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 Objections
Claim 9 recites “an optical template.” However, Claim 1, which Claim 9 depends upon, already introduces an optical template. Thus, this should be changed to “the optical template.”
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9, 10, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pastor (US 20200110259 A1).
Claim 1: Pastor teaches a laser radar, wherein the laser radar comprises:
a housing (Fig 1, showing housing around sensor 10);
a laser transmitter provided in the housing, configured to transmit laser light (Fig. 1, transmitter 12 and [0052]);
an optical window provided at the housing, wherein the laser light transmitted from the laser transmitter leaves the housing through the optical window (Fig. 1, front screen 34),
and laser light reflected by a target object returns to the interior of the housing through the optical window (Fig. 1, target object 32 reflecting light back and [0058]);
a laser receiver provided in the housing, configured to receive the laser light reflected by the target object (Fig. 1, receiver 28 and reference light beam 36 reflected off target object 32);
and an optical template, wherein a portion of the laser light transmitted from the laser transmitter is reflected by the optical template to the laser receiver ([0060] last sentence, describing simulation pattern).
Claim 2: Pastor teaches the laser radar according to claim 1, wherein the laser radar is a vehicle-mounted laser radar ([0022], [0030]).
Claim 4: Pastor teaches the laser radar according to claim 1, wherein a light-absorbing region is provided at the boundary of the optical template (Figs. 7G and 7H).
Claim 5: Pastor teaches the laser radar according to claim 1, wherein the optical template comprises a plurality of sub-templates ([0060] - multiple zones).
Claim 6: Pastor teaches the laser radar according to claim 5, wherein a light-absorbing region is provided at the boundary of each sub-template (Figs. 7G and 7H along with [0060]).
Claim 7: Pastor teaches the laser radar according to claim 1, wherein the optical template is provided in an optical path inside the housing (Fig. 1, reference target 32 in light path 36 and inside screen 34).
Claim 9: Pastor teaches a laser radar-based detection method, which performs detection by using a laser radar according to claim 1, wherein the laser radar-based detection method comprises the following steps:
a) calibrating a parameter of an optical template to obtain a standard value; and b) measuring the parameter of the optical template to obtain a measurement value and comparing the measurement value with the standard value ([0016] - binary statement as to reference target was met),
and if a difference between the measurement value and the standard value exceeds a specific threshold, it is determined that the laser radar is faulty ([0013]).
Claim 10: Pastor teaches the laser radar-based detection method according to claim 9, wherein the parameter of the optical template comprises reflection intensity of the optical template to laser light and coordinates of the optical template ([0016]).
Claim 12: Pastor teaches the laser radar-based detection method according to claim 9, wherein the boundary of the optical template is determined based on a sudden change in reflection intensity near a light-absorbing region (Figs. 7G and 7H, light absorbing region causing sudden change in reflection intensity).
Claim 13: Pastor teaches the laser radar-based detection method according to claim 9, wherein the laser radar is a vehicle-mounted laser radar ([0022], [0030]), and in step b),
a parameter of the optical template is measured in real time during the traveling of a vehicle ([0066] - reference light beam being the same as transmission light beam implies real time).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pastor in view of Mohr (US 20210109344 A1).
Claim 3: Pastor teaches the laser radar according to Claim 1, as well as a deflection unit (Fig. 1, unit 20 and [0052]-[0053]). Pastor does not teach, but Mohr does teach, wherein the laser radar comprises:
a rotating mirror (Fig. 5, polygonal mirror 508),
the rotating mirror having an axis of rotation perpendicular to an XOY plane (Fig. 5, note no axis are defined so the rotation axis of the polygonal mirror can be defined as perpendicular to XOY plane);
and a galvo mirror (Fig. 5, galvo mirror 504),
the galvo mirror having an axis of rotation perpendicular to an XOZ plane (Fig. 5, galvo mirror rotating perpendicular to polygonal mirror and [0018]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the mirror setup, as taught by Mohr, in place of the deflection unit as taught by Pastor, because this enables “a very large collection aperture while maintaining a compact design for overall device form factor” (Mohr [0013]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pastor in view of Tayu (US 20220057203 A1).
Claim 8: Pastor teaches the laser radar according to Claim 1, , wherein the laser radar comprises an optical- to-electrical conversion module ([0054]). Pastor does not teach, but Tayu does teach, wherein the laser radar comprises […] a cable connector ([0013]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the cable connector, as taught by Tayu, in the system as taught by Pastor, because a cable would provide a robust physical connection between electronics. In addition, a cable is well known in the art.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pastor in view of Braun (US 20230076693 A1).
Claim 11: Pastor teaches the laser radar-based detection method according to claim 10. Pastor does not teach, but Braun does teach wherein a geometric center or an optical center of gravity of the optical template is calculated as the coordinates of the optical template ([0012] – calibrating LiDAR input with expected intensities – thus making optical center of gravity the expected coordinates).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the calibration, as taught by Braun, in the system as taught by Pastor because, as Braun teaches, this allows for calibration during operation ([0012]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLARA CHILTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6-2 MT.
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, Helal Algahaim can be reached at 571-270-5227. 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.
/CLARA G CHILTON/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/ SPE , Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights