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 .
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 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.
Response to Amendment
The following addresses applicant’s remarks/amendments 30 January 2026.
Claims 1, 15, 18, and 28 were amended; no claims were cancelled; claim 30 was added; therefore, claims 1-30 are pending in the current application and will be addressed below.
Examiner notes that while Applicant’s remarks states “the Applicant has filed a terminal disclaimer” on pg. 7 of Applicant’s remarks, no Terminal Disclaimer appears to have been filed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 30 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-30 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the specific combination of the references being used in the current rejection.
In response to applicant’s argument that references fail to show certain features of applicant’s invention, it is noted that features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “arm extending from the vehicle to the sensor pod, the sensor pod extending vertically from the arm”) are not recited in the rejected claims. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). However, these claim limitations were not present in the previous claims and were presented by amendment on 30 January 2026. Therefore, the issue of whether Huang addresses these limitations are not relevant. These amended claims containing new limitations have been addressed by Shane and Huang in the present Office Action.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 3-12, 15, 18, 20-26, 28, and 30 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 (which depends on claims 14, 13, 12, and 1) of copending Application No. 17881366 in view of Huang US 20210405159 A1 and Shane WO 2020180707 A1.
Regarding claim 1, 17881366 claim 15 (which depends on claims 14, 13, 12, and 1) teaches a connecting assembly for coupling a sensor pod to a vehicle, the connecting assembly comprising: an arm (claim 15); and a scanning lidar located within connecting assembly (claim 1).
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach the arm extending form the vehicle to the sensor pod, the sensor pod extending vertically from the arm, and the scanning lidar within the arm.
Shane teaches the arm extending form the vehicle to the sensor pod, the sensor pod extending vertically from the arm (306 extending to 102 in Fig. 3, [0065-68]; see also Figs. 1-2, 16-19, 21-28)
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (lidar in first housing, Figs. 3-7, [0053]).
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 17881366 claim 15 to include the arm extending form the vehicle to the sensor pod, the sensor pod extending vertically from the arm, and the scanning lidar within the arm similar to Shane and Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 3, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is wholly located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR completely within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (lidar in first housing, Figs. 3-7, [0053]).
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the scanning lidar is wholly located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 4, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is partially located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR completely within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (lidar in first housing, Figs. 3-7, [0053
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the scanning lidar is partially located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 5, 17881366 claim 15 (which depends on claims 14, 13, 12, and 1) as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1, further comprising a heat sink (claim 12).
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach the heat sink having cooling fins.
Huang teaches heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins (shown in Fig. 6A-6B as fins, [0094-96])
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 Shane to include a heat sink having cooling fins similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 6, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 5, wherein the heat sink is a structural component of the arm (heat sink is structural component of lower surface which can be of the sensor pod arm; claim 15).
Regarding claim 7, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 5, wherein the heat sink forms a lower surface of the arm (heat sink is structural component of lower surface which can be of the sensor pod arm; claim 15).
Regarding claim 8, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 7, wherein the arm comprises a sensor pod arm and a bracket, and wherein the lower surface is a lower surface of the sensor pod arm, a lower surface of the bracket, or a combination thereof (claim 15).
Regarding claim 9, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1, the arm further comprising a sensor pod arm and a bracket (claim 15).
Regarding claim 10, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 9,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the sensor pod arm is rotationally coupled to the bracket.
Shane teaches a rotating bracket (rotating coupling 1505, Fig. 15, [0110]).
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the sensor pod arm is rotationally coupled to the bracket similar to Shane with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of allowing adjustment of the sensor pod.
Regarding claim 11, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 9,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is located entirely within the sensor pod arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (lidar within first housing 107 (which has two arm portions) in Figs. 3-7, 12, [0049, 65-67].
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 17881366 claim 15 to include a scanning lidar located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 12, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 9,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is located within the sensor pod arm and the bracket.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (lidar within first housing 107 (which has two arm portions) in Figs. 3-7, 12, [0049, 65-67]).
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 17881366 claim 15 to include a scanning lidar located within the arm and bracket similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 15, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1, wherein a location of the scanning lidar defines a moment arm generated by the sensor pod housing on the connecting assembly (all components of the connecting assembly inherently define a moment arm).
Regarding claim 18, 17881366 claim 15 teaches a connecting assembly for coupling a sensor pod to a vehicle, the connecting assembly comprising: an arm (claim 15); a scanning lidar located within the arm; and a heat sink located within the arm.
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach the scanning lidar and heat sink are located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (lidar in first housing, Figs. 3-7, [0053]) and heat dissipation structure 106 which can be a heat sink with fins (heat dissipation structure 106 shown in Fig. 6A-6B as fins, [0094-96]).
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 17881366 claim 15 to include a scanning lidar located within the arm; and a heat sink located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view and helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 20, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar and the heat sink are wholly located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR completely within a horizontal section of a sideview mirror (lidar in first housing, Figs. 3-7, [0053]) and heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (heat dissipation structure 106 shown in Fig. 6A-6B as fins, [0094-96]).
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the scanning lidar and the heat sink are wholly located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view and helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 21, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar and the heat sink are partially located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR completely within a horizontal section of a sideview mirror (lidar in first housing, Figs. 3-7, [0053]) and heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (heat dissipation structure 106 shown in Fig. 6A-6B as fins, [0094-96]).
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the scanning lidar and the heat sink are partially located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view and helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 22, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18, wherein the heat sink forms a portion of a lower surface of the arm.
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach the heat sink comprises cooling fins extending from and below the lower surface.
Huang teaches heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (shown in Figs. 3, 6A-6B as fins, [0085, 94-96]).
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the heat sink comprises cooling fins extending from and below the lower surface similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors while providing strength to the assembly.
Regarding claim 23, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 22, wherein the arm comprises a sensor pod arm and a bracket, and wherein the lower surface is a lower surface of the sensor pod arm, a lower surface of the bracket, or a combination thereof (claim 15).
Regarding claim 24, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18, the arm further comprising a sensor pod arm and a bracket (claim 15).
Regarding claim 25, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 24,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the sensor pod arm is rotationally coupled to the bracket.
Shane teaches a rotating bracket (rotating coupling 1505, Fig. 15, [0110]).
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the sensor pod arm is rotationally coupled to the bracket similar to Shane with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of allowing adjustment of the sensor pod.
Regarding claim 26, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 24,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar and the heat sink are located entirely within the sensor pod arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR completely within a horizontal section of a sideview mirror (lidar in first housing, Figs. 3-7, [0053]) and heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (heat dissipation structure 106 shown in Fig. 6A-6B as fins, [0094-96]).
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the scanning lidar and the heat sink are located entirely within the sensor pod arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view and helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 28, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18, wherein a location of the scanning lidar and the heat sink defines a moment arm generated by the sensor pod housing on the connecting assembly (all components of the connecting assembly inherently define a moment arm).
Regarding claim 30, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the arm extends along a longitudinal centerline axis from the vehicle to the sensor pod and having a first lateral side and a second lateral side substantially parallel with the first lateral side, and the scanning lidar disposed between the first lateral side and the second lateral side.
Shane teaches the arm extends along a longitudinal centerline axis from the vehicle to the sensor pod and having a first lateral side and a second lateral side substantially parallel with the first lateral side (306 in Fig. 3, [0065-68]).
Huang teaches a lidar disposed between two lateral parallel sides (Figs. 3 and 12, [0065-68])
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the arm extends along a longitudinal centerline axis from the vehicle to the sensor pod and having a first lateral side and a second lateral side substantially parallel with the first lateral side, and the scanning lidar disposed between the first lateral side and the second lateral side similar to Shane and Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s).
Claims 2, 13-14, 19, and 27 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 of copending Application No. 17881366 in view of Huang US 20210405159 A1 and Shane WO 2020180707 A1 and further in view of Grossman US 20220244737 A1.
Regarding claim 2, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach further comprising one or more conduits located within the arm.
Grossman teaches conduit 410 in Fig. 4B within an arm ([0037]).
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 17881366 claim 15 to include one or more conduits located within the arm similar to Grossman with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of providing electrical and data connections to the sensors in the arm and sensor pod.
Regarding claim 13, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 12,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is located entirely within the sensor pod arm and the bracket, such that a portion of the scanning lidar is located in the sensor pod arm and a portion of the scanning lidar is located in the bracket.
Grossman teaches a conduit with wires of the LIDAR in the arm and bracket (Figs. 3-4, [0037]; wires of the LIDAR can be considered part of the LIDAR). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning Huang’s Lidar inside an arm and bracket is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
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 17881366 claim 15 such that wherein the scanning lidar is located entirely within the sensor pod arm and the bracket, such that a portion of the scanning lidar is located in the sensor pod arm and a portion of the scanning lidar is located in the bracket similar to Grossman with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 14, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 12,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is located partially within the sensor pod arm, partially within the bracket, and partially within the sensor pod.
Grossman teaches a conduit with wires of the LIDAR in the arm and bracket and lidar in the sensor pod (Figs. 3-4, [0035-37]; wires of the LIDAR can be considered part of the LIDAR; and sensor pod structure 302 or 322). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning Huang’s Lidar inside an arm and bracket is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the scanning lidar is located partially within the sensor pod arm, partially within the bracket, and partially within the sensor pod similar to Grossman with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 19, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach further comprising one or more conduits located within the arm.
Grossman teaches conduit 410 in Fig. 4B within an arm ([0037])
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 17881366 claim 15 to include one or more conduits located within the arm similar to Grossman with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of providing electrical and data connections to the sensors in the arm and sensor pod.
Regarding claim 27, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 24,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar and the heat sink are located partially within the sensor pod arm, partially within the bracket, and partially within the sensor pod.
Grossman teaches a conduit with wires of the LIDAR in the arm and bracket and lidar in the sensor pod (Figs. 3-4, [0035-37]; wires of the LIDAR can be considered part of the LIDAR; and sensor pod structure 302 or 322). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning Huang’s Lidar inside an arm and bracket is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the scanning lidar and the heat sink are located partially within the sensor pod arm, partially within the bracket, and partially within the sensor pod. similar to Grossman with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view and helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Claims 16, 17, and 29 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 of copending Application No. 17881366 in view of Huang US 20210405159 A1 and Shane WO 2020180707 A1, and further in view of Higashimachi US 20220203904 A1.
Regarding claim 16, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is the only sensor located in the connecting assembly.
Higashimachi teaches structural areas with only a single sensor which can be a lidar (40 or 50 in Fig. 6, [0058-62]; 30 in Fig. 3, [0038]; or common sensor unit with at least one kind of external sensor attached in Claim 1)
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the scanning lidar is the only sensor located in the connecting assembly similar to Higashimachi with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of spreading out the views of various sensors to help minimize blind spots.
Regarding claim 17, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 16,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein no cameras, no radar, no other lidars, and no other sensors are located in the arm.
Higashimachi teaches structural areas with only a single sensor which can be a lidar (40 or 50 in Fig. 6, [0058-62]; 30 in Fig. 3, [0038]; or common sensor unit with at least one kind of external sensor attached in Claim 1)
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 Shane such that no cameras, no radar, no other lidars, and no other sensors are located in the arm similar to Higashimachi with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of spreading out the views of various sensors to help minimize blind spots.
Regarding claim 29, 17881366 claim 15 as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18,
17881366 claim 15 does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is the only sensor located in the aim.
Higashimachi teaches structural areas with only a single sensor which can be a lidar (40 or 50 in Fig. 6, [0058-62]; 30 in Fig. 3, [0038]; or common sensor unit with at least one kind of external sensor attached in Claim 1)
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 17881366 claim 15 such that the scanning lidar is the only sensor located in the arm similar to Higashimachi with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of spreading out the views of various sensors to help minimize blind spots.
The rejections above are provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejections.
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, 3-15, 18, 20-28, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shane WO 2020180707 A1 in view of Huang US 20210405159 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Shane teaches a connecting assembly for coupling a sensor pod to a vehicle (Fig. 3), the connecting assembly comprising:
an arm extending form the vehicle to the sensor pod, the sensor pod extending vertically from the arm (306 extending to 102 in Fig. 3, [0065-68]; see also Figs. 1-2, 16-19, 21-28); and
Shane does not explicitly teach a scanning lidar located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane to include a scanning lidar located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 3, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is wholly located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR completely within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar is wholly located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 4, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is partially located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR completely within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]; completely is at least partially). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar is partially located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 5, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1,
Shane does not explicitly teach further comprising a heat sink having cooling fins.
Huang teaches heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins (shown in Fig. 6A-6B as fins, [0094-96])
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 Shane to include a heat sink having cooling fins similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 6, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 5,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the heat sink is a structural component of the arm.
Huang teaches heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (shown in Figs. 3, 6A-6B as fins, [0085, 94-96])
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 Shane such that the heat sink is a structural component of the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors while providing strength to the assembly.
Regarding claim 7, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 5,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the heat sink forms a lower surface of the arm.
Huang teaches heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (shown in Figs. 3, 6A-6B as fins, [0085, 94-96]).
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 Shane such that the heat sink forms a lower surface of the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors while providing strength to the assembly.
Regarding claim 8, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 7, wherein the arm comprises a sensor pod arm and a bracket (arm assembly 304 with beam assembly 306 and mounting assembly 308 with bracket 310, Fig. 3, [0067-68]; or coupling 1505 and horizontal portion of support frame 1501, Fig. 15, [0110]; including lower surfaces); and wherein the lower surface is a lower surface of the sensor pod arm, a lower surface of the bracket, or a combination thereof (arm assembly 304 with beam assembly 306 and mounting assembly 308 with bracket 310, Fig. 3, [0067-68]; or coupling 1505 and horizontal portion of support frame 1501, Fig. 15, [0110]; including lower surfaces).
Regarding claim 9, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1, the arm further comprising a sensor pod arm and a bracket (arm assembly 304 with beam assembly 306 and mounting assembly 308 with bracket 310, Fig. 3, [0067-68]; or coupling 1505 and horizontal portion of support frame 1501, Fig. 15, [0110]).
Regarding claim 10, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 9, wherein the sensor pod arm is rotationally coupled to the bracket (rotating coupling 1505, Fig. 15, [0110]).
Regarding claim 11, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 9,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is located entirely within the sensor pod arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar is located entirely within the sensor pod arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 12, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 9,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is located within the sensor pod arm and the bracket.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar is located within the sensor pod arm and the bracket similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 13, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 12,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is located entirely within the sensor pod arm and the bracket, such that a portion of the scanning lidar is located in the sensor pod arm and a portion of the scanning lidar is located in the bracket.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane such that wherein the scanning lidar is located entirely within the sensor pod arm and the bracket, such that a portion of the scanning lidar is located in the sensor pod arm and a portion of the scanning lidar is located in the bracket similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 14, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 12,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is located partially within the sensor pod arm, partially within the bracket, and partially within the sensor pod.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar is located partially within the sensor pod arm, partially within the bracket, and partially within the sensor pod similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view.
Regarding claim 15, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1, wherein a location of the scanning lidar defines a moment arm generated by the sensor pod housing on the connecting assembly (all components in the connecting assembly inherently define a moment arm).
Regarding claim 18, Shane teaches the connecting assembly for coupling a sensor pod to a vehicle, the connecting assembly comprising:
an arm (306 in Fig. 3, [0067-68]; see also Figs. 1-2, 16-19, 21-28);
Shane does not explicitly teach a scanning lidar located within the arm; and a heat sink located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]) and heat dissipation structure 106 which can be a heat sink with fins (shown in Fig. 6A-6B as fins, [0094-96]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane to include a scanning lidar located within the arm; and a heat sink located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view and helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 20, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar and the heat sink are wholly located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR completely within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]) and heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (shown in Figs. 3, 6A-6B as fins, [0085, 94-96]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar and the heat sink are wholly located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view and helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 21, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar and the heat sink are partially located within the arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR completely within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]; completely is at least partially) and heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (shown in Figs. 3, 6A-6B as fins, [0085, 94-96]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar and the heat sink are partially located within the arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view and helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 22, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the heat sink forms a portion of a lower surface of the arm and comprises cooling fins extending from and below the lower surface.
Huang teaches heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (shown in Figs. 3, 6A-6B as fins, [0085, 94-96]).
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 Shane such that the heat sink forms a portion of a lower surface of the arm and comprises cooling fins extending from and below the lower surface similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors while providing strength to the assembly.
Regarding claim 23, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 22, wherein the arm comprises a sensor pod arm and a bracket (arm assembly 304 with beam assembly 306 and mounting assembly 308 with bracket 310, Fig. 3, [0067-68]; or coupling 1505 and horizontal portion of support frame 1501, Fig. 15, [0110]; including lower surfaces), and wherein the lower surface is a lower surface of the sensor pod arm, a lower surface of the bracket, or a combination thereof (arm assembly 304 with beam assembly 306 and mounting assembly 308 with bracket 310, Fig. 3, [0067-68]; or coupling 1505 and horizontal portion of support frame 1501, Fig. 15, [0110]; including lower surfaces)..
Regarding claim 24, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18, the arm further comprising a sensor pod arm and a bracket (arm assembly 304 with beam assembly 306 and mounting assembly 308 with bracket 310, Fig. 3, [0067-68]; or coupling 1505 and horizontal portion of support frame 1501, Fig. 15, [0110]).
Regarding claim 25, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 24, wherein the sensor pod arm is rotationally coupled to the bracket (rotating coupling 1505, Fig. 15, [0110]).
Regarding claim 26, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 24,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar and the heat sink are located entirely within the sensor pod arm.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]) and heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (shown in Figs. 3, 6A-6B as fins, [0085, 94-96]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar and the heat sink are located entirely within the sensor pod arm similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view and helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 27, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 24,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar and the heat sink are located partially within the sensor pod arm, partially within the bracket, and partially within the sensor pod.
Huang teaches a LIDAR within an arm-like horizontal section of a sideview mirror (Lidar 11 in Figs. 1-2, [0051]) and heat dissipation structure 106 which can be fins as part of support structure 109 on the lower surface (shown in Figs. 3, 6A-6B as fins, [0085, 94-96]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that positioning a Lidar inside an arm of a mirror assembly is a simple rearrangement of parts because shifting the position of the Lidar (or adding an additional Lidar) would not have modified the operation of the device and would be an obvious matter of design choice (See MPEP 2144.04 VI. C., In reJapikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950), and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
Furthermore, Shane does teach a scanning lidar 112 or 1503 attached to support frame (Figs. 1-3, 16-19, 21-28, [0101, 107-110]; shown at least partially enclosed in horizontal portion of frame in Figs. 22-28 at lower portion 1501D of the distal end 1501A, [0120]).
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar and the heat sink are located partially within the sensor pod arm, partially within the bracket, and partially within the sensor pod similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s) while providing a desired field of view and helping dissipate heat generated by lidar and other sensors.
Regarding claim 28, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18, wherein a location of the scanning lidar and the heat sink defines a moment arm generated by the sensor pod housing on the connecting assembly (all components in the connecting assembly inherently define a moment arm).
Regarding claim 30, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1, wherein the arm extends along a longitudinal centerline axis from the vehicle to the sensor pod and having a first lateral side and a second lateral side substantially parallel with the first lateral side (306 in Fig. 3, [0065-68]),
Shane does not explicitly teach the scanning lidar disposed between the first lateral side and the second lateral side.
Huang teaches a lidar disposed between two lateral parallel sides (Figs. 3 and 12, [0065-68])
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar disposed between the first lateral side and the second lateral side similar to Huang with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using available space to house and protect Lidar unit(s).
Claims 2 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shane WO 2020180707 A1 in view of Huang US 20210405159 A1 and further in view of Grossman US 20220244737 A1.
Regarding claim 2, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1,
Shane does not explicitly teach further comprising one or more conduits located within the arm.
Grossman teaches conduit 410 in Fig. 4B ([0037])
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 Shane to include one or more conduits located within the arm similar to Grossman with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of providing electrical and data connections to the sensors in the arm and sensor pod.
Regarding claim 19, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18,
Shane does not explicitly teach further comprising one or more conduits located within the arm.
Grossman teaches conduit 410 in Fig. 4B ([0037])
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 Shane to include one or more conduits located within the arm similar to Grossman with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of providing electrical and data connections to the sensors in the arm and sensor pod.
Claims 16-17 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shane WO 2020180707 A1 in view of Huang US 20210405159 A1 and further in view of Higashimachi US 20220203904 A1.
Regarding claim 16, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 1,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is the only sensor located in the connecting assembly.
Higashimachi teaches structural areas with only a single sensor which can be a lidar (40 or 50 in Fig. 6, [0058-62]; 30 in Fig. 3, [0038]; or common sensor unit with at least one kind of external sensor attached in Claim 1)
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar is the only sensor located in the connecting assembly similar to Higashimachi with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of spreading out the views of various sensors to help minimize blind spots.
Regarding claim 17, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 16,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein no cameras, no radar, no other lidars, and no other sensors are located in the arm.
Higashimachi teaches structural areas with only a single sensor which can be a lidar (40 or 50 in Fig. 6, [0058-62]; 30 in Fig. 3, [0038]; or common sensor unit with at least one kind of external sensor attached in Claim 1)
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 Shane such that no cameras, no radar, no other lidars, and no other sensors are located in the arm similar to Higashimachi with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of spreading out the views of various sensors to help minimize blind spots.
Regarding claim 29, Shane as modified above teaches the connecting assembly of claim 18,
Shane does not explicitly teach wherein the scanning lidar is the only sensor located in the arm.
Higashimachi teaches structural areas with only a single sensor which can be a lidar (40 or 50 in Fig. 6, [0058-62]; 30 in Fig. 3, [0038]; or common sensor unit with at least one kind of external sensor attached in Claim 1)
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 Shane such that the scanning lidar is the only sensor located in the arm similar to Higashimachi with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of spreading out the views of various sensors to help minimize blind spots.
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 JOSEPH C FRITCHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5533. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached on 571-272-6970. 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.
/J.C.F./Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ISAM A ALSOMIRI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645