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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Fig. 2 contains reference character 38, which is not mentioned in the description.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 9, line 19, “the collector branch of the first transistor 66” should read “the collector branch of the first transistor 68”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dolganov et al. (US 20230112690 A1), hereinafter Dolganov, in view of Beuschel et al. (US 20210156975 A1), hereinafter Beuschel.
Regarding claim 1, Dolganov teaches:
Optoelectronic sensor (10) for detecting and determining the distance of an object (24) in a monitoring area (26) ([0017] “FIG. 1 is a diagram of an example LIDAR system 100 described herein.”),
having a light emitter (12) which has a light source (16) and is intended for emitting at least one light pulse (20) ([0017] “The LIDAR system 100 may include a controller 102, a TDC 104, a laser driver 106, a laser 108 (e.g., a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL)), and a detector 110… The laser trigger signal may cause the laser driver 106 to provide an electrical pulse to the laser 108, thereby causing emission of an optical signal at the laser 108.”),
having a light receiver (36) for generating a received signal (40) from the light pulse (28) which is remitted or reflected by the object (24) ([0017] “The LIDAR system 100 may include a controller 102, a TDC 104, a laser driver 106, a laser 108 (e.g., a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL)), and a detector 110… As further shown, the detector 110 may detect a reflection of the optical signal from an object.”), and
having a control and evaluation unit (48) which is designed to control the light emitter (12) and to determine a time-of-flight of the light and, from this, to determine a distance of the object (24) from the sensor (10) ([0017] “The LIDAR system 100 may include a controller 102, a TDC 104, a laser driver 106, a laser 108 (e.g., a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL)), and a detector 110. As shown, the controller 102 may be configured to provide a laser trigger signal to the laser driver 106… The TDC 104 may determine a time interval between the start signal and the stop signal, which may be used to determine a distance of the object from the LIDAR system.”),
the control and evaluation unit (48) having a timing unit (54) which is set up to receive the received signal (40) and a trigger signal (62) and to determine the time-of-flight of the light from a time interval between the trigger signal (62) and the receive signal (40) ([0017] “The LIDAR system 100 may include a controller 102, a TDC 104, a laser driver 106, a laser 108 (e.g., a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL)), and a detector 110… Moreover, the laser driver 106 may provide a start signal (e.g., a feedback signal) to the TDC 104… Based on detecting the reflection, the detector 110 may provide a stop signal to the TDC 104. The TDC 104 may determine a time interval between the start signal and the stop signal, which may be used to determine a distance of the object from the LIDAR system.”),
characterised in that the sensor (10) has a trigger circuit (60) which is set up to pick up a voltage (UL) applied to the light source (16) of the light emitter (12) ([0043] “FIG. 5 is a diagram of an example driver circuit 500 described herein. In some implementations, the LIDAR system 100 may include the driver circuit 500.”; [0045] “… an anode of the optical emitter 508 may be connected to a drain of the switch 520, and the capacitively coupled voltage divider element 514 may be connected to a cathode of the optical emitter 408. In this way, current for an output signal at the signal output 512 is not wasted as the current is a portion of a main current for the optical emitter 508.”)
[…]
Dolganov does not explicitly teach:
and to output the trigger signal (62) when a magnitude of the picked-up voltage (UL) exceeds a predetermined threshold value (92) .
Beuschel, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
and to output the trigger signal (62) when a magnitude of the picked-up voltage (UL) exceeds a predetermined threshold value (92) (FIG. 2; [0033] “The output signal is fed, between the laser diodes L and the shunt resistor RL, to a comparator Comp where the output signal is compared with a reference voltage Vref. The start signal START is used in the receiving arrangement to measure the times of the photon events in relation to the light emission by means of a time-to-digital converter (TDC) and to accumulate these in a histogram H.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the lidar system of Dolganov with the threshold-based comparator of Beuschel to ensure that a start trigger is not erroneously triggered.
Regarding claim 2, Dolganov in view of Beuschel teaches the optoelectronic sensor of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the light emitter (12) comprises a light source driver (14) for supplying power to the light source (16) (Dolganov: FIG. 1; [0017] “The LIDAR system 100 may include a controller 102, a TDC 104, a laser driver 106, a laser 108 (e.g., a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL)), and a detector 110.”).
Regarding claim 3, Dolganov in view of Beuschel teaches the optoelectronic sensor of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the trigger circuit comprises a voltage divider (64) for picking up the voltage (UL) applied to the light source (16) of the light emitter (12) (Dolganov: [0045] “… an anode of the optical emitter 508 may be connected to a drain of the switch 520, and the capacitively coupled voltage divider element 514 may be connected to a cathode of the optical emitter 408. In this way, current for an output signal at the signal output 512 is not wasted as the current is a portion of a main current for the optical emitter 508.”).
Regarding claim 4, Dolganov in view of Beuschel teaches the optoelectronic sensor of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the voltage (UL) applied to the light source (16) of the light emitter (12) is picked up at a cathode of the light source (16) (Dolganov: [0045] “… an anode of the optical emitter 508 may be connected to a drain of the switch 520, and the capacitively coupled voltage divider element 514 may be connected to a cathode of the optical emitter 408. In this way, current for an output signal at the signal output 512 is not wasted as the current is a portion of a main current for the optical emitter 508.”).
Regarding claim 5, Dolganov in view of Beuschel teaches the optoelectronic sensor of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the trigger circuit (60) comprises a comparator for generating the trigger signal (62) (Beuschel: FIG. 2; [0033] “The output signal is fed, between the laser diodes L and the shunt resistor RL, to a comparator Comp where the output signal is compared with a reference voltage Vref. The start signal START is used in the receiving arrangement to measure the times of the photon events in relation to the light emission by means of a time-to-digital converter (TDC) and to accumulate these in a histogram H.”).
Claim(s) 1, 6-8, and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dolganov in view of Nankivil (US 4888477 A).
Regarding claim 1, Dolganov teaches:
Optoelectronic sensor (10) for detecting and determining the distance of an object (24) in a monitoring area (26) ([0017] “FIG. 1 is a diagram of an example LIDAR system 100 described herein.”),
having a light emitter (12) which has a light source (16) and is intended for emitting at least one light pulse (20) ([0017] “The LIDAR system 100 may include a controller 102, a TDC 104, a laser driver 106, a laser 108 (e.g., a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL)), and a detector 110… The laser trigger signal may cause the laser driver 106 to provide an electrical pulse to the laser 108, thereby causing emission of an optical signal at the laser 108.”),
having a light receiver (36) for generating a received signal (40) from the light pulse (28) which is remitted or reflected by the object (24) ([0017] “The LIDAR system 100 may include a controller 102, a TDC 104, a laser driver 106, a laser 108 (e.g., a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL)), and a detector 110… As further shown, the detector 110 may detect a reflection of the optical signal from an object.”), and
having a control and evaluation unit (48) which is designed to control the light emitter (12) and to determine a time-of-flight of the light and, from this, to determine a distance of the object (24) from the sensor (10) ([0017] “The LIDAR system 100 may include a controller 102, a TDC 104, a laser driver 106, a laser 108 (e.g., a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL)), and a detector 110. As shown, the controller 102 may be configured to provide a laser trigger signal to the laser driver 106… The TDC 104 may determine a time interval between the start signal and the stop signal, which may be used to determine a distance of the object from the LIDAR system.”),
the control and evaluation unit (48) having a timing unit (54) which is set up to receive the received signal (40) and a trigger signal (62) and to determine the time-of-flight of the light from a time interval between the trigger signal (62) and the receive signal (40) ([0017] “The LIDAR system 100 may include a controller 102, a TDC 104, a laser driver 106, a laser 108 (e.g., a vertical cavity surface emitting laser (VCSEL)), and a detector 110… Moreover, the laser driver 106 may provide a start signal (e.g., a feedback signal) to the TDC 104… Based on detecting the reflection, the detector 110 may provide a stop signal to the TDC 104. The TDC 104 may determine a time interval between the start signal and the stop signal, which may be used to determine a distance of the object from the LIDAR system.”),
characterised in that the sensor (10) has a trigger circuit (60) which is set up to pick up a voltage (UL) applied to the light source (16) of the light emitter (12) ([0043] “FIG. 5 is a diagram of an example driver circuit 500 described herein. In some implementations, the LIDAR system 100 may include the driver circuit 500.”; [0045] “… an anode of the optical emitter 508 may be connected to a drain of the switch 520, and the capacitively coupled voltage divider element 514 may be connected to a cathode of the optical emitter 408. In this way, current for an output signal at the signal output 512 is not wasted as the current is a portion of a main current for the optical emitter 508.”)
[…]
Dolganov does not explicitly teach:
and to output the trigger signal (62) when a magnitude of the picked-up voltage (UL) exceeds a predetermined threshold value (92) .
Nankivil, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the use of a one-shot multivibrator when generating the start trigger for a lidar device (FIG. 1; [Col. 2, Lines 21-35] The start pulse 21 triggers and ECL one-shot multivibrator 24 which generates a switch control pulse 26 of fixed duration. Note that “one-shot multivibrator” is another term for a monostable flip-flop.).
While the trigger of Nankivil originates from the laser driver, when combined with the invention of Dolganov, this trigger would be implemented based on the laser voltage, as described above.
Thus, Nankivil, in the combination, teaches:
and to output the trigger signal (62) when a magnitude of the picked-up voltage (UL) exceeds a predetermined threshold value (92) (Note that one-shot multivibrators inherently have some threshold value associated with them.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the lidar system of Dolganov with the one-shot multivibrator of Nankivil as one known and predictable choice for producing a trigger pulse for a timing circuit.
Regarding claim 6, Dolganov in view of Nankivil teaches the optoelectronic sensor of claim 1, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the trigger circuit (60) comprises a monostable flip-flop (66) for generating the trigger signal (62) (Nankivil: FIG. 1; [Col. 2, Lines 21-35] “The start pulse 21 triggers and ECL one-shot multivibrator 24 which generates a switch control pulse 26 of fixed duration.” Note that “one-shot multivibrator” is another term for a monostable flip-flop.).
Regarding claim 7, Dolganov in view of Nankivil teaches the optoelectronic sensor of claim 6, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the monostable flip-flop (66) is arranged to transfer a first transistor (68) of the monostable flip-flop (66) from a conductive state to a blocking state when the magnitude of the voltage (UL) applied to the light source (16) of the light emitter (12) exceeds a predetermined threshold (This limitation appears to describe the functionality of a basic monostable multivibrator. See, for example, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multivibrator accessed by the WaybackMachine dated 12/12/2021. In particular, the section “Monostable”: “For the circuit in Figure 2, in the stable state Q1 is turned off and Q2 is turned on. It is triggered by zero or negative input signal applied to Q2 base (with the same success it can be triggered by applying a positive input signal through a resistor to Q1 base). As a result, the circuit goes in State 1 described above. After elapsing the time, it returns to its stable initial state.” Note, “State 1 (Q1 is switched on, Q2 is switched off)”. Q2 of this description corresponds to the first transistor of the claimed invention.).
Regarding claim 8, Dolganov in view of Nankivil teaches the optoelectronic sensor of claim 7, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the trigger circuit (60) is arranged to generate the trigger signal (62) based on a collector voltage (UK) of the first transistor (68) (This limitation appears to describe the functionality of a basic monostable multivibrator. See, for example, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multivibrator accessed by the WaybackMachine dated 12/12/2021. In particular, the section “Monostable”: “Q2 collector voltage is the output of the circuit”. Q2 of this description corresponds to the first transistor of the claimed invention.).
Regarding claim 12, the trigger circuit of claim 12 is encompassed in scope by the optoelectronic sensor of claim 6, and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 13, Dolganov in view of Nankivil teaches the trigger circuit of claim 12, as described above, and further teaches:
wherein the trigger circuit (60) comprises a voltage divider (64) (Dolganov: [0045] “… an anode of the optical emitter 508 may be connected to a drain of the switch 520, and the capacitively coupled voltage divider element 514 may be connected to a cathode of the optical emitter 408. In this way, current for an output signal at the signal output 512 is not wasted as the current is a portion of a main current for the optical emitter 508.”).
Regarding claim 14, the trigger circuit of claim 14 is encompassed in scope by the optoelectronic sensor of claim 7, and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claim(s) 9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dolganov in view of Nankivil and further in view of Pham (US 5432466 A).
Regarding claim 9, Dolganov in view of Nankivil teaches the optoelectronic sensor of claim 7, as described above, but does not teach:
wherein a base-collector path (72) of the first transistor (68) comprises a series connection with a first diode (74) and a damping resistor (76) for preventing saturation of the first transistor (68).
Pham, in the related area of optimizing electronic circuits, teaches:
wherein a base-collector path (72) of the first transistor (68) comprises a series connection with a first diode (74) and a damping resistor (76) for preventing saturation of the first transistor (68) (Sole FIG.; [Col. 6, Lines 31-61] “Translator circuit 21 employs circuitry to prevent transistors of differential stage 24 and output stage 25 from going into hard saturation without using Schottky diodes. Resistors 61 and 62, and diode 63 prevent transistor 64 from saturating in the first non-saturating output drive stage of differential stage 24…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the multivibrator of Dolganov in view of Nankivil with the circuitry configuration of Pham to avoid saturation of the transistor.
Regarding claim 15, the trigger circuit of claim 15 is encompassed in scope by the optoelectronic sensor of claim 9, and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dolganov in view of Nankivil and further in view of Wikipedia (Shunt (electrical). Wikipedia. Retrieved from the internet: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shunt_(electrical)#Diodes_as_shunts. Retrieved via WaybackMachine dated 11/29/2021).
Regarding claim 10, Dolganov in view of Nankivil teaches the optoelectronic sensor of claim 7, as described above, but does not teach:
wherein a base-emitter path of the first transistor (68) comprises a second diode (78) for protecting the base-emitter path from negative voltages.
However, shunt diodes are a well-known technique in the art of electronic circuits. See, for example, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shunt_(electrical)#Diodes_as_shunts accessed by the WaybackMachine dated 11/29/2021 (“Where devices are vulnerable to reverse polarity of a signal or power supply, a diode may be used to protect the circuit.”). Thus teaching, when modified into the sensor of Dolganov in view of Nankivil:
wherein a base-emitter path of the first transistor (68) comprises a second diode (78) for protecting the base-emitter path from negative voltages.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the lidar system of Dolganov in view of Nankivil with a well-known shunt diode to prevent reverse polarity of a signal.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dolganov in view of Nankivil and further in view of Wikipedia (Capacitive Coupling. Wikipedia. Retrieved from the internet: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitive_coupling. Retrieved via WaybackMachine dated 12/06/2021).
Regarding claim 11, Dolganov in view of Nankivil teaches the optoelectronic sensor of claim 6, as described above, but does not teach:
wherein an AC coupling (80) is arranged downstream of the monostable flip-flop (66).
However, an AC coupling is a well-known and predictable optimization in the field of electronic circuits. See, for example, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitive_coupling accessed by the WaybackMachine dated 12/06/2021 ([Section "Use in analog circuits"]: “In analog circuits, a coupling capacitor is used to connect two circuits such that only the AC signal from the first circuit can pass through to the next while DC is blocked. This technique helps to isolate the DC bias settings of the two coupled circuits.”). Thus teaching, when modified into the sensor of Dolganov in view of Nankivil:
wherein an AC coupling (80) is arranged downstream of the monostable flip-flop (66).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the lidar system of Dolganov in view of Nankivil with the well-known and predictable AC coupling to isolate the DC bias between the trigger generating circuitry and the TDC.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN C. GRANT whose telephone number is (571)272-0402. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571)270-3603. 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.
/SEAN C. GRANT/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645