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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in JP on 2022-09-16. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the JP2022-147845 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pochiraju (20130054187).
Referring to claims 1, 9, and 14, Pochiraju shows an optical sensing system (see figures 9-11) comprising:
a three-dimensional scanner configured to measure a distance to a measurement target by scanning the measurement target with a laser light and receiving reflected light of the laser light (see figure 9 note the scanner Ref 44 and 42), and
a scanning density determination circuit (see figure 9 Ref 46 also see paragraph 53) configured to dynamically determine a scanning density during scanning such that the scanning density increases as the distance to the distance measurement point increases or decreases as the luminance increases (see paragraph 57-58 also see figure 13 as compared to the variable speed method shown in figure 14) so as to suppress variation in a point cloud density caused by a length of the distance to the distance measurement point (see paragraph 57-58 also see figure 13 and 14).
Referring to claims 2, 10, and 15, Pochiraju shows wherein the scanning density determination circuit is further configured to determine the scanning density such that the distance to the distance measurement point and the scanning density have a positive correlation, or determines the scanning density such that the luminance and the scanning density have a negative correlation (see paragraph 57).
Referring to claims 3, 11, and 16, Pochiraju shows the scanning density determination circuit is further configured to:
determine the scanning density as a first scanning density when the distance to the distance measurement point is longer than a first distance or when the luminance is lower than a first luminance; and
determine the scanning density as a second scanning density lower than the first scanning density when the distance to the distance measurement point is shorter than the first distance or when the luminance is higher than the first luminance (see paragraph 57 and figure 13 compared to figure 14).
Referring to claim 5, Pochiraju shows when the three-dimensional scanner adopts a direct time of flight (dToF) method of irradiating the measurement target with a pulsed laser light,
the three-dimensional scanner increases or decreases a pulse period of the laser light with which the measurement target is irradiated based on the scanning density determined by the scanning density determination circuit (see paragraph 52).
Referring to claim 7, Pochiraju shows the three-dimensional scanner increases or decreases a scanning speed of the laser light with which the measurement target is irradiated based on the scanning density determined by the scanning density determination circuit (see paragraph 57 note the real time speed control of the scanner).
Referring to claims 8, 13, and 18, Pochiraju shows comprising a point cloud data generation circuit configured to generate point cloud data based on the distance measured by the three-dimensional scanner (see paragraph figure 14).
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pochiraju (20130054187) in view of Toyota (20230221444).
Referring to claim 6, Pochiraju shows the LIDAR device that is a traditional direct TOF system and fails to specifically show an FMCW system. Toyota shows a similar device that includes an FMCW LIDAR (see paragraph 88) and shows the three-dimensional scanner increases or decreases a sampling period of an intermediate frequency signal based on the scanning density determined by the scanning density determination circuit (see paragraph 89-92 note the adjustment of the resolution based on sampling period). It would have been obvious to include the specifics of how to increase or decrease measurement resolution as shown by Toyota to allow for the consistency of a point cloud as taught by Jeong in an FMCW LIDAR system because FMCW LIDAR is commonly used in vehicle borne systems as taught by both Jeong and Toyota.
Claim(s) 4, 12, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pochiraju (20130054187) in view of Jeong (KR1020200135246).
Referring to claims 4, 12, and 17, Pochiraju shows adjusting the scanning density relative to the distance to the target object, however, fails to specifically show a look up table with a corresponding relationship between the distance and the scanning density.
Jeong shows the scanning density determination circuit is further configured to determine the scanning density by referring to a scanning density determination table indicating a correspondence relationship between the distance to the distance measurement point and the scanning density or a correspondence relationship between the luminance and the scanning density (see paragraph 71-72). It would have been obvious to include a look up table because this is extremely well known to store correlated data and allows the processing device to perform less computation for each scan by simply looking up a corresponding scanning value needed for the detected range.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUKE D RATCLIFFE whose telephone number is (571)272-3110. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM EST.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/LUKE D RATCLIFFE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights