DETAILED ACTION
This Action addresses the communication received on 17 Mar 2026. Applicant has amended Claims 1-3 and 5-11; and cancelled Claim 4. The Office rejects pending Claims 1-3 and 5-11 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, 5-7 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Livingston - U.S. Pat. 5900620 - in view of Onal et al. - U.S. Pub. 20220137218 +_+_+
As for Claim 1, Livingston teaches a search radiation section configured to radiate search light to a target object (838, Col. 5|14: “Referring to FIG. 2. the tracking system 10 of the present invention is shown integrated with a conventional imaging tracker 20 [search radiation section]. The conventional imaging tracker 20 may be employed with the tracking system 10 of the present invention to initially determine an approximate location of a targeted object.”); a laser radiation section configured to radiate a laser beam (Col. 3|39: “The system is implemented in conjunction with a laser weapon 12 [laser radiation section] to steer a laser beam 14 produced by the laser weapon into engagement with a target, such as the missile shown at 16.”); an image acquisition section configured to acquire a first image in which the target object is imaged and a second image in which an imaging range including the target object is imaged (Fig 1. 28 and 24, Col. 3|46: “Radiation 24 reflected from the hit spot, in combination with radiation 28 reflected from the missile, form an input cone of radiation, indicated generally at 30. As will now be described, the tracker of the present invention images both the missile 16 and the laser beam hit spot 20 in a manner that minimizes loss of missile information.”); a generation section configured to generate a generated image in which an influence by disturbance light is less than in the first image, based on the first image and the second image; and a radiation control section configured to control a direction in which the laser radiation section radiates the laser beam, based on the generated image (Fig 1. 28 and 24, Col. 3|49: “…the tracker of the present invention [while controlling the direction of the laser beam] images both the missile 16 and the laser beam hit spot 20 in a manner that minimizes loss of missile information.”), wherein a second intensity of the search light by which an image is formed in the second image is smaller than a first intensity of the search light by which an image is formed in the first image (Col. 4|57: “As shown in FIG. 4, images generated by the detector arrays 52, 72 are shown. The image generated, shown generally at 80, corresponds to the laser beam hit spot formed by laser beam radiation scattered from the missile target body. As shown, the image of the missile itself is below a detection threshold level and is therefore not imaged by the detector array 52. The filter 48 is preferably as narrow as possible, depending on laser stability, in order to reduce black body energy arising from hot metal of the missile body. Preferably, the narrow band optical filter is centered on the strongest laser line, if the laser has multiple lines. ”) Livingston does not explicitly teach the remaining limitations.
But Onal teaches and the generation section is configured to generate the generated image by, for a subtraction area that occupies at least a part of the first image, subtracting, from luminance values of pixels included in the subtraction area, luminance values of corresponding pixels of the second image corresponding to luminance values of the disturbance light included in the first image (¶87|2: “Specifically, NIR camera 500 may be configured to generate NIR image 502 that represents a portion of an environment illuminated by NIR light emitted by NIR illuminator 406, as well as NIR image 534 that represents the portion of the environment while it is not illuminated by the NIR light from NIR illuminator 406. Control circuitry 524 may be configured to detect retroreflectors within NIR image 502 based on a difference between (illuminated) NIR image 502 and (nonilluminated) NIR image 534. Specifically, image subtractor 528 may be configured to subtract NIR image 534 from NIR image 502, thereby generating difference image 530.”)
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 Livingston and Onal because subtracting luminance values between pixels of two different images of the same object allows one to detect and/or remove retroreflectors, blooming, or other artifacts from an image.
[**Examiner Note: currently listed PTO-892 references Fisher, Rutkiewicz, and Arar similarly teach pixel subtraction between images.]
As for Claim 5, which depends on Claim 1, Livingston teaches wherein the generation section is further configured to determine a part of the first image that includes an image of the target object as the subtraction area (Col. 5|28: “As a result, the detector array 72 detects the missile image 86, which is formed from a low-level radiation such as long wave infrared radiation, which is lower than the radiation forming the laser beam hit spot, which is typically medium wave infrared radiation. Thus, as shown in FIG. 2, the laser beam hit spot is limited in irradiance by action of the micro mirror array 66. The tracker polarization of the target radiation described above ensures that only radiation from the target is passed to the array 72.”)
As for Claim 6, which depends on Claim 5, Livingston teaches wherein the generation section is further configured to determine the subtraction area based on the direction in which the laser radiation section radiates the laser beam (Col. 4|57: “As shown in FIG. 4, images generated by the detector arrays 52, 72 are shown. The image generated, shown generally at 80, corresponds to the laser beam hit spot formed by laser beam radiation scattered from the missile target body. As shown, the image of the missile itself is below a detection threshold level and is therefore not imaged by the detector array 52. The filter 48 is preferably as narrow as possible, depending on laser stability, in order to reduce black body energy arising from hot metal of the missile body. Preferably, the narrow band optical filter is centered on the strongest laser line, if the laser has multiple lines. ”)
As for Claim 7, which depends on Claim 5, Livingston teaches wherein the generation section is further configured to determine an area that includes a pixel of the first image of which a brightness is higher than a criteria as the subtraction area (Col. 5|1: “It should be appreciated that the arrays 52, 72 are aligned, and the focal lengths of lenses 50, 70 are adjusted, such that a given pixel occupies the same relative position in all three arrays, as indicated at 82 in FIG. 4.”)
As for Claim 9, which depends on Claim 1, Livingston teaches wherein the laser beam has an intensity which is higher than the search light (Col. 5|28: “As a result, the detector array 72 detects the missile image 86, which is formed from a low-level radiation such as long wave infrared radiation, which is lower than the radiation forming the laser beam hit spot, which is typically medium wave infrared radiation.”) Claims 10-11 recite substantially the same subject matter as Claim 1 and stand rejected on the same basis accordingly.
+-_+_+_+-_+_+_+-_+_+_+-_+_+_+-_+_+_+-_+_+_+
+_+_+ Claims 2-3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Livingston and Onal in view of Uyeno et al. - U.S. Pub. 20220137395 +_+_+
As for Claim 2, which depends on Claim 1, Livingston and Onal do not explicitly teach all the claim elements.
But Uyeno teaches wherein the search light is laser light of which a wavelength range is a first band, wherein the image acquisition section comprises: a first imaging section configured to perform imaging of the first image in which the image is formed by light having a wavelength in a second band that includes the first band; and a second imaging section configured to perform imaging the second image in which the image is formed by light having a wavelength in a third band that does not include the first band, and wherein the generation section is further configured to generate the generated image based on the first image of which the imaging is performed by the first imaging section and the second image of which the imaging is performed by the second imaging section (Fig. 4 showing multi-wavelength target tracking system and Fig. 5, showing various wavelengths of the different beams of the image tracker, including overlapping and distinct wavelength bands. ¶38|1: “A LADAR detector 620 is configured to sense reflected laser energy at a sampling rate sufficient to detect the one or more pulses that illuminate the tracked target. LADAR detector 620 may be a single-pixel detector or a pixelated detector. Depending upon the configuration of the system, the detector can be a single narrowband detector, multiple narrowband detectors or a single multi-spectral detector. A single-pixel detector has the advantages of low SWaP-C, reduced processing and lower noise. A pixelated detector has the advantages of simplified receiver design, larger FOY, and verification of the steered laser beam position for closed-loop control.”)
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 Livingston and Onal with Uyeno a multispectral search and detection “has the advantages of simplified receiver design, larger FOY, and verification of the steered laser beam position for closed-loop control.” (Uyeno, ¶38|10)
As for Claim 3, which depends on Claim 1, Uyeno teaches wherein the search radiation section is further configured to: radiate, in a first period, the search light at the first intensity; and radiate, in a second period, no search light or the search light at the second intensity, and wherein the image acquisition section comprises an imaging section configured to: perform imaging of the first image in which the target object that is irradiated with the search light at the first intensity in the first period is imaged; and perform imaging of the second image in which the imaging range including the target object that is not irradiated with the search light or is irradiated with the search light at the second intensity in the second period is imaged (Fig. 4 showing multi-wavelength target tracking system and Fig. 5, showing various wavelengths of the different beams of the image tracker, including overlapping and distinct wavelength bands. ¶38|1: “A LADAR detector 620 is configured to sense reflected laser energy at a sampling rate sufficient to detect the one or more pulses that illuminate the tracked target. LADAR detector 620 may be a single-pixel detector or a pixelated detector. Depending upon the configuration of the system, the detector can be a single narrowband detector, multiple narrowband detectors or a single multi-spectral detector. A single-pixel detector has the advantages of low SWaP-C, reduced processing and lower noise. A pixelated detector has the advantages of simplified receiver design, larger FOY, and verification of the steered laser beam position for closed-loop control.”)
As for Claim 8, which depends on Claim 2, Uyeno teaches wherein: the image acquisition section further comprises a third imaging section configured to perform imaging of a third image in which light having a wavelength in a fourth band forms an image; the first band is between the third band and the fourth band on an axis of light wavelength; and the generation section is further configured to generate the generated image based on the third image of which imaging is performed by the third imaging section, in addition to the first image and the second image (Fig. 4 showing multi-wavelength target tracking system and Fig. 5, showing various wavelengths of the different beams of the image tracker, including overlapping and distinct wavelength bands. ¶38|1: “A LADAR detector 620 is configured to sense reflected laser energy at a sampling rate sufficient to detect the one or more pulses that illuminate the tracked target. LADAR detector 620 may be a single-pixel detector or a pixelated detector. Depending upon the configuration of the system, the detector can be a single narrowband detector, multiple narrowband detectors or a single multi-spectral detector. A single-pixel detector has the advantages of low SWaP-C, reduced processing and lower noise. A pixelated detector has the advantages of simplified receiver design, larger FOY, and verification of the steered laser beam position for closed-loop control.”)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 17 Mar 2026 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
Prosecution Insights