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
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 08/18/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1 and 11 are amended. Claims 7 and 17 remain cancelled. Claims 1-6, 8-16, and 18-22 are currently under examination.
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 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pristinski et al. (US 2017/0322401).
Regarding Claim 1, Pristinski discloses an optical receiving apparatus for preventing saturation of each cell comprising a pixel, wherein the optical receiving apparatus comprises:
a photodetector comprises a plurality of pixels, wherein each pixel of the plurality of pixels comprises a plurality of cells (sensing element/ microcells, para. [0039]), and wherein each cell of the plurality of cells is configured to convert a received optical signal into an electrical signal (68, Fig. 6) (Pristinski Explicitly teaches multi-pixel detectors, including silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs) that usually consists of tens or hundreds of individual sensing pixels/ cells, para. [0039); and
a beam homogenization prisms, wherein each of the plurality of homogenization prisms is associated with at least one pixel of the plurality of pixels, wherein each of the beam homogenization prisms is configured to receive an incident light beam and redistribute the incident light beam among the plurality of cells associated with the at least one pixel, and wherein each beam homogenization prism comprises an output surface facing the photodetector (A beam homogenization structure/prism (the guiding portion of the one piece optical element) is configure to receive an incident light beam and diffuse/ redistribute the intensity of the beam among the plurality of sales of the photo detector. This is done specifically to prevent individual detector pixels/cells from saturation while adjacent pixels remain far from saturation, thereby improving dynamic range and detection performance. The structure includes an output surface/exit facing the photo detector (para. [0036], para. [0061]).
Pristinski does not explicitly disclose a plurality of discrete beam homogenization units/prism, each corresponding to/associated with at least one individual pixel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention to implement the homogenization function of Pristinski using a plurality of discrete beam homogenization units/prisms, each associated with at least one pixel. Pristinski itself identifies the exact problem of non-uniform illumination using local cell/pixel saturation in multi-cell detectors and solve it via homogenization (para. [0025]). Discrete optical elements associated with individual pixels of SiPM/SPAD Multi cell arrays are conventional and well known for improving local light collection and illumination uniformity. Applying the homogenization principle of Pristinski at the individual pixel level is a predictable design choice that more precisely addresses intra-pixel non uniformity. The optical mechanism remains the same, only the spatial scale changes. One of ordinary kill in the art would have expected success with no teaching away.
Regarding Claim 21, method claim 21 is rejected under same rationale as the rejection of apparatus claim 1.
Claim(s) 2 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Pristinski et al. (US 2017/0322401) in view of Vanderwerf et al. (US 6,024,452)
Regarding Claim 2, modified Pristinski discloses a beam homogenization structure(the guiding portion of the one-piece optical element) that relies on internal reflection and configure to receive an incident light beam and diffuse/ redistribute the intensity of the beam among the plurality of sales of the photo detector (para. [0036], [0061]).
modified Pristinski is silent, but Vanderwerf teaches beam homogenizer in which a reflective coating is applied to the inner side surface of the surrounding structure to enhance reflection and homogenization of the light beam(see e.g. the embodiment with prism elements separated by an air space surrounded by a coated cylinder, col. 7, lines 36-53 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply a reflective coating to the side wall of a discrete homogenization prism of the modified Pristinski apparatus to improve diffusion efficiency of the incident light beam among the sales of the associated pixels with predictable results in no teaching away.
Regarding Claim 22, method claim 22 is rejected under same rationale as the rejection of apparatus claim 2.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Pristinski et al. (US 2017/0322401) in view of Badahdah et al. (US2014/0160784).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Pristinski do not explicitly disclose, but Badahdah teaches (figure 6, para. [0046]-[0047], ‘…the interface materials 503 and 505 provide adhesion between lens 502, diffuser 504 and light pipe 501’) the components of the beam homogenization unit are connected through bonding by using a photosensitive adhesive (503,505).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify components of each of the beam homogenization unit disclosed in modified Pristinski with the photosensitive adhesive connected bonding as taught in Badahdah with a reasonable expectation of success because it allows fast curing, precise alignment, and a strong, durable bond without the need for heat or mixing. This method provides a high-speed, automated assembly process that is ideal for creating a reliable seal with minimal shrinkage and good thermal stability.
Claim(s) 4-5 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Pristinski et al. (US 2017/0322401)in view of Ammar (US 2009/0223555).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Pristinski does not explicitly disclose, but Ammar teaches an optical receiving apparatus (see figure 4a and para. [0106]) the beam homogenization unit (83,85) further comprises a diffusion sheet (83), disposed before a light entrance surface of the beam homogenization kaleidoscope (=commonly a prism, 85); and the diffusion sheet is configured to diffuse and output the received incident light beam to the light-entrance surface of the beam homogenization prism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the beam homogenization prism modified Pristinski by placing a diffusion sheet before the light-entrance surface of a beam homogenization prism as taught in Ammar with great expectation of success because it improves optical performance by reducing hot spots, smoothing light intensity distribution, and stabilizing output uniformity against minor alignment shifts.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Pristinski does not explicitly disclose, but Ammar teaches (see figure 8, para. [0127]) the beam homogenization unit further comprises a microlens (Fresnel lens, 83), for each light-entrance surface of the beam homogenization unit; and the microlens (Fresnel lens, 83)is configured to converge the received incident light beam on the light-entrance surface of the beam homogenization prism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the beam homogenization prism modified Pristinski using a microlens on the light-entrance surface of a beam homogenization prism to converge light as taught in Ammar with great expectation of success because it provides precise control and high efficiency as well as it shapes the beam profile and improves uniformity.
Regarding Claim 8, modified Pristinski does not explicitly disclose, but Ammar teaches an optical receiving apparatus (Fig. 3, 4d-4e, para. [0097], [0109]) wherein two or more beam homogenization units of the plurality of beam homogenization units are embraced and fastened by using a mechanical part (128, 87).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to embrace and fasten the beam homogenization prisms of modified Pristinski with mechanical part as taught in Ammar with great expectation of success in order to physically secure the beam homogenization prisms.
Regarding Claim 9, modified Pristinski does not explicitly disclose, but Ammar teaches an optical receiving apparatus (Fig. 3, 3a, 4d-4e and 5a, para. [0112]) wherein the beam homogenization unit (85) corresponds to a plurality of pixels (multi-junction cells), and the plurality of beam homogenization units are a kaleidoscope (=commonly a prism, 85) without internal isolation and form a row layout or a column layout.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the plurality of the beam homogenization prisms of modified Pristinski by associating each beam homogenization prism with multiple pixels without internal isolation in flexible layouts (row, column, or irregular) as taught in Ammar with great expectation of success because it improves spatial blending, increases optical throughput, reduces diffraction artifacts, and simplifies manufacturing across complex optoelectronic or display surfaces.
Regarding Claim 10, modified Pristinski does not explicitly disclose, but Ammar teaches an optical receiving apparatus (Fig. 3, 3a, 4d-4e) wherein the light-emitting surface of the beam homogenization unit (85) has the same size as a photosensitive surface in the pixel 85 of the photodetector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the light-emitting surface of each beam homogenization prisms of modified Pristinski the same size as a photosensitive surface in the associated at least one pixel as taught in Ammar with great expectation of success in order to maximizes optical coupling efficiency, prevents light spillage into adjacent pixels to eliminate spatial cross-talk, and preserves high-resolution modulation in dense optoelectronic sensor arrays.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Pristinski et al. (US 2017/0322401) in view of Lerner et al. (US 2017/0176758).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Pristinski do not explicitly disclose, but Lerner teaches a rectangular beam homogenization prism (Fig. 1a, Fig. 4a, 4b; para. [0036], ‘…the collimated beam portions 418, 424 can be homogenized subsequently in a light pipe or integrating prism in order to provide a line, rectangular, or other shaped beam with a uniform intensity profile across one or more directions perpendicular to the direction of propagation…”).
From what is disclosed in Fig. 6 of the instant application:
PNG
media_image1.png
180
573
media_image1.png
Greyscale
tan
θ
2
=
d
2
L
1
→
L
1
=
d
(
2
tan
θ
2
)
For each (θ/2) angle of the uniform beam with a specific index of refraction for a given prism material, the claimed equation L ≥ d/(2 * tan(θ/2)) seem to hold for the entirety of the rectangular light guide or prism.
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 beam homogenization prism disclosed in modified Pristinski with the rectangular beam homogenization prism as taught in Lerner with the inherent minimum length required for a rectangular light pipe (homogenizing prism) with a reasonable expectation of success because it allows effective light homogenization through total internal reflection (TIR), a straightforward and reliable design, and its suitability for rectangular or square cross-sections, which can simplify system integration.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hennecke et al. (US 2021/0109199) and Pristinski et al. (US 2017/0322401).
Regarding Claim 11, Hennecke discloses a light detection and ranging system (para. [0024]), comprising a light source (10, Fig. 1), a scanner (MEMS mirror 12, Fig. 1), a receiving lens (42, Fig. 4, [Para. [0063]), an optical receiving apparatus (Fig. 4), wherein the light source is configured to output a laser beam (Fig. 1); the scanner is configured to perform scanning in a specified region (Fig. 1, Fig. 4); the receiving lens (42, Fig. 4) is configured to converge an echo optical signal reflected by an object (Fig. 4, [Para. [0063], [0065]) on the optical receiving apparatus.
Hennecke also discloses the optical receiving apparatus (Fig. 4), comprising a photodetector (15, Fig. 1, para. [0038]; 44, Fig. 4) and a beam homogenization unit (diffuser optics 55, para. [0079]), wherein the photodetector (44, Fig. 4) comprises a plurality of pixels (47-1 -47- 5, Fig. 4), each pixel of the plurality of pixels (e.g. 47-1, Fig. 4) comprises a plurality of cells (46, Fig. 4; 1, Fig. 2)), and each cell of the plurality of cells is configured to convert a received optical signal into an electrical signal (‘…Each square in the SiPM pixels 47-1 to 47-5 represents a microcell,…’, para. [0067]; Fig. 2; para. [0052]) and a beam homogenization unit is configured to correspond to at least one pixel of the photodetector and to diffuse a received incident light beam to a plurality of cells comprised in the corresponding at least one pixel(55, Fig. 5).
Pristinski also discloses an optical receiving apparatus for preventing saturation of each cell comprising a pixel, wherein the optical receiving apparatus comprises: a photodetector comprises a plurality of pixels, wherein each pixel of the plurality of pixels comprises a plurality of cells (sensing element/ microcells, para. [0039]), and wherein each cell of the plurality of cells is configured to convert a received optical signal into an electrical signal (68, Fig. 6) (Pristinski Explicitly teaches multi-pixel detectors, including silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs) that usually consists of tens or hundreds of individual sensing pixels/ cells, para. [0039); and
a beam homogenization prisms, wherein each of the plurality of homogenization prisms is associated with at least one pixel of the plurality of pixels, wherein each of the beam homogenization prisms is configured to receive an incident light beam and redistribute the incident light beam among the plurality of cells associated with the at least one pixel, and wherein each beam homogenization prism comprises an output surface facing the photodetector (A beam homogenization structure/prism (the guiding portion of the one piece optical element) is configure to receive an incident light beam and diffuse/ redistribute the intensity of the beam among the plurality of sales of the photo detector. This is done specifically to prevent individual detector pixels/cells from saturation while adjacent pixels remain far from saturation, thereby improving dynamic range and detection performance. The structure includes an output surface/exit facing the photo detector (para. [0036], para. [0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the optical receiving apparatus of the light detection and ranging system of Hennecke with the detailed optical receiving apparatus of Pristinski above with great expectation of success in order to detect a detection light as well as prevent saturation of each cell in multi-cell detectors and solve it via homogenization (Pristinski, para. [0025]).
Modified Hennecke does not explicitly disclose a plurality of discrete beam homogenization units/prism, each corresponding to/associated with at least one individual pixel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the invention to implement the homogenization function of modified Hennecke using a plurality of discrete beam homogenization units/prisms, each associated with at least one pixel. Pristinski itself identifies the exact problem of non-uniform illumination using local cell/pixel saturation in multi-cell detectors and solve it via homogenization (Pristinski para. [0025]. Discrete optical elements associated with individual pixels of SiPM/SPAD Multi cell arrays are conventional and well known for improving local light collection and illumination uniformity. Applying the homogenization principle of Pristinski at the individual pixel level is a predictable design choice that more precisely addresses intra-pixel non uniformity. The optical mechanism remains the same, only the spatial scale changes. One of ordinary kill in the art would have expected success with no teaching away.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Hennecke et al. (US 2021/0109199) in view of Vanderwerf et al. (US 6,024,452)
Regarding Claim 2, modified Hennecke discloses a beam homogenization structure(the guiding portion of the one-piece optical element) that relies on internal reflection and configure to receive an incident light beam and diffuse/ redistribute the intensity of the beam among the plurality of sales of the photo detector (Pristinski , para. [0036], [0061]).
Vanderwerf teaches beam homogenizer in which a reflective coating is applied to the inner side surface of the surrounding structure to enhance reflection and homogenization of the light beam(see e.g. the embodiment with prism elements separated by an air space surrounded by a coated cylinder, col. 7, lines 36-53 ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply a reflective coating to the side wall of a discrete homogenization prism of the modified Hennecke apparatus to improve diffusion efficiency of the incident light beam among the sales of the associated pixels with predictable results in no teaching away.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Hennecke et al. (US 2021/0109199) in view of Lerner et al. (US 2017/0176758).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Hennecke do not explicitly disclose, but Lerner teaches a rectangular beam homogenization prism (Fig. 1a, Fig. 4a, 4b; para. [0036], ‘…the collimated beam portions 418, 424 can be homogenized subsequently in a light pipe or integrating prism in order to provide a line, rectangular, or other shaped beam with a uniform intensity profile across one or more directions perpendicular to the direction of propagation…”).
From what is disclosed in Fig. 6 of the instant application:
PNG
media_image1.png
180
573
media_image1.png
Greyscale
tan
θ
2
=
d
2
L
1
→
L
1
=
d
(
2
tan
θ
2
)
For each (θ/2) angle of the uniform beam with a specific index of refraction for a given prism material, the claimed equation L ≥ d/(2 * tan(θ/2)) seem to hold for the entirety of the rectangular light guide or prism.
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 beam homogenization prism disclosed in modified Hennecke with the rectangular beam homogenization prism as taught in Lerner with the inherent minimum length required for a rectangular light pipe (homogenizing prism) with a reasonable expectation of success because it allows effective light homogenization through total internal reflection (TIR), a straightforward and reliable design, and its suitability for rectangular or square cross-sections, which can simplify system integration.
Claim(s) 14-15 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Hennecke et al. (US 2021/0109199) in view of Ammar (US 2009/0223555).
Regarding Claim 14, modified Hennecke does not explicitly disclose, but Ammar teaches an optical receiving apparatus (see figure 4a and para. [0106]) the beam homogenization unit (83,85) further comprises a diffusion sheet (83), disposed before a light entrance surface of the beam homogenization kaleidoscope (=commonly a prism, 85); and the diffusion sheet is configured to diffuse and output the received incident light beam to the light-entrance surface of the beam homogenization prism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the beam homogenization prism modified Hennecke by placing a diffusion sheet before the light-entrance surface of a beam homogenization prism as taught in Ammar with great expectation of success because it improves optical performance by reducing hot spots, smoothing light intensity distribution, and stabilizing output uniformity against minor alignment shifts.
Regarding Claim 15, modified Hennecke does not explicitly disclose, but Ammar teaches (see figure 8, para. [0127]) the beam homogenization unit further comprises a microlens (Fresnel lens, 83), for each light-entrance surface of the beam homogenization unit; and the microlens (Fresnel lens, 83)is configured to converge the received incident light beam on the light-entrance surface of the beam homogenization prism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the beam homogenization prism modified Hennecke using a microlens on the light-entrance surface of a beam homogenization prism to converge light as taught in Ammar with great expectation of success because it provides precise control and high efficiency as well as it shapes the beam profile and improves uniformity.
Regarding Claim 18, modified Hennecke does not explicitly disclose, but Ammar teaches an optical receiving apparatus (Fig. 3, 4d-4e, para. [0097], [0109]) wherein two or more beam homogenization units of the plurality of beam homogenization units are embraced and fastened by using a mechanical part (128, 87).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to embrace and fasten the beam homogenization prisms of modified Hennecke with mechanical part as taught in Ammar with great expectation of success in order to physically secure the beam homogenization prisms.
Regarding Claim 19, modified Hennecke does not explicitly disclose, but Ammar teaches an optical receiving apparatus (Fig. 3, 3a, 4d-4e and 5a, para. [0112]) wherein the beam homogenization unit (85) corresponds to a plurality of pixels (multi-junction cells), and the plurality of beam homogenization units are a kaleidoscope (=commonly a prism, 85) without internal isolation and form a row layout or a column layout.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the plurality of the beam homogenization prisms of modified Hennecke by associating each beam homogenization prism with multiple pixels without internal isolation in flexible layouts (row, column, or irregular) as taught in Ammar with great expectation of success because it improves spatial blending, increases optical throughput, reduces diffraction artifacts, and simplifies manufacturing across complex optoelectronic or display surfaces.
Regarding Claim 20, modified Hennecke does not explicitly disclose, but Ammar teaches an optical receiving apparatus (Fig. 3, 3a, 4d-4e) wherein the light-emitting surface of the beam homogenization unit (85) has the same size as a photosensitive surface in the pixel 85 of the photodetector.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the light-emitting surface of each beam homogenization prisms of modified Hennecke the same size as a photosensitive surface in the associated at least one pixel as taught in Ammar with great expectation of success in order to maximizes optical coupling efficiency, prevents light spillage into adjacent pixels to eliminate spatial cross-talk, and preserves high-resolution modulation in dense optoelectronic sensor arrays.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over modified Hennecke et al. (US 2021/0109199) in view of Badahdah et al. (US2014/0160784).
Regarding Claim 16, modified Hennecke do not explicitly disclose, but Badahdah teaches (figure 6, para. [0046]-[0047], ‘…the interface materials 503 and 505 provide adhesion between lens 502, diffuser 504 and light pipe 501’) the components of the beam homogenization unit are connected through bonding by using a photosensitive adhesive (503,505).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify components of each of the beam homogenization unit disclosed in modified Hennecke with the photosensitive adhesive connected bonding as taught in Badahdah with a reasonable expectation of success because it allows fast curing, precise alignment, and a strong, durable bond without the need for heat or mixing. This method provides a high-speed, automated assembly process that is ideal for creating a reliable seal with minimal shrinkage and good thermal stability.
Conclusion
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