Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/038,764

DISTANCE INFORMATION ACQUISITION SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 25, 2023
Priority
Nov 27, 2020 — CN 202011361142.2 +2 more
Examiner
TRIVEDI, ATUL
Art Unit
3661
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Ningbo ABAX Sensing Electronic Technology Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allowance Rate
780 granted / 856 resolved
+39.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
881
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
77.2%
+37.2% vs TC avg
§102
5.0%
-35.0% vs TC avg
§112
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 856 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smits, US 2019/0302264 A1, in view of Beuschel, et al., US 2019/0277952 A1. As per Claim 1, Smits teaches a distance information acquisition system (¶¶ 35-37), include: a light source module (¶ 38), a receiving module (¶ 40) and a processing module (¶ 60; processor 202 of Figure 2); the light source module includes N groups of emission light with timing correlation (¶ 73), where N is an integer greater than or equal to 3 (¶¶ 32-33; between “one or more outgoing light beams” and “one or more incoming light beams”), and at least two groups of adjacent emission light include timing correlation in emission timing (¶¶ 89-90). Smits does not expressly teach: that the receiving module receives the returned light of N groups of emission light in the field of view and converts the returned light signal into electrical signal, where the N groups of emission light are emitted by the light source module; and that the processing module obtains a set of distance information of the detected object in the complete field of view according to the electrical signals converted by the N groups of emission light. Beuschel teaches: that the receiving module receives the returned light of N groups of emission light in the field of view and converts the returned light signal into electrical signal (¶ 45), where the N groups of emission light are emitted by the light source module (¶¶ 39-40; from “component DC”); and that the processing module obtains a set of distance information of the detected object in the complete field of view according to the electrical signals converted by the N groups of emission light (¶¶ 42, 45). At the time of the invention, a person of skill in the art would have thought it obvious to combine the lidar system of Smits with the electrical converter of Beuschel, in order to reduce the amount of memory space that must be used to store measurement data. As per Claim 2, Smits teaches that the N groups of emission light are at least divided into M emitting types of light, where M is an integer greater than or equal to 2, wherein there are at least 2 groups of emission light in at least one type of light (¶ 33; “one or more incoming light beams”), the at least 2 groups of emission light includes a first timing correlation in emission timing (¶ 103), the M emitting types of light include a second timing correlation in emission timing (¶ 100). As per Claim 3, Smits teaches that the N is 4 of the N groups of emission light with timing correlation (¶¶ 153-154; based on “second incoming light beam 672” and “second pulsed outgoing light beam 662” of Figure 6B). As per Claim 4, Smits teaches that the light emission time interval of the first timing correlation is less than or equal to the light emission time interval of the second timing correlation (¶ 151; “t.sub.2>t.sub.0”). As per Claim 5, Smits does not expressly teach that the light emission time interval of the first timing correlation further includes a quench time interval where the quench time interval is not more than 20% of the minimum duration of the N groups of emission light. Beuschel teaches that the light emission time interval of the first timing correlation further includes a quench time interval where the quench time interval is not more than 20% of the minimum duration of the N groups of emission light (¶ 43; based on “a time period that is much shorter than 1 ns”). See Claim 1 above for the rationale based on obviousness, motivations and reasons to combine. As per Claim 6, Smits teaches that the N groups of emission light with time correlation are all emission light spot clusters, where each spot cluster includes the same number of multiple discontinuous light spots (¶¶ 86-87; “a highly collimated ‘fine-tipped’ beam that produces a beam spot less than 10 millimeter (mm) in diameter”). As per Claim 7, Smits teaches that the receiving module includes SPAD array modules (¶¶ 33, 40, 51). As per Claim 8, Smits teaches that the processing module obtains at least two different time windows widths statistical results according to at least one group of emission light conversion signals output by the SPAD array module (¶¶ 151-154; based on “Δt.sub.0” and “Δt.sub.1”). As per Claim 9, Smits teaches that the processing module obtains the distance result information of the detected object in the field of view according to the at least two different time windows widths statistical results of the at least one group of emission light conversion signals (¶¶ 194-197). As per Claim 10, Smits does not expressly teach that the distance information acquisition system acquires not less than 30 groups distance information of the detected objects in a complete field of view, during at least part of the working time. However, in light of Beuschel’s teaching “that the evaluation circuit stores 100 to 150 measurements, preferably 130 measurements, for each light pulse” (¶ 26), and distance ranges of “a distance of 150 to 300 meters (¶ 25), it would have fallen within the range of routine optimization, under MPEP 2144.05 II.A., that the distance information acquisition system acquires not less than 30 groups distance information of the detected objects in a complete field of view, during at least part of the working time. See Claim 1 above for the rationale based on obviousness, motivations and reasons to combine. As per Claim 11, Smits teaches that at least two groups of emission light of at least one emitting type further include a third timing correlation in the emission timing (¶ 154; based on “t.sub.3”). As per Claim 12, Smits teaches that the light emission time interval of the third timing correlation is less than the light emission time interval of the first timing correlation (¶ 154; “t.sub.3>t.sub.1”). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ATUL TRIVEDI whose telephone number is (313)446-4908. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri; 9:00 AM-5:00 PM EST. 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, Peter Nolan can be reached at (571) 270-7016. 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. ATUL TRIVEDI Primary Examiner Art Unit 3661 /ATUL TRIVEDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3661
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 25, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12637098
Vehicle and Control Method Thereof
2y 2m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12637103
METHOD AND APPARATUS WITH AUTONOMOUS DRIVING DECISION LEARNING
2y 2m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12640038
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PREDICTING COLLISION PROBABILITIES ASSOCIATED WITH ROADWAY INTERSECTIONS
1y 7m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12617385
PREDICTION APPARATUS AND PREDICTION METHOD FOR AT LEAST ONE BRAKE SYSTEM COMPONENT OF A BRAKE SYSTEM OF A VEHICLE
2y 8m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12617412
SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR DETECTING ABNORMAL FOLLOWING VEHICLES
2y 2m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
91%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+8.5%)
1y 11m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 856 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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