Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/036,495

VERIFICATION OF THE OPERABILITY OF A LASER SCANNER

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
May 11, 2023
Examiner
HELLNER, MARK
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
VALEO SCHALTER UND SENSOREN GMBH
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allow Rate
1339 granted / 1477 resolved
+38.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
1515
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
42.2%
+2.2% vs TC avg
§102
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
§112
13.6%
-26.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1477 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement filed 5/11/2023 has been considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings filed 5/11/2023 are approved by the examiner. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Headings for the major subsection and paragraph numbers are required. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because it recites “…A computer program product having instructions which cause a laser scanner device as claimed in claim 6 to carry out a method for checking the function of the laser scanner device…”; thus, being directed an algorithm. The MPEP 2106.04 (a)(1) sets forth the following example of a claim that does not recited an abstract idea: v. a method for loading BIOS into a local computer system which has a system processor and volatile memory and non-volatile memory, the method comprising the steps of: responding to powering up of the local computer system by requesting from a memory location remote from the local computer system the transfer to and storage in the volatile memory of the local computer system of BIOS configured for effective use of the local computer system, transferring and storing such BIOS, and transferring control of the local computer system to such BIOS Therefore, amending the preamble of claim 12 to: “…A non-volatile memory including an information processing program configured having instructions which cause a laser scanner device as claimed in claim 6 to carry out a method for checking the function of the laser scanner device…” would overcome the rejection of claim 12. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-11 are allowed. Claim 12 would be allowable, if amended to overcome its rejection under 35 USC 101. Closest prior art cited by the examiner: Puskul (DE 102018110566 A1). Zecchini et al (United States Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0189977). By way of example, with respect to the cited prior art, claim 6 recites: A laser scanner device [ taught by figure 7 of Puskul or Figure 3C of Zecchini et al ] having a computing unit [ figure 1 of Zecchini et al discloses an application processor ] and a laser scanner [ Zecchini et al discloses a light scanning device (108) or Puskol discloses a deflection mirror (26) ], wherein: the laser scanner has a housing with a light-transmissive window [ shown schematically by either figure 3C of Zecchini et al or figure 7 of Puskol ], a transmitter unit for emitting laser signals which is arranged within the housing [ taught by element (102) of Zecchini et al or element (22) of Puskol ], a control unit, a movable deflection unit for deflecting the laser signals [ taught by element (108) of Zecchini et al or deflection element (26) of Puskol ], and a detector unit arranged within the housing [ taught by element (352) of Zecchini et al or element (24) of Puskol ]; the control unit is configured to drive the transmitter unit such that the transmitter unit transmits at least one test signal during a test phase [ figure 3C shows the test signal generate by scanning outside the angular range of the window or figure 7 of Puskol shows generating a test signal by angular scanning outside of the window ], and to drive the deflection unit in such a way that the deflection unit is aligned vis-à-vis the transmitter unit during the test phase so that the at least one test signal is not directed at the window [ taught by the test scanning arrangements show by either figure 3C of Zecchini et al or figure 7 of Puskol ]; wherein characterized in that the detector unit has at least two optical detectors which are configured to record components of the at least one test signal and to generate at least two detector signals on the basis of the detected components [ both figures 3C of Zecchini et al and figure 7 of Puskol show optical detectors ]; and the computing unit is configured to determine a pulse width for each of the at least two detector signals and to calculate a sum of the determined pulse widths and to check a functionality of the transmitter unit and/or detector unit on the basis of the sum. The cited prior art, taken alone or in combination, does not teach or suggest the computing unit is configured to determine a pulse width for each of the at least two detector signals and to calculate a sum of the determined pulse widths and to check a functionality of the transmitter unit and/or detector unit on the basis of the sum. Therefore, claims 1-11 are allowable and claim 12 would be allowable. Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to MARK HELLNER at telephone number (571)272-6981. Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. /MARK HELLNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 11, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601925
VIRTUAL IMAGE DISPLAY OPTICAL ARCHITECTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597754
PREDICTIVE CONTROL OF A PULSED LIGHT BEAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586976
TUNABLE MICROCHIP LASER AND LASER SYSTEM FOR RANGING APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586973
RARE EARTH DOPED FIBER AND FIBER OPTIC AMPLIFIER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578467
LIGHT DETECTION AND RANGING (LiDAR)-BASED INSPECTION DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
91%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+8.2%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1477 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