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 1-20 for examination. The Office rejects Claims 1-20 as detailed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1, 10, 19, and any corresponding dependent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The disclosure purports to reveal, at an abstract level, a system for determining cloud content and density through a relationship between the circular polarization (fourth Stokes parameter) and the multiple scattering ratio of refracted light from a cloud. However, there are no specific details outlining this relationship other than a generic graph illustrating the concept of how ice particles and water droplets could appear in distinct regions on a graph, or could be contained in a lookup table, etc. The Office finds no actual data, or detailed drawings, from a working system that might indicate or reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that applicant had possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing.
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 Ray et al. - U.S. Pub. 20210293659 - in view of Roy et al. - "Scattering Phase Function Depolarization Parameter Model and Its Application to Water Droplets Sizing Using Off-axis Lidar Measurements at Multiple Angles"; Appl. Opt. 57, 969-977; 2018 +_+_+
As for Claim 1, Ray teaches a light receiver system configured to receive reflected light from a cloud (¶2|1: “Some aircraft are equipped with Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) systems to measure cloud metrics, for example. An example of a compact, airborne LIDAR system is an optical ice detector (OID), which is intended to probe the airstream surrounding an aircraft to determine properties of the cloud atmosphere through which the aircraft is passing. The OID projects short pulses of laser light into the surrounding clouds and measures the backscatter as a function of the time-of-flight of a pulse to generate backscatter signals. Backscatter provides an estimate of a characteristic droplet or ice crystal size and the liquid and/or ice water content of the clouds.”) Although Ray teaches measuring the cloud phase using scatter information, it does not explicitly teach connecting it with light circular polarization (Fourth Stokes parameter) info.
But Roy teaches a cloud phase module operatively connected to the light receiver system and configured to calculate a fourth Stokes parameter and a multiple scattering ratio (MSR) parameter based on the reflected light, wherein the cloud phase module is configured to determine a phase of a cloud based on a relationship between the fourth Stokes parameter and the MSR parameter (P971: “3. D PARAMETER MEASUREMENT CONCEPT AND MC SIMULATIONS:
The fact that direct measurement of the depolarization parameter leads to information on droplet size [and cloud phase] is the concept’s backbone. To get this information, it is necessary to perform off-axis lidar measurements, as displayed in Fig. 7(a). …Using circular polarization, we make sure that the measurements are independent of the azimuthal angle. The use of MC to demonstrate scattering effects on depolarization by water clouds in the presence of multiple scattering is a powerful tool that has led to the Hu relationship [15], presently used for the analysis of the space lidar Caliop.”)
It 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 to combine Ray and Roy because being able to calculate cloud phase with fewer parameters results in simpler and faster calculations and less power and equipment needed.
As for Claim 2, which depends on Claim 1, Roy teaches wherein the cloud phase module is configured to use only the fourth Stokes parameter and the MSR parameter to determine the phase of the cloud (P971: “3. D PARAMETER MEASUREMENT CONCEPT AND MC SIMULATIONS:
The fact that direct measurement of the depolarization parameter leads to information on droplet size [and cloud phase] is the concept’s backbone. To get this information, it is necessary to perform off-axis lidar measurements, as displayed in Fig. 7(a). …Using circular polarization, we make sure that the measurements are independent of the azimuthal angle. The use of MC to demonstrate scattering effects on depolarization by water clouds in the presence of multiple scattering is a powerful tool that has led to the Hu relationship [15], presently used for the analysis of the space lidar Caliop.”)
As for Claim 3, which depends on Claim 1, Ray teaches wherein the light receiver system includes: at least one on-axis light channel that is configured to receive reflected light that is coincident and/or parallel with a light emission axis and output on-axis signals; and at least one off-axis light channel configured to receive off-axis reflected light that is not coincident and/or not parallel to the light emission axis and output off-axis signals (¶16|1: “FIG.1 is a schematic diagram of an embodiment of a cloud conditions measurement system for use in a wind tunnel. Cloud conditions measurement system 10 includes laser transmitter 12, on-axis receiver fiber 14, off-axis receiver fiber 16 and single collimation lens 18 (i.e., a collection/receiver lens).”)
As for Claim 4, which depends on Claim 3, Ray teaches wherein the MSR parameter is calculated by comparing on-axis signals from the at least one on-axis channel to off-axis signals from the at least one off-axis channel (¶16|1: “FIG.1 is a schematic diagram of an embodiment of a cloud conditions measurement system for use in a wind tunnel. Cloud conditions measurement system 10 includes laser transmitter 12, on-axis receiver fiber 14, off-axis receiver fiber 16 and single collimation lens 18 (i.e., a collection/receiver lens).”)
As for Claim 5, which depends on Claim 4, Roy teaches wherein the cloud phase module is configured to: plot one or more data points of fourth Stokes parameter vs. MSR parameter in a graph; and determine the phase of the cloud based on a location of the one or more data points on the graph (P972 Fig. 6)
As for Claim 6, which depends on Claim 5, Roy teaches wherein the cloud phase module is configured to reference data point location association information to determine the phase of the cloud, wherein the data point location association information is defined based on physical parameters of the light receiver system and/or one or more operating conditions (P971: “3. D PARAMETER MEASUREMENT CONCEPT AND MC SIMULATIONS: The fact that direct measurement of the depolarization parameter leads to information on droplet size [and cloud phase] is the concept’s backbone. To get this information, it is necessary to perform off-axis lidar measurements, as displayed in Fig. 7(a). …Using circular polarization, we make sure that the measurements are independent of the azimuthal angle. The use of MC to demonstrate scattering effects on depolarization by water clouds in the presence of multiple scattering is a powerful tool that has led to the Hu relationship [15], presently used for the analysis of the space lidar Caliop.”)
As for Claim 7, which depends on Claim 4, Roy teaches wherein the cloud phase module is configured to calculate the MSR parameter and reference a look up table based on the fourth Stokes parameter and the MSR parameter to determine the phase of the cloud (P970, Table 1).
As for Claim 8, which depends on Claim 7, Roy teaches wherein the cloud phase module is configured to reference the look up table additionally based on one or more operating conditions to determine the phase of the cloud (P973, water cloud characteristics: ….”)
As for Claim 9, which depends on Claim 1, Roy teaches further comprising a light emitter having a defined divergence (P972: “Laser: • beam divergence: 0.3 mrad”)
Claims 10-18 recite substantially the same subject matter as Claims 1-9, respectively, and stand rejected on the same basis accordingly.
Claims 19-20 recite substantially the same subject matter as Claims 1 and 3, respectively, and stand rejected on the same basis accordingly.
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