DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-16 are pending
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9-11, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Beuschel ‘975 (US 2021/0156975).
Regarding Claims 1 and 16, Beuschel ‘975 discloses a Lidar and a laser detector [Fig 2, 3; 0007; 0031-34], comprising multiple optical detection units and a received signal processing module [Fig 2, 3; 0007; 0031-34], wherein: the multiple optical detection units are divided into at least a first block and a second block [0007; 0034; 0038], a first bias voltage is input into each optical detection unit in the first block, a second bias voltage is input into each optical detection unit in the second block, and the first bias voltage is different from the second bias voltage [Fig 2; 0034-35]; and the received signal processing module is configured to process a received incident optical signal detected by the first block and the second block and to provide an output signal [0037-38].
Regarding Claim 2, Beuschel ‘975 also discloses wherein outputs of the optical detection unit in the first block are combined into a first detection signal for outputting, and outputs of the optical detection unit in the second block are combined to output a second detection signal; and wherein the received signal processing module comprises a first receiving circuit for processing the first detection signal and a second receiving circuit for processing the second detection signal [0017; 0034; 0038; 0040], as it is common for photodiodes to be arranged between the single-photon avalanche diodes and separated into columns or rows.
Regarding Claims 3 and 4, Beuschel ‘975 also discloses wherein the first bias voltage is higher than the second bias voltage, and when the first block outputs a saturated echo signal, the received signal processing module obtains information of an echo signal via the second detection signal output by the second block by either … excluding the saturated echo signal output by the first block, or with a rising edge and/or saturation width of the saturated echo signal output by the first block [ Fig 2; 0034-36], as this is common in the art as it would allows for an accurate time-correlated photon count.
Regarding Claim 6, Beuschel ‘975 also discloses wherein the multiple optical detection units further are divided into a third block, a third bias voltage is input into each optical detection unit in the third block, and the third bias voltage is different from the first bias voltage and the second bias voltage; wherein outputs of optical detection units in the third block are combined into a fourth detection signal for outputting; and wherein the received signal processing module comprises a fourth receiving circuit for processing the fourth detection signal [0007].
Regarding Claim 7, Beuschel ‘975 also discloses wherein the first block or the second block comprises at least two sub-blocks, outputs of different sub-blocks are used as different detection signals for outputting, and outputs of optical detection units in a same sub-block are combined into a same detection signal for outputting [0018; 0034-36].
Regarding Claim 9, Beuschel ‘975 also discloses wherein the optical detection units in a same block convert their respective excited currents into pulse signals, combine the pulse signals into a detection signal via a logic combination circuit, and output the detection signal to a receiving circuit [0018; 0034-36].
Regarding Claim 10, Beuschel ‘975 also discloses wherein optical detection units in a same block convert their respective excited currents into pulse signals, combine the pulse signals into a detection signal via analog circuit addition and output the detection signal to a receiving circuit [0018; 0034-36].
Regarding Claim 11, Beuschel ‘975 also discloses wherein the multiple optical detection units are divided into multiple blocks, and input bias voltages of two adjacent blocks are different [Fig 3, 4].
Regarding Claim 15, Beuschel ‘975 also discloses wherein the multiple optical detection units comprise a silicon photomultiplier (SiPM) array or a single-photon avalanche diode (SPAD) array [0018; 0034-36].
Claim(s) 1 and 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Steinkogler (US 2020/0057146).
Regarding Claims 1 and 16, Steinkogler discloses a Lidar and a laser detector [Fig 1, 3; 0001; 0044], comprising multiple optical detection units and a received signal processing module [Fig 1, 3, 7, 9; 0001; 0044; 0053; 0065], wherein: the multiple optical detection units are divided into at least a first block and a second block [Fig 1, 3, 7, 9; 0001; 0044; 0053; 0065], a first bias voltage is input into each optical detection unit in the first block, a second bias voltage is input into each optical detection unit in the second block, and the first bias voltage is different from the second bias voltage [Fig 7, 9; 0044; 0053; 0065]; and the received signal processing module is configured to process a received incident optical signal detected by the first block and the second block and to provide an output signal [0044; 0053; 0065].
Regarding Claim 11, Steinkogler also discloses wherein the multiple optical detection units are divided into multiple blocks, and input bias voltages of two adjacent blocks are different [Fig 3; 0055-56].
Regarding Claim 12, Steinkogler also discloses wherein the second bias voltage is lower than the first bias voltage, and the optical detection units in the second block are arranged around the first block [Fig 6; 0062 ].
Regarding Claim 13, Steinkogler also discloses wherein the second block and the first block are arranged side by side [Fig 6; 0062].
Regarding Claim 14, Steinkogler also discloses wherein the second bias voltage is lower than the first bias voltage, the laser detector comprises at least two second blocks, and the at least two second blocks are respectively arranged on different sides of the first block [Fig 6; 0062].
Regarding Claim 15, Steinkogler also discloses wherein the multiple optical detection units comprise a silicon photomultiplier (SiPM) array or a single-photon avalanche diode (SPAD) array [0003; 0044].
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 7-10 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Beuschel ‘079 (US 2021/0165079).
Regarding Claims 1 and 16, Beuschel ‘079 discloses a Lidar and a laser detector [Fig 2, 3; 0004; 0009-11; 0015; 0049], comprising multiple optical detection units and a received signal processing module [Fig 2, 3; 0004; 0009-11; 0015; 0049], wherein: the multiple optical detection units are divided into at least a first block and a second block [Fig 2, 3; 0009-11; 0015; 0049], a first bias voltage is input into each optical detection unit in the first block, a second bias voltage is input into each optical detection unit in the second block, and the first bias voltage is different from the second bias voltage [0009-11; 0015; 0049]; and the received signal processing module is configured to process a received incident optical signal detected by the first block and the second block and to provide an output signal [0009-11; 0015; 0043; 0049].
Regarding Claim 2, Beuschel ‘079 also discloses wherein outputs of the optical detection unit in the first block are combined into a first detection signal for outputting, and outputs of the optical detection unit in the second block are combined to output a second detection signal; and wherein the received signal processing module comprises a first receiving circuit for processing the first detection signal and a second receiving circuit for processing the second detection signal [0027], as it is common for photodiodes to be arranged between the single-photon avalanche diodes and separated into columns or rows.
Regarding Claim 5, Beuschel ‘079 also discloses wherein an output of at least some optical detection units in the first block and an output of at least some optical detection units in the second block are combined into a third detection signal for outputting; and the received signal processing module comprises a third receiving circuit for processing the third detection signal [Fig 6; 0049].
Regarding Claim 7, Beuschel ‘079 also discloses wherein the first block or the second block comprises at least two sub-blocks, outputs of different sub-blocks are used as different detection signals for outputting, and outputs of optical detection units in a same sub-block are combined into a same detection signal for outputting [0006-0011; 0015; 0040-43; 0046].
Regarding Claim 8, Beuschel ‘079 also discloses, wherein optical detection units in a same block are connected in parallel to combine outputs into a detection signal and output the detection signal to a receiving circuit [0006-0011; 0015; 0040-43; 0046].
Regarding Claim 9, Beuschel ‘079 also discloses wherein the optical detection units in a same block convert their respective excited currents into pulse signals, combine the pulse signals into a detection signal via a logic combination circuit, and output the detection signal to a receiving circuit [0006-0011; 0015; 0040-43; 0046].
Regarding Claim 10, Beuschel ‘079 also discloses wherein optical detection units in a same block convert their respective excited currents into pulse signals, combine the pulse signals into a detection signal via analog circuit addition and output the detection signal to a receiving circuit [0006-0011; 0015; 0040-43; 0046].
Regarding Claim 15, Beuschel ‘079 also discloses wherein the multiple optical detection units comprise a silicon photomultiplier (SiPM) array or a single-photon avalanche diode (SPAD) array [0010; 0015].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11 August 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
A broadest reasonable interpretation of Claim 1 (and 16) follows. A laser detector or lidar device has a laser emitter, plural (at least two) detection blocks (which can be individual detection elements or groups of), of which there are different (first and second) applied bias voltages, with signals from each the first and second “blocks” used in some way to produce an output signal.
Primary reference Beuschel ‘079 in [0009] and [0011] and [0015] states that SPADs are assigned to different groups (which correspond to first and second blocks) can be charged to different bias voltages VSpad1 and/or VSpad2, with [0037] describing in more detail how this process may be controlled.
Primary reference Steinkogler describes groups of receive elements in [0046] and [0053], with different bias voltages applied in [0065] – [0066] and [0070] – [0071].
Primary reference Beuschel ‘975 in [0034] and [0035] and others states that SPADs (which correspond to first and second blocks) can be charged to different bias voltages, in [0043] and [0049].
Applicant's remaining arguments amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
As such, the applicant’s arguments do not appear persuasive to overcome any of the separate rejections for independent claims 1 and 16, nor any subsequent dependent claims as listed in Paragraphs 5-12, 15-19 or 22-28 above. No allowable subject matter can be identified at this time.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JAMES R HULKA whose telephone number is (571)270-7553. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 9am-6pm, F: 10am-2pm.
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 5712705227. 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.
JAMES R. HULKA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3645
/JAMES R HULKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
