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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 11, 24-25, 27-28, 30, 36, 46-47, 63 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bao (WO 2022134011 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bao discloses one or more light sources configured to generate transmission light, “The lamp assembly includes one or more range sensors (e.g., lidars) , one or more light sources” (Abstract). Bao discloses a window, “the housing 340 may include a protective cover to protect the headlight lamp 310 and the lidar 320 from dirt, water, inclement weather, etc. The housing 340 may include a supporting member 342 and a translucent member 344.” (Page 12 Top Paragraph). Bao discloses a steering mechanism controlled to: steer a detection portion of the transmission light toward a field-of- view (FOV) of the LiDAR via the window, “The lidar 320 may be a single channel lidar or a scanning lidar. For example, the lidar 320 may include a scanner for changing a propagation path of the laser beam emitted from the laser beam emitter. For example, the scanner may include one or more optical elements for reflecting, refracting, and/or diffracting the laser beam emitted by the laser beam emitter.” (Page 10 Bottom Paragraph). Bao discloses receive return light formed based on the detection portion of the transmission light in the FOV, “For example, the navigation system may include one or more lidars for detecting objects located near the autonomous vehicle. The lidars may include a light source to emit laser beams and an optical receiver to receive light reflected from an object. “ (Page 6 Middle Paragraph). Bao discloses that a non-detection portion of the transmission light is transmitted in a visible light spectrum to a field-of-illumination (FOI) via the window, “ As shown in FIG. 2, the lighting system 200 includes a low beam lamp 210 and a high beam lamp 220 at both sides at the front of the vehicle.” (Page 8 Bottom Paragraph) and “The low beam light module projects light in a lateral and/or downward direction to provide adequate lighting without reducing visibility of oncoming traffic. The high beam lamp 220 includes a high beam light module configured to provide an intense, center-weighted distribution of light for driving in areas with poor lighting conditions.” (Page 8 Bottom Paragraph). It can be assumed that the light emitted from these lamps is within the visible spectrum as they are meant to illuminate areas for the driver.
Regarding claim 27, rejected under same reasoning as claim 1, see claim 1 rejection.
Regarding claim 2, Bao discloses the system of claim 1, see claim 1 rejection. Bao discloses that the one or more light sources are controllable to adjust one or more of brightness, color, direction, focus, or contrast of at least a part of the non-detection portion of the transmission light, “The system may increase a brightness of the headlight lamp 310 in response to detecting an object in front of the vehicle by the lidar 320. “ (Page 16 Top Paragraph).
Regarding claim 28, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 2, see claim 2 rejection.
Regarding claim 4, Bao discloses the system of claim 1, see claim 1 rejection. Bao discloses that the detection portion of the transmission light and the non-detection portion of the transmission light are arranged to be non-coaxial, “As shown in FIG. 4, the angle adjustment system 400 includes a first adjuster 305 for adjusting a first angle of the headlight lamp 310, a second adjuster 325 for adjusting a first angle of the lidar 320, and a third adjuster 315 for adjusting a second angle of the headlight lamp 310.” (Page 12 Bottom Paragraph) and see Figure 4.
Regarding claim 30, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 4, see claim 4 rejection.
Regarding claim 11, Bao discloses the system of claim 1, see claim 1 rejection. Bao discloses that the non-detection portion of the transmission light is transmitted through the window as vehicle illumination light or vehicle signaling light, “the housing 340 may include a protective cover to protect the headlight lamp 310 and the lidar 320 from dirt, water, inclement weather, etc. The housing 340 may include a supporting member 342 and a translucent member 344.” (Page 12 Top Paragraph) and see Figure 4.
Regarding claim 36, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 11, see claim 11 rejection.
Regarding claim 24, Bao discloses the system of claim 1, see claim 1 rejection. Bao discloses control circuitry configured to control the non-detection portion of the transmission light in a non- continuous way, “For example, the headlight lamp 310 may be controlled to be turned on or turned off by a controller in the vehicle.” (Page 10 Bottom Paragraph).
Regarding claim 46, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 24, see claim 24 rejection.
Regarding claim 25, Bao discloses the system of claim 1, see claim 1 rejection. Bao discloses that the non-detection portion of the transmission light has a temporal profile, “In some embodiments, the system may adjust an operation of the headlight lamp 310 or the lidar 320 when a predetermined environmental condition is satisfied. For example, the system may increase a brightness of the headlight lamp 310 when a brightness of an external light is lower than a predetermined threshold. The system may increase a brightness of the headlight lamp 310 when a visibility of an environment is lower than a predetermined threshold. The system may gradually increase a brightness of the headlight lamp 310 when a brightness of an external light gradually decreases.” (Page 10 Bottom Paragraph).
Regarding claim 47, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 25, see claim 25 rejection.
Regarding claim 63, Bao discloses one or more light sources configured to generate transmission light, “The lamp assembly includes one or more range sensors (e.g., lidars) , one or more light sources” (Abstract). Bao discloses a window, “the housing 340 may include a protective cover to protect the headlight lamp 310 and the lidar 320 from dirt, water, inclement weather, etc. The housing 340 may include a supporting member 342 and a translucent member 344.” (Page 12 Top Paragraph). Bao discloses a steering mechanism controlled to: steer a detection portion of the transmission light toward a field-of- view (FOV) of the LiDAR via the window, “The lidar 320 may be a single channel lidar or a scanning lidar. For example, the lidar 320 may include a scanner for changing a propagation path of the laser beam emitted from the laser beam emitter. For example, the scanner may include one or more optical elements for reflecting, refracting, and/or diffracting the laser beam emitted by the laser beam emitter.” (Page 10 Bottom Paragraph). Bao discloses receive return light formed based on the detection portion of the transmission light in the FOV, “For example, the navigation system may include one or more lidars for detecting objects located near the autonomous vehicle. The lidars may include a light source to emit laser beams and an optical receiver to receive light reflected from an object. “ (Page 6 Middle Paragraph). Bao discloses that a non-detection portion of the transmission light is transmitted in a visible light spectrum to a field-of-illumination (FOI) via the window, “ As shown in FIG. 2, the lighting system 200 includes a low beam lamp 210 and a high beam lamp 220 at both sides at the front of the vehicle.” (Page 8 Bottom Paragraph) and “The low beam light module projects light in a lateral and/or downward direction to provide adequate lighting without reducing visibility of oncoming traffic. The high beam lamp 220 includes a high beam light module configured to provide an intense, center-weighted distribution of light for driving in areas with poor lighting conditions.” (Page 8 Bottom Paragraph). It can be assumed that the light emitted from these lamps is within the visible spectrum as they are meant to illuminate areas for the driver. Bao discloses that the system is controlled by the vehicle to generate visible illumination or visible vehicle signals, “For example, the headlight lamp 310 may be controlled to be turned on or turned off by a controller in the vehicle.” (Page 10 Bottom Paragraph).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3, 26, 29, 48-51, 55 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao (WO 2022134011 A1) in further view of Park (US 10584842 B2).
Regarding claim 3, Bao discloses the system of claim 1, see claim 1 rejection. Bao does not disclose that the one or more light sources comprise one or more red-green-blue (RGB) light emitting diodes (LEDs) capable of changing color, the one or more RGB LEDs being arranged in one or more 1- dimensional or 2-dimensional arrays configured to generate the non-detection portion of the transmission light.
Park discloses disclose that the one or more light sources comprise one or more red-green-blue (RGB) light emitting diodes (LEDs) capable of changing color, the one or more RGB LEDs being arranged in one or more 1- dimensional or 2-dimensional arrays configured to generate the non-detection portion of the transmission light, “ FIG. 5 is a diagram for explanation of a lamp for a vehicle, the lamp in which a plurality of light sources is included in light emitting unit, according to an implementation.’ (??) and “The light source 302 may include a plurality of light emitting elements 302R, 302G, and 302B. For example, the light source 302 may include a red laser diode 302R, a green laser diode 302G, and a blue laser diode 302R” (Page 29, Lines 58-67).
Bao discloses the system of claim 1. What is claimed has the improvement of using RGB LEDs for the non-detection portion of the transmission lights. Park discloses a vehicle that uses RBG LEDs in to produce light and different light patterns. One of skill in the art before the effective filing date could have applied what is disclosed by Park to the system discloses by Bao as it is a known improvement and the references are analogous to each other so the results would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 26, Bao discloses the system of claim 1, see claim 1 rejection. Bao does not disclose that at least one of the one or more light sources comprises a plurality of light emitting elements, each of the plurality of light emitting elements is controllable independently from other light emitting elements to form a light pattern. Park does disclose this, “For example, the light source 302 may include a plurality of micro LEDs 610 as light emitting elements. Each of the micro LEDs 610 may be turned on and off individually by the control of the processor 170. Color and brightness of a light output from each of the micro LEDs 610 may be controlled individually by the control of the processor 170” (Page 29 Lines 33-38) and Figure 6.
Regarding claim 48, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 26, see claim 26 rejection.
Regarding claim 29, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 3, see claim 3 rejection.
Regarding claim 49, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 3, see claim 3 rejection.
Regarding claim 55, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 49, see claim 49 rejection.
Regarding claim 50, the combination of Bao and Park disclose the system of claim 49, see claim 49 rejection. Bao discloses that the one or more light sources are controllable to adjust one or more of brightness, color, direction, focus, or contrast of at least a part of the non-detection portion of the transmission light, “The system may increase a brightness of the headlight lamp 310 in response to detecting an object in front of the vehicle by the lidar 320. “ (Page 16 Top Paragraph).
Regarding claim 51, the combination of Bao and Park disclose the system of claim 49, see claim 49 rejection. Bao discloses that the detection portion of the transmission light and the non-detection portion of the transmission light are arranged to be non-coaxial, “As shown in FIG. 4, the angle adjustment system 400 includes a first adjuster 305 for adjusting a first angle of the headlight lamp 310, a second adjuster 325 for adjusting a first angle of the lidar 320, and a third adjuster 315 for adjusting a second angle of the headlight lamp 310.” (Page 12 Bottom Paragraph) and see Figure 4.
Claim(s) 8, 14, 34, and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bao (WO 2022134011 A1) in further view of Keilaf (US 11500076 B2).
Regarding claim 8, Bao discloses the lidar system of claim 1, see claim 1 rejection. Bao discloses a first light source configured to generate the non-detection portion of the transmission light, “ As shown in FIG. 2, the lighting system 200 includes a low beam lamp 210 and a high beam lamp 220 at both sides at the front of the vehicle.” (Page 8 Bottom Paragraph) Bao discloses a second light source configured to generate the detection portion of the transmission light, “The lamp assembly includes one or more range sensors (e.g., lidars) , one or more light sources” (Abstract). Bao does not disclose that the detection portion of the transmission light and the non- detection portion of the transmission light having different wavelengths.
Keilaf does disclose the detection portion of the transmission light and the non- detection portion of the transmission light having different wavelengths, “FIG. 2C illustrates an example of LIDAR system 100 in which projecting unit 102 includes a primary light source 112A and a secondary light source 112B. Primary light source 112A may project light with a longer wavelength than is sensitive to the human eye in order to optimize SNR and detection range. For example, primary light source 112A may project light with a wavelength between about 750 nm and 1100 nm. In contrast, secondary light source 112B may project light with a wavelength visible to the human eye.” (Page 48 Lines 55-63). The secondary light source can be taken as the non-detection light source as it is in the visible light range.
Keilaf teaches that the wavelength of the light can be changed to optimize the range of the light. “Primary light source 112A may project light with a longer wavelength than is sensitive to the human eye in order to optimize SNR and detection range. For example, primary light source 112A may project light with a wavelength between about 750 nm and 1100 nm.” (Page 48 Lines 58-62). One of skill in the art could apply what is taught by Keilaf to the system disclosed by Bao before the effective filing date as Keilaf teaches that changing the wavelengths of light effects the range of that light, making it possible to optimize one light source for detection and one for non-detection by what is disclosed by Keilaf.
Regarding claim 34, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 8, see claim 8 rejection.
Regarding claim 14, Bao discloses the system of claim 1 see claim 1 rejection. Bao does not disclose that the detection portion of the transmission light is in the non-visible light spectrum. Keilaf discloses that the detection portion of the transmission light is in the non-visible light spectrum, “Primary light source 112A may project light with a longer wavelength than is sensitive to the human eye in order to optimize SNR and detection range. For example, primary light source 112A may project light with a wavelength between about 750 nm and 1100 nm.” (Page 48 Lines 58-62).
Regarding claim 39, rejected under the same reasoning as claim 14, see claim 14 rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSH CHARLES GARDINER whose telephone number is (571)270-0634. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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.
/JOSH CHARLES GARDINER/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights