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 Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13 currently recites “simultaneously impressing a current into the array of a plurality of laser diodes”
It should be amended to recite “simultaneously impressing a current into an array of a plurality of laser diodes”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Satyan et al. (US 12,038,511 B2).
Regarding Claim 1, Satyan discloses an optical measurement system comprising:
a device for emitting electromagnetic radiation, comprising a plurality of laser elements ([Col. 7, ll. 36-39] The LIDAR system 500 includes second CHDL 570, which is chirped in the opposite direction as the first CHDL 510).
an optical element, comprising a first waveguide and adapted to transmit a first partial beam of irradiated electromagnetic radiation ([Col. 7, ll. 38-46] The first and second CHDLs 510, 570 may be multiplexed by a beam combiner 575, the beams from the first and second CHDLs 510, 570 are combined and directed to the target 560) and to incouple a second partial beam of the electromagnetic radiation into the first waveguide at a first position ([Coil. 10, ll. 9-11] The laser beam (other than the fraction extracted for the LO) is output from the circulator… to form an output beam Examiner Note: The LO 125/525 path represents the internal waveguide carrying the second partial beam) and to outcouple the second partial beam from the first waveguide at a second position ([Col. 3, ll. 7-8] a LO wave and a reflected wave [are] incident on a photodetector Examiner Note: As shown in Fig. 5, the LO beam is outcoupled at the 2x1 coupler 545 to meet the reflected signal);
an array of a plurality of detectors ([Col. 7, ll. 46-49] The reflected beams from the target are separated by beam divider (using polarization or wavelength as appropriate) are directed to separate detectors 550, 585) wherein the first partial beam is reflected by an object and coherently superimposed with electromagnetic radiation outcoupled from the first waveguide, thereby obtaining a mixed signal, the mixed signal being detected by the plurality of detectors ([Col. 2, ll. 26-36] The reflected light exits the circulator 130 and is combined with the local oscillator wave 125 in a 2×1 coupler 145. The combined LO wave and the reflected light from the target are incident on a photodetector (PD) 150. The photodetector 150 provides an output current proportional to the incident optical power. The photodetector 150 effectively multiplies the amplitudes of the reflected light and the L wave to create a coherent “beat signal” whose frequency is directly proportional to the round-trip time delay to the target, and the range to the target is thus determined).
Regarding Claim 2, Satyan discloses that the optical element comprises a separate outcoupling device ([Col 2, ll. 17-18] The output of the CHDL 110 is divided into two components by a tap coupler 120) adapted to branch off the second partial beam ([Col 2, ll. 18-21] A small fraction is separated from the output to be used as a Local Oscillator (LO) wave 125. The majority (typically >90%) of the CHDL output power is directed to a target 160 via a circulator 130) and incouple the same into the first waveguide ([Col. 2, ll. 26-39] reflected light exits the circulator 130 and is combined with the local oscillator wave 125 in a 2×1 coupler 145… the optical paths between the CHDL, couplers, circulator and photodetector are optical fibers).
Regarding Claim 3, Satyan discloses a plurality of waveguide elements arranged in a beam path upstream of the detectors ([Col. 7, ll. 46-49] & [Col. 2, ll. 26-29] the reflected beams from the target are separated by beam divider… are directed to separate detectors 550, 585… The reflected light exits the circulator 130 and is combined with the local oscillator wave 125 in a 2x1 coupler 145) and adapted to feed the signals to be detected to the plurality of detectors ([Col. 15, ll. 4-6) The combined LO waves and the received light beams from the target are respectively incident on N photodetectors 1450).
Regarding Claim 4, Satyan discloses that the waveguide elements are single-mode waveguide elements ([Col. 12, ll. 25-30] A mode transformer may be used to transform a set of N0 closely spaced modes… by coupling each available mode into a respective single mode optical fiber).
Regarding Claim 5, Satyan discloses a second optical element ([Col. 2, ll. 20-21] The output of the CHDL 110 is divided into two components by a tap coupler 120. A small fraction is separated from the output to be used as a Local Oscillator (LO) wave) between the optical element and the plurality of waveguide elements ([Col. 2, ll. 17-29] The output of the CHDL 110 is divided into two components by a tap coupler 120… the reflected light exits the circulator 130 and is combined with the local oscillator wave 125 in a 2x1 coupler 145 Examiner Note: This creates a specific sequence: tap coupler -> circulator -> 2x1 coupler, satisfying the “between” limitation).
Regarding Claim 6, Satyan discloses a plurality of optical micro elements ([Col. 12, ll. 47-51] Each element of the microlens array 1030 then converts (further focuses) the spot incident on it, thereby creating a sparse array of smaller spots at an image plan 1135 of the MLA), each associated with a detector and arranged upstream thereof ([Col. 14, ll. 66-67]-[Col. 15, ll. 1-6.] The lens 1470 collects light reflected from the target (not shown) and forms the reflected light into N received light beams 1440. The received light beams separated from the output beams by the circulator 1430 and are combined with respective LO beams by N couplers or beamsplitters 1445. The combined LO waves and the received light beams from the target are respectively incident on N photodetectors 1450).
Regarding Claim 8, The optical measurement system according to claim 1, further comprising evaluation electronics adapted to determine a difference frequency between a frequency of the reflected radiation and the electromagnetic radiation outcoupled from the first waveguide ([Col. 3, ll. 2-15]. At any given time during the measurement interval T.sub.M, the frequency difference Δω between the output and reflected waves is given by: Δω=ξr… Δω can be determined by processing the output current from the photodetector).
Regarding Claim 9, Satyan discloses a modulation device adapted to modify a wavelength of the emitted electromagnetic radiation ([Col. 5, ll. 44-51] a frequency modulated laser 400 suitable for use in a high speed LIDAR system. The system includes a laser device 410 that is driven by a laser driver circuit 415 that controls the frequency of the laser output… the laser driver 415 controls the output frequency of the laser 410 by varying an electrical current provided to an input of the laser 410).
Regarding Claim 10, Satyan discloses that the modulation device comprises a current source and is adapted to modify a current intensity impressed into the laser diodes ([Col. 5, ll. 44-51] a frequency modulated laser 400 suitable for use in a high speed LIDAR system. The system includes a laser device 410 that is driven by a laser driver circuit 415 that controls the frequency of the laser output… the laser driver 415 controls the output frequency of the laser 410 by varying an electrical current provided to an input of the laser 410).
Regarding Claim 11, Satyan discloses that several of the plurality of laser diodes are capable of being controlled simultaneously ([Col. 7, ll. 19-31] The first improvement, as incorporated into the LIDAR system 500 of FIG. 5, is to use two CHDLs 510, 570 to simultaneously illuminate the same pixel on the target, with the frequencies of the CHDLs chirping in opposite directions… This enables the up and down measurements of FIG. 3 to be performed simultaneously).
Regarding Claim 12, Satyan discloses a LIDAR system, comprising the optical measurement system according to claim 1 ([Col. 7, ll. 18-19] the basic coherent LIDAR system of FIGS. 1, 2, and 3).
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satyan et al. (US 12,038,511 B2).
Regarding Claim 7, Satyan teaches that the optical element comprises an opaque region at the second position on the side facing the object ([Col. 8, ll. 56-60] A master-oscillator power-amplifier (MOPA) laser with a broad-area or flared/tapered amplifier can provide single-mode operation at high (i.e., greater than 10 W) output power on a single integrated semiconductor chip Examiner Note: it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the remaining surface of that semiconductor chip facet (the side facing the object) would be opaque to prevent stray light from entering the integrated waveguides).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Satyan et al. (US 12,038,511 B2) in view of Hai Vidal et al. (US 2023/0160681 A1).
Regarding Claim 13, Satyan teaches a method of operating the measurement system according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises:
simultaneously impressing a current into a laser diode, as a result of which electromagnetic radiation is respectively emitted ([Col. 5, ll. 44-51] a frequency modulated laser 400 suitable for use in a high-speed LIDAR system. The system includes a laser device 410 that is driven by a laser driver circuit 415 that controls the frequency of the laser output… the laser driver 415 controls the output frequency of the laser 410 by varying an electrical current provided to an input of the laser 410);
detecting a photocurrent by the detectors, thereby determining a detection signal ([Col 16, ll. 6-11] The output of the balanced detector 1610 is amplified using a transimpedance amplifier (TIA) 1615, digitized using an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) 1620, and the spectrum of the photocurrent signal is calculated by a Digital Signal Processor (DSP) 1625 using a Fourier transform); and
determining, from the detection signal, a positional relationship or a change in the positional relationship between an object which reflects the electromagnetic radiation and the device for emitting electromagnetic radiation ([Col. 16, ll. 48-50] The output of receiver array is typically two “images” (i.e., two values per pixel) corresponding to the depth map and the intensity of the reflections).
Satyan is not relied upon as teaching an array of a plurality of laser diodes.
However, Hai Vidal teaches an array of a plurality of laser diodes ([0181] utilizing a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL) array).
Satyan and Hai Vidal are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are both in the same field of coherent LiDAR. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the lasers of satyan to include the array of a plurality of laser diodes of Hai Vidal with a reasonable expectation of success. This modification would have been motivated by the desire to increase the 3D imaging rate and broaden the field of view without needing additional mechanical scanning parts. By integrating Hai Vidal’s teaching of a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL) array into Satyan’s coherent LiDAR system, the system can simultaneously capture depth data for a large number of pixels across a scene. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that using a VCSEL array in a coherent detection system would yield the predictable result of a high-resolution LiDAR capable of high-speed data acquisition.
Regarding Claim 14, Satyan teaches that the detection signal is a periodic signal from which a difference is determined between a frequency of electromagnetic radiation emitted by the laser diode and the frequency of the electromagnetic radiation reflected by the object ([Col. 3, ll. 2-15]. At any given time during the measurement interval T.sub.M, the frequency difference Δω between the output and reflected waves is given by: Δω=ξr… Δω can be determined by processing the output current from the photodetector).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVAN H HAUT whose telephone number is (571)272-7927. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-3pm 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, Helal Algahaim can be reached at (571) 272-9358. 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.
/E.H.H./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645