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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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) 1 1 - 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Herr US5790243 . Regarding independent claim 1 1 , Herr discloses, in Figures 1-5, A lidar device (Herr; Fig. 1-5; sensor 2), comprising: a light source (Herr; Fig. 1; laser 8) ; a detector (Herr; Fig. 1; detector 12) ; and a mirror device (Herr; Fig. 1; rotating hexagonal mirror 4) , the light source having a main radiation direction (Herr; Fig. 1; the emitted laser beam 6 that is collinear with laser 8) and the detector having a main detection direction (Herr; Fig. 1; the object- reflected light that is collected at collection optics 20 and is collinear with detector 12) , the mirror device being rotatable about an axis (Herr; Fig. 1; rotating hexagonal mirror 4) , the mirror device having a facet wheel with a number of facets (Herr; Fig. 1; rotating hexagonal mirror 4; the facets are the six faces/facets of the hexagonal mirror 4) , the main radiation direction and the main detecting direction being at a predetermined angle to each other (Herr; Fig. 1) , the predetermined angle being a function of the number of facets (Herr; Fig. 1; hexagonal mirror 4) , a light beam (Herr; Fig. 1; the emitted laser beam 6) emitted from the light source being reflected by a first facet of the facets (Herr; Fig. 1; the facet/face that reflects the emitted laser beam 6 that is collinear with laser 8) , a light beam reflected back from an object (Herr; Fig. 1; “road surface”) being reflected by a second facet of the facets (Herr; Fig. 1; the facet/face that reflects the object-reflected light that is collected at collection optics 20 and is collinear with detector 12) , the first facet and the second facet being different from one another (Herr; Fig. 1) . Regarding claim 12, Herr discloses The lidar device as recited in claim 11, wherein the light source and the detector are situated on different sides of the mirror device (Herr; Fig. 1; laser 8 is positioned on a different hexagonal side relative to detector 12). Regarding claim 13, Herr discloses The lidar device as recited in claim 11, wherein the predetermined angle is calculable using the formula 720 degrees divided by the number of facets times a natural number plus/minus one tolerance deviation (Herr; Fig. 1; rotating hexagonal mirror 4; the facets are the six faces/facets of the hexagonal mirror 4; a hexagon is a solution that yields the calculable predetermined angle based on the formula which is consistent with 18264411 instant applicant’s hexagonal mirror shown in ‘411 instant applicant’s Fig. 2 that shows a facet wheel 140 that is a regular hexagon). Regarding claim 14, Herr discloses The lidar device as recited in claim 11, wherein the main radiation direction and the main detection direction each being described by a three-dimensional vector having three components, a Cartesian coordinate system for describing the vectors having an x axis, a y axis, and a z axis, the z axis being parallel to the axis about which the mirror device is rotatable, the vector of the main radiation direction having an x component, a y component, and a z component, the y component of the vector of the main radiation direction being zero, the vector of the main detection direction having an x component, a y component, and a z component, the x component and the y component of the vector of the main detection direction being a function of the x component of the vector of the main radiation direction, and the z component of the vector of the main detection direction corresponding to a negative of the z component of the vector of the main radiation direction (Herr; Fig. 1; rotating hexagonal mirror 4; the facets are the six faces/facets of the hexagonal mirror 4). Regarding independent claim 20 , Herr discloses the invention substantially the same as described above in reference to independent claim 1 , and A vehicle (Herr; Fig. 4; truck 112), comprising: a lidar device (Herr; Fig. 1-5; sensor 2). Claim(s) 11- 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Knockeart US3813140. Regarding independent claim 11 , Knockeart discloses, in Figure 7, A lidar device ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7), comprising: a light source ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7; refer to corresponding light source 32 in Fig. 2); a detector ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7; detector 39); and a mirror device ( Knockeart ; rotating octagonal prism 11), the light source having a main radiation direction and the detector having a main detection direction ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7), the mirror device being rotatable about an axis ( Knockeart ; rotating octagonal prism 11), the mirror device having a facet wheel with a number of facets ( Knockeart ; rotating octagonal prism 11), the main radiation direction and the main detecting direction being at a predetermined angle to each other ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7), the predetermined angle being a function of the number of facets ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7), a light beam emitted from the light source being reflected by a first facet of the facets ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7), a light beam reflected back from an object being reflected by a second facet of the facets ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7), the first facet and the second facet being different from one another ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7). Regarding claim 12, Knockeart discloses The lidar device as recited in claim 11, wherein the light source and the detector are situated on different sides of the mirror device ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7). Regarding claim 13, Knockeart discloses The lidar device as recited in claim 11, wherein the predetermined angle is calculable using the formula 720 degrees divided by the number of facets times a natural number plus/minus one tolerance deviation ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7; an octagon is a solution that yields the calculable predetermined angle based on the formula which is consistent with 18264411 instant applicant’s octagonal mirror shown in ‘411 instant applicant’s Fig. 6 that shows a mirror device 190 that is a regular octagon). Regarding claim 14, Knockeart discloses The lidar device as recited in claim 11, wherein the main radiation direction and the main detection direction each being described by a three-dimensional vector having three components, a Cartesian coordinate system for describing the vectors having an x axis, a y axis, and a z axis, the z axis being parallel to the axis about which the mirror device is rotatable, the vector of the main radiation direction having an x component, a y component, and a z component, the y component of the vector of the main radiation direction being zero, the vector of the main detection direction having an x component, a y component, and a z component, the x component and the y component of the vector of the main detection direction being a function of the x component of the vector of the main radiation direction, and the z component of the vector of the main detection direction corresponding to a negative of the z component of the vector of the main radiation direction ( Knockeart ; rotating octagonal prism 11). Regarding claim 15, Knockeart discloses The lidar device as recited in claim 11, wherein a main plane standing perpendicular to the axis, and the main radiation direction and the main detection direction each deviating from the main plane by a maximum of 5 degrees ( Knockeart ; Fig. 7; the emitting light and the received light are collinear and are on the main plane). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 16-19 are 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. Regarding claim 16, in combination with the other structures required by the base claim and intervening claims, the prior art fails to disclose, teach, suggest, or render obvious the claimed configuration of “the facet number being different from the further facet number” (claim 16 line 7). While Woywood US3646568 teaches stacked/dual hexagonal mirror system 40, the dual mirrors have the same number of facets/sides instead of a different number. Also, while Kaneda et al. US20110112795 teaches a reflecting octagon mirror 9 and a square prism 10 in which the number of sides of the mirror relative to the prism is an integer relationship, the prism 10 is for transmitting light rather than for reflecting light and the mirror 9 and the prism 10 are not stacked. Claims 17-19 also contain allowable subject matter based on their dependency on parent claim 16. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Stoppel US20240012116 teaches a rotating polygon mirror. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JONATHAN MALIKASIM whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (313)446-6597 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F; 8 am - 5 pm (CST) . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Yuqing Xiao can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-3603 . 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. /JONATHAN MALIKASIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645 3/ 3 /26