Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/852,890

LIDAR WITH INTELLIGENT ORIENTATION

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 29, 2022
Examiner
HULKA, JAMES R
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
LUMAR TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
731 granted / 957 resolved
+24.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+11.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
994
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.2%
-34.8% vs TC avg
§103
50.5%
+10.5% vs TC avg
§102
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
§112
14.0%
-26.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 957 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 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) 1-2, 4, 10, 15, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ledbetter (US 2020/0150247) in view of Chen (US 2012/0281996). Regarding Claim 1, Ledbetter teaches apparatus comprising a light source coupled to a reflector having a plurality of facets [0007; 0058; 0064], a controller connected to the light source [0007; 0058; 006. Ledbetter does not explicitly teach – but Chen does teach directed to map at least one of the plurality of facets [0012; 0035-41]. It would have been obvious to modify the apparatus of Ledbetter to map facets in order to effectively calibrate or determine whether a correction is needed. Regarding Claim 4, Ledbetter teaches method comprising: coupling a light source [0007; 0058; 0064] to a reflector having a plurality of facets [0007; 0058; 0064]; directing light energy to the reflector, as directed by a controller [0007; 0058; 0064]. Ledbetter does not explicitly teach – but Chen does teach mapping at least one facet of the reflector in response to the light energy reflected by the reflector [0012; 0035-41]. It would have been obvious to modify the apparatus of Ledbetter to map facets in order to effectively calibrate or determine whether a correction is needed. Regarding Claim 15, Ledbetter teaches a method comprising: coupling a light source to a reflector having a plurality of facets [0007; 0058; 0064]; directing light energy to the reflector, as directed by a controller [0007; 0058; 0064]; and bouncing light energy off the reflector [0007; 0058; 0064]; and sensing, with a detector connected to the controller, a downrange target [0007; 0039-41; 0058; 0064]. Ledbetter does not explicitly teach – but Chen does teach calibrating, with the controller, the reflector to accurately identify a downrange target [0012; 0035-41]. It would have been obvious to modify the method of Ledbetter to map facets in order to effectively calibrate or determine whether a correction is needed. Regarding Claim 2, Ledbetter also teaches wherein the controller is connected to a segmented detector as part of a light detection and ranging system [0007; 0058; 0064]. Regarding Claim 10, Ledbetter does not explicitly teach – but Chen does teach wherein the controller assigns a reflection signature to at least one facet of the reflector [0007; 0058; 0064]. It would have been obvious to modify the method of Ledbetter to map facets with a specific signature in order to effectively calibrate or determine whether a correction is needed. Regarding Claim 18, Ledbetter also teaches wherein the calibration involves varying a speed of rotation of the reflector over time [0081]. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ledbetter (US 2020/0150247) and Chen (US 2012/0281996), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cho (US 2022/0276350). Regarding Claim 3, Ledbetter does not explicitly teach – but Cho does teach wherein the reflector is a non-symmetric polygon [0052; 0067-73]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Ledbetter to include a non-symmetrical polygon reflector to scan the interested area with a resolution higher than a resolution of other area. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ledbetter (US 2020/0150247) and Chen (US 2012/0281996), as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Wang (US 2022/0334228). Regarding Claim 19, Ledbetter does not explicitly teach – but Wang does teach wherein the calibration involves changing a position of the light source relative to the reflector [0102-0108; 0131]. It would have been obvious to modify the method of Ledbetter to include adjusting light source position relative to the reflector to compensate the facet non-uniformity differences and assembly errors associated with light steering device. Claim Objections Claims 5-9, 11-14, 16-17 and 20 are 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 JAMES R HULKA whose telephone number is (571)270-7553. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 9am-6pm, F: 10am-2pm. 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, Robert Hodge can be reached at 5712722097. 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. JAMES R. HULKA Primary Examiner Art Unit 3645 /JAMES R HULKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 29, 2022
Application Filed
Oct 07, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591050
TIME OF FLIGHT RANGING SYSTEM AND RANGING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12571917
IMAGE SENSOR OPERATING BASED ON PLURALITY OF DELAY CLOCK SIGNALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571884
SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND MEDIA FOR SINGLE PHOTON DEPTH IMAGING WITH IMPROVED EFFICIENCY USING COMPRESSIVE HISTOGRAMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12553994
AVALANCHE PHOTODIODE GAIN COMPENSATION FOR WIDE DYNAMIC RANGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12546895
DEVICE OF ACQUISITION OF A 2D IMAGE AND OF A DEPTH IMAGE OF A SCENE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+11.5%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 957 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