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 .
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges the reply filed on 01/27/2026 in which claims 1, 5, 13, 17-18, and 20 have been amended. Claims 2, 6, 11-12, and 19 have been canceled. Currently claims 1, 3-5, 7-10, 13-18, and 20 are pending for examination in this application.
Based on this reply:
The specification objections are withdrawn.
The previous prior art rejections are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7-10, 13-18, and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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, 3-5, 7-10, 13-18, and 20 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.
Regarding claim 1, the amended claim recites specific gear structure, namely the “single-stage planetary gear-set” and associated details, as well as sensors to monitor the rotation and a controller configured to “adjust the motor to maintain the second speed at one half of the first speed based on the speed signal.” It is unclear how these claim limitations could work together. Based on both an understanding of the function of a planetary gear-set as well as the examiner’s understanding of the disclosure, the relative rotation rate between gear elements is defined by the structural arrangement of the gears and would not be influenced by “adjust[ing] the motor.”
To explain further, the specification in [0047] states, “The lidar assembly 215 includes a transmission 260, such as a single-stage planetary gearset, according to one or more embodiments. The transmission 260 includes a sun gear 262, planet gears 264, and a ring gear 266. The sun gear 262 is fixed to the motor shaft 244, and each of the sun gear 262, planet gears 264, and ring gear 266 are connected to one of the base 232, the first platform 256, and the second platform 258 to provide the different gear ratios,” and it is further understood from the specification that the base is a “fixed base” ([0042]). There does not appear to be any other teaching in the specification regarding planetary gear-sets which would lead to a substantially different situation. Based on this, the gear speed ratio of the remaining two parts of the planetary gear-set would seem to be defined by the structure of the gears. See, for example, Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicyclic_gearing accessed by the Wayback Machine dated 12/12/2021), “In many epicyclic gearing systems, one of these three basic components is held stationary; one of the two remaining components is an input, providing power to the system, while the last component is an output, receiving power from the system. The ratio of input rotation to output rotation is dependent upon the number of teeth in each gear, and upon which component is held stationary” (Page 4). Thus, while adjusting the motor may change the overall rate of rotation, the relative rate of rotation between the components would not change.
Independent claims 13 and 17, which have a similar scope to claim 1, are rejected for essentially the same reasons.
Claims 3-5, 7-10, 14-16, 18, and 20 are rejected based on claim dependency.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 7-8, 13-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (CN 106019296 A), hereinafter Zhang in view of Zhang et al. (US 20120207430 A1), hereinafter Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicyclic_gearing accessed by the Wayback Machine dated 12/12/2021), hereinafter Wikipedia3.
Regarding claim 1, as best understood in view of the 112b rejection above, Zhang teaches:
A lidar assembly ([0011] “The present application relates to a hybrid solid-state multi-line optical scanning distance measuring device”) comprising:
an array of detectors mounted relative to an axis (FIG. 1, light receiving module 4; [0012] “Optionally, the photoelectric sensor is an array photoelectric sensor composed of M rows and N columns of independently working photoelectric sensors.”);
a mirror mounted for rotation about the axis at a first speed, with a front surface aligned to intersect the axis to reflect light along the axis and form a reflected image (FIG. 1; [0031] “the reflecting surface of the reflector 2 is at an angle of 45 degrees to the horizontal plane,… converting the infrared detection light reflected by obstacles or objects to be measured in the environment and incident on the reflector in a horizontal direction into infrared detection light emitted vertically downward.”); and
a prism mounted for rotation about the axis at a second speed that is less than the first speed (FIG. 1; [0032] “The dove prism 3 rotates synchronously with the reflector (or prism), and the rotational angular velocity of the dove prism 3 is half of the rotational angular velocity of the reflector… the dove prism is located in the light transmission path between the light receiving module and the reflector”),
wherein the prism is disposed between the mirror and the array of detectors and configured to receive the reflected image and to project a stationary inverted image onto the array of detectors (FIG. 1; [0032] “the dove prism is located in the light transmission path between the light receiving module and the reflector”; [0046] “The setting of the Dove prism ensures that the image formed on the light receiving module through the imaging lens is always in a fixed direction, that is, the imaging direction of the image on the light receiving module does not rotate with the rotation of the reflector.”),
a motor ([0036] “The motor 11 is used to drive the Dove prism and the reflector (or prism) to rotate.”);
[…]
Zhang does not teach:
a single-stage planetary gear-set mechanically coupled to the motor, wherein the planetary gear-set comprising a sun gear, a plurality of planet gears, and a ring gear, wherein the single-stage planetary gear-set is configured to physically divide an output torque of the motor and
a controller in communication with at least one sensor and the motor, the controller being configured to:
receive a speed signal from at least one sensor indicative of at least one of the first speed and the second speed:
determine, based on the speed signal, whether the second speed is equal to one half of the first speed: and
adjust the motor to maintain the second speed at one half of the first speed based on the speed signal.
Zhang2, in the related field of opto-mechanical control of rotating systems, teaches:
a single-stage planetary gear-set mechanically coupled to the motor, wherein the planetary gear-set comprising a sun gear, a plurality of planet gears, and a ring gear ([0026] “To explain how the on-axis fiber optic rotary joint (FORJ) integrated in motor 99, or 100 works, the cross section view of a preferred on-axis fiber optic rotary joint is enlarged in FIG. 5. The motor shaft 34, or 24, is also the rotor of FORJ. A sun gear 118 is fixed with rotor 34, which is engaged with planet gear 119, while another planet gear 120 is engaged with an internal gear 122, which is fixed with motor housing 99. A Dove prism 115 is co-axially fixed inside the through bore of carrier 116. The planet gear system is such designed so that the carrier 116 will rotate at the half speed as that of the rotor 34 and in the same rotational direction. In this way, the rotating paralleled light beams on the rotor 34 will be coupled into corresponding collimators in the collimator bundle 111, or 112 after pass through the Dove prism 115.” Note that “internal gear 122” corresponds to the claimed ring gear.),
wherein the single-stage planetary gear-set is configured to physically divide an output torque of the motor (It is naturally understood that planetary gear systems divide the output torque. See, for example, Wikipedia3, Section “Torque ratios of standard epicyclic gearing.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Zhang with the planetary gear system of Zhang2 as one known and predictable alternative for establishing the relative rotation control of a Dove prism for use in a de-rotation configuration.
In a separate aspect of the of embodiment, Zhang2 teaches:
(Note that in view of the 112b rejection above, the specific details of incorporating the remaining limitations of claim 1 with the above limitations is not expanded upon, as it is unclear how such systems could be incorporated.)
a controller in communication with at least one sensor and the motor ([0018] “motor controllers 203 and 204”), the controller being configured to:
receive a speed signal from at least one sensor indicative of at least one of the first speed and the second speed ([0018] “Encoders 201 and 202 are used to detect the rotation speed and direction of rotor 18. The signals from encoder 201 and 202 are transmitted to motor controllers 203 and 204 respectively to control the motion of motors 101 and 102.”);
determine, based on the speed signal, whether the second speed is equal to one half of the first speed ([0019] “The speed ratio between rotor 18 and motor shaft 24 and 34 is designed to 1:1.” While Zhang2 does not explicitly state that the controller determines whether the desired ratio is achieved, this is clearly implied by the overall context of a system which monitors and controls the rotations. Further, while Zhang2 contemplates this configuration in the context of a motor system that is intended to be matched 1:1, it would be obvious to set the control to correspond to the desired rotation ratio, and thus by incorporating the system into Zhang it would be obvious to adopt the desired 2:1 ratio of Zhang.); and
adjust the motor to maintain the second speed at one half of the first speed based on the speed signal ([0018] “The signals from encoder 201 and 202 are transmitted to motor controllers 203 and 204 respectively to control the motion of motors 101 and 102.”; Zhang: [0032] “The dove prism 3 rotates synchronously with the reflector (or prism), and the rotational angular velocity of the dove prism 3 is half of the rotational angular velocity of the reflector”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have used the encoders and motor control of Zhang2 in the system of Zhang to maintain a desired rotation ratio.
Regarding claim 3, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the lidar assembly of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the prism further comprises: a major face arranged in parallel with the axis (Zhang: FIG. 1, Dove prism 3);
a minor face arranged in parallel with the major face, wherein the minor face is shorter than the major face (Zhang: FIG. 1, Dove prism 3); and
an input face and an output face extending from opposing ends of the major face to opposing ends of the minor face (Zhang: FIG. 1, Dove prism 3),
wherein the input face receives the reflected image and the stationary inverted image exits through the output face (Zhang: FIG. 1, Dove prism 3; Note the ray tracings of FIG. 1, as well as the known operation of a Dove prism.).
Regarding claim 5, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the lidar assembly of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
a transmission coupled between the motor and the mirror at a first output ratio and coupled between the motor and the prism at a second output ratio, wherein the first output ratio is greater than the second output ratio (Zhang2: FIG. 5; [0026] “The motor shaft 34, or 24, is also the rotor of FORJ. A sun gear 118 is fixed with rotor 34, which is engaged with planet gear 119, while another planet gear 120 is engaged with an internal gear 122, which is fixed with motor housing 99. A Dove prism 115 is co-axially fixed inside the through bore of carrier 116. The planet gear system is such designed so that the carrier 116 will rotate at the half speed as that of the rotor 34”; Zhang: [0038] “The first transmission gear set and the second transmission gear set enable the rotational angular velocity of the reflector (or prism) to be twice the rotational angular velocity of the Dove prism.”).
Regarding claim 7, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the lidar assembly of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the array of detectors is stationary and does not rotate relative to the axis (Zhang: FIG. 1; [0060] “By placing all electronic components on a fixed base… At this point, all the rotating devices are just oscillating mirrors (or prisms), and no electronic communication is required”).
Regarding claim 8, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the lidar assembly of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
further comprising: a base, wherein the array of detectors is mounted to the base (Zhang: FIG. 1; corresponding annotations below);
a first platform longitudinally spaced apart from the base and mounted for rotation about the axis at the first speed, wherein the first platform supports the mirror (Zhang: FIG. 1; corresponding annotations below);
sidewalls extending transversely from the base […] to define a cavity (Zhang: FIG. 1; corresponding annotations below); and
a second platform disposed within the cavity and mounted for rotation about the axis at the second speed, wherein the second platform supports the prism (Zhang: FIG. 1; corresponding annotations below).
PNG
media_image1.png
468
676
media_image1.png
Greyscale
While Zhang does not explicitly teach that the sidewalls extend all the way to the first base, this is a simple constructional choice with predictable results.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have extended the sidewalls of Zhang in view of Zhang2 up to the first platform, as one constructional design choice with predictable results.
Regarding claim 13, the method of claim 13 matches the scope of the apparatus of claim 1, and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 14, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the method of claim 13, as described above, and further teaches:
controlling one of the first speed and the second speed based on the other of the first speed and the second speed (Zhang2 describes a system of monitoring and controlling motor speeds to maintain a desired ratio ([0018-19]). It is obvious, as a naturally understood mathematical fact, that this would be achieved either by increasing the speed of the part that is relatively slow, decreasing the speed that is relatively fast, or some combination of the two.).
Regarding claim 15, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the method of claim 13, as described above, and further teaches:
decreasing the second speed in response to the second speed being greater than one half of the first speed (Zhang2 describes a system of monitoring and controlling motor speeds to maintain a desired ratio ([0018-19]). It is obvious, as a naturally understood mathematical fact, that this would be achieved either by increasing the speed of the part that is relatively slow, decreasing the speed that is relatively fast, or some combination of the two.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have implemented the speed ratio control of the system of Zhang in view of Zhang2, by controlling the speed of one of the two motors to appropriately match the desired speed ratio relative to the other, as this is one of the predictable choices for adjusting absolute speed to establish a desired speed ratio.
Regarding claim 16, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the method of claim 13, as described above, and further teaches:
increasing the second speed in response to the second speed being less than one half of the first speed (Zhang2 describes a system of monitoring and controlling motor speeds to maintain a desired ratio ([0018-19]). It is obvious, as a naturally understood mathematical fact, that this would be achieved either by increasing the speed of the part that is relatively slow, decreasing the speed that is relatively fast, or some combination of the two.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have implemented the speed ratio control of the system of Zhang in view of Zhang2, by controlling the speed of one of the two motors to appropriately match the desired speed ratio relative to the other, as this is one of the predictable choices for adjusting absolute speed to establish a desired speed ratio.
Regarding claim 17, as best understood in view of the 112b rejection above, Zhang teaches:
An optical sensor comprising:
a base (FIG. 1; corresponding annotations below);
at least one detector mounted to the base (FIG. 1, light receiving module 4);
a first platform mounted for rotation about an axis at a first speed and longitudinally spaced apart from the base (FIG. 1; corresponding annotations below);
a mirror supported by the first platform, the mirror comprising a front surface aligned to intersect the axis to reflect light along the axis and form a reflected image (FIG. 1; [0031] “the reflecting surface of the reflector 2 is at an angle of 45 degrees to the horizontal plane,… converting the infrared detection light reflected by obstacles or objects to be measured in the environment and incident on the reflector in a horizontal direction into infrared detection light emitted vertically downward.”);
a second platform mounted for rotation about the axis at a second speed (FIG. 1; corresponding annotations below), wherein the second speed is less than the first speed ([0032] “The dove prism 3 rotates synchronously with the reflector (or prism), and the rotational angular velocity of the dove prism 3 is half of the rotational angular velocity of the reflector”);
a prism supported by the second platform and disposed between the mirror and the at least one detector ([0032] “the dove prism is located in the light transmission path between the light receiving module and the reflector”), the prism being configured to receive the reflected image and to provide a stationary inverted image onto the at least one detector (FIG. 1; [0032] “the dove prism is located in the light transmission path between the light receiving module and the reflector”; [0046] “The setting of the Dove prism ensures that the image formed on the light receiving module through the imaging lens is always in a fixed direction, that is, the imaging direction of the image on the light receiving module does not rotate with the rotation of the reflector.”),
a motor ([0036] “The motor 11 is used to drive the Dove prism and the reflector (or prism) to rotate.”),
[…]
PNG
media_image1.png
468
676
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Zhang does not teach:
a single-stage planetary gear-set mechanically coupled to the motor and configured to physically divide an output torque of the motor;
at least one sensor configured to provide a speed signal indicative of at least one of the first speed and the second speed; and
a controller in communication with the at least one sensor and the motor, the controller being configured to:
receive the speed signal;
determine whether the second speed is equal to one half of the first speed; and
adjust the motor to maintain the second speed at one half of the first speed based on the speed signal.
Zhang2, in the related field of opto-mechanical control of rotating systems, teaches:
a single-stage planetary gear-set mechanically coupled to the motor ([0026] “To explain how the on-axis fiber optic rotary joint (FORJ) integrated in motor 99, or 100 works, the cross section view of a preferred on-axis fiber optic rotary joint is enlarged in FIG. 5. The motor shaft 34, or 24, is also the rotor of FORJ. A sun gear 118 is fixed with rotor 34, which is engaged with planet gear 119, while another planet gear 120 is engaged with an internal gear 122, which is fixed with motor housing 99. A Dove prism 115 is co-axially fixed inside the through bore of carrier 116. The planet gear system is such designed so that the carrier 116 will rotate at the half speed as that of the rotor 34 and in the same rotational direction. In this way, the rotating paralleled light beams on the rotor 34 will be coupled into corresponding collimators in the collimator bundle 111, or 112 after pass through the Dove prism 115.” Note that “internal gear 122” corresponds to the claimed ring gear.) and
configured to physically divide an output torque of the motor (It is naturally understood that planetary gear systems divide the output torque. See, for example, Wikipedia3, Section “Torque ratios of standard epicyclic gearing.”) and
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the system of Zhang with the planetary gear system of Zhang2 as one known and predictable alternative for establishing the relative rotation control of a Dove prism for use in a de-rotation configuration.
In a separate aspect of the of embodiment, Zhang2 teaches:
(Note that in view of the 112b rejection above, the specific details of incorporating the remaining limitations of claim 1 with the above limitations is not expanded upon, as it is unclear how such systems could be incorporated.)
at least one sensor configured to provide a speed signal indicative of at least one of the first speed and the second speed ([0018] “Encoders 201 and 202 are used to detect the rotation speed and direction of rotor 18. The signals from encoder 201 and 202 are transmitted to motor controllers 203 and 204 respectively to control the motion of motors 101 and 102.”);
a controller in communication with the at least one sensor and the motor ([0018] “motor controllers 203 and 204”), the controller being configured to:
receive the speed signal ([0018] “Encoders 201 and 202 are used to detect the rotation speed and direction of rotor 18. The signals from encoder 201 and 202 are transmitted to motor controllers 203 and 204 respectively to control the motion of motors 101 and 102.”);
determine whether the second speed is equal to one half of the first speed ([0019] “The speed ratio between rotor 18 and motor shaft 24 and 34 is designed to 1:1.” While Zhang2 does not explicitly state that the controller determines whether the desired ratio is achieved, this is clearly implied by the overall context of a system which monitors and controls the rotations. Further, while Zhang2 contemplates this configuration in the context of a motor system that is intended to be matched 1:1, it would be obvious to set the control to correspond to the desired rotation ratio, and thus by incorporating the system into Zhang it would be obvious to adopt the desired 2:1 ratio of Zhang.); and
adjust the motor to maintain the second speed at one half of the first speed based on the speed signal ([0018] “The signals from encoder 201 and 202 are transmitted to motor controllers 203 and 204 respectively to control the motion of motors 101 and 102.”; Zhang: [0032] “The dove prism 3 rotates synchronously with the reflector (or prism), and the rotational angular velocity of the dove prism 3 is half of the rotational angular velocity of the reflector”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have used the encoders and motor control of Zhang2 in the system of Zhang to maintain a desired rotation ratio.
Regarding claim 18, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the optical sensor of claim 17, as described above, and further teaches:
a transmission coupled between the motor and the mirror at a first output ratio and coupled between the motor and the prism at a second output ratio, wherein the first output ratio is greater than the second output ratio (Zhang2: FIG. 5; [0026] “The motor shaft 34, or 24, is also the rotor of FORJ. A sun gear 118 is fixed with rotor 34, which is engaged with planet gear 119, while another planet gear 120 is engaged with an internal gear 122, which is fixed with motor housing 99. A Dove prism 115 is co-axially fixed inside the through bore of carrier 116. The planet gear system is such designed so that the carrier 116 will rotate at the half speed as that of the rotor 34”; Zhang: [0038] “The first transmission gear set and the second transmission gear set enable the rotational angular velocity of the reflector (or prism) to be twice the rotational angular velocity of the Dove prism.”).
Regarding claim 20, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the optical sensor of claim 17, as described above, and further teaches:
further comprising at least one emitter to project light pulses radially outward from the axis, wherein the mirror receives light indicative of the light pulses reflected off an external object (Zhang: FIG. 1; [0030] “The emitting light source 1 is used for emitting infrared detection light.”; [0031] “the reflecting surface of the reflector 2 is at an angle of 45 degrees to the horizontal plane, converting the infrared detection light emitted vertically upward into infrared detection light emitted horizontally to the external environment, and converting the infrared detection light reflected by obstacles or objects to be measured in the environment and incident on the reflector in a horizontal direction into infrared detection light emitted vertically downward.”).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Zhang2 , as evidenced by Wikipedia3, and further in view of Celestron (celestron.com/blogs/knowledgebase/what-are-the-different-types-of-prism-coatings?srsltid=AfmBOorwx2glVYGwi_VE8RGvdS_-NhBURRAZuqw0yJP3eBaSEji8Whim dated 12/23/2020).
Regarding claim 4, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the lidar assembly of claim 3, as described above, but does not teach:
wherein the prism further comprises: reflective material disposed over the major face; and
wherein the reflected image reflects off of the reflective material disposed over the major face of the prism and passes through the output face to provide the stationary inverted image (Note that besides the reflective material, the rest of this limitation describes the basic geometry and operation of a Dove prism, which is taught by Zhang, as described above.).
Celestron teaches that reflective coatings may be used on prism surfaces, in particular when total internal reflection is not expected, to improve reflectivity (“metallic material such as aluminum or silver is applied to the reverse side of a prism surface that is not totally reflective to raise the reflectivity of the prism mirror surface.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the Dove prism of Zhang in view of Zhang2 with a metallic coating for any optical configuration in which the bare reflection of the prism would have fallen below the reflectivity of a metallic coating, to improve the reflectivity and ensure optimal signal transfer to the detector.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, and further in view of Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hall_effect_sensor accessed by the Wayback Machine dated 04/27/2021), hereinafter Wikipedia1.
Regarding claim 9, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, teaches the lidar assembly of claim 8, as described above, but does not teach:
further comprising: a first magnet mounted to one of the sidewalls and the first platform; and
a first sensor mounted to the other of the sidewalls and the first platform to detect the first magnet to provide a mirror rotational speed signal indicative of the first speed.
As disclosed by Wikipedia1, Hall effect sensors are a common sensor for monitoring the speed of rotating objects in combination with magnets placed on the objects (Paragraph 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have used a Hall effect sensor in the lidar system of Zhang in view of Zhang2 to track and monitor the rotational speed of the platforms, and thus also the attached optical elements.
Regarding claim 10, Zhang in view of Zhang2, as evidenced by Wikipedia3, and further in view of Wikipedia1 teaches the lidar assembly of claim 9, as described above, and further teaches:
further comprising: at least one motor coupled to the first platform and the second platform (Zhang: [0036] “The motor 11 is used to drive the Dove prism and the reflector (or prism) to rotate.”);
a second magnet mounted to one of the sidewalls and the second platform (Wikipedia1: [Paragraph 3]: Hall effect sensor);
a second sensor mounted to the other of the sidewalls and the second platform to detect the second magnet to provide a prism rotational speed signal indicative of the second speed (Wikipedia1: [Paragraph 3]: Hall effect sensor); and
a controller in communication with the at least one motor and programmed to control one of the first speed and the second speed based on the other of the first speed and the second speed (Zhang2: [0018-19] “Encoders 201 and 202 are used to detect the rotation speed and direction of rotor 18. The signals from encoder 201 and 202 are transmitted to motor controllers 203 and 204 respectively to control the motion of motors 101 and 102… The speed ratio between rotor 18 and motor shaft 24 and 34 is designed to 1:1.” Note that this description describes a system which clearly controls the motors to maintain the desired speed ratio based on the signal from the encoders.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ivie (US 4166959 A) teaches a Dove prism de-rotation system using a single-stage planetary gear-set.
Bogatscher et al. (DE 102017210683 A1) teaches a lidar system with a rotating mirror and Dove prism rotated at one half the rotational velocity of the mirror to maintain a steady image orientation on the detector.
Goren et al. (US 20220397647 A1) teaches a Dove prism used in a lidar system to maintain orientation of transmission and receiving optics relative to the field of view.
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 SEAN C. GRANT whose telephone number is (571)272-0402. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30 am - 6:00 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.
/SEAN C. GRANT/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645