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 .
Status of Claims
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed 2/18/2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 1, 4, 5, 9, 12, 13, 15 and 19 are amended and claim 2 is cancelled. Thus, claims 1 and 3-20 are currently pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement submitted on 2/18/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98 and has been considered.
Response to Amendment
The amendments to claims 4, 5, and 19 have overcome their respective claim objections, which are now withdrawn. The amendments to claim 15 has overcome the rejection made under 35 U.S.C. 102, and the prior art rejections of claims 15-20 are now withdrawn. The amendment to claims 1 and 9 have overcome the claim rejection made under 35 U.S.C. 103, and the prior art rejections of claims 1-14 are now withdrawn.
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.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano (US 20220146648 A1) in view of Kudla (US 20210223374 A1).
Regarding Claim 1: Sano discloses an optical sensor comprising a package (Figs. 1 and 2)
a light source (Fig. 2, light source 20), configured to illuminate light according to a light source driving signal ([0073] the automatic exposure (AE) control unit 40 controls the light source 20 to emit light according to a cycle);
a light sensor, recorded with an event threshold corresponding to an exposure interval (Fig. 2, light detection unit 30; Fig. 9, there is a threshold where reflected light can be distinguished from ambient light and internal system noise) and comprising:
a first pixel, configured to receive reflected light from an object outside the package illuminated by the light source and to sample according to a sampling signal (Fig. 3, two-tap pixel 34; Fig. 5, there are two accumulation timings (second and third graph) for detecting reflected light; Fig. 1),
the light sensor also is configured to respectively acquire reference photon events using multiple of the exposure intervals ([0102] and Fig. 5, the bottom graph shows accumulation timing that spans multiple exposure intervals and the acquired signal n2 is ambient light that is accumulated and integrated), and
a processor (Fig. 2, AE control unit 40) configured to
compare a number of the reference photon events of each of the multiple exposure intervals with the event threshold to generate a random code ([0074] based on current frame information, the next frame light emission exposure calculation and control units 41 and 42 determine the exposure of the light emission in the next frame; Fig. 10, current frame information has the amount of charge in tap A and B, and the exposure and timing control is modulated such that the charge amount is as close to the saturation threshold as possible, without exceeding it), and
modulate the light source driving signal and the sampling signal using the random code (([0074] based on current frame information, the next frame light emission exposure calculation and control units 41 and 42 determine the exposure of the light emission in the next frame).
Sano does not disclose that package comprises a first accommodation space and a second accommodation space separated by a wall, where there is a first pixel arranged inside the first accommodation space and a light source and second pixel arranged inside the second accommodation space, where the second pixel is configured to receive reflected light from an inner surface of the second accommodation space illuminated by the light source.
Kudla teaches an optical system that has a first and second accommodation space separated by a wall (Figs. 3 and 6, compartments 43 and 44), where there is a first pixel arranged inside the first accommodation space (Fig. 6, receiver chip 22) and a light source and second pixel arranged inside the second accommodation space (Fig. 6, detector 45 and laser 10), where the second pixel is configured to receive reflected light from an inner surface of the second accommodation space illuminated by the light source (Fig. 6, light reflected off window and back toward detector 45).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor disclosed by Sano, such that there is a transmitter and receiver compartment, and that the ambient light is detected by a separate sensor located in the transmitter compartment, as taught by Kudla. Sano, in paragraph [0121] explains that the ambient light acquired is separate from the reflected light and that it can be acquired individually. A person ordinarily skilled in the art would then be motivated to make this modification because the separate sensor, taught by Kudla, can also measure ambient light (Kudla, [0075]). This separate sensor also can be used to detect dirt on the window for the transceiver compartment and also determine a location of the dirt (Kudla, [0076] – [0078]).
Regarding Claim 6: Sano and Kudla teach the optical sensor as claimed in claim 1. Sano further discloses wherein the processor is configured to modulate the light source driving signal and the sampling signal using phase shift keying according to the random code ([0074] the next frame light emission/exposure condition calculation and control units 41 and 42 control the timing and duration of the light emission in the next frame).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano (US 20220146648 A1) in view of Kudla (US 20210223374 A1) further in view of Pacala (US 20230176223 A1). Sano and Kudla teach the optical sensor as in claim 1.
They do not teach wherein the event threshold is a number of photon events of a peak of a probability distribution of multiple photon events previously acquired by the second pixel using multiple of the exposure intervals.
However, Pacala teaches this limitation with Fig. 37 and paragraph [0298]. In Fig. 37, the noise threshold 3712 is calculated based on a standard deviation of the number of photon counts in the background time bins. This is determined by a standard deviation analysis of the histogram data.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the sensor taught by Sano and Kudla, such that a standard deviation analysis of the noise measurements is used as the threshold, as taught by Pacala. Standard deviation analyses are performed on probability distributions because the standard deviation is a measure of how close data points are to the average/mean. This would be applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of being able to determine a threshold for internally reflected light noise (MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale C).
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano (US 20220146648 A1) in view of Kudla (US 20210223374 A1) further in view of Pacala (US 20230176223 A1) further in view of Takemoto (US 20180329063 A1).
Regarding Claim 4: Sano, in view of Kudla and Pacala, teaches the optical sensor as in claim 3. Sano further teaches upon the number of the reference photon events being smaller than the event threshold, the random code is set as 0 ([0115] and Fig. 10, if the control target for having signals above a threshold are not met, the next frame is adjusted. This means if the target is met, the current frame does not need to be adjusted. Since ambient light is also controllable, this is also included in the consideration of adjusting the subsequent frame) and
upon the number of the reference photon events being equal to the event threshold, the random code is not generated ([0115] and Fig. 10, if the control target for having signals above a threshold are not met, the next frame is adjusted. This means if the target is met, nothing happens, and there is no change).
They do not expressly teach wherein upon the number of the reference photon events is larger than the event threshold, the random code is set as 1.
Takemoto teaches upon the number of the reference photon events is larger than the event threshold, the random code is set as 1 ([0112] and [0068] and Fig. 4, in the first measurement time frame of Frame 1, only background noise is detected, and this background noise can exceed the event threshold. Since no reflected light is detected, the timing of the transmission and exposure is changed until the reflected light signal is detected).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the sensor taught by Sano, Kudla, and Pacala, by incorporating the teaching suggested by Takemoto, where the transmission and exposure timing is modulated until a reflected signal is detected. This is beneficial because determining whether light has been detected and in what segment it has been detected can be simplified and made more efficient by simply checking if there is a presence or absence of a signal, and the magnitude of the signal strength would not have to be saved (Takemoto, [0070-0071]).
Regarding Claim 5: Sano, in view of Kudla, Pacala, and Takemoto, teaches the optical sensor as claimed in claim 4. With this combination, Sano further teaches wherein the exposure interval is selected based on a number of photon events at the peak minus a 3 times of standard deviation in the probability distribution being larger than 0 ([0118] and Figs. 11 and 12, the exposure timings of the subsequent frames are controlled to maximize a confidence value without exceeding the saturation threshold, while still meeting a target saturation threshold, where the amount of reflected light needs to be larger than the ambient light threshold by a minimum confidence level. In Fig. 12, the amount of reflected light in tap A is more than three times the reflected noise offset), and
a number of photon events at the peak plus a 3 times of standard deviation in the probability distribution being smaller than a saturation of the second pixel ([0115] exposure timing is controlled in order to obtain a maximum SNR. If the maximum number of detected photons is too close to the ambient light noise and the minimum confidence level has not been met, the exposure timing will be modulated).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano (US 20220146648 A1) in view of Kudla (US 20210223374 A1) further in view of Yeruhami (US 20200249354 A1). Sano, in view of Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as claimed in claim 1. Sano further discloses wherein the random code has one bit ([0101] and Fig. 5, one whole cycle is 4 x Tp, and within this cycle, light is transmitted at 0 and 180 degrees). According to applicant’s specifications on page 7 lines 10-18, a modulation of zero phase shift and 180 degree phase shift “can be used as a modulation scheme” that corresponds to a random code with one bit.
While Kudla teaches that the second pixel comprises a photodiode ([0072]), they do not expressly teach that the second pixel comprises one single photon avalanche diode.
Yeruhami teaches a second pixel meant to detect light that has been internally reflected, and that this second pixel is one single photon avalanche diode (Fig. 8A and [0242]).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the optical sensor taught by Sano and Kudla, such that the second pixel, that is meant to detect internally reflected light, is a SPAD, as taught by Yeruhami. This would be a simple substitution of one type of detector for another type of detector. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale B.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sano (US 20220146648 A1) in view of Kudla (US 20210223374 A1) further in view of Yeruhami (US 20200249354 A1) and further in view of Ono (US 20220137215 A1). Sano, in view of Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as claimed in claim 1. While Kudla teaches that the second pixel comprises photodiodes ([0072]), Sano and Kudla do not teach that the second pixel comprises two single photon avalanche diodes and the random code has two bits.
Yeruhami teaches a second pixel meant to detect light that has been internally reflected, and that this second pixel comprises two single photon avalanche diodes (Fig. 8A and [0242]).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the optical sensor taught by Sano and Kudla, such that the second pixel, that is meant to detect internally reflected light, is a SPAD, as taught by Yeruhami. This would be a simple substitution of one type of detector for another type of detector. See MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale B.
However, this still does not teach that the random code has two bits.
Ono teaches a two-tap lidar system where the random code has two bits (Figs. 12-15, showing detecting signals where the irradiation light has phase delay of 0, 90, 180, and 270 degrees respectively). According to applicant’s specifications on page 7 lines 10-18, a modulation of zero phase shift and 180-degree phase shift “can be used as a modulation scheme” that corresponds to a random code with one bit. Since a 0 and 180 degree phase shift corresponds to one bit, an additional phase shift of 90 and 270 degrees can correspond to two bits.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor taught by Sano, Kudla, and Yeruhami, by employing the 2-tap 4-phase measurement scheme, as taught by Ono. This is a design modification that would have been predictable to a person having ordinary skill in the art because Ono describes that their detection scheme can be applied in a case where the distance is determined in a 2-tap 2-phase scheme, as well as the 2-tap 4-phase scheme illustrated in Figs. 12-15. “Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art” (MPEP Section 2141.III KSR Rationale F).
Claims 9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawahito (US 20230367019 A1), in view of Sano (US 20220146648 A1), further in view of Kudla (US 20210223374 A1).
Regarding Claim 9: Kawahito discloses an optical sensor (Fig. 1, device 1), comprising:
a light source, configured to illuminate light according to a light source driving signal to cause the light source to have a lighting interval and an extinction interval within one operation period (Fig. 1, light source 1; [0076] light source 1 has a semiconductor light emitting element and a driving circuit);
a pixel, configured to acquire photon events according to a sampling signal corresponding to the lighting interval and the extinction interval (Fig. 1 photodiode 11; Fig. 5, there are two taps SG1 and SG2, which sample at different time intervals to acquire photon events); and
a processor, configured to calculate an object distance according to the photon events using indirect time of flight ([0072-0073] distance is determined in an indirect time of flight method based on a flight time), and upon the object distance being larger than a predetermined distance, change the extinction interval to be longer than the lighting interval ([0050] The timing of the exposure periods of the first and second transfer control gates G1 and G2 are variable with respect to the emission timing of the irradiation light L1; Fig. 5, the return pulse L2 is at a distance that is ‘far’ and the exposure periods are given a time delay, extending the time of the measurement period. Because the timing and duration of the emitted light pulse is constant, the extinction interval becomes longer once this time delay in the exposure intervals is introduced).
Kawahito is silent on the optical sensor comprising a package, comprising a first and second accommodation space separated by a wall, the first and second accommodation space shaving a first and second opening respectively. Kawahito is also silent on this second accommodation space having a light source and a second pixel, where light is directed toward the environment through the second opening and the second pixel is configured to receive light reflected off an inner surface of the second accommodation space and acquires reference photons in an exposure interval, and the first accommodation space having a first pixel, where echo light enters via the first opening. In this particular embodiment, Kawahito also does not teach that the lighting and extinction intervals are identical to each other, and also does not teach the generation of a random code by comparing a number of reference photon events in the exposure interval with an event threshold to accordingly modulate the light source driving signal and the sampling signal.
Sano teaches an optical sensor comprising a package (Figs. 1 and 2), that acquires reference photon events in an exposure interval ([0102] and Fig. 5, the bottom graph shows accumulation timing that spans multiple exposure intervals and the acquired signal n2 is ambient light that is accumulated and integrated), and where the processor is configured to generate a random code by comparing a number of the reference photon events in the exposure interval with an event threshold to accordingly modulate the light source driving signal and the sampling signal ([0074] based on current frame information, the next frame light emission exposure calculation and control units 41 and 42 determine the exposure of the light emission in the next frame; Fig. 10, current frame information has the amount of charge in tap A and B, and the exposure and timing control is modulated such that the charge amount is as close to the saturation threshold as possible, without exceeding it), and where a pixel is configured to acquire photon events according to a sampling signal corresponding to the lighting interval and the extinction interval, identical to each other (Fig. 5, during one cycle, which is 4 x Tp, there are two dime intervals where light is emitted, one at 0 degrees and one at 180 degrees. There are two time intervals, one at 90 degrees and one at 270 degrees, where light is not irradiated. This means the time that the light is irradiated is the same as the time that it is ’off’).
It would have been obvious to a person ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor disclosed by Kawahito, by incorporating the detection scheme taught by Sano. Determining a reference number of photon events and using that to generate a random code for the driving and sampling signals, taught by Sano, is beneficial because it would improve the accuracy of distance measurements (Sano, [0071]).
However, this combination still does not teach a package, comprising a first and second accommodation space separated by a wall, the first and second accommodation space shaving a first and second opening respectively; or this second accommodation space having a light source and a second pixel, where light is directed toward the environment through the second opening and the second pixel is configured to receive light reflected off an inner surface of the second accommodation space and acquires reference photons in an exposure interval, and the first accommodation space having a first pixel, where echo light enters via the first opening.
Kudla teaches a package comprising a first accommodation space and a second accommodation space separated by a wall, the first accommodation space has a first opening and the second accommodation space has a second opening where photon events for the first pixel are acquired via the first opening and light is illuminated via the second opening (Fig. 4, first accommodation space 44 with receiver chip receiving light via receiver window 31a, wall 41, second accommodation space 43 with second window 31b and another detector 45).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor taught by Kawahito and Sano, such that there is a transmitter and receiver compartment, and that the ambient light is detected by a separate sensor located in the transmitter compartment, as taught by Kudla. Sano, in paragraph [0121] explains that the ambient light acquired is separate from the reflected light and that it can be acquired individually. A person ordinarily skilled in the art would then be motivated to make this modification because the separate sensor, taught by Kudla, can also measure ambient light (Kudla, [0075]). This separate sensor also can be used to detect dirt on the window for the transceiver compartment and also determine a location of the dirt (Kudla, [0076] – [0078]).
Regarding Claim 11: Kawahito, in view of Sano and Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as claimed in claim 9. Sano further teaches when the object distance is smaller than the predetermined distance, the processor is configured to subtract a predetermined calibration value from the photon events ([0102-0103] and Equation 1, the ambient light component, N2, is removed from the detected signal to remove the influence of ambient light and only leave the reflected light component; Fig. 5, the bottom graph illustrates the accumulation of ambient light).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the sensor taught by Kawahito and Sano and Kudla, by removing ambient light from the detected signal as taught by Sano. This would be beneficial because the sensor also detects ambient light in addition to reflected light, and removing the ambient light component will yield a better distance measurement by improving SNR(Sano, [0102-0103] and [0115]).
Regarding Claim 12: Kawahito, in view of Sano and Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as claimed in claim 11. In this combination, Sano further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to control the first pixel to acquire calibration photon events corresponding to the lighting interval using another sampling signal, and updating the predetermined calibration value using the calibration photon events (Fig. 5 and [0102], ambient light is detected as signal n2, and the ambient light component that is used in distance calculation is N2, the sum of signals n2. Because there are multiple time intervals during which ambient light is sampled, the value of N2 is updated as signals n2 are acquired).
Regarding Claim 13: Kawahito, in view of Sano and Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as claimed in claim 11. In this combination, Sano teaches that the predetermined calibration value is a number of photon events that do not represent an echo signal (Fig. 5).
In this combination, Kudla teaches that there is a protection cover in front of the light source and the first pixel (Fig. 4, windows 31a and 31b), wherein light contributed by reflected light from the protection cover is measured by the first pixel (Fig. 4, light reflected from the protection cover taking path (2) is detected by the first pixel).
Regarding Claim 14: Kawahito, in view of Sano and Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as claimed in claim 9. Kawahito further discloses wherein the processor is configured to extend the extinction interval without changing the lighting interval (Fig.5 and [0055-0056] in each of the cycles of operation, only delay time is changed, and illumination time has not changed).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawahito (US 20230367019 A1), in view of Sano (US 20220146648 A1), further in view of Kudla (US 20210223374 A1), further in view of Takemoto (US 20180329063 A1). Kawahito, in view of Sano and Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as claimed in claim 9. However, they do not expressly teach wherein the extinction interval is changed to be longer than 2 times of the lighting interval.
Takemoto teaches a sensor where the extinction interval is longer than 2 times the lighting interval (Fig. 22, there are two cycle periods where light is transmitted at the start of the cycle period. The time between emitted pulses is longer than 2 times the duration of the transmitted pulse).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor taught by Kawahito and Sano and Kudla, such that the extinction interval is changed to be longer than twice the duration of the lighting interval, as taught by Takemoto. This simply amounts to choosing an optimal value for the lighting and extinction intervals, which could be obtained through routine experimentation by one ordinarily skilled in the art (See MPEP 2144.05.II)
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takemoto (US 20180329063 A1), in view of Sano (US 20220146648 A1), further in view of Kudla (US 20210223374 A1).
Regarding Claim 15: Takemoto discloses an optical sensor (Fig. 1, distance measuring device 10) comprising:
a light source (Fig. 1, light emitter 101), configured to illuminate light according to a light source driving signal to cause the light source to have a lighting interval shorter than an extinction interval within one operation period (Figs. 4 and 10, the light signals P11, P12, and P13, in frame 1, are shorter than their respective measurement time ranges. The time that the light is not being emitted is longer than the duration of the light pulse);
a pixel (Fig. 1, light receiver 102), configured to respectively acquire photon events within at least three sampling periods according to a sampling signal (Fig. 4, each frame has three cycle periods where the exposure time is when the pixel acquires charge; Fig. 10, in Frame 1, there are three cycle periods, in Frame 2 there are many sampling periods, where one time duration corresponding to Exposure A and Exposure B is one sampling period); and
a processor configured to calculate at least two object distances respectively according to a ratio of numbers of the photon events of two adjacent sampling periods among the at least three sampling periods ([0114] the controller 103 divides the second measurement time range, in frame 2, into three segments. For each segment, a distance measurement operation is performed; Fig. 4(c), during the second and third cycle periods, the received light is detected during the exposure period, illustrated by the shading. These second and third cycle periods are adjacent sampling periods; Fig. 10, and [0185] based on the ratios of intensity in the exposure sequences, a distance is calculated. There are many cycles of exposure periods in Frame 2 where distance can be calculated).
Takemoto does not expressly teach that there are two accommodation spaces separated by a wall, each having their own respective openings, where the first accommodation space includes a first pixel, and where the second accommodation space includes a light source and a second pixel, configured to receive light reflected from an inner surface of the second accommodation space illuminated by the light source to acquire reference photons in an exposure interval, and where the processor generates a random code by comparing a number of reference photon events in the exposure interval with an event threshold to accordingly modulate the light source driving signal and the sampling signal.
Sano teaches an optical sensor comprising a package (Figs. 1 and 2), that acquires reference photon events in an exposure interval ([0102] and Fig. 5, the bottom graph shows accumulation timing that spans multiple exposure intervals and the acquired signal n2 is ambient light that is accumulated and integrated), and where the processor is configured to generate a random code by comparing a number of the reference photon events in the exposure interval with an event threshold to accordingly modulate the light source driving signal and the sampling signal ([0074] based on current frame information, the next frame light emission exposure calculation and control units 41 and 42 determine the exposure of the light emission in the next frame; Fig. 10, current frame information has the amount of charge in tap A and B, and the exposure and timing control is modulated such that the charge amount is as close to the saturation threshold as possible, without exceeding it).
It would have been obvious to a person ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor disclosed by Takemoto, by incorporating the detection scheme taught by Sano. Determining a reference number of photon events and using that to generate a random code for the driving and sampling signals, taught by Sano, is beneficial because it would improve the accuracy of distance measurements (Sano, [0071]).
However, this combination still does not teach a package, comprising a first and second accommodation space separated by a wall, the first and second accommodation space shaving a first and second opening respectively; or this second accommodation space having a light source and a second pixel, where light is directed toward the environment through the second opening and the second pixel is configured to receive light reflected off an inner surface of the second accommodation space and acquires reference photons in an exposure interval, and the first accommodation space having a first pixel, where echo light enters via the first opening.
Kudla teaches a package comprising a first accommodation space and a second accommodation space separated by a wall, the first accommodation space has a first opening and the second accommodation space has a second opening where photon events for the first pixel are acquired via the first opening and light is illuminated via the second opening (Fig. 4, first accommodation space 44 with receiver chip receiving light via receiver window 31a, wall 41, second accommodation space 43 with second window 31b and another detector 45) and where the first accommodation space has a first pixel (Fig. 4, receiver in receiver side 44) and the second accommodation space has the light source and a second pixel (Fig. 4, laser and detector on the transmitter side).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sensor taught by Takemoto and Sano, such that there is a transmitter and receiver compartment, and that the ambient light is detected by a separate sensor located in the transmitter compartment, as taught by Kudla. Sano, in paragraph [0121] explains that the ambient light acquired is separate from the reflected light and that it can be acquired individually. A person ordinarily skilled in the art would then be motivated to make this modification because the separate sensor, taught by Kudla, can also measure ambient light (Kudla, [0075]). This separate sensor also can be used to detect dirt on the window for the transceiver compartment and also determine a location of the dirt (Kudla, [0076] – [0078]).
Regarding Claim 16: Takemoto, in view of Sano and Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as in claim 15. Takemoto further discloses wherein a number of the sampling periods is determined according to an expected detection distance range of the optical sensor ([0171] “The number of times of integration increases in distance measurement in a range including a distant location because the number of photons that were reflected by a measurement target and returns decreases. For this reason, it is important to shorten the cycle of an emission light pulse, and to increase the number of times of integration”).
Regarding Claim 17: Takemoto, in view of Sano and Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as in claim 15. Takemoto further discloses wherein the processor is configured to change lengths of the lighting interval and the sampling periods to calibrate a distance resolution ([0186-0191] and Fig. 10, the length and timings of the lighting and exposure periods are different in Frame 1 vs Frame 2).
Regarding Claim 18: Takemoto, in view of Sano and Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as in claim 15. Takemoto further discloses wherein among the at least three sampling periods, a start of a later sampling period is aligned with an end of a previous sampling period (Fig. 10, in both frames 1 and 2, the subsequent cycle periods start immediately after current cycle period ends. There is no waiting time between cycle periods).
Regarding Claim 19: Takemoto, in view of Sano and Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as in claim 15. Takemoto further discloses wherein among the at least three sampling periods, a first sampling period is corresponding to the lighting interval, and the rest of the sampling periods are corresponding to the extinction interval (Fig. 10, in both Frames 1 and 2, there is an exposure period that corresponds with the time segment in which the light is emitted; Fig. 4, in the first cycle period of frame 1 the exposure time is at the same time segment where light is emitted).
Regarding Claim 20: Takemoto, in view of Sano and Kudla, teaches the optical sensor as in claim 15. Takemoto further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to add a delay distance in calculating the object distance using the two adjacent sampling periods behind a first sampling period among the at least three sampling periods ([0186-0191] since frame 2 is more accurate, but there is an unambiguous distance, frame 1 is used to disambiguate. When the distance of the object corresponds to a time that is longer than the duration of a single time period, the delay distance can be added because it was determined within the first frame and a unique distance can be determined).
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 ISABELLE LIN BOEGHOLM whose telephone number is (571)270-0570. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30am-5pm, Fridays 8am-12pm.
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.
/ISABELLE LIN BOEGHOLM/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights