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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See detailed mapping bellow.
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) 1, 17 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 US 20180284282 A1 in view of D0 US 20180329065 A1.
Regarding claims 1, 17 D1 teaches
1, 17 (Original) A light ranging and detection (LiDAR) system comprising:[0035]
a collection lens configured to receive return signal light and stray light;(106/1330 fig. 13 a or b)
a photodetector; and(105 or 1305)
a return optical path from the collection lens to the photodetector including one or more stray light filtering structures, the stray light filtering structures comprising:
a slit filter comprising a light-blocking material surrounding a slit- shaped aperture(1320 od slit in 1330), the slit-shaped aperture being dimensioned and positioned on the optical path relative to the collection lens such that light received at the collection lens having an angle of incidence expected for return signal light passes through the slit-shaped aperture and light received at the collection lens having an angle of incidence consistent with stray light is attenuated by the light-blocking material;([0115-0116]) and
a bandpass filter configured to pass light in a wavelength range expected for the return signal light and attenuate light having a wavelength outside of a wavelength range expected for the return signal light.[0111]
D1 does not teach but D0 teaches
wherein the return optical path(fig. 21b) further comprises a collimating lens(2151) disposed between the slit filter(2140) and the bandpass filter(2161 [according to [0061] bandpass filter may be positioned after collimating lens such as collimating lens is between slit filter and bandpass filter) and a focusing lens(2191) disposed between the bandpass filter(2161) and the photodetector(2171): and
wherein the collection lens(202), the collimating lens(213), the slit filter(211) and the focusing lens(2191) are configured and positioned on the return optical path relative to each other(combination of fig. 21b and fig. 2) and relative to the photodetector such that an image of light passing through the slit-shaped aperture formed at the photodetector has an area that is larger than a cross-sectional area of the slit-shaped aperture.(fig. 21b implicit aperture of the slit 2144 is much smaller than area of the sensor coverage where image is formed 2173 fig. 21b)
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D0 in order to filter the unwanted frequencies and direct them into multiple detectors associated with single pixel and therefore increasing the resolution.
10. (Currently Amended) The system ofclaim 1 wherein the optical path further comprises a folding mirror positioned between the collection lens and the slit filter.([0077] fig. 13)
11. (Currently Amended) The system ofclaim 1 implemented in a LiDAR system further comprising:a laser source system comprising a laser source and transmission optics configured to direct outgoing laser light on a transmission optical path that is substantially separated from the collection lens and from a receiving optical path that includes the collection lens.(fig. 13a)
Claim(s) 2-5, 18 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D0 US 20180329065 A1.
Although D1 does not teach D0 teaches
2. (Original) The system of claim 1 wherein the bandpass filter is disposed on the optical path between the slit filter and the photodetector.(fig. 2)
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D0 in order to filter the light received at photodetectors.
Regarding claim 4, 5 D1 does not teach but D0 teaches
4. (Currently Amended) The system ofclaim 1 wherein the photodetector comprises an array of photodetector cells and the optical path further comprises:
a microlens array between the focusing lens and the array of photodetector cells, the microlens array comprising a plurality of respective lenslets positioned and configured to direct light from the focusing lens to respective photodetector cells of the array of photodetector cells.(fig. 2)
5. (Currently Amended) The system ofclaim 1 wherein the photodetector comprises an array of photodetector cells.
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D0 in order to focus light on individual photodetector and obtain picture of multiple pixels of the environment at the time.
Although D1 does not teach
6. (Currently Amended) The system ofclaim 5 wherein the array of photodetector cells has a cross-sectional area that is larger than a cross-sectional area of the slit-shaped aperture.
It will be obvious over D1 pinhole in 1330 and the array of photodetectors in D0 fig. 2 in order to obtain picture of multiple pixels of the environment at the time.
Although D1 and D0 do not explicitly teach
8. (Currently Amended) The system ofclaim 1 wherein the slit- shaped aperture is rectangular with width that is substantially less than a length, the width being in a range of 3pm to 7pm and a length in a range of lmm-5mm.
9. (Original) The system of claim 8 wherein the length is in a range of lmm-5mm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art, at the time of invention to modify apparatus by D1, since it has been held that the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D0 US 20180329065 A1 further in view of D01 US 10324170 B1.
Regarding claims 12, D1 teaches
a first transmission folding mirror;(fig. 13a,b)
but does not teach
a second transmission folding mirror;
a third folding mirror; and a rotating polygon mirror.
D01 teaches using multiple mirrors and polygon mirror in order to scan the surrounding and deliver light to specific optical components.(Fig. 6a)
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D01 in order to scan the surrounding and deliver light to specific optical components.
Regarding claim 13 D1 does not teach but D01 teaches
13. (Original) The system of claim 12 wherein the transmission optics further comprise:
a first collimating lens(212) disposed between the laser source and the first transmission folding mirror;
15. (Currently Amended) The system of claim 12 wherein the third folding mirror is positioned to receive return signal light from a facet of the rotating polygon mirror and direct it to the collection lens.(fig. 6a)
16. (Currently Amended) The system of claim 12 wherein the first transmission folding mirror is oriented substantially parallel to an orientation of the second transmission folding mirror.(fig. 6A, 8)
while neither D1 or D01 teach
a second collimating lens disposed between the first transmission folding mirror and the second transmission folding mirror.
This is just obvious matter of the design choice in order to deliver collimated light to the receiver or other components. For example by placing collimating lens between first transmission folding mirror and the second transmission folding mirror in fig. 6A of D01 one can achieve collimation of the receive beam and also to avoid reflection of the lens 204-1 to have spread larger than mirror 208-1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14, 19 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.
Although US 20190257926 A1 teaches two different collimating lenses [0023] it is not obvious why combination of claim 14 with claim 13 would be obvious or advantageous.
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 HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7845. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7am - 5 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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (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.
/HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights