Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/975,539

COMPACT LIDAR SYSTEMS FOR DETECTING OBJECTS IN BLIND-SPOT AREAS

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Oct 27, 2022
Examiner
BAGHDASARYAN, HOVHANNES
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Innovusion, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
759 granted / 971 resolved
+26.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
85 currently pending
Career history
1056
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
45.7%
+5.7% vs TC avg
§102
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
§112
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 971 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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. Claim(s) 1, 22 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1(as evidenced by D2 US 20200142072 A1). Regarding claims 1, 22 D1 teaches 1. A light detection and ranging (LiDAR) system for detecting objects in blind-spot areas, comprising: a housing;(fig. 2A) a scanning-based LiDAR assembly disposed in the housing, the scanning-based LiDAR assembly being configured to scan a plurality of light beams to illuminate a first field-of-view (FOV); [0151]and a non-scanning-based LiDAR assembly disposed in the housing, the non-scanning-based LiDAR assembly being configured to transmit laser light to illuminate a second FOV without scanning, [0151] wherein a detection distance range of the scanning-based LiDAR assembly extends beyond a detection distance range of the non-scanning-based LiDAR assembly.(implicit flash lidar device is not for long distances in comparison to scanning lidars see evidence by D2 [0004]) but does not explicitly teach the first FOV being different from, and overlapping with, the second FOV, Although D1 does not teach limitation above it is just a matter of design choice to extend lidar data from short to long distance without gaps. Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1. Although D1 does not explicitly teach 2. The LiDAR system of claim 1, wherein a vertical range scanned by the scanning-based LiDAR assembly overlaps with a vertical range illuminated by the non-scanning LiDAR assembly It is just obvious modification which is associated with designing FOV coverage in order to provide continuous coverage of field of view. 3. The LiDAR system of claim 1, wherein a vertical range scanned by the scanning-based LiDAR assembly does not overlap with a vertical range illuminated by the non-scanning LiDAR assembly. It is just obvious modification which is associated with designing FOV coverage in order to provide with one lidar coverage in front of vehicle and second one side or back of the vehicle . 4. The LiDAR system of claim 1, wherein the detection distance range of the scanning based LiDAR assembly is up to 200 meters. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art, at the time of invention to modify apparatus by D1, since it has been held that the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. 5. The LiDAR system of claim 1, wherein the detection distance range of the non-scanning- based LiDAR assembly is up to 30 meters. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art, at the time of invention to modify apparatus by D1, since it has been held that the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. Claim(s) 6, 23 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D3 US 20180284246 A1 . D1 teaches wherein the non-scanning-based LiDAR assembly comprises a flash LiDAR device configured to simultaneously illuminate the second FOV in a single light pulse.[0151] but does not teach while D3 teaches 6, 23 The LiDAR system of claim 1, wherein the scanning-based LiDAR assembly comprises a multi-facet polygon that is rotatable to scan the plurality of light beams to illuminate the first FOV, [0073] 12, 25 The LiDAR system of claim 1, wherein the scanning-based LiDAR assembly comprises a first laser source configured to provide the plurality of light beams at a first wavelength; wherein the non-scanning-based LiDAR assembly comprises a second laser source configured to provide the laser light at a second wavelength, the second wavelength being different from the first wavelength.[0096] The additional features of claim 17 are also already known from document D3 (see paragraphs [0046] to [0049] in conjunction with figure 1: "A coating that is HR for wavelengths away from a light-source operating wavelength may prevent most incoming light at unwanted wavelengths from being transmitted through the window 117."). The additional features of claim 18 are also already known from document D3 (see paragraph [0090]: "... the flash lidar system may capture a point cloud with a single emitted pulse of light that illuminates a field of regard."). The additional features of claims 19, 20, 27, and 28 are also already known from document D3(see paragraph [0064]: "..., the receiver 140 includes ... more avalanche photodiodes ... more single-photon avalanche diodes ..., the receiver 140 includes ... more PN photodiodes...", and paragraph [0113]: "The vehicle controller 372 then combines or stitches together the points clouds from the respective sensor heads 360 to construct a combined point cloud covering a 360- degree horizontal view."). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by D3 in order to provide scanner to scan the field of view as required by D1. Although D1 does not explicitly teach 7, 24 The LiDAR system of claim 6, wherein the scanning-based LiDAR assembly further comprises a fixed mirror configured to direct the plurality of light beams to the multi-facet polygon. This is well known type of scanners and therefore It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by Official Notice in order to provide scanner to scan the beam. (see also US 5864391 A) Although D1 does not explicitly teach 8. The LiDAR system of claim 6, wherein the multi-facet polygon is a variable angle multi- facet polygon (VAMFP), the VAMFP comprising a plurality of facets each having a facet angle, the facet angle of each facet corresponding to a vertical range of scanning, wherein the vertical range of at least one facet is different from the vertical ranges of other facets. (Official Notice also presented in PCT report for the case PCT/US2022/048292)This is well known type of scanners and therefore It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by Official Notice in order to provide scanner to scan the beam. (see also US 5864391 A) 9. The LiDAR system of claim 8, wherein the VAMFP comprises four facets having facet angles of about 2.5 to 5 degrees apart, wherein the facet angles of the plurality of facets are configured such that a total vertical range of scanning of all the four facets is about 20 to 40 degrees. (simple design choice in order to provide desired FOV) 10. The LiDAR system of claim 8, wherein the plurality of vertical ranges of all the facets are non-overlapping vertical ranges. (simple design choice in order to provide desired FOV) 11. The LiDAR system of claim 8, wherein at least two vertical ranges of the plurality of facets are overlapping vertical ranges. (simple design choice in order to provide desired FOV) 21. The LiDAR system of claim 1, wherein a height of the LiDAR system is equal to or less than about 35-40 mm or is configured such that the LiDAR system is installable in a vehicle's side-view mirror or a support structure thereof.(Simple design choice) Claim(s) 13, 26, 14 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D3 US 20180284246 A1 further in view of D4 20180275251 . Regarding claims bellow D1 does not teach but D4 teaches 13, 26 The LiDAR system of claim 12, wherein the scanning-based LiDAR assembly further comprises: a collimation lens optically coupled to a first laser source, the collimation lens being configured to collimate the plurality of light beams provided by the first laser source; a receiving lens configured to collect return light generated based on the illumination of the first FOV; and a combining mirror disposed between the collimation lens and the receiving lens. (see paragraph [0049] in conjunction with figures 2 and 4: "..., the scanning LiDAR having an optical structure which shares a transmitting and receiving lens may include a beam source 210, a beam detector 220, a hole mirror 230, and a transmitting and receiving lens 240, ..."). 14. The LiDAR system of claim 13, wherein the combining mirror comprises: a first portion configured to allow passing of the plurality of light beams from the first laser source; and a second portion configured to redirect the collected return light to a light detector. (see paragraph [0049] in conjunction with figures 2 and 4: "..., the scanning LiDAR having an optical structure which shares a transmitting and receiving lens may include a beam source 210, a beam detector 220, a hole mirror 230, and a transmitting and receiving lens 240, ..."). 15. The LiDAR system of claim 14, wherein the first portion is a center portion of the combining mirror and the second portion is a portion of the combining mirror that is other than the center portion. (see paragraph [0049] in conjunction with figures 2 and 4: "..., the scanning LiDAR having an optical structure which shares a transmitting and receiving lens may include a beam source 210, a beam detector 220, a hole mirror 230, and a transmitting and receiving lens 240, ..."). 16. The LiDAR system of claim 13, wherein the combining mirror comprises: a first portion configured to allow passing of the collected return light to a light detector; and a second portion configured to redirect the plurality of light beams from the first laser source.(simple light redirection design) It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by D4 in order to provide optical system which is capable of scanning with multiple frequencies . 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 HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7845. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7am - 5 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. /HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 27, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 19, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 19, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 25, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 23, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591059
OPTICAL RANGING DEVICE AND OPTICAL RANGING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591047
OPTICAL SYSTEM FOR LIGHT DETECTION AND RANGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585000
RECEIVING DEVICE FOR AN OPTICAL MEASUREMENT APPARATUS FOR CAPTURING OBJECTS, LIGHT SIGNAL REDIRECTION DEVICE, MEASUREMENT APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A RECEIVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569880
CMOS ULTRASONIC TRANSDUCERS AND RELATED APPARATUS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560721
SPAD LIDAR SYSTEM WITH BINNED PIXELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
78%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+16.1%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 971 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