Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after 16 Mar 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Applicant presents Claims 1-14 for examination. The Office rejects Claims 1-14 as detailed below.
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)(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, 4-5, and 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Caltabiano - U.S. Pub. 20230031569 +_+_+
As for Claim 1, Caltabiano teaches a laser emitter configured to emit a laser beam (Fig. 10, Laser 12); an optical splitter located in an outgoing path of the laser beam and configured to receive the laser beam and split the laser beam into a plurality of split beams (Fig. 10, DOE 130, splitting laser 12 into multiple spot beams, ¶154|1: “As shown as an example in FIG. 10, the DOE 130 is configured to reshape the laser beam L from the laser source 12 into a plurality of light beams L1, ..., L6 having a plurality of transverse spot sizes forming a matrix of light spots with a size equal to the size of the grid projected onto the target.”); and a collimation assembly located in outgoing paths of the split beams and configured to receive the split beams and collimate the split beams into collimated beams (¶160|1: “In one or more embodiments, the beam shaping arrangement 13 [i.e., collimation assembly] with the DOE 130 can be further configured to compensate for geometrical distortion of the spot matrix due to the optical projection path (mainly MEMS lens or mirrors).”)
As for Claim 4, which depends on Claim 1, Caltabiano teaches wherein the transmitter module further comprises a coupling assembly disposed between the laser emitter and the optical splitter and configured to couple the laser beam into the optical splitter (Fig. 10, DOE 130, splitting laser 12 into multiple spot beams, ¶154|1: “As shown as an example in FIG. 10, the DOE 130 is configured to reshape the laser beam L from the laser source 12 into a plurality of light beams L1, ..., L6 having a plurality of transverse spot sizes forming a matrix of light spots with a size equal to the size of the grid projected onto the target.”)
As for Claim 5, which depends on Claim 4, Caltabiano teaches wherein the coupling assembly comprises a lens assembly (¶149|1: “In the example considered in FIG. 8, the double stage arrangement comprises two single stage arrangements being otherwise understood that such an arrangement is purely an example and in no way limiting. For instance, both the first and second beam steering stages can comprise multi-stage and multi-axial arrangements comprising mirrors, lenses, OPA or other suitable optical arrangements.”)
As for Claim 10, which depends on Claim 1, Caltabiano teaches wherein the collimation assembly is a lens (¶149|1: “In the example considered in FIG. 8, the double stage arrangement comprises two single stage arrangements being otherwise understood that such an arrangement is purely an example and in no way limiting. For instance, both the first and second beam steering stages can comprise multi-stage and multi-axial arrangements comprising mirrors, lenses, OPA or other suitable optical arrangements.”)
As for Claim 11, which depends on Claim 10, Caltabiano teaches wherein the collimation assembly comprises at least one first lens and at least one second lens, the first lens being located upstream of the second lens along the outgoing paths of the split beams (¶149|1: “In the example considered in FIG. 8, the double stage arrangement comprises two single stage arrangements being otherwise understood that such an arrangement is purely an example and in no way limiting. For instance, both the first and second beam steering stages can comprise multi-stage and multi-axial arrangements comprising mirrors, lenses, OPA or other suitable optical arrangements.”)
Claims 12-13 recite substantially the same subject matter as Claim 1 and stand rejected on the same basis accordingly.
As for Claim 14, Caltabiano teaches a vehicle system, comprising: a LiDAR (¶67|1: “As shown as an example in FIG. 1, the [LiDAR] apparatus 10 may be used in a navigation system VS on-board a vehicle (such as an autonomous wheeled vehicle). For instance, the control unit 20 may provide measurements of distance between a target object P and the vehicle to the navigation system VS in order to drive movements of the vehicle ( e.g., controlling a speed of the wheels).”) according to claim 13 (<< Claim 13, recites substantially the same subject matter as Claim 1 and stands rejected on the same basis.)
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.
+_+_+ Claims 2-3 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caltabiano in view of Crouch et al. - U.S. Pub. No. 20200326427 +_+_+
As for Claim 2, which depends on Claim 1, Caltabiano doesn’t explicitly teach that the beam splitting is implemented with an integrated [i.e., on-chip] optical waveguide.
But Crouch teaches wherein the optical splitter is an integrated optical waveguide (¶114|7: “In some embodiments, in step 601 the beam 201 is split using a beam splitter (not shown) and the separate beams are directed into the waveguides 225a, 225b and are transmitted from tips 217 of the waveguides 225a, 225b.” Further, (¶133|9) “[i]n alternative embodiments, hardware, such as application specific integrated circuit 720, may be used in place of or in combination with software to implement the invention. Thus, embodiments of the invention are not limited to any specific combination of hardware and software.”)
It 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 to combine Caltabiano and Crouch because integrated optical waveguides are a necessary way of directing light on a LiDAR chip.
As for Claim 3, which depends on Claim 2, Crouch teaches wherein the integrated optical waveguide has an incident end, through which the laser beam is emitted into the integrated optical waveguide (Fig. 2G, Waveguide 225a), and an outgoing end, through which the plurality of split beams is emitted out; and the transmitter module further comprises at least one of the following: a first spot-size converter disposed inside the integrated optical waveguide and located at the incident end of the integrated optical waveguide (¶114|7: “In some embodiments, in step 601 the beam 201 is split using a beam splitter (not shown) and the separate beams are directed into the waveguides 225a, 225b and are transmitted from tips 217 of the waveguides 225a, 225b.” Further, (¶133|9) “[i]n alternative embodiments, hardware, such as application specific integrated circuit 720, may be used in place of or in combination with software to implement the invention. Thus, embodiments of the invention are not limited to any specific combination of hardware and software.”); and a second spot-size converter disposed inside the integrated optical waveguide and located at the outgoing end of the integrated optical waveguide.
As for Claim 6, which depends on Claim 1, Crouch teaches wherein the optical splitter comprises an input optical fiber, a coupler, and an optical fiber array having a plurality of output optical fibers, wherein the laser emitter is coupled to the coupler via the input optical fiber, and wherein the coupler is connected to the plurality of output optical fibers (¶73|1: “Optical coupling to flood or focus on a target or focus past the pupil plane are not depicted. As used herein, an optical coupler is any component that affects the propagation of light within spatial coordinates to direct light from one component to another component, such as a vacuum, air, glass, crystal, mirror, lens, optical circulator, beam splitter, phase plate, polarizer, optical fiber, optical mixer, among others, alone or in some combination.”)
As for Claim 7, which depends on Claim 6, Caltabiano teaches wherein the optical fiber array comprises: a plurality of rows of output optical fibers arranged in a first direction, each row having a plurality of output optical fibers disposed in a second direction, wherein: output optical fibers in two adjacent rows are staggered, a minimum of a center-to-center distance between two of the output optical fibers in the second direction is a first spacing, a minimum spacing between two adjacent ones of the output optical fibers in the same row in the second direction is a second spacing, the first spacing being less than the second spacing, and the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction (¶132|1: “ FIG. 7 is an example diagram of an embodiment where the beam steering arrangement comprises optical elements to provide an Optical Phased Array (OPA), configured to split the laser beam from the source 12 in an array of mutually coherent emitters, where the phase difference between each pair of emitters is controlled, e.g., via driving circuitry 20, in order to manipulate the direction of the outgoing combined beam, in a manner known per se. As shown as an example in FIG. 7, the beam steering arrangement 14 comprises an optical phased array, OPA, 144. For instance, the OPA is capable of steering the light beam L along to the two oscillation axes.”)
As for Claim 8, which depends on Claim 7, Caltabiano teaches wherein the optical fiber array comprises: a substrate formed with a groove portion comprising a plurality of placement grooves disposed in sequence in the second direction, each of the placement grooves allowing the disposition of one of the output optical fibers, wherein: a groove spacing between two adjacent ones of the placement grooves in the second direction being equal to a diameter of the output optical fiber; and the groove portion is configured to allow the placement of the plurality of rows of output optical fibers, with two adjacent rows of output optical fibers being in contact; and a cover plate pressed onto one of the rows of output optical fibers (¶132|1: “ FIG. 7 is an example diagram of an embodiment where the beam steering arrangement comprises optical elements to provide an Optical Phased Array (OPA), configured to split the laser beam from the source 12 in an array of mutually coherent emitters, where the phase difference between each pair of emitters is controlled, e.g., via driving circuitry 20, in order to manipulate the direction of the outgoing combined beam, in a manner known per se. As shown as an example in FIG. 7, the beam steering arrangement 14 comprises an optical phased array, OPA, 144. For instance, the OPA is capable of steering the light beam L along to the two oscillation axes.”)
As for Claim 9, which depends on Claim 7, Caltabiano teaches wherein the optical fiber array comprises: a substrate having a first side and a second side opposite in a thickness direction, the first side having a plurality of first accommodating grooves disposed in sequence in the second direction, the second side having a plurality of second accommodating grooves disposed in sequence in the second direction, wherein: each of the first accommodating grooves and the second accommodating grooves allows for disposition of one of the output optical fibers, a groove spacing between two adjacent ones of the first accommodating grooves and a groove spacing between two adjacent ones of the second accommodating grooves are equal to a diameter of the output optical fiber, the first accommodating groove and the second accommodating groove are staggered in the second direction, and a groove spacing between any one of the first accommodating grooves and an adjacent one of the second accommodating grooves in the second direction is less than a groove spacing between two adjacent ones of the first accommodating grooves; and a first cover plate and a second cover plate covering the first side and the second side, respectively (¶132|1: “ FIG. 7 is an example diagram of an embodiment where the beam steering arrangement comprises optical elements to provide an Optical Phased Array (OPA), configured to split the laser beam from the source 12 in an array of mutually coherent emitters, where the phase difference between each pair of emitters is controlled, e.g., via driving circuitry 20, in order to manipulate the direction of the outgoing combined beam, in a manner known per se. As shown as an example in FIG. 7, the beam steering arrangement 14 comprises an optical phased array, OPA, 144. For instance, the OPA is capable of steering the light beam L along to the two oscillation axes.”)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLINT THATCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-3588. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5:30pm ET and generally keeps a daily 2:30pm timeslot open for interviews.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant may call the examiner to set up a time or use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) system 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.
Though not relied on, the Office considers the additional prior art listed in the Notice of Reference Cited form (PTO-892) pertinent to Applicant's disclosure.
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.
/Clint Thatcher/
Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights