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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The applicant’s amendments/remarks dated 03/13/2026 have been received, entered, and fully considered. Claims 1, 4-5, 7, 12-13, 21, and 24 are amended. Claims 1-24 are currently pending and are under examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Taiwan on 09/05/2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the TW111133560 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunne (US 5,612,779) in view of SLOBODYANYUK (US 2017/0082737).
Regarding Claims 1 and 13, and broadly interpreted, Dunne discloses an optical radar and an optical signal pickup method for an optical radar (abstract, Fig. 1), comprising: an optical-signal receiving unit configured to receive a reflected light (optical signal receiving unit/photodetector, see col. 1 , line 15-25; Col. 2, lines 50-65), Fig. 1); and an optical-signal pickup unit coupled to the optical-signal receiving unit (22. Fig. 1), and comprising: a first optical-signal filtering circuit configured to filter out a first interference pulse (36 coupled to receiving section, Fig. 1) of the reflected light (Fig. 1), wherein the first interference pulse has a first interference voltage value higher than a reference voltage (discloses automatic/adaptive noise threshold (reference voltage level) circuit in the laser receiver. It monitors background noise and dynamically sets a reference/threshold voltage. Pulses exceeding this threshold (high amplitude ”first reference value” or noise) are handled as a potential valis signals while lower level noise is suppressed. This is amplitude based removal of strong interference pulses from reflected light).
Dunne is silent, but SLOBODYANYUK teaches an optical-signal filtering circuit coupled to the first optical-signal filtering circuit and configured to: generate a clock signal comprising a clock pulse; and filter out a second interference pulse that does not match the clock pulse in time point from the reflected light (abstract, para. [0018]-[0025], [0035-[0045])(discloses lidar system synchronized ‘system clock’/’universal clock signal’ to generate a timing/firing references(clock pulses/timeslots). Receivers validate returns against this synchronized timing to reject unsynchronized interference from lidar (second reference pulses that do not match the expected clock/timing point).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the amplitude based noise/threshold filtering (first stage: remove high voltage interference pulses disclosed in Dunne with the transmission synched clock/timing validation in ToF system)’s clock/temporal gating (second stage: remove timing-mismatched interference) taught in SLOBODYANYUK with a reasonable expectation of success because it provides better signal discrimination with no un expected results. Both references address the same problem of interference/noise suppression in optical receivers for reliable ToF measurement. Cascading amplitude thresholding and temporal clock matching was a predictable routine improvement for solar background, cross talk, and multi lidar interference.
Claim(s) 3 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Dunne in view of Jantzi et al. (doc. “Spatial and temporal domain filtering for underwater lidar”.
Regarding Claims 3 and 15, broadly interpreted, modified Dunne do not explicitly disclose, but Jantzi teaches an optical radar and an optical signal pickup method for an optical radar (abstract, section 1. Introduction) wherein the optical-signal receiving unit comprises: a photodiode (photomultiplier tube (PMT), Fig. 4) configured to sense the reflected light and output a reflected-light signal in response; and a first amplifier (variable gain amplifier, second column, page B14, ‘…The digitizer front-end includes a variable gain amplifier…’) coupled to the photodiode and configured to amplify the reflected-light signal.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical radar disclosed in modified Dunne with the photodiode and amplifier taught in Jantzi with a reasonable expectation of success for high-speed, sensitive, and linear detection of reflected light pulses. The photodiode and amplifier convert low-level optical signals into usable voltage signals rapidly, enabling accurate distance measurements with low noise, compact footprints, and high sensitivity to faint light returns.
Claim(s) 10 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Dunne in view of Druml et al. (US 2022/0018941).
Regarding Claims 10 and 22, an broadly interpreted, modified Dunne discloses an optical radar and an optical signal pickup method for an optical radar (abstract, Fig. 1), comprising: a reflected-light signal of the reflected light comprises a plurality of first reflected pulses (Fig. 1, col.2 line 18-39).
Modified Dunnes is silent, but Druml teaches an optical radar/Lidar comprises: a time-to-digital conversion unit (TDC) coupled to the optical-signal pickup unit and configured to obtain at least one time difference of the first reflected pulses (para. [0062]-[0063]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical radar disclosed in modified Dunne with the time-to-digital conversion unit (TDC) taught in Druml with a reasonable expectation of success because it converting laser pulse flight time into digital data, enabling detailed 3D mapping optical communication offering benefits like compact size, low power, high update rates, and cost-effectiveness.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4-5, 7-9,11-12, 14,16-17, 19-21, and 23-24 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
In regards to the foreign priority claim, the certified foreign priority document do not seem to be submitted. In regards to the applicant’s argument on page 1 of the remarks dated 03/13/2026, the document submitted on 12/07/2022 do not seem to be a certified priority document. The examiner still do not see the certified priority documents in the file wrapper and respectfully requests the applicant to submit the required documents.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 ASSRES H WOLDEMARYAM whose telephone number is (571)272-6607. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-5PM.
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, Joshua Huson can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
Assres H. Woldemaryam
Primary Examiner (Aeronautics and Astronautics)
Art Unit 3642
/ASSRES H WOLDEMARYAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights