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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1, 13 and claims depending on it are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
It is unclear how many light sources are present in the system and whether first source and second source are separate sources or same. Clarity issue also supported by the claims 3 and 4 where in claim 3 first and second sources are two different sources and in claim 4 second and first source are the same sources.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1,13, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 US 11092676 B2( or in view of D2 US 11994627 B2).
Regarding claims 1, 13 D1 teaches
one or more light sources(102 from devices 100-1,2, 3 fig. 1) configured to transmit a sequence of transmit pulse groups(112-1+114-1 ,112-2+114-2) toward one or more targets(216 fig. 2A,2b) in a physical environment(col 5, col 10 last paragraph),
wherein the sequence includes a first transmit pulse group and a second transmit pulse group(fig. 1),
wherein the first transmit pulse group includes a first light pulse in a first wavelength and a second light pulse in a second wavelength(col 14 lines 51-65) with a first encoding time delay between the first light pulse and the second light pulse(fig. 1), the second transmit pulse group includes a third light pulse in the first wavelength and a fourth light pulse in the second wavelength (col 14 lines 51-65) with a second encoding time delay between the third light pulse and the fourth light pulse(fig. 1), and
the first encoding time delay and the second encoding time delay are included in a history of transmitted encoding time delays;(implicit as comparator used to identify pulse pairs col 6 lines 3-21)
one or more detectors(104) configured to detect received light pulses in the first wavelength and the second wavelength; and(implicit)
one or more processors configured to perform one or more correlations(comparator) to identify signals to identify which transmit pulse group among candidate transmit pulse groups including the first transmit pulse group and the second transmit pulse group corresponds to the pair of received pulses included in the received light pulses
calculating time-of-flight associated with the pair of received pulses identified as corresponding to the identified transmit pulse group among candidate transmit pulse groups including the first transmit pulse group and the second transmit pulse group(col 13 line 55 -col 14 line 3 arrival time of the pulse doublet in ladar system is completely analogous to time of flight as system knows its own transmission time and therefore tof=toa-transmission )
but does not teach
correlation between a detected timing between a pair of received pulses included in the received light pulses and one or more encoding time delays from the history of transmitted encoding time delays
Although does not explicitly say “and based on a time-of-flight determine a distance to a point on the one or more targets” it is obvious as that the principle of operation of ladar is using tof to calculate the distance.
and wherein the first light pulse and the third light pulse are generated at least in part by a first light source included in the plurality of light sources, and the second light pulse and the fourth light pulse are generated at least in part by a second light source included in the plurality of light sources;
D2 also teaches
Multiple sources (emitter 1+ emitter 2 or different pulse sections within one source if the pulses transmitted by one source) and
wherein the first pulse and the third light pulse are generated at least in part by a first light source included in the plurality of light sources, and the second light pulse and the fourth light pulse are generated at least in part by a second light source included in the plurality of light sources;(arbitrary waveform 1 includes 1 which can be generated by one configuration and -1 which can be generated by second configuration)
Although D1 does not explicitly say correlation between a detected timing between a pair of received pulses included in the received light pulses and one or more encoding time delays from the history of transmitted encoding time delays, Correlation techniques as comparator are well known in the art and it is obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to perform the correlation in order to separate the signals.(see as evidence for example D2 US 11994627 B2)
Also as evidence Examiner adds reference US 20190067896 A1[0032] and WO 2018136709 A1[0045] which shows that simultaneous time-frequency modulation is well known.
Regarding claim 3 although D1 does not explicitly teach
3. (Currently Amended) The system of claim 1 [[2]], wherein the first light source and the second light source are different light sources, the first light source is configured for the first wavelength, and the second light source is configured for the second wavelength.
In case of the laser system one of ordinary skills in the art would recognize that in order to generate different frequencies one needs to have two laser source of different colors and therefore as a single source one can call combination of the two sources which generate two different frequencies.
4. (Original) The system of claim 1, wherein the first light pulse, the second light pulse, the third light pulse, and the fourth light pulse are generated at least in part by a common light source configured to alternate between configurations using the first wavelength and the second wavelength.(col 4 lines 51-65)
5. (Original) The system of claim 1, wherein the first light pulse is transmitted before the second light pulse, and wherein the third light pulse is transmitted before the fourth light pulse. (fig. 1 pulses timing can be completely arbitrary)
6. (Original) The system of claim 1 wherein the first light pulse is transmitted before the second light pulse, and wherein the fourth light pulse is transmitted before the third light pulse. (fig. 1 pulses timing can be completely arbitrary)
7. (Original) The system of claim 1 wherein the first encoding time delay and the second encoding time delay are different. (fig. 1)
8. (Original) The system of claim 1 wherein the first encoding time delay is characterized by a positive value and the second encoding time delay is characterized by a negative value.(fig. 1 depends on what applicants call fist, second and third pulses)
9. (Original) The system of claim 1 wherein the first transmit pulse group is associated with a first group identifier(first device fig. 1), the second transmit pulse group is associated with a second group identifier different from the first group identifier(second device), the first group identifier is associated with the first encoding time delay, and the second group identifier is associated with the second encoding time delay.(fig. 1)
10. (Original) The system of claim 9, wherein the first group identifier is associated with an entry stored in the history of transmitted encoding time delays, and the stored entry is associated with the first encoding time delay.(obvious ad comparator to identify the pulses is present and using correlator is obvious modification)
11. (Original) The system of claim 1, wherein a first detector included in the one or more detectors is configured to detect the received light pulses in the first wavelength, and a second detector included in the one or more detectors is configured to detect the received light pulses in the second wavelength. (obvious over D2 fig. 1 or fig. 1 two different RX )
12. (Original) The system of claim 11, wherein the first detector and the second detector are different(fig. 1 in D1 or D2), the first light pulse and the second light pulse are emitted with an transmit offset(fig. 1 in D1/D2), and the first detector and the second detector are configured to be positioned at locations on a receive image plane of a receiver component based on the transmit offset.(Fig. 1 of D1 100-1 and 100-2 are not collocated and have their offset which correspond to offset of receivers. )
Similarly to claim rejection above claims 14-17 are obvious over D1 and D2.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-19 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7845. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7am - 5 pm.
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 5712726970. 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.
/HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645