Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 16 Mar 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
After preliminary amendments, Applicant presents Claims 11-20 for examination. The Office rejects Claims 11-20 as detailed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Weber (U.S. Pub. 20190078934).
As for Claim 11, Weber teaches a light source (Fig. 1, light emitter 2, ¶46|2-3); and a bandpass filter situated in a reception path of the LIDAR system (Fig. 1, spectral filter 4, ¶48|1-5), the reception path being configured to receive light emitted by the light source (¶47|3: “The sensor chip 3 is to detect a part of the radiation R reflected back from an object 9 in the exterior of the sensor device 1.”), which was reflected in surroundings of the LIDAR system (¶11|4: “In particular, an interference filter is used in the front of the sensor device which is preferably a three-dimensional detection system like Lidar, structured light, time-of-flight or proximity sensor.”); wherein a spectral transmission width of the bandpass filter is configured to be narrower (¶12|4: “The passband of the filter is narrow and has, for example, a spectral transmission range of 5 nm, 10 nm or 15 nm or the like.”) than a spectral emission width of a light beam emitted by the light source (¶19|3: “As an alternative or in addition, the spectral width [of the emitted radiation] is at most 20 nm or 15 nm or 10 nm or 5 nm.”)
As for Claim 12, which depends on Claim 11, Weber teaches wherein the spectral transmission width is no greater than 95% of the spectral emission width (¶12|4: “The passband of the filter is narrow and has, for example, a spectral transmission range of 5 nm, 10 nm or 15 nm or the like.” Further, (¶19|3) “As an alternative or in addition, the spectral width [of the emitted radiation] is at most 20 nm or 15 nm or 10 nm or 5 nm.” That is, if the if the emitted bandwidth is 20 nm and the passband filter is 15 nm, then the spectral transmission width to the sensor would be 75% of the spectral emission width.)
As for Claim 13, which depends on Claim 11, Weber teaches wherein the LIDAR system is configured to adapt a temperature control of the light source to a temperature-dependent change of the bandpass filter (¶7|1: “According to at least one embodiment, the sensor device comprises a filter driver. The filter driver is designed to adjust the spectral transmission range to the determined peak wavelength. That is, the spectral transmission range of the spectral filter component can be adapted to the peak wavelength which is generated depending on the temperature of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip.”)
As for Claim 14, which depends on Claim 13, Weber teaches further comprising: a temperature stabilization unit configured to regulate the temperature control of the light source in such a way that a central wavelength of the light sources agrees with a central wavelength of the bandpass filter (¶7|1: “According to at least one embodiment, the sensor device comprises a filter driver. The filter driver is designed to adjust the spectral transmission range to the determined peak wavelength. That is, the spectral transmission range of the spectral filter component can be adapted to the peak wavelength which is generated depending on the temperature of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip.”)
As for Claim 15, which depends on Claim 14, Weber teaches wherein the temperature stabilization unit includes a heating element or a Peltier element to regulate the temperature control of the light source (¶70|1: “According to FIG. 9, the filter driver 6 comprises a temperature control unit 61, for example, a heating unit.”)
As for Claim 16, which depends on Claim 14, Weber teaches wherein the temperature stabilization unit includes a temperature sensor configured to measure a present operating temperature of the bandpass filter (¶70|3: “Hence, the temperature of the spectral filter component 4 can be adjusted by the filter driver 6. By means of a defined temperature, the spectral transmission range of the filter component is adjusted.”)
As for Claim 19, which depends on Claim 11, Weber teaches wherein the LIDAR system is configured to emit a laser line using the light source, and to generate an optical image using the reception path, a line detector being provided in the reception path to generate the optical image (¶51|1: “According to FIG. 2, the radiation R is emitted in a larger angular range. For example, the object 9 is completely or nearly completely illuminated by the radiation R on a side facing the sensor device 1. In this case, the sensor device 1 can be an iris recognition sensor, for example. Hence, the sensor chip 3 can comprise a plurality of pixels to image the object 9.”)
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 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of Sun et al. (U.S. Pub. 20200191921).
As for Claim 17, which depends on Claim 11, Weber does not explicitly teach all the claim limitations.
But Sun teaches further comprising: a rotatably attached mirror to effectuate a beam deflection (¶19|1: “According to one embodiment, a LIDAR device of an autonomous driving vehicle (ADV) includes an array of light emitters to emit a number of light beams to sense a physical range associated with a target. The LIDAR device further includes a prism-shaped mirror assembly supported by a rotatable platform, the joining faces of the mirror assembly forming different angles with respect to a bottom base face and acting as reflective surfaces.”)
It 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 to combine Weber and Sun because using a rotating mirror platform allows for detecting and ranging in all 360 degrees surrounding a vehicle.
As for Claim 18, which depends on Claim 11, Sun teaches further comprising: a rotatably attached platform carrying a transmission path, which includes the light source, and the reception path, to effectuate a beam deflection (¶19|1: “According to one embodiment, a LIDAR device of an autonomous driving vehicle (ADV) includes an array of light emitters to emit a number of light beams to sense a physical range associated with a target. The LIDAR device further includes a prism-shaped mirror assembly supported by a rotatable platform, the joining faces of the mirror assembly forming different angles with respect to a bottom base face and acting as reflective surfaces.”)
+-_+_+_+
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of Albuquerque et al. (U.S. Pub. 20100271614).
As for Claim 20, Weber teaches a light source (Fig. 1, light emitter 2, ¶46|2-3); and a bandpass filter situated in a reception path of the LIDAR system (Fig. 1, spectral filter 4, ¶48|1-5), the reception path being configured to receive light emitted by the light source (¶47|3: “The sensor chip 3 is to detect a part of the radiation R reflected back from an object 9 in the exterior of the sensor device 1.”), which was reflected in surroundings of the LIDAR system (¶11|4: “In particular, an interference filter is used in the front of the sensor device which is preferably a three-dimensional detection system like Lidar, structured light, time-of-flight or proximity sensor.”); wherein a spectral transmission width of the bandpass filter is configured to be narrower (¶12|4: “The passband of the filter is narrow and has, for example, a spectral transmission range of 5 nm, 10 nm or 15 nm or the like.”) than a spectral emission width of a light beam emitted by the light source (¶19|3: “As an alternative or in addition, the spectral width [of the emitted radiation] is at most 20 nm or 15 nm or 10 nm or 5 nm.”) Weber does not explicitly teach the remaining claim elements.
But Albuquerque teaches wherein the LIDAR system is electrically connected to a battery of the vehicle for operating the LIDAR system (¶37|4: “In this case, a plurality of separate LIDAR systems 10-1, ... , 10-N are utilized and positioned at various separate locations on a car. Inasmuch as the systems 10 are relatively small as a result of the integration advantages of the present invention, they do not require large spaces, or draw significant power from the car's battery.”)
It 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 to combine Weber and Albuquerque because tapping in to the vehicle’s existing power supply is more efficient than trying to design a separate power supply for the Lidar system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLINT THATCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-3588. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5:30pm ET and generally keeps a daily 2:30pm timeslot open for interviews.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant may call the examiner to set up a time or use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) system 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.
Though not relied on, the Office considers the additional prior art listed in the Notice of Reference Cited form (PTO-892) pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. The listed patents and published applications [*Entries D-H*] and the listed NPL [*Entry U*] relate to filtering received light in a lidar system.
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.
/Clint Thatcher/
Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645