Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 16 Mar 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Applicant presents Claims 1-19 for examination. The Office rejects Claims 1-19 as detailed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-9 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yao (U.S. Pub. 20190257927 IDS Ref.).
As for Claim 1, Yao teaches a switch configured to direct a switch signal to one of multiple different alternate waveguides such that the alternate waveguide to which the switch directs the switch signal receives the switch signal from the switch (¶40|19: ”The fiber directs the combined optical output [i.e., switch signal] to an optical switch or a semiconductor optical amplifier (SOA) which can be turned on and off rapidly by electrical pulses from a local oscillator (LO) circuitry. Using an SOA as the optical switch has the advantage of having both optical amplification and switching functions in one structure or device.”), the switch signal carrying multiple different channels (¶8|12: “The optical beamforming module includes a WDM demultiplexer that separates the combination optical beam [i.e., switch signal] into the different optical probe beams at the different WDM wavelengths, respectively, different optical waveguides or fiber lines coupled to receive the different optical probe beams at the different WDM wavelengths, respectively….”); and an optical grating configured to receive multiple different channel output signals, each of the different channel output signals including light from the switch signal and carrying a different one of the channels (¶40|16: “The WDM module can be implemented in various configurations, including, e.g., an arrayed waveguide grating (AWG), …or other suitable WDM technologies.”), the optical grating configured to output that channel output signals such that a direction that each of the channel output signals travels away from the optical grating changes in response to a change in the alternate waveguide to which the switch directs the switch signal (¶41|1: “The specific BFU example shown in FIG. 2A includes a wavelength-selective optical device that separates the received probe light from the fiber with different WDM wavelengths into different output probe beams at the different WDM wavelengths, respectively. For example, a diffraction grating may be one implementation of this wavelength- selective optical device for diffracting the probe light at the different WDM wavelengths into different output probe beams at different directions at the different WDM wavelengths, respectively.”)
As for Claim 2, which depends on Claim 1, Yao teaches wherein the optical grating is selected from a group consisting of a diffraction grating (Fig. 2A, showing a diffraction grating), holographic diffraction grating, and a digital planar holographic diffraction grating.
As for Claim 3, which depends on Claim 1, Yao teaches wherein the LIDAR system is configured to output multiple system output signals that each carries a different one of the channels, a direction that each of the system output signals travels away from the LIDAR system changes in response to changes in the alternate waveguide to which the switch directs the switch signal (¶41|5: “For example, a diffraction grating may be one implementation of this wavelength- selective optical device for diffracting the probe light at the different WDM wavelengths into different output probe beams at different directions at the different WDM wavelengths, respectively.”)
As for Claim 4, which depends on Claim 1, Yao teaches wherein the optical grating receives the different channel output signals from a lens and the lens is configured such that a direction that each of the channel output signals travels away from the lens changes in response to a change in the alternate waveguide to which the switch directs the switch signal (¶5|12: “…a motor engaged to cause the optical collimator [i.e., lens] and the optical diffraction grating to rotate together to scan the different optical probe beams at different beam directions and at the different WDM wavelengths for LiDAR sensing while maintaining optical alignment with each other that are aligned relative to each other….”)
As for Claim 5, which depends on Claim 1, Yao teaches further comprising a splitter configured to receive the switch signal from the alternate waveguide to which the switch directs the switch signal, the splitter being configured to divide the switch signal into the multiple different channel output signals (Fig. 9B, , ¶55|4: “A wavelength division demultiplexer is provided to split the received light into different optical signals at the different WDM wavelengths and this WDM can be made with AWG technology or other integrated optic technologies in implementations.”)
As for Claim 6, which depends on Claim 5, Yao teaches wherein the splitter is a demultiplexer (Fig. 9B, , ¶55|4: “A wavelength division demultiplexer is provided to split the received light into different optical signals at the different WDM wavelengths and this WDM can be made with AWG technology or other integrated optic technologies in implementations.”)
As for Claim 7, which depends on Claim 5, Yao teaches wherein an optical pathway that each of the channel output signals travels from the splitter to the optical grating passes through a lens (¶5|12: “…a motor engaged to cause the optical collimator [i.e., lens] and the optical diffraction grating to rotate together to scan the different optical probe beams at different beam directions and at the different WDM wavelengths for LiDAR sensing while maintaining optical alignment with each other that are aligned relative to each other….”)
As for Claim 8, which depends on Claim 7, Yao teaches wherein the channel output signals are each incident on a different region of the lens (Fig. 11A, showing different wavelengths incident on and refracting through lens at different angles.)
As for Claim 9, which depends on Claim 5, Yao teaches wherein the splitter includes multiple first splitter waveguides and multiple second splitter waveguides, the splitter configured to receive the switch signal on one of the first splitter waveguides, and the splitter configured to output the channel output signals on a portion of the second splitter waveguides (¶80|5: “The COEO in FIG. 16 includes a first waveguide formed on the substrate having a first end that is to receive a modulated optical signal from the optical modulator, and a second end that has an angled facet coupled to the micro-resonator via evanescent coupling, a second waveguide formed on the substrate and having a first end with an angled facet which is coupled to the micro-resonator via evanescent coupling, and a semiconductor photodetector formed on the substrate to receive and convert an optical output from the second waveguide into an electrical signal. ”)
As for Claim 16, which depends on Claim 9, Yao teaches wherein the splitter is a demultiplexer (Fig. 9B, , ¶55|4: “A wavelength division demultiplexer is provided to split the received light into different optical signals at the different WDM wavelengths and this WDM can be made with AWG technology or other integrated optic technologies in implementations.”)
As for Claim 17, which depends on Claim 1, Yao teaches wherein each of the channel output signals had a different angle of incidence on the optical grating (Fig. 2A showing different angles of incidence for each of the different wavelengths off the optical grating.)
As for Claim 18, which depends on Claim 1, Yao teaches wherein the optical grating has a dispersion between 0.05 degrees/nm and 0.2 degrees/nm (Fig. 2A, shows a diffraction grating reflecting any number (1 through n) of possible wavelengths at any number corresponding dispersion angles.)
Claim 19 recites substantially the same subject matter as Claim 1 and stands rejected on the same basis accordingly.
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 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao in view of Hosseini et al. (U.S. Pub. 20210318442).
As for Claim 10, which depends on Claim 9, Yao does not explicitly teach all the claim limitations.
But Hosseini teaches wherein the splitter includes at least 4 first splitter waveguides and at least 16 second splitter waveguides (¶35|1: “To address the packing limitation of the 2D array noted above an alternative arrangement such as that shown in FIG. 2(B) may be employed. As illustratively shown in that figure, a number of emitters elements including phase shifters and optical grating(s) are optically coupled to a tunable laser via a tree-based distribution network. Such an arrangement advantageously provides for both emission steering with phase and emission steering with wavelength.” The tree may be arranged in any format including branching in multiples of 4.)
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to combine Yao and Hosseini because arranging the splitter in a tree formation “advantageously provides for both emission steering with phase and emission steering with wavelength.” (Hosseini, ¶35|6)
As for Claim 11, which depends on Claim 10, Yao teaches wherein the system is configured to output system output signals that each includes light from a different one of the channel output signals and a field of view angle for the system output signals is greater than 20° and less than 60° (¶37|6: “The multiple lasers are oriented in the vertical plane (e.g., XZ pane) with a relatively even crossing angle to cover the pre-selected vertical FOY (e.g., 26.8 degrees) in the XZ plane and are rotated around Z axis to achieve the full 360-degree FOY for each of the multiple lasers.”)
As for Claim 12, which depends on Claim 9, Hosseini teaches wherein each of the second splitter waveguides terminates at a facet and a center-to-center distance between the facets is between 5 μm and 100 μm (¶35|1: “To address the packing limitation of the 2D array noted above an alternative arrangement such as that shown in FIG. 2(8) may be employed. As illustratively shown in that figure, a number of emitters elements including phase shifters and optical grating(s) are optically coupled to a tunable laser via a tree-based distribution network. Such an arrangement advantageously provides for both emission steering with phase and emission steering with wavelength.” Distance between facets is a function of the number of waveguides, which is not limited in the references and which would include any distance that is physically possible to manufacture at the time of filing.)
As for Claim 13, which depends on Claim 9, Hosseini teaches wherein the portion of the second splitter waveguides on which the channel output signals are output changes in response to a change in the first splitter waveguide that receives the switch signal (¶35|1: “To address the packing limitation of the 2D array noted above an alternative arrangement such as that shown in FIG. 2(8) may be employed. As illustratively shown in that figure, a number of emitters elements including phase shifters and optical grating(s) are optically coupled to a tunable laser via a tree-based distribution network. Such an arrangement advantageously provides for both emission steering with phase and emission steering with wavelength.” Changes in secondary level would be reflective of changes in a previous level.)
As for Claim 14, which depends on Claim 9, Hosseini teaches wherein the portion of the second splitter waveguides on which the channel output signals are output changes in response to a change in the alternate waveguide which receives the switch signal (¶35|1: “To address the packing limitation of the 2D array noted above an alternative arrangement such as that shown in FIG. 2(8) may be employed. As illustratively shown in that figure, a number of emitters elements including phase shifters and optical grating(s) are optically coupled to a tunable laser via a tree-based distribution network. Such an arrangement advantageously provides for both emission steering with phase and emission steering with wavelength.” Changes in secondary level would be reflective of changes in a previous level.)
As for Claim 15, which depends on Claim 9, Hosseini teaches wherein each of the alternate waveguides serves as one of the first splitter waveguides (¶80|5: “The COEO in FIG. 16 includes a first waveguide formed on the substrate having a first end that is to receive a modulated optical signal from the optical modulator, and a second end that has an angled facet coupled to the micro-resonator via evanescent coupling, a second waveguide formed on the substrate and having a first end with an angled facet which is coupled to the micro-resonator via evanescent coupling, and a semiconductor photodetector formed on the substrate to receive and convert an optical output from the second waveguide into an electrical signal. ”)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLINT THATCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-3588. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5:30pm ET and generally keeps a daily 2:30pm timeslot open for interviews.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant may call the examiner to set up a time or use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) system at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the 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