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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The crossed out references on the IDS are not considered because the publication dates listed on the IDS do not match the actual publication dates of the references. The reference the examiner assumes that was intended to be disclosed to Rakuljic is cited in the attached PTO-892.
Claim Objections
Claims 2 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In re. claims 2 and 12, the phrase “system an object” in line 3 is a grammatical error.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5-7 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 5-7 and 15-17, it is unclear if the multiple different subject data periods in line 3 of the claim is the same or in addition to the previously recited multiple different subject data periods.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sebastian (US 2015/0177367) in view of Satyan (US 2019/0025431).
In re. claim 1, Sebastian teaches a method of operating a LIDAR system, comprising: transmitting a system output signal (12) from the LIDAR system such that a sample region (10) is illuminated by the system output signal (fig. 1), during illumination of the sample region, the system output signal includes a check data period (phase angle module (245) and outlier analyzer (246) period of operation) (para [0044]) and multiple subject data periods (periods encompassing variety of optical frequencies) (para [0027]), a frequency of the system output signal changing at different rates during the subject data periods (frequency sweep can include sinusoidal, sawtooth, etc. patterns and can increase monotonically, linearly, and nonlinearly during the frequency pattern) (para [0027]); combining light (14) that returns to the LIDAR system from the system output signal (fig. 1) with light from a reference signal (light from the emitted signal (12)) (para [0030]) so as to generate a beating signal beating at a beat frequency (para [0030]); calculating a comparative beat frequency (estimate of beat frequency using phase angle versus time data (35)) (para [0044]-[0045]), the comparative beat frequency approximating a value of the beat frequency of the beating signal during the check data period (points on regression line (37)) (para [0045]), the comparative beat frequency being calculated using the beat frequency of the beating signal from multiple different subject data periods (time data of the combined frequencies, or beat frequencies, converted into the frequency domain for analysis) (para [0039]) (time data used in the phase angle module for the beat frequency estimate) (para [0044]).
Sebastian fails to disclose the reference signal including light that has not exited from the LIDAR system.
Satyan teaches the reference signal (from laser (110)) including light (light in local oscillator wave (125)) that has not exited from the LIDAR system (fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Sebastian to incorporate the teachings of Satyan to have the reference signal include light that has not exited from the LIDAR system, for the purpose of analyzing the emitted signal while reducing the possibility of external interference on the emitted signal.
In re. claims 2 and 12, Sebastian as modified by Satyan (see Sebastian) teach the comparative beat frequency is calculated such that the comparative beat frequency value matches the beat frequency during the check data period when the distance and/or radial velocity between the LIDAR system an object located in the sample region during the subject data periods matches the distance and/or radial velocity between the LIDAR system and the object during the check data period (points that match regression line (37)) (para [0048]).
In re. claims 3 and 13, Sebastian as modified by Satyan (see Sebastian) teach comparing a value of the comparative beat frequency with the value of the beat frequency of the beating signal during the check data period (via linear regression analysis (37)) (para [0048]).
In re. claims 4 and 14, Sebastian as modified by Satyan (see Sebastian) teach making a determination whether the comparative beat frequency is within a window of values, the window of values includes the value of the beat frequency of the beating signal during the check data period (values along the linear regression line (37)) (para [0048]).
In re. claims 5 and 15, Sebastian as modified by Satyan (see Sebastian) teach calculating candidate LIDAR data from the beat frequencies of the beating signal during the subject data periods (combined (beat) frequency used to determine range and/or velocity) (para [0053]), the candidate LIDAR data indicating a potential radial velocity and/or a potential distance between the LIDAR system and an object in the sample region (e.g. data (36) in figure 3D) (para [0048]); and classifying the candidate LIDAR data such that the candidate LIDAR data does not represent LIDAR data for the sample region in response to the comparative beat frequency being outside the window of values (does not fit to the linear regression line), the LIDAR data indicating a radial velocity and/or a distance between the LIDAR system and the object (combined (beat) frequency used to determine range and/or velocity) (para [0053]).
In re. claim 6 and 16, Sebastian as modified by Satyan (see Sebastian) teach calculating candidate LIDAR data from the beat frequencies of the beating signal during the subject data periods (combined (beat) frequency used to determine range and/or velocity) (para [0053]),, the candidate LIDAR data indicating a potential radial velocity and/or a potential distance between the LIDAR system and an object in the sample region (e.g. data on the regression line (37) in figure 3D) (para [0048]); and classifying the candidate LIDAR data such that the candidate LIDAR data represents LIDAR data for the sample region in response to the comparative beat frequency being within the window of values (fits the linear regression line), the LIDAR data indicating a radial velocity and/or a distance between the LIDAR system and the object (combined (beat) frequency used to determine range and/or velocity) (para [0053]).
In re. claims 7 and 17, Sebastian as modified by Satyan (see Sebastian) teach calculating LIDAR data (data points) from the beat frequency of the beating signal during multiple different subject data periods (periods of variety of optical frequencies) (para [0027]) (analysis iteratively performed) (para [0036]), the LIDAR data indicating a radial velocity and/or distance between the LIDAR system and an object in the sample region (combined (beat) frequency used to determine range and/or velocity) (para [0053]).
In re. claims 8 and 18, Sebastian as modified by Satyan (see Sebastian) teach the calculation of the LIDAR data excludes the beat frequency of the beating signal during the check data period (section of combined frequency can be removed and the analysis repeated) (para [0048]).
In re. claims 9 and 19, Sebastian as modified by Satyan (see Sebastian) teach the sample region is one of multiple different sample regions that are sequentially illuminated by the system output signal and further comprising: calculating the comparative beat frequency for each of the sample regions (optical frequencies in frequency sweep) (para [0027]), calculating the candidate LIDAR data for each of the different sample regions (spectral analysis for specified number of iterations) (para [0036]), the candidate LIDAR data for each of the sample regions being calculated from the beat frequency that results from illumination of the sample region during multiple different data periods (spectral analysis from combined frequency data in up-chirp and down-chirp), the candidate LIDAR data for each of the sample regions indicating a potential radial velocity and/or potential distance between the LIDAR system and an object located in the sample region (para [0053]), and LIDAR data for each of the sample regions indicating a radial velocity and/or a distance between the LIDAR system and an object located in the sample region (para [0053]); applying one or more check criteria (linear regression line (37)) (fig. (3D) to each of the comparative beat frequencies (phase angle of the beat frequencies) (para [0045]), in response to the application of the one or more check criteria to the comparative beat frequencies for each of the sample regions in a first portion of the sample regions providing a first result (on the linear regression line), classifying the candidate LIDAR data for the sample regions in the first portion of the sample regions such that the candidate LIDAR data for each of the sample regions in the first portion of the sample regions represents the LIDAR data for the sample regions in the first portion of the sample regions (data kept when not considered an outlier) (para [0048]-[0049]), and in response to the application of the one or more check criteria to the comparative beat frequencies for each of the sample regions in a second portion of the sample regions providing a second result (such as data points (36)), classifying the candidate LIDAR data for the sample regions in the second portion of the sample regions such that the candidate LIDAR data for each of the sample regions in the second portion of the sample regions does not represent the LIDAR data for the sample regions in the second portion of the sample regions (eliminated from the remaining time series data) (para [0048]).
In re. claims 10 and 20, Sebastian as modified by Satyan (see Sebastian) teach the method of claim 1, wherein the rate of change in the frequency of the system output signal during the check data periods is different from the rate of change in the frequency of the system output signal during a portion of the subject data periods (frequency sweep can include sinusoidal, sawtooth, etc. patterns and can increase monotonically, linearly, and nonlinearly during the frequency pattern) (para [0027]).
In re. claim 11, Sebastian teaches a system, comprising: a LIDAR system (100) configured to output a system output signal (12) such that a sample region (10) is illuminated by the system output signal (fig. 1), during illumination of the sample region, the system output signal includes a check data period (outlier analyzer (246) period of operation) (fig. 2) and multiple subject data periods (periods encompassing variety of optical frequencies including up-chirp and down-chirp) (para [0027]), a frequency of the system output signal changing at different rates during the subject data periods (continually increasing optical frequency or decreasing optical frequency) (para [0027]); the LIDAR system including a light-combining component (140) that combines light (14) that returns to the LIDAR system from the system output signal with light from a reference signal (light from the emitted signal (12)) (para [0030]) so as to generate a beating signal beating at a beat frequency (para [0030]); and electronics (fig. 2) configured to calculate a comparative beat frequency (estimate of beat frequency using phase angle versus time data (35)) (para [0044]-[0045]), the comparative beat frequency approximating a value of the beat frequency of the beating signal from the check data period (points on regression line (37)) (para [0045]), and the comparative beat frequency being calculated using the beat frequency of the beating signal from multiple different subject data periods (time data of the combined frequency converted into the frequency domain for analysis) (para [0039]) (time data used in the phase angle module for the beat frequency estimate) (para [0044]).
Sebastian fails to disclose the reference signal including light that has not exited from the LIDAR system.
Satyan teaches the reference signal (from laser (110)) including light (light in local oscillator wave (125)) that has not exited from the LIDAR system (fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified Sebastian to incorporate the teachings of Satyan to have the reference signal include light that has not exited from the LIDAR system, for the purpose of analyzing the emitted signal while reducing the possibility of external interference on the emitted signal.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher D. Hutchens whose telephone number is (571)270-5535. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached at 571-272-6909. 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.
/C.D.H./
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3647
/Christopher D Hutchens/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3647