Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/253,563

Method for Operating a First Illumination Device, a Second Illumination Device and an Optical Sensor, Control Device for Carrying Out Such a Method, Gated Camera Apparatus Comprising Such a Control Device, and Motor Vehicle Comprising Such a Gated Camera Apparatus

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
May 18, 2023
Examiner
GEROLEO, FRANCIS
Art Unit
3619
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Daimler Truck AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
73%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 73% — above average
73%
Career Allow Rate
418 granted / 573 resolved
+20.9% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
622
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.8%
-34.2% vs TC avg
§103
53.4%
+13.4% vs TC avg
§102
18.1%
-21.9% vs TC avg
§112
12.3%
-27.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 573 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. 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. Claim(s) 11, 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2015/0291097 A1 (“O’Cualain”). Regarding claim 11, O’Cualain, in Figs. 1-5, discloses a method for operating a first illumination device (5.1), a second illumination device (5.2), and an optical sensor (7), comprising the steps of: controlling the first illumination device (5.1), the second illumination device (5.2) (e.g. see illuminating device 3 in Fig. 1 including two light sources 10, paragraphs [0045]-[0046]), and the optical sensor (7) (e.g. see camera 4 in Fig. 1, paragraphs [0041]-[0044]) in a temporally coordinated manner (e.g. see synchronous operation of illumination and capturing of images, paragraphs [0047]-[0050] and Fig. 5); assigning a visible distance range (15) to the coordinated control (e.g. see calculating distance of the detected object taking into account internal and/or external orientation of the camera, paragraphs [0019], [0062]); during an illumination by the first illumination device (5.1), the optical sensor (7) captures a first image (19.1) by the coordinated control (e.g. see capturing an image with illumination from each light sources 10 of illuminating device 3 activated one by one, paragraphs [0047]-[0050] and [0054], images 12 in Fig. 5); during an illumination by the second illumination device (5.2), the optical sensor (7) captures a second image (19.2) by the coordinated control (e.g. see capturing an image with illumination from each light sources 10 of illuminating device 3 activated one by one, paragraphs [0047]-[0050] and [0054], images 12 in Fig. 5); during a time of an absence of an illumination by the first illumination device (5.1) and the second illumination device (5.2), the optical sensor (7) captures a third image (19.3) (e.g. see capturing an image without illumination/illumination device 3 inactive, paragraphs [0047]-[0050] and [0054], image 11 in Fig. 5); and forming a difference captured image (19.4) from the first captured image (19.1), the second captured image (19.2), and the third captured image (19.3) (e.g. see generating edge image 8 from images 12 and image 11 shown in Fig. 5 by subtracting non-illuminated image 11 from illuminated images 12, paragraphs [0054]-[0057]). Regarding claim 14, O’Cualain further discloses further comprising the step of searching for objects (17) in the difference captured image (19.4) (e.g. see step edges are searched to depict a contour of object 7 in Fig. 4, paragraphs [0056]-[0057], and see calculating distance of the detected object, paragraphs [0019], [0062]). Regarding claim 15, O’Cualain further discloses further comprising the step of carrying out a distance measurement in the difference captured image (19.4) (e.g. see calculating distance of the detected object, paragraphs [0019], [0062]). Regarding claim 16, O’Cualain further discloses a control device (9) configured to perform the method according to claim 11 (e.g. see image processing device 5 in Fig. 1). Regarding claim 17, O’Cualain further discloses a gated camera apparatus (3), comprising: a first illumination device (5.1); a second illumination device (5.2); an optical sensor (7); and a control device (9) configured to perform the method according to claim 11 (e.g. see camera system 2 in Fig. 1). Regarding claim 18, O’Cualain further discloses wherein the first illumination device (5.1) and the second illumination device (5.2) are disposed horizontally offset from each other (e.g. see two light sources 10 in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs[0046]-[0048], [0058]). 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) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Cualain. Regarding claim 19, although O’Cualain discloses wherein the first illumination device (5.1) and the second illumination device (5.2) are disposed horizontally offset from each other (e.g. see two light sources 10 in Figs. 1-2, paragraphs[0046]-[0048], [0058]), it is noted O’Cualain differs from the present invention in that it fails to particularly disclose are disposed vertically offset from each other. O’Cualain however, in paragraph [0058], discloses that only vertical edges 19 of the object 7 are extracted in the two light sources case located on the same height, i.e. horizontally offset as shown in Figs. 1-2, and further discloses, in paragraphs [0046]-[0048], however, that multiple light sources can also be used, i.e. that illuminating device 3 includes several light sources 10 attached at different locations on the motor vehicle. Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the reference of O’Cualain before him/her, to include wherein the first illumination device (5.1) and the second illumination device (5.2) are disposed vertically offset from each other in order to increase reliability and precision, as well as, to extract horizontal edges. Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Cualain in view of US 2006/0091297 A1 (“Anderson”). Regarding claim 13, although O’Cualain discloses the first captured image (19.1), the second captured image (19.2), and the third captured image (19.3) and forming the difference captured image (19.4) (e.g. see generating edge image 8 from images 12 and image 11 shown in Fig. 5 by subtracting non-illuminated image 11 from illuminated images 12, paragraphs [0054]-[0057]), it is noted O’Cualain differs from the present invention in that it fails to particularly disclose further comprising the step of applying a method for image registration to the first captured image (19.1), the second captured image (19.2), and the third captured image (19.3) before forming the difference captured image (19.4). Anderson however, teaches further comprising the step of applying a method for image registration to the first captured image (19.1), the second captured image (19.2), and the third captured image (19.3) before forming the difference captured image (19.4) (e.g. see first image data and second image data are registered, paragraph [0041]). Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the references of O’Cualain and Anderson before him/her, to include the teachings of Anderson into O’Cualain in order to facilitate rapid and reliable detection of an object and/or estimation of a distance between the system and the object. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 12 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 6975246 B1, Collision Avoidance Using Limited Range Gated Video US 20230017893 A1, IMAGING SYSTEM US 20180203122 A1, GATED STRUCTURED IMAGING US 20150168954 A1, METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR OBSTACLE DETECTION USING STRUCTURED LIGHT US 20130070095 A1, FAST OBSTACLE DETECTION Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANCIS G GEROLEO whose telephone number is (571)270-7206. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 am - 3:30 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, Anna M Momper can be reached at (571) 270-5788. 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. /Francis Geroleo/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 18, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591065
DISTANCE MEASUREMENT DEVICE AND DISTANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581109
METHOD FOR ENCODING AND DECODING IMAGE INFORMATION AND DEVICE USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574501
METHOD, AND APPARATUS FOR REFERENCE FRAME SELECTION, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568223
RESTRICTIONS ON DECODER SIDE MOTION VECTOR DERIVATION BASED ON CODING INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12563202
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR VIDEO INTRA PREDICTION INVOLVING FILTERING REFERENCE SAMPLES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
73%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+19.3%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 573 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month