Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/930,356

MEASUREMENT APPARATUS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Sep 07, 2022
Examiner
THATCHER, CLINT A
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
DENSO CORPORATION
OA Round
2 (Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
255 granted / 315 resolved
+29.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
348
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
17.4%
-22.6% vs TC avg
§103
36.0%
-4.0% vs TC avg
§102
24.1%
-15.9% vs TC avg
§112
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 315 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This Action addresses the communication received on 4 Dec 2025. Applicant has amended Claim 1. The Office rejects pending Claims 1-4 as detailed below. Response to Amendments 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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keilaf et al. (U.S. Pub. 20190271767) in view of Ohishi et al. (U.S. Pub. 20010002860 [previous IDS entry]). As for Claim 1, Keilaf teaches a measurement apparatus mounted to a vehicle, the measurement apparatus comprising: a light emitting unit configured to radiate pulsed light (Fig. 1A, Projecting Unit 102, ¶72 L2-4); at least one light receiving element configured to output a light reception signal corresponding to an amount of light received at a preset sensitivity, and to receive reflected light of the pulsed light radiated by the light emitting unit (Figs. 1A and 4A, Sensing Unit 106, including photodetection Sensors 116, ¶104); a measurement unit configured to measure an object based on the light reception signal output from the at least one light receiving element having received the reflected light (¶4, L4-9); a monitor circuit configured to generate a monitor signal indicating the amount of light received by the at least one light receiving element based on the light reception signal output from the at least one light receiving element (¶87, L10: “Optionally, sensing unit 106 may include sensor 116 that is agnostic to the laser polarization, and is primarily sensitive to the amount of impinging photons at a certain wavelength range.”) […]. Keilaf generally teaches dynamically adjusting the sensitivity of photodetection elements, but does not detail the specific steps of monitoring and adjusting the photodetection element as claimed below. But Ohishi teaches an adjustment unit configured to adjust the sensitivity of the at least one light receiving element, based on a difference between a voltage of the monitor signal generated by the monitor circuit based on the light reception signal from the light receiving element having received reference light with an intensity fixed to a preset level (¶20|25: “projecting a light beam from the light emitting element with a plurality of values of specifying light amount [preset intensity level] toward the photodetection element [i.e., the light receiving element having received reference light with an intensity fixed to a preset level], and the step of determining a range of photodetection sensitivity [i.e., voltage produced by light receiving element] of the photodetection element in response to a change of the light amount.”), and a voltage of the monitor signal generated by the monitor circuit based on the light reception signal from the light receiving element whose reception of the reference light is blocked (¶9|1: “Based on the photodetection light amount (i.e. the received light amount [i.e., the voltage of the signal converted from the received light]) of the photodetection element 7, the density adjusting motor 21 is rotated so that the light amount of the reflected distance measuring light beam 4' and the internal reference light beam 12 entering the photodetection element 7 is maintained at a constant level, and the position of the density filter 20 is controlled. In synchronization with a reference signal issued by the distance measuring circuit 8, the optical path changing motor 18 is rotated and controlled, and the reflected distance measuring light beam 4' and the internal reference light beam 12 entering the photodetection element 7 are switched over.” That is, both signals are used to adjust the photoreceptor sensitivity, the reference light and the reflected light, which are kept separate [i.e., the reference light is blocked from the reflected light].) 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 Keilaf and Ohishi because the method taught by Ohishi allows a monitor to control the photoreceptor sensitivity with the two signals (reference and reflected) received at the one photoreceptor without the signals interfering with each other. This at least removes the need for an extra photoreceptor by directing both signals to one photoreceptor, and by keep the signals separate, there is no need for extra circuit logic to separate the combined signals. As for Claim 2, which depends on Claim 1, Keilaf teaches further comprising: a detection unit configured to detect, based on the monitor signal, a noise component contained in the light reception signal (¶234 L17: “For example, if a noise producing object (such as a vehicle tail light, license plate, etc.) is determined to be located at a certain distance from LIDAR system 100, then amplification parameter values may be reduced during a time window when light reflections from the noise producing object are expected to be received at sensor 116, for example. As a result, blinding effects caused by the noise producing object may be reduced.”) As for Claim 3, which depends on Claim 1, Keilaf teaches wherein the at least one light receiving element includes a plurality of light receiving elements (¶104 L1: “Sensor 116 includes a plurality of detection elements 402 for detecting photons of a photonic pulse reflected back from field of view 120.”) As for Claim 4, which depends on Claim 2, Keilaf teaches wherein the at least one light receiving element includes a plurality of light receiving elements (¶104 L1: “Sensor 116 includes a plurality of detection elements 402 for detecting photons of a photonic pulse reflected back from field of view 120.”) Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 4 Dec 2025 relate to newly amended claims and are not addressed in this section; the rejections above, however, address the latest version of the claims in detail. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action. Applicants should direct any inquiry concerning this or earlier communications to CLINT THATCHER at phone 571.270.3588. Examiner is normally available Mon-Fri, 9am to 5:30pm ET and generally keeps a daily 2:30pm timeslot open for interviews. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, 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. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 07, 2022
Application Filed
Sep 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 24, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 24, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 04, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Mar 08, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 18, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 18, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12572349
Computer-Implemented Method And Device For The Automated Update Of A Communication Unit Of A Control Unit Of A Vehicle
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12547393
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR RELIABLE OVER-THE-AIR FIRMWARE UPDATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12523747
OPTICAL APPARATUS, IN-VEHICLE SYSTEM, AND MOVING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12524222
BUILDING AN OPERATING SYSTEM WITH AN AUTOMATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12517707
CODE GENERATION TECHNIQUE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+10.4%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 315 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month