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 Amendment
The Amendment filed February 12th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-7, and 9-16 remain pending in the application. Applicant's amendments to the Specification and Drawings have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final office Action mailed November 13th, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-11, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ferreira et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20200284883 A1), hereinafter Ferreira.
Regarding claim 1, Ferreira teaches an optoelectronic sensor for detecting an object in a monitored zone ([0402] The disclosure relates to a LIDAR Sensor System for environment detection, wherein the LIDAR Sensor System is designed to carry out repeated measurements for detecting the environment, wherein the LIDAR Sensor System has an emitting unit (First LIDAR Sensing System) which is designed to perform a measurement with at least one laser pulse and wherein the LIDAR system has a detection unit (Second LIDAR Sensing Unit), which is designed to detect an object-reflected laser pulse during a measurement time window.; [Fig. 76]; [2815] A first scanned laser beam 7614 (e.g. scanned into a first half of the FOV 7612) including first laser pulses may be reflected by a first object 7616 as a first reflected laser beam 7618) , comprising:
a light transmitter and transmission optics associated with the light transmitter in a transmission path for transmitting a light beam; ([2815] The laser sources 7602 and 7604 and the beam steering system 7610 may be part of the First LIDAR Sensing System 40.)
a light receiver and reception optics associated with the light receiver and offset from the transmission optics by a spacing in a reception path for receiving a light beam remitted by the object and for generating a received light spot on the light receiver;([2816] the optical component 7628 may have one or more surface regions (which are in the receiving light path) configured as a dual focus meta surface, which focusses the light echoes wavelength-dependent and/or polarization-dependent onto each one of a first sensor 7630 and a second sensor 7632) and
a control and evaluation unit configured to evaluate a received signal of the light receiver ([0402] Furthermore, the LIDAR system has a control device (LIDAR Data Processing System/Control and Communication System/LIDAR Sensor Management System), which is designed, in the event that at least one reflected beam component is detected, to associate the detected beam component on the basis of a predetermined assignment with a solid angle range from which the beam component originates.)
wherein the reception optics has at least one optical metaelement having a metasurface and/or a metamaterial ([2816] By way of example, the optical component 7628 may have one or more surface regions (which are in the receiving light path) configured as one or more meta-surfaces. In various embodiments, the optical component 7628 may have one or more surface regions (which are in the receiving light path) configured as a dual focus meta surface, which focusses the light echoes wavelength-dependent and/or polarization-dependent onto each one of a first sensor 7630 and a second sensor 7632)
and the reception optics is configured such that a displacement of the received light spot on the light receiver in a near zone of the optoelectronic sensor dependent on a distance of the object from the optoelectronic sensor is no larger than a full width at half maximum of the received light spot, ([2816] Alternatively, the optical component 7628 having one or more (e.g. multi-focus) meta-surface may be configured to focus the light echoes polarization-dependent onto each one of the first sensor 7630 and the second sensor 7632.) and
wherein the optoelectronic sensor further comprises an optical corrective element in the reception path that reduces a dependence of a reception level of the light receiver on the distance of the object from the optoelectronic sensor ([2816] By way of example, the optical component 7628 may have one or more surface regions (which are in the receiving light path) configured as one or more meta-surfaces. In various embodiments, the optical component 7628 may have one or more surface regions (which are in the receiving light path) configured as a dual focus meta surface, which focusses the light echoes wavelength-dependent and/or polarization-dependent onto each one of a first sensor 7630 and a second sensor 7632.).
Regarding claim 2, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1, wherein the reception optics is configured such that the displacement of the received light spot on the light receiver in the near zone of the sensor dependent on the distance of the object from the sensor is no larger than a half full width at half maximum of the received light spot ([2827]In case of a LIDAR system with conventional optics arrangements and an FOV 7612 of e.g. 12° in vertical direction and 60° in horizontal direction, typical sensor elements may have a size of 0.3 mm in vertical direction and 2.5 mm in horizontal direction, i.e. exhibiting a large aspect ratio of 8,33. In case of an angle-convergent multi-layer collection lens, the FOV 7612 may be focussed on a sensor element 52 with a much smaller aspect ratio, e.g at least smaller than 5, down to an aspect ratio of 1, e.g. a quadratic sensor element 52.).
Regarding claim 3, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1, wherein the reception optics is configured such that the received light spot does not have any displacement dependent on the distance of the object from the sensor ([2816] Alternatively, the optical component 7628 having one or more (e.g. multi-focus) meta-surface may be configured to focus the light echoes polarization-dependent onto each one of the first sensor 7630 and the second sensor 7632.).
Regarding claim 4, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1, wherein the optical metaelement has at least one metalens ([2827] In case of an angle-convergent multi-layer collection lens, the FOV 7612 may be focussed on a sensor element 52 with a much smaller aspect ratio, e.g at least smaller than 5, down to an aspect ratio of 1, e.g. a quadratic sensor element 52. This may allow for a smaller sensor and may avoid the loss of optical efficiency in the corners of the FOV 7612. Such a meta lens can be designed by providing a first surface of an optical component and a second surface of the optical component (opposite to the first surface) as a meta-surface.).
Regarding claim 6, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1, wherein the reception optics has at least one refractive and/or diffractive optics ([2832] The first meta-surface 7906 is configured to diffract light of different character (e.g. with respect to wavelength and/or polarization) convergently and divergently towards the second meta-surface 7908.).
Regarding claim 7, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1, wherein the optical metaelement at least partly has the function of the reception optics ([Fig. 78]; [2827] In case of an angle-convergent multi-layer collection lens, the FOV 7612 may be focussed on a sensor element 52 with a much smaller aspect ratio, e.g at least smaller than 5, down to an aspect ratio of 1, e.g. a quadratic sensor element 52. This may allow for a smaller sensor and may avoid the loss of optical efficiency in the corners of the FOV 7612. Such a meta lens can be designed by providing a first surface of an optical component and a second surface of the optical component (opposite to the first surface) as a meta-surface.).
Regarding claim 9, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 8, wherein the optical metaelement at least partly has the function of both the reception optics and the optical corrective element ([Fig. 78]; [2827] In case of an angle-convergent multi-layer collection lens, the FOV 7612 may be focussed on a sensor element 52 with a much smaller aspect ratio, e.g at least smaller than 5, down to an aspect ratio of 1, e.g. a quadratic sensor element 52. This may allow for a smaller sensor and may avoid the loss of optical efficiency in the corners of the FOV 7612. Such a meta lens can be designed by providing a first surface of an optical component and a second surface of the optical component (opposite to the first surface) as a meta-surface.).
Regarding claim 10, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1, wherein the reception optics images the remitted light beam for all the angles of incidence occurring over a range of the sensor on the light receiver such that an overmodulation of the light receiver is avoided ([2826] In various embodiments, the meta-surface provided on one or more surfaces (e.g. on two opposing surfaces) of an optical component of the Second LIDAR Sensing System 50 (in other words of an optical component in the receiver path of the LIDAR Sensor System 10) is provided to collect the echoes (reflected laser beam(s)) from a wide FOV 7612 onto a LIDAR sensor 52).
Regarding claim 11, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1, wherein the reception optics images the remitted light beam for all the angles of incidence occurring over a range of the sensor on the light receiver such that a reception level of the light receiver remains constant ([2827] In case of an angle-convergent multi-layer collection lens, the FOV 7612 may be focussed on a sensor element 52 with a much smaller aspect ratio, e.g at least smaller than 5, down to an aspect ratio of 1, e.g. a quadratic sensor element 52. This may allow for a smaller sensor and may avoid the loss of optical efficiency in the corners of the FOV 7612).
Regarding claim 15, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1, wherein the sensor is configured as a light barrier or as a distance measurement sensor in accordance with the time of light principle ([0402] The disclosure relates to a LIDAR Sensor System for environment detection, wherein the LIDAR Sensor System is designed to carry out repeated measurements for detecting the environment, wherein the LIDAR Sensor System has an emitting unit (First LIDAR Sensing System) which is designed to perform a measurement with at least one laser pulse and wherein the LIDAR system has a detection unit (Second LIDAR Sensing Unit), which is designed to detect an object-reflected laser pulse during a measurement time window).
Regarding claim 16, Ferreira teaches a method of detecting an object in a monitored zone ([0402] The disclosure relates to a LIDAR Sensor System for environment detection, wherein the LIDAR Sensor System is designed to carry out repeated measurements for detecting the environment, wherein the LIDAR Sensor System has an emitting unit (First LIDAR Sensing System) which is designed to perform a measurement with at least one laser pulse and wherein the LIDAR system has a detection unit (Second LIDAR Sensing Unit), which is designed to detect an object-reflected laser pulse during a measurement time window.; [Fig. 76]; [2815] A first scanned laser beam 7614 (e.g. scanned into a first half of the FOV 7612) including first laser pulses may be reflected by a first object 7616 as a first reflected laser beam 7618), comprising
a light transmitter transmitting a light beam; ([2815] The laser sources 7602 and 7604 and the beam steering system 7610 may be part of the First LIDAR Sensing System 40.),
imaging a light beam remitted by the object on a light receiver by reception optics arranged offset by a distance from the light transmitter; ([2816] the optical component 7628 may have one or more surface regions (which are in the receiving light path) configured as a dual focus meta surface, which focusses the light echoes wavelength-dependent and/or polarization-dependent onto each one of a first sensor 7630 and a second sensor 7632), and
generating a received signal with the light receiver, ([0402] Furthermore, the LIDAR system has a control device (LIDAR Data Processing System/Control and Communication System/LIDAR Sensor Management System), which is designed, in the event that at least one reflected beam component is detected, to associate the detected beam component on the basis of a predetermined assignment with a solid angle range from which the beam component originates.),
wherein the reception optics has at least one optical metaelement having a metasurface and/or a metamaterial ([2816] By way of example, the optical component 7628 may have one or more surface regions (which are in the receiving light path) configured as one or more meta-surfaces. In various embodiments, the optical component 7628 may have one or more surface regions (which are in the receiving light path) configured as a dual focus meta surface, which focusses the light echoes wavelength-dependent and/or polarization-dependent onto each one of a first sensor 7630 and a second sensor 7632) and
the reception optics is configured such that a displacement of the received light spot on the light receiver dependent on a distance of the object from a sensor including the light transmitter and the light receiver is reduced such that the displacement in a near zone of the sensor is no larger than a full width at half maximum of the received light spot, ([2816] Alternatively, the optical component 7628 having one or more (e.g. multi-focus) meta-surface may be configured to focus the light echoes polarization-dependent onto each one of the first sensor 7630 and the second sensor 7632.) and
wherein the sensor further comprises an optical corrective element in a reception path that reduces a dependence of a reception level of the light receiver on the distance of the object from the sensor ([2816] By way of example, the optical component 7628 may have one or more surface regions (which are in the receiving light path) configured as one or more meta-surfaces. In various embodiments, the optical component 7628 may have one or more surface regions (which are in the receiving light path) configured as a dual focus meta surface, which focusses the light echoes wavelength-dependent and/or polarization-dependent onto each one of a first sensor 7630 and a second sensor 7632.).
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.
Claims 5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferreira in view of Lundeen et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20210239995 A1), hereinafter Lundeen.
Regarding claim 5, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1,
Ferreira fails to teach the sensor wherein the optical metaelement has at least one spaceplate.
However, Lundeen teaches the sensor wherein the optical metaelement has at least one spaceplate ([0107] An ultrathin monolithic imaging system may be formed by, for instance, further integrating a metalens and a spaceplate directly on a sensor (FIG. 2C), in accordance with various embodiments.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Ferreira to comprise the spaceplate similar to Lundeen, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of making the overall optical device and sensor more compact than traditional optical devices.
Regarding claim 12, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1,
Ferreira fails to teach the sensor wherein the metaelement has a first part element for a reduction of a distance dependence of the received light spot position on a distance of the object and a second part element for an at least partial homogenization of a reception level at different distances of the object.
However, Lundeen teaches the sensor wherein the metaelement has a first part element for a reduction of a distance dependence of the received light spot position on a distance of the object and a second part element for an at least partial homogenization of a reception level at different distances of the object ([0097] In accordance with various embodiments, a spaceplate may influence the phase properties, path, trajectory, convergence point, or focus point, of light which is either converging or diverging. Such converging or diverging may be due to the presence of a focusing element, interchangeably referred to herein as a “lens”, which resides at least in part in the path of the light, wherein a focusing element or lens may be any one or more of, but is not limited to, a lens, a lens system, a metalens, a refracting element, a focusing element, a material which provides an optical power, a material which changes the angle of a ray of light, or the like; [0109] Combining this amplitude and phase behaviour, the Fourier transfer function of free space is H(k)=exp(ikzdeff). Therefore, a spaceplate, in accordance with various embodiments, may produce the same transfer function.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Ferreira to comprise the multi-layered metaelement to reduce distance dependency and homogenize the reception level similar to Lundeen, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of producing a sensor that can maintain image integrity despite a more compact design.
Claim 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ferreira in view of Hu et al. (United states Patent No. 10979635 B2), hereinafter Hu.
Regarding claim 13, Ferreira teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 1,
Ferreira fails to teach the sensor wherein the transmission optics has a second optical metaelement.
However, Hu teaches the sensor wherein the transmission optics has a second optical metaelement ([Col: 15, lines 46-51] The 3D sensor 1100 includes a pattern projecting module 1110 with the first WFOV meta-lens 1112 and a light emitter array 1114 (e.g., a micro-LED or vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser (VCSEL) array) and a camera module 1120 with the second WFOV meta-lens 1122 and photodetector array 1124.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Ferreira to comprise the second optical device in the transmission path similar to Hu, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of even more precisely directing the outgoing light beam in addition to the returned beam.
Regarding claim 14, Ferreira, as modified, teaches the sensor in accordance with claim 13,
Ferreira fails to teach the sensor wherein the optical metaelement and the second optical metaelement are configured as a common metaelement.
However, Hu teaches the sensor wherein the optical metaelement and the second optical metaelement are configured as a common metaelement ([Col: 14, lines 39-44] FIGS. 10A and 10B illustrate the wide-angle imaging capability of the WFOV meta-lens 700. FIG. 10A shows the measurement setup 1000, where a laser 1010 illuminates an object 1014 through a diffuser 1012. The meta-lens 700 collects the light scattered by the object 1014 and projects it onto an InSb FPA camera 1030 through a mid-IR lens 1020).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Ferreira to comprise the common metaelement similar to Hu, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of compacting the design of the overall sensor and reducing the number of overall parts in the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 12th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant’s argument that Ferreira’s optical component does not teach or suggest reducing a dependence of a reception level of the light receiver on the distance of the object from the sensor is not persuasive. As the claim limitation lacks further specification on to the way in which the optical corrective element reduces dependency on the distance of the object, there is nothing in the language of the claim that teaches beyond the prior art of Ferreira. As limiting the wavelength dependency, taught in the cited section of the prior art, reduces the distance in at least one respect, the prior art is seen to read on the broadest reasonable interpretation to one of ordinary skill in the art of the claim limitation as written. As such, the rejection, formerly made regarding claim 8 and now amended to regard claim 1, as necessitated by the applicant’s amendments, is maintained in this Final Office Action.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ROBERT WILLIAM VASQUEZ JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, Flex Friday, 8:00-5:00 PST.
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.
/ROBERT W VASQUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights