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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 05/25/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-12 remain pending. Applicant’s amendment to the claims overcome each and every 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of Claims 1-12.
Applicant’s amendment to the preamble Claim 1 integrates the judicial exception into a practical application by supplying specific position details to the first and second scanning apparatus and the relation between the first and second scanning apparatus, thus amendment overcomes the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection of Claims 1-12.
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, 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, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant amended Claim 1 to detail “a preset range of the first distance”. The specifications details in [0006] and [0071]-[0076] that the rotation angle of the first scanning apparatus is preset rotation range, but it does not disclose the first distance as being within a preset distance range. Thus the specification does not reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the first distance is within a preset distance range.
Claims 2-12 are rejected due to dependence on Claim 1.
Examiner’s Note
Claims 1-12 are not rejected under a prior art rejection (35 U.S.C. 102 or 35 U.S.C. 103).
Zhao (US20200191972) teaches a method for determining the position of LIDAR sensors based on the LIDAR sensor information in [0054]-[0062] and Figures 7-8.
Liu (CN113506376A) teaches a point cloud stitching ICP method that is based on a geometric model in [n0206].
Chun (KR20190080022A) teaches a first lidar acquiring point cloud data and a second lidar that has acquisition times of the point cloud data that are different from the first lidar, a position measurement unit for measuring the position and direction of the vehicle at the time of acquiring the point cloud data, and a control unit for generating first and second depth maps and direction maps from the point cloud data acquired from the first and second lidar in [0009]. Chun further teaches that estimations of distances can be performed from the point cloud and maps in [0010]. Chun further teaches the cross section with the point cloud view in [0047].
Mei (CN112254664A) teaches a geometric model with geometric parameter analysis associated with the point cloud contour analysis in [0037]. Mei details that the point cloud data includes the cross section of a complex high-performance component in [0005].
Kacyra (US20020149585) teaches a scanning laser device generating a model with a three dimension object.
Zhao, Liu, Chun, Mei, and Kacyra are silent with regards to the limitations of Claim 1 of “establishing a calculation model of a receiving cross section of the second scanning surface;
based on the calculation model of the receiving cross section of the second scanning surface, within a preset rotation range of the first scanning apparatus and within a preset range of the first distance, obtaining a distribution set of sizes of cross sections corresponding to an angle of the first scanning apparatus and the first distance; and
selecting, from the distribution set of sizes of cross sections, the first distance corresponding to a case in which the sizes of the receiving cross sections are symmetrically distributed relative to the angle of the first scanning apparatus.”.
Claims 2-12 are dependent on Claim 1.
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 YOSSEF KORANG-BEHESHTI whose telephone number is (571)272-3291. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 am - 6:30 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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at (571) 270-0349. 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.
/YOSSEF KORANG-BEHESHTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights