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
The Amendment filed June 18th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-8 remain pending in the application. Applicant's amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final office Action mailed March 19th, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1-3, and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunphy et al. (United States Patent No. 11892572 B1), hereinafter Dunphy in view of Schmidtlin et al. (United States Patent No. 11486970 B1), hereinafter Schmidtlin..
Regarding claim 1, Dunphy teaches an optical transmitter, comprising:
a laser diode array configured to emit corresponding laser pulses ([Col. 3, line 65-67] Additionally or alternatively, examples could include a 2-dimensional array of light sources that are optically coupled to a 2-dimensional SLM pixel array; [Col. 5, line 6-9] In some examples, the at least one light-emitter device 110 is configured to emit respective light beams 112 toward an environment 10 via the micromirror devices 120.);
a micro-optics module configured to focus the laser pulses into a scanning beam ([Col. 6, line 38-40] For example, the transmit lens 114 could be configured to focus the respective light beams along a portion of the shared micromirror axis.); and
a drive motor configured to rotate the optical transmitter to the scanning beam covers a horizontal field of view ([Col. 6, line 20-23] In some examples, the optical transmitter module 100 may also include a base 140 configured to rotate or pivot about a first axis so as to sweep respective transmit axes about an azimuth range.), and
wherein the controller is further configured to determine an alignment of the optical transmitter based on the determined scan path ([Col.5 line 18-34] In some example embodiments, each of the micromirror devices 120 could include a steerable reflective surface 122 configured to dynamically reduce or minimize light that interacts with the retroreflector object 14…Furthermore, the micromirror devices 120 can be individually addressed so that each micromirror device 120 could be maintained at respective, controllable angles.).
Dunphy fails to teach the transmitter comprising a controller configured to perform an initial number of line scans and determine a scan path to reach a predetermined optimal position, wherein the controller is further configured to determine the scan path based on a predetermined function, and
However, Schmidtlin teaches the transmitter comprising a controller configured to perform an initial number of line scans and determine a scan path to reach a predetermined optimal position ([Col. 5 Line 29-39] For example, some embodiments of the present technology use one or more light sources that produce light signals of different wavelengths and/or along different optical paths...This allows for tuning the signals to appropriate transmit powers and the possibility of having overlapping scan areas that cover scans of different distances.),
wherein the controller is further configured to determine the scan path based on a predetermined function ([Col. 5, line 62-64] LiDAR system 100 transmits light pulse 102 along path 104 as determined by the steering system of LiDAR system 100.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Dunphy to comprise the controller determined scan path designed to optimize the path and use a predetermined scan path function similar to Schmidtlin, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of self-calibrating the transmitter to optimize in a range of environments and ensuring a base-line function by which to determine the optimal scan path for a diverse range of environments.
Regarding claim 2, Dunphy teaches the optical transmitter of claim 1, wherein the micro-optics module is disposed a predetermined distance in front of the laser diode array ([Fig. 3]; [Col. 5, line 15-17] In some examples, micromirror devices 120 could be disposed at an image plane of a transmit lens 114 that is optically-coupled to the light-emitter devices 110.).
Regarding claim 3, Dunphy teaches the optical transmitter of claim 1, wherein the laser diode array includes n number of laser emitters configured to emit n number of laser pulses ([Col. 8, line 6-9] As illustrated in FIG. 3, the plurality of light-emitter devices 110a, 110b, 110c, and 110d could be configured to emit respective light beams 112a, 112b, 112c, and 112d toward transmit lens 114).
Regarding claim 7, Dunphy teaches the optical transmitter of claim 1, wherein the laser diode array comprises a vertically stacked array of light emitters ([Fig. 3]).
Regarding claim 8, Dunphy teaches the optical transmitter of claim 1, wherein the optical transmitter is an autonomous vehicle optical transmitter ([Col. 10, line 30-33] FIGS. 5A, 5B, 5C, 5D, and 5E illustrate a vehicle 500, according to an example embodiment. In some embodiments, the vehicle 500 could be a semi- or fully-autonomous vehicle; [Col. 10, line 39-40] In some examples, the vehicle 500 may include one or more sensor systems 502, 504, 506, 508, 510, and 512).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunphy in view of Schmidtlin, further in view of Ghosh et al. (United states Patent Application Publication 20150362585 A1), hereinafter Ghosh
Regarding claim 4, Dunphy teaches the optical transmitter of claim 3,
Dunphy fails to teach the transmitter wherein n=48
However, Ghosh teaches a transmitter wherein n=48 ([0067] The number of VCSEL arrays in an array chip and their individual emission properties are selected according to the required output power, shape, and size of the illumination area required for a given sensing, imaging or scanning environment.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Dunphy to comprise the array dimensions similar to Ghosh, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of implementing a specific dimension of a light emitting array to attenuate into a desired intensity.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dunphy in view of Schmidtlin, further in view of Uyeno et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20220229160 A1), hereinafter Uyeno.
Regarding claim 5, Dunphy teaches the optical transmitter of claim 3,
Dunphy fails to teach the transmitter wherein the micro-optics module focuses the laser pulses into the scanning beam to have a specific intensity of cumulative light at a target
However, Uyeno teaches the transmitter wherein the micro-optics module focuses the laser pulses into the scanning beam to have a specific intensity of cumulative light at a target ([0038] More specifically, the Piston capability can be used to focus the beam such as to form a “fan” or “spot” beam. The Piston capability can also be used to adjust the size, divergence or intensity profile of the beam, produce deviations in the wavefront of the beam to compensate for atmospheric distortions, adjust phase to maintain a zero phase difference across the beam, add optical power to focus or defocus the beam or to improve the formation and steering of the beam by approximating a continuous surface across the micro-mirrors, which reduces unwanted diffraction to increase power in the optical beam.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Dunphy to comprise the module focusing system to increase intensity similar to Uyeno, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of rendering a higher intensity scan to areas of interest to scan a dynamic environment.
Regarding claim 6, Dunphy, as modified above, teaches the optical transmitter of claim 5,
Dunphy fails to teach the transmitter wherein when a corresponding laser emitter "x" is inoperable, the micro-optics module focuses the laser pulses into the scanning beam to have the specific intensity of the cumulative light at the target that is equal to (100%-x)*Intensity.
However, Uyeno teaches the transmitter wherein when a corresponding laser emitter "x" is inoperable, the micro-optics module focuses the laser pulses into the scanning beam to have the specific intensity of the cumulative light at the target that is equal to (100%-x)*Intensity ([0038] More specifically, the Piston capability can be used to focus the beam such as to form a “fan” or “spot” beam. The Piston capability can also be used to adjust the size, divergence or intensity profile of the beam, produce deviations in the wavefront of the beam to compensate for atmospheric distortions, adjust phase to maintain a zero phase difference across the beam, add optical power to focus or defocus the beam or to improve the formation and steering of the beam by approximating a continuous surface across the micro-mirrors, which reduces unwanted diffraction to increase power in the optical beam.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Dunphy to comprise the module focusing system to increase intensity and compensate for deactivated emitters similar to Uyeno, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of rendering a higher intensity scan to areas of interest to scan a dynamic environment, while compensating for emitters deactivated or not functioning.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 18th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that the prior art of Schmidtlin, formerly reliant to teach in combination with the primary prior art of Dunphy, the limitations of cancelled claims 9 and 10 that have since been incorporated into claim 1, fail to teach the active optical alignment for determining an optical alignment position of optical components of a laser module using an initial line scan and a function based scan path. The applicant explains in their arguments and remarks that the specification outlines a function and optimization process by which the scan path of the independent claim is derived and concludes that this process is different from the prior art. The examiner notes, however, that claims are examined under the broadest reasonable interpretation to one of ordinary skill in the art as written and presented. By this metric, the prior art teaches the alignment position determination using a function based scan path as noted above and in the previous Non-Final Office action mailed March 19th, 2026. Without additional detail added to the claim limitations pointing out how the controller is further distinguished over the prior art, incorporating those details outlined by the applicant found in the specification, the rejection is maintained in this Final Office Action.
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 ROBERT WILLIAM VASQUEZ JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, Flex Friday, 8:00-5:00 PST.
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.
/ROBERT W VASQUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights