference (fig. 5 switching pump power (PRI CONTROL) and adjusting seed laser (DELAYED PRI CONTROL) occur at different times having time difference t from 50, 0031, adjusting PRI of pump will switch/adjust pump power, Applicant’s specification 0064 lines 11-13), and a desire to compensate for fluctuations in ASE and mitigate unwanted noise during pulses and PRI changes to maintain a constant output energy level (0020 lines 5-9 + 0021 lines 1-10).
Williams does not explicitly disclose the first time difference is determined based on one or both of pulse energy fluctuation and a settling time for stabilizing the pulse energy fluctuation.
Waarts discloses setting a first time difference between a first amplifier duty cycle and second amplifier duty cycle to reduce backtravelling scattering noise (ie. ASE) in an optical amplifier system (col. 19 lines 1-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine the first time difference based on one or both of pulse energy fluctuation and a settling time for stabilizing the pulse energy fluctuation to reduce ASE/scattering noise in the device (Waarts col. 19 lines 1-18).
Modified Williams does not disclose this first time difference being determined by a first controller.
Nagai discloses a MOPO/MOPA device comprising a synchronization controller that determines a delay between a signal sent to an oscillation chamber and one sent to an amplification chamber (0158-0162, figs. 1, 2a/b oscillation chamber 10, amplification chamber 30, synchronization controller 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first time difference being determined by a first controller to provide increased automation and timing precision (to help ensure minimal ASE/scattering noise).
Regarding claim 2, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: generating, based on a first seed control signal (fig. 5 DELAYED PRI CONTROL from SYSTEM CONTROLLER 20, 0025 lines 1-4), the seed laser light at the first triggering frequency (fig. 5 SEED PULSES generated at fig. 2 PRI2); and delivering the seed laser light at the first triggering frequency to the first power amplification medium (fig. 5 SEED PULSES delivered at PRI2 to 14).
Regarding claim 3, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the seed laser light comprises a continuous wave laser light or a pulsed laser light (seed laser light is pulsed, fig. 2, 0019 lines 1-3).
Regarding claim 4, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1, wherein switching the pump power that is deliverable to the first power amplification medium comprises: switching the pump power from a low power state to a high power state, or from an off state to an on state (fig. 5 pump power delivered to 14 is pulsed, oscillates between high and low power states, 0008 lines 7-11).
Regarding claim 5, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1, wherein switching the pump power that is deliverable to the first power amplification medium comprises: switching the pump power from a high power state to a low power state, or from an on state to an off state (fig. 5 pump power delivered to 14 is pulsed, oscillates between high and low power states, 0008 lines 7-11).
Regarding claim 6, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1, wherein switching the pump power is timed to occur at the first time difference before adjusting the seed laser light (fig. 5 switching pump power (PRI CONTROL) occurs at time difference t before adjusting seed laser (DELAYED PRI CONTROL) due to 50, 0031, adjusting PRI of pump will switch/adjust pump power, Applicant’s specification 0064 lines 11-13).
Regarding claim 9, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first time difference comprises a pre- configured time difference or an adjustable time difference (0030 lines 8-12, arrival times are controlled (ie. Preconfigured and/or adjustable)).
Regarding claim 10, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: communicating, based on the first time difference, a first control signal between a first pump controller and a seed controller (fig. 5 based on 50/DELAY t, first control signal from 20 between pump controller 18 and seed controller 13 (annotated fig. 5 added thicker dashed line portion between 18 and 13), 0025 lines 1-4), wherein the first control signal causes one of adjusting the seed laser light or switching the pump power that is deliverable to the first power amplification medium (annotated fig. 5 thicker dashed line controls one of 13 PRI or 18 PRI, and switches pump/seed power (turns ON/OFF), 0025).
PNG
media_image1.png
523
800
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig. 5
Regarding claim 11, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the second triggering frequency is higher than the first triggering frequency (fig. 2 PRI3 frequency higher than PRI2 frequency).
Regarding claim 12, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1.
Modified Williams does not disclose wherein the second trigger frequency is lower than the first triggering frequency.
Williams discloses a pulse PRI timeline where a period of lower frequency PRI occurs immediately after a period of higher frequency PRI (fig. 2 tau4 frequency lower than tau3 frequency, 0019).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the second triggering frequency lower than the first triggering frequency to improve functionality of the device during situations where required detection range goes from short to long (0018).
Regarding claim 13, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1, wherein adjusting the seed laser light to have the second triggering frequency different from the first triggering frequency comprises: generating, based on a second seed control signal (fig. 5 20 generates second PRI signal (fig. 2 PRI3) and PRI change signal, 0008 lines 6-9, 0020 lines 1-5), the seed laser light at the second triggering frequency (fig. 5 pulses and seed pulses at fig. 2 frequency at PRI3 during tau3); and delivering the seed laser light at the second triggering frequency to the first power amplification medium (fig. 5 12 delivers SEED PULSES to 14 at tau3 PRI3 frequency).
Regarding claim 14, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: outputting, by the first power amplification medium, a first amplified laser light having a first wavelength (fig. 5 pulse P from 14 must have some wavelength, prior art fig. 1 pulse is emitted at lambda_sig, 0026 final 6 lines).
Regarding claim 15, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 14.
Modified Williams does not disclose further comprising: switching pump power that is deliverable to a second power amplification medium, the second power amplification medium carrying the first amplified laser light, wherein switching the pump power that is deliverable to the second power amplification medium and switching the pump power that is deliverable to the first power amplification medium are timed to occur at different times having a second time difference.
Waarts discloses an optical amplifier system with an injected signal and first pump power signal provided to first amplification medium (fig. 7 Is/90 and P1/92 provided to A1, col. 19 lines 45-55), output is then sent to second amplification medium with second pump power signal (fig. 7 A1 output combined with P2/100 and sent to A2, col. 19 lines 55-end + col. 20 lines 1-10), wherein the second pump power is delivered to the second medium before the first pump power delivered to first medium by a second time difference (fig. 6 P2 duty cycle for signal to 102 starts before P1 duty cycle for signal to 94, col. 18 lines 49-end + col. 19 lines 1-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add switching pump power that is deliverable to a second power amplification medium, the second power amplification medium carrying the first amplified laser light, wherein switching the pump power that is deliverable to the second power amplification medium occurs before switching the pump power that is deliverable to the first power amplification medium to the method of claim 14 to achieve higher power levels and energies with less complex systems (Waarts col. 2 lines 24-26) and to reduce amount of backtraveling scattering noise from the second power amplifier sent to the first power amplifier, increasing efficiency (Waarts col. 19 lines 1-15).
Regarding claim 16, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 15 wherein switching the pump power that is deliverable to the second power amplification medium is timed to occur at the second time difference before switching the pump power that is deliverable to the first power amplification medium (fig. 6 P2 duty cycle for signal to 102 starts before P1 duty cycle for signal to 94, by exactly the second time difference, col. 18 lines 49-end + col. 19 lines 1-15).
Regarding claim 17, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 15.
Modified Williams does not disclose wherein switching the pump power that is deliverable to the second power amplification medium is timed to occur at the second time difference after switching the pump power that is deliverable to the first power amplification medium.
Waarts separately discloses a shorter pulse length/duration for the second amplification medium pump pulse and longer one for the first pump pulse (col. 19 lines 20-30).
Switching the second medium pump power after the first medium pump power would have been obvious to try (before or after) (MPEP 2143 I E). Applicant does not appear to offer or suggest any criticality regarding the specific order of events.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to switch the pump power that is deliverable to the second power amplification medium at the second time difference after switching the pump power that is deliverable to the first power amplification medium to reduce amount of forward scattering noise from the first power amplifier sent to the second power amplifier, increasing efficiency (Waarts col. 19 lines 20-25).
Regarding claim 18, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 15.
Modified Williams does not disclose further comprising: communicating, based on the second time difference, a second control signal between a second pump controller and a first pump controller, wherein the second control signal causes one of switching the pump power of the first power amplification medium or switching the pump power that is deliverable to the second power amplification medium.
Williams discloses using a common controller for multiple pulse sources in a LiDAR device (fig. 5 20 controls both 13 + 18).
From claim 15 rejection, Waarts discloses the optical amplifier system with the injected signal and first pump power signal provided to first amplification medium (fig. 7 Is/90 and P1/92 provided to A1, col. 19 lines 45-55), output is then sent to the second amplification medium with second pump power signal (fig. 7 A1 output combined with P2/100 and sent to A2, col. 19 lines 55-end + col. 20 lines 1-10), wherein the second pump power is delivered to the second medium before the first pump power delivered to first medium by the second time difference (fig. 6 P2 duty cycle for signal to 102 starts before P1 duty cycle for signal to 94, col. 18 lines 49-end + col. 19 lines 1-15). Warts discloses using 2 separate amplification media with 2 separate pulse sources (fig. 7 A1 and A2 correspond to pump P1 and P2, respectively).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to communicate, based on the second time difference and using a common system controller, a second control signal between a second pump controller and a first pump controller, wherein the second control signal causes one of switching the pump power of the first power amplification medium or switching the pump power that is deliverable to the second power amplification medium to allow for consolidated control of one or both pump signals while reducing the amount of scattering noise.
Regarding claim 19, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 15 with the appropriate aforementioned use of the first and second time differences.
Modified Williams does not disclose further comprising: communicating, based on the plurality of time differences, respective control signals from a master controller to a seed controller, a first pump controller, and a second pump controller, wherein the seed controller, the first pump controller, and the second pump controller control adjusting the seed laser light, switching the pump power deliverable to the first power amplification medium, and switching the pump power deliverable to the second power amplification medium, respectively, based on their respective control signals.
Williams discloses using a common/master controller for multiple pulse sources in a LiDAR device (fig. 5 20 controls both 13 + 18).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to communicate, based on the plurality of time differences, respective control signals from a master controller to a seed controller, a first pump controller, and a second pump controller, wherein the seed controller, the first pump controller, and the second pump controller control adjusting the seed laser light, switching the pump power deliverable to the first power amplification medium, and switching the pump power deliverable to the second power amplification medium, respectively, based on their respective control signals to consolidate the signal sources into one component (a master controller) and simplify the device and reduce the occupied space.
Regarding claim 20, modified Williams discloses the method of claim 15.
Modified Williams does not disclose further comprising: outputting, by the second power amplification medium, a second amplified laser light having the first wavelength.
Waarts discloses an optical amplification system with a second amplified laser light having an output wavelength equal to an input seed pulse wavelength (fig. 7 lambda_S seed input wavelength does not change throughout path to OUT, no elements present to alter wavelength).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to output, by the second power amplification medium, a second amplified laser light having the first wavelength to simplify operation of device and any related calculations by keeping the wavelength constant throughout.
Regarding claim 21, Williams discloses a system for performing dynamic pulse control of a fiber laser in a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) scanning system (figs. 1 + 5, 0005 lines 1-3, 0006), comprising: a first pump controller configured to switch pump power that is deliverable to a first power amplification medium carrying seed laser light having a first triggering frequency (fig. 5 16+18 configured to switch pump power deliverable to 14 carrying SEED PULSES from 12 w/ first frequency fig. 2 PRI2, 0021 lines 15-19, 0024 lines 1-7, 0017 lines 13-14, 0019, 0022); and a seed controller configured to adjust the seed laser light to have a second triggering frequency different from the first triggering frequency (figs. 2+5 12 configured to adjust SEED PULSES to have PRI3 different from PRI2); wherein switching the pump power and adjusting the seed laser light are timed to occur at different times having a first time difference (fig. 5 switching pump power (PRI CONTROL) and adjusting seed laser (DELAYED PRI CONTROL) occur at different times having difference t from 50), and a desire to compensate for fluctuations in ASE and mitigate unwanted noise during pulses and PRI changes to maintain a constant output energy level (0020 lines 5-9 + 0021 lines 1-10).
Williams does not explicitly disclose the first time difference is determined based on one or both of pulse energy fluctuation and a settling time for stabilizing the pulse energy fluctuation.
Waarts discloses setting a first time difference between a first amplifier duty cycle and second amplifier duty cycle to reduce backtravelling scattering noise (ie. ASE) in an optical amplifier system (col. 19 lines 1-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine the first time difference based on one or both of pulse energy fluctuation and a settling time for stabilizing the pulse energy fluctuation to reduce ASE/scattering noise in the device (Waarts col. 19 lines 1-18).
Modified Williams does not disclose this first time difference being determined by a first controller.
Nagai discloses a MOPO/MOPA device comprising a synchronization controller that determines a delay between a signal sent to an oscillation chamber and one sent to an amplification chamber (0158-0162, figs. 1, 2a/b oscillation chamber 10, amplification chamber 30, synchronization controller 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first time difference being determined by a first controller to provide increased automation and timing precision (to help ensure minimal ASE/scattering noise).
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams in view of Waarts, Nagai, and Welford et al. (US-9810786-B1).
Regarding claim 22, Williams discloses a method for performing dynamic pulse control of a fiber laser in a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) scanning system (figs. 1 + 5, 0005 lines 1-3, 0006), comprising: switching pump power that is deliverable to a first power amplification medium (fig. 5 16 deliverable to 14, 0021 lines 15-19, 0024 lines 1-7), the first power amplification medium carrying seed laser light having a first triggering frequency (fig. 5 14 carries SEED PULSES from 12 w/ a first frequency fig. 2 PRI2 (pulse repetition interval), 0017 lines 13-14, 0019, 0022); and adjusting the seed laser light to have a second triggering frequency different from the first triggering frequency (figs. 2+5 12 adjusted to have second frequency PRI3 different from PRI2), wherein switching the pump power and adjusting the seed laser light are timed to occur at different times having a first time difference (fig. 5 switching pump power (PRI CONTROL) and adjusting seed laser (DELAYED PRI CONTROL) occur at different times having time difference t from 50, 0031, adjusting PRI of pump will switch/adjust pump power, Applicant’s specification 0064 lines 11-13), and a desire to compensate for fluctuations in ASE and mitigate unwanted noise during pulses and PRI changes to maintain a constant output energy level (0020 lines 5-9 + 0021 lines 1-10).
Williams does not explicitly disclose the first time difference is determined based on one or both of pulse energy fluctuation and a settling time for stabilizing the pulse energy fluctuation.
Waarts discloses setting a first time difference between a first amplifier duty cycle and second amplifier duty cycle to reduce backtravelling scattering noise (ie. ASE) in an optical amplifier system (col. 19 lines 1-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine the first time difference based on one or both of pulse energy fluctuation and a settling time for stabilizing the pulse energy fluctuation to reduce ASE/scattering noise in the device (Waarts col. 19 lines 1-18).
Modified Williams does not disclose this first time difference being determined by a first controller.
Nagai discloses a MOPO/MOPA device comprising a synchronization controller that determines a delay between a signal sent to an oscillation chamber and one sent to an amplification chamber (0158-0162, figs. 1, 2a/b oscillation chamber 10, amplification chamber 30, synchronization controller 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first time difference being determined by a first controller to provide increased automation and timing precision (to help ensure minimal ASE/scattering noise).
Modified Williams does not disclose a non-transitory computer readable medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, which when executed by one or more processors of an electronic device, cause the electronic device to perform a process comprising the above method steps.
Welford discloses storing instructions for an optical parametric oscillator for a LiDAR system as one or more modules of computer-program instructions encoded or stored on a computer-readable non-transitory storage medium and implemented as hardware or software or to control operation of a computer system (col. 1 lines 35-50, col. 51 lines 5-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to put the method steps on a non-transitory computer readable medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, which when executed by one or more processors of an electronic device, cause the electronic device to perform a process to make the method steps more transportable and sharable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7, 23 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 7: Prior art of record does not disclose switching pump power at a first time difference after adjusting seed laser light.
Claim 23: Prior art of record does not disclose time difference based on pulse energy fluctuation and/or settling time specifically of the output amplified laser light in conjunction with the existing limitations incorporated from claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alex Ehrlich whose telephone number is (703)756-5716. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MinSun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/A.E./ Examiner, Art Unit 2828
/MINSUN O HARVEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2828