Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/738,797

LIDAR RANGE ENHANCEMENT USING PULSE CODING

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
May 06, 2022
Examiner
BAGHDASARYAN, HOVHANNES
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
LG Innotek Co., Ltd.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
759 granted / 971 resolved
+26.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
85 currently pending
Career history
1056
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
45.7%
+5.7% vs TC avg
§102
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
§112
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 971 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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. Claims 1, 8, 14 and dependents 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. Limitation “wherein the pulse code offset comprises a sequence of N pulse code offsets applied over N lidar frame” is unclear . What does it mean that 1st lidar frame has only 1 pulse code offset, 2nd lidar frame has only 2 pulse code offsets, 3rd lidar frame has only 3 pulse code offsets or for example we have 3 lidar frames and each one of them has 3 pulse codes. Also issue rises if we have only 1 Lidar frame then how many pulse code offsets we need to have. If only one then last limitation of the claim does not make sense. 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, 8, 14 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 US 20210124027 A1. Regarding claims 1, 8, 14 D1 teaches 1. A method, comprising: Receiving(fig. 4b), by a lidar detector[0003] during a lidar frame(4a), a reflected laser signal corresponding to a laser pulse(13c, d) emitted by a lidar emitter, wherein the received reflected laser signal is associated with a time bin(14c, 14d) of the lidar frame and with a pulse code offset(14c and 14d are offsets) applied to a laser signal emitted during that lidar frame;(fig 4a) aggregating, by one or more computing devices, the received reflected laser signal into an avalanche histogram(fig. 4b) at a time bin of the avalanche histogram corresponding with the time bin of the lidar frame, (fig. 4b) wherein one or more additional received reflected laser signals are further aggregated into the avalanche histogram at corresponding time bins(signals from pulses 13c, 13d) of the avalanche histogram as a set of received reflected laser signals, each of the one or more additional received reflected laser signals having a corresponding pulse code offset; and(fig. 4a, 4b) decoding, by the one or more computing devices, the set of received reflected laser signals by shifting each received reflected laser signal of the set of received reflected laser signals to a time bin of a decoded avalanche histogram based on the corresponding pulse code offset.(fig. 4b, 5a-c) wherein the pulse code offset comprises a sequence of N pulse code offsets(at least 2 pulse code offsets for 13 preset for each frame 30) applied over N lidar frame(fig. 2 two lidar frames 30), and wherein the sequence of N pulse code offsets is selected such that a difference between successive offsets in the sequence, d(n) - d(n-1), is a different value for each n.(fig. 3 [0066] implicit as offsets are random then dn-d(n-1) will be different) Although D1 does not explicitly teach wherein the pulse code offset comprises a cyclic pulse code offset cyclically related to the pulse code offset chousing periodic/cyclic pulse code in transmission is one of simplification of the invention of D1 where pulse code is arbitrary [0070] which is proportional to the emission time. In fig. 2 transmission times are not explicitly periodic but using periodic transmission instead allow for example to check reliability/repeatability of the measurement. 2., 9, 15 The method of claim 1, further comprising: computing, by the one or more computing devices, a distance of a target based on a grouping of received reflected laser signals within a time bin of the decoded avalanche histogram.(fig. 5c [0075]) 7, 20 The method of claim 1, wherein the lidar detector comprises a single photon detector.[0052] 6, 19 The method of claim 1, wherein the pulse code offsets are selected such that a subset of the set of received reflected laser signals corresponding to a reflection from an out-of-range target resolves to scattered bins of the decoded avalanche histogram. The additional feature of claim 6 would be easily derived from the disclosure of Dl (after compensating received reflected measuring pulses by shifting entities (16) in each histogram (15) to former time based on randomly determined emission times of laser pulses, entities representing correct TOF (20) are overlapped at specific time in each histogram (15) but other entities representing incorrect TOF are scattered around the correct TOF (20) (see paragraphs [0065]-[0068]; and figures 2-5) inherent outcome). Claim(s) bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1. Although D1 does not explicitly say 3, 4, 10, 16, 17 The method of claim 1, further comprising: decoding, by the one or more computing devices, the set of received reflected laser signals by shifting each received reflected laser signal of the set of received reflected laser signals to a time bin of a cyclically decoded avalanche histogram based on a cyclic remapping of the corresponding pulse code offset(fig. 3b using emission time shift) wherein Rmax is given as a maximum distance for an in-range target detectable within the lidar frame when the laser signal emitted during the lidar frame is the reflected laser signal, the method further comprising: computing, by the one or more computing devices, a distance of a target within a range N*Rmax to (N+1)*Rmax based on a grouping of received reflected laser signals within a time bin of the cyclically decoded avalanche histogram, wherein the cyclic remapping corresponds to the range. The additional features of claims 3-4, 10 are merely matters of design option from the disclosure of D1 (when a measurement range scanned during each measurement interval is divided into a short-section, a mid-section and a far-section, which section a target within the measurement range is located may be determined based on an overlapped histogram generated by detecting randomly emitted measurement pulses with a lidar receiving unit, wherein the randomly emitted measurement pulses are reflected at each section, and a short-region, a mid-region and a far-region of the lidar receiving unit may be selectively activated to detect the reflected measurement pulses (see paragraphs [0021]-[0022], [0040]-[0047]; and figures 2-5)). 5, 18 The method of claim 1, wherein the receiving further comprises: disarming the lidar detector for a hold-off time duration, wherein the hold-off time duration includes an arm offset applied to a subsequent lidar frame, wherein the arm offset corresponds to an arm code that shifts a time window for arming the lidar detector during the subsequent lidar frame. The additional feature of claim 5 is merely a matter of design option from the disclosure of Dl (a lidar receivingunit includes a short-region, a mid-region and a far region each activated only if a measurement pulse is received at a short-interval, a mid-interval or a far-interval within each measurement interval (see paragraphs [0040]-[0046])). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 in order to process different distance regions and to save energy in between measurements. 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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 06, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Sep 10, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 26, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112
Dec 01, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 02, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 11, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591059
OPTICAL RANGING DEVICE AND OPTICAL RANGING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591047
OPTICAL SYSTEM FOR LIGHT DETECTION AND RANGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585000
RECEIVING DEVICE FOR AN OPTICAL MEASUREMENT APPARATUS FOR CAPTURING OBJECTS, LIGHT SIGNAL REDIRECTION DEVICE, MEASUREMENT APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A RECEIVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569880
CMOS ULTRASONIC TRANSDUCERS AND RELATED APPARATUS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560721
SPAD LIDAR SYSTEM WITH BINNED PIXELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+16.1%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 971 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month