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 § 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.
Claims 8-9 and any corresponding dependent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 8 and 9 recite "…wherein lens arrays for mapping the respective one of said areas of the array of spatial light modulator elements versus the center of the detector.”
The meaning of the claims is unclear.
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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LaChapelle et al. - U.S. Pub. 20200256960 - in view of Gagne et al. - U.S. Pat. 10976415 +_+_+
As for Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches a transmission unit with a sequential or simultaneous pulse or burst illumination source (Fig. 11, Light Source 110, ¶88|3: “In particular embodiments, a lidar system 100 may include (i) a light source 110 that emits pulses of light….”), a receiver unit comprising: a receiving optics (Fig. 11, receiver 140, mirror 420, lens 430, ¶88), multiple detectors for detection of received illumination light and feed of respective detection channels (Fig. 11, detector array 500, ¶88), a dense array of equal spatial light modulator elements being arranged in a focal plane of the receiving optics between the receiving optics and the detectors, whereby: the spatial light modulator elements provide a first spatial modulation state and a second spatial modulation state each, the two states differing in light redirection, and the array of spatial light modulator elements and the detectors are arranged such that only in the first modulation state light from the receiving optics is redirected via a respective spatial light modulator element in a targeted manner towards a detector [i.e., a DMD] (Fig. 11, DMD 400, ¶89|1: “In particular embodiments, a receiver 140 of a lidar system 100 may include (i) a digital micromirror device (DMD) 400 and (ii) a detector array 500. A DMD 400, which may be referred to as a spatial light modulator (SLM), may include a two-dimensional array of electrically addressable micromirrors 402. A portion of the micromirrors 402 may be set to an active-on state to direct a received pulse of light to the detector array 500.”), an evaluation electronics for evaluation of signals of respective detection channels for distance determination based on the principle of time of flight (¶88|14: “Additionally or alternatively, the processor may determine the distance D from the lidar system 100 to the target 130 based at least in part on a round-trip time for an emitted pulse of light to travel from the lidar system to the target 130 and back to the lidar system 100.”) LaChapelle does not explicitly teach the remaining elements.
But Gagne teaches wherein the receiver unit comprises a dense array of optical wedges in between the array of spatial light modulator elements and the detectors, whereby: the wedges are juxtaposed with respect to the focal plane, each wedge covers a different area of the array of spatial light modulator elements and their refractive planes are differently oriented, such that light coming from spatial light modulator elements in the first modulation state is refracted area-wise in different refraction directions (Fig. 7, wedge arrays 705 - 720, Col. 10|3: “ In one embodiment, each set of optics includes a wedge pair to reduce the decenter of each optical beam and the separation between the four optical beams. The inner wedge pairs 710 and 715 may have wedge angles to reduce the pitch of the inner optical beams by a particular distance. The outer wedge pairs 705 and 720 may have larger wedge angles to reduce the pitch of the outer optical beams by a larger distance than the inner wedges. The larger wedge angles of the outer wedge pairs 705 and 720 may provide for similar spacing between each of the optical beams at the output lens. It should be noted that optical system 700 may be extended to any number of optical sources as well as any combination of optics to reduce the pitch of the optical sources in focal space. As additional optical sources are added in parallel, the wedge angles of the optics for the additional sources may be increased accordingly as they are further from center.” That is, the reference teaches that wedge prism arrays may be layered throughout a series of optical elements to focus or disperse rays from a previous layer.)
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 LaChapelle and Gagne because DMDs are limited in the angles in which they can reflect rays toward or away from detectors, and adding a prism wedge array after a DMD element can effectively and cheaply, and with limited size and space impact, increase the dispersal range of the DMD.
As for Claim 2, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein the dense array of spatial light modulator elements is embodied as a digital micromirror device (Fig. 11, DMD 400, ¶89|1: “In particular embodiments, a receiver 140 of a lidar system 100 may include (i) a digital micromirror device (DMD) 400 and (ii) a detector array 500. A DMD 400, which may be referred to as a spatial light modulator (SLM), may include a two-dimensional array of electrically addressable micromirrors 402. A portion of the micromirrors 402 may be set to an active-on state to direct a received pulse of light to the detector array 500.”)
As for Claim 3, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein the detectors are spatially separated from each other according to a respective refraction direction each such that light of a respective modulator area is receivable by a respective detector (Fig. 11, Receiver 140, triggered detectors of detector array 500 are mapped to specific areas of the DMD.)
As for Claim 4, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein the illumination is in the wavelength range between 1000nm and 2000nm, in particular has a wavelength of 1064nm, 1310nm or 1550nm (¶87|15: “As another example, a light source 110 may emit pulses of light having a wavelength of approximately 905 nm, 1400 nm, 1480 nm, 1505 nm, 1530 nm, 1550 nm, 1555 nm, 1600 nm, or any other suitable wavelength.”)
As for Claim 5, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein a respective detector is embodied as an avalanche photo diode (¶44|17: “As another example, receiver 140 may include one or more avalanche photodiodes (APDs) or one or more single-photon avalanche diodes (SPADs).”)
As for Claim 6, which depends on Claim 1, Gagne teaches wherein a respective detector has an electronic bandwidth of at least 100 MHz, in particular at least 1 GHz (Col. 7|15: “ In general, the highest frequency that can be processed is one-half of the sampling frequency (i.e., the “Nyquist limit”). In one example, and without limitation, if the sampling frequency of the ADC is 1 gigahertz, then the highest beat frequency that can be processed without aliasing (ΔfRmax) is 500 megahertz.”)
As for Claim 7, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein a photo sensitive area of a respective detector is substantially covering the same field of view as a respective one of said areas of the array of spatial light modulator elements (Fig. 11, Receiver 140, triggered detectors of detector array 500 are mapped to specific areas of the DMD.)
As for Claim 8, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein lens arrays for mapping the respective one of said areas of the array of spatial light modulator elements versus the center of the detector (Fig. 11, Receiver 140, triggered detectors of detector array 500 are mapped to specific areas of the DMD.)
As for Claim 9, which depends on Claim 6, LaChapelle teaches wherein lens arrays for mapping the respective one of said areas of the array of spatial light modulator elements versus the center of the detector (Fig. 11, Receiver 140, triggered detectors of detector array 500 are mapped to specific areas of the DMD.)
As for Claim 10, which depends on Claim 8, LaChapelle teaches wherein a photosensitive area of a respective detector is at least ten times smaller than the respective area of the array of spatial light modulator elements, in particular whereby the photosensitive area has a diameter of 350μm at most (¶44|35: “An active region may have any suitable size or diameter, such as for example, a diameter of approximately 10 μm, 25 μm, 50 μm, 80 μm, 100 μm, 200 μm, 500 μm, 1 mm, 2 mm, or 5 mm.”)
As for Claim 11, which depends on Claim 1, Gagne teaches wherein the array of optical wedges is the first optical element in the light path between the array of spatial light modulator elements and the detectors (Fig. 7, wedge arrays 705 - 720, Col. 10|3: “ In one embodiment, each set of optics includes a wedge pair to reduce the decenter of each optical beam and the separation between the four optical beams. The inner wedge pairs 710 and 715 may have wedge angles to reduce the pitch of the inner optical beams by a particular distance. The outer wedge pairs 705 and 720 may have larger wedge angles to reduce the pitch of the outer optical beams by a larger distance than the inner wedges. The larger wedge angles of the outer wedge pairs 705 and 720 may provide for similar spacing between each of the optical beams at the output lens. It should be noted that optical system 700 may be extended to any number of optical sources as well as any combination of optics to reduce the pitch of the optical sources in focal space. As additional optical sources are added in parallel, the wedge angles of the optics for the additional sources may be increased accordingly as they are further from center.” That is, the reference teaches that wedge prism arrays may be layered throughout a series of optical elements to focus or disperse rays from a previous layer.)
As for Claim 12, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein the device comprises a camera with an image sensor, whereby in the second modulation state a respective spatial light modulator element directs light from the receiving optics to the image sensor (¶127|1: “FIG. 21 illustrates an example receiver 140 that includes a digital micromirror device (DMD) 400, a detector array 500, and a camera 600.”)
As for Claim 13, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein the device comprises means for light absorption, in particular a beam dump, for absorbing light redirected by a spatial light modulator element in the second modulation state and/or a further modulation state (Fig. 11, Receiver 140, triggered detectors of detector array 500 are mapped to specific areas of the DMD.)
As for Claim 14, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein multiple detection channels are arranged parallel and the evaluation electronics is configured for parallel distance determination (¶166|20: “In certain circumstances, multitasking or parallel processing operations may be performed. ”)
As for Claim 15, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein all detection channels are arranged parallel and the evaluation electronics is configured for parallel distance determination (¶166|20: “In certain circumstances, multitasking or parallel processing operations may be performed. ”)
As for Claim 16, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein the transmission unit comprises means for emitting the illumination in form of multiple light fans spaced to each other and oriented in accordance to lines of the modulator elements (¶37|1: “In particular embodiments, lidar system 100 may include a scanner 120 configured to scan an output beam 125 across a field of regard of the lidar system 100. As an example, scanner 120 may include one or more scanning mirrors configured to pivot, rotate, oscillate, or move in an angular manner about one or more rotation axes. The output beam 125 may be reflected by a scanning mirror, and as the scanning mirror pivots or rotates, the reflected output beam 125 may be scanned in a corresponding angular manner.”)
As for Claim 17, which depends on Claim 16, LaChapelle teaches whereby the means for emitting the illumination comprise one or more of: a grating or diffractive optical element, multiple line lasers, arrays of VCSELs (¶81|8: “The seed laser diode 350 (which may be referred to as a seed laser or a master oscillator) may include any suitable type of laser diode, such as for example, a Fabry-Perot laser diode, a quantum well laser, a DBR laser, a DFB laser, a VCSEL, or a quantum dot laser diode. A SOA 360 (which may be referred to as a semiconductor amplifier, a semiconductor waveguide amplifier, or a power amplifier) may include a semiconductor optical waveguide that receives seed light from the seed laser diode 350 and amplifies the seed light as it propagates through the optical waveguide.”)
As for Claim 18, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein the receiving optics and the array of spatial light modulator elements define a field of view of at most 40°x21° (¶40|15: “In particular embodiments, lidar system 100 may have a FOR of approximately 10°, 20°, 40°, 60°, 120°, 360°, or any other suitable FOR.”)
As for Claim 19, which depends on Claim 1, LaChapelle teaches wherein the receiving optics and the array of spatial light modulator elements define a field of view of at most 20°x10.5° (¶40|15: “In particular embodiments, lidar system 100 may have a FOR of approximately 10°, 20°, 40°, 60°, 120°, 360°, or any other suitable FOR.”)
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