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 .
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 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.
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 1-7, 9-15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chriqui US 20200049886 A1 in view of Dunn US 20210255324 A1 and Piggott US 20240094360 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Chriqui teaches a LiDAR system comprising
a light source configured to generate light (optical source such as a laser, [0025, 34]);
a lens (focusing element 16, Figs. 1-5, [0034-35]);
a rotating scanning mirror (mechanically steered mirror 34 in Fig. 1, [0036]); and
a photonic integrated circuit (PIC) chip mechanically registered with the lens (PIC 10, Figs. 1-5, [0032-37]), the PIC chip further comprising
a transmission waveguide lithographically fabricated thereon, wherein a first end of the transmission waveguide is optically coupled to the light source (waveguide 20 optically coupled to laser input port 36 in Figs. 1-5, [0034]);
a first free space coupler lithographically fabricated thereon and positioned at a second end of and optically coupled to the transmission waveguide (folding element 14, Figs. 1-5, [0032-35]);
a receiver waveguide lithographically fabricated thereon (waveguides 20 can be receiver waveguides in Figs. 1-5, [0034]);
a second free space coupler lithographically fabricated thereon and positioned at a first end of and optically coupled to the receiver waveguide, and further lithographically aligned with the first free space coupler (folding elements 14, Figs. 1-5, [0032-36]); and
a detector fabricated thereon and optically coupled to a second end of the receiver waveguide (photodetector 26 in Figs. 1-3, [0032-35]);
Chriqui does not explicitly teach generating light pulses and wherein the lens focuses both light pulses generated at the light source and output from the first free space coupler onto the scanning mirror and returning light reflected from the scanning mirror onto the second free space coupler.
Dunn teaches use of a common lens (1032) to focus light on a scanning mirror 1004 and return light on transmitters/receivers 1022 with each transmitters/receiver channel having a photodiode to receive a return laser beam (810 in Fig. 8 and unlabeled in Fig. 10, [0039, 43]).
Piggott teaches transmitting laser pulses ([0041]).
Additionally, pulsed lasers and common lenses are well-known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chriqui such that the light source generates pulsed light similar to Piggott, and the lens focuses both light pulses generated at the light source and output from the first free space coupler onto the scanning mirror and returning light reflected from the scanning mirror onto the second free space coupler similar to Dunn with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of simplifying free-space optical components used.
Regarding claim 2, Chriqui as modified above teaches the LiDAR system of claim 1, wherein in a configuration in which the first free space coupler functions as both a transmitter and a receiver (all can function as transmitter and receiver in Figs. 1-3, [0032-36]), the LiDAR system further comprises an output receiver waveguide lithographically fabricated on the PIC chip and optically coupled to the transmission waveguide at a first end and to the detector at a second end (Annotated Fig. 3 below shows an arrow pointing at receiver waveguide that is optically coupled to transmitting waveguides 20 and to the detector at a second end, [0032-36]); wherein the lens is further configured to focus returning light reflected from the scanning mirror onto the first free space coupler (lens 16 focuses received light, Figs. 1-5, [0032-36]).
PNG
media_image1.png
446
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 3: Arrow “A” pointing to lithographically fabricated waveguide connecting photodetector 26 and transmitting waveguides, and connected to a first port of the optical splitter (22 and 24). Arrow “B” pointing towards output a second port. Arrow “C” pointing towards a third port which leads to laser 26.
Regarding claim 3, Chriqui as modified above teaches the LiDAR system of claim 2 further comprising an optical splitter fabricated on the PIC chip positioned between and optically coupled to each of the light source and the transmission waveguide and between the transmission waveguide and the output receiver waveguide to which it is also optically coupled (beam combiner 22 and 24 in Figs. 1-3, [0032-36]).
Regarding claim 4, Chriqui as modified above teaches the LiDAR system of claim 3, wherein the optical splitter is oriented such that light pulses from the light source are input to the optical splitter through a first output port of the optical splitter (see “C” in annotated Fig. 3 above, [0032-35]) and transmitted to the first free space coupler through an input port of the optical splitter optically coupled to the transmission waveguide (see “B” in annotated Fig. 3 above, [0032-35]), and the returning light is received from the first free space coupler through transmission waveguide optically coupled to the input port (see “B” in annotated Fig. 3 above, [0032-35]) and output from a second output port of the optical splitter optically coupled to the output receiver waveguide (see “A” in annotated Fig. 3 above, [0032-35]).
Regarding claim 5, Chriqui as modified above teaches the LiDAR system of claim 3
Chriqui does not explicitly teach further comprising an encoder fabricated on the PIC chip positioned between the light source and the optical splitter.
Piggott teaches an encoder (modulator 220) between splitter (230) and light source (202, Fig. 2A, [0041-48])
Additionally, Chriqui teaches an amplifier (28) before an encoder (phase shifter 18, Figs. 1,3, [0035]) on a tx/rx portion of the lidar. However moving these to a waveguide portion by the laser and before Chriqui’s splitter, similar to Piggott, or including these in addition to Chriqui’s components, would have the predictable result of helping control the transmitted optical signal without directly manipulating the returned light.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chriqui to include an encoder fabricated on the PIC chip positioned between the light source and the optical splitter similar to Piggott with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of helping identify the transmitted light after it is reflected and received.
Regarding claim 6, Chriqui as modified above teaches the LiDAR system of claim 3
Chriqui does not explicitly teach further comprising an amplifier fabricated on the PIC chip positioned between the light source and the optical splitter.
Piggott teaches an amplifier (beam preparation stage 210) between splitter (230) and light source (202, Fig. 2A, [0041-48])
Additionally, Chriqui teaches an amplifier (28) before an encoder (phase shifter 18, Figs. 1,3, [0035]) on a tx/rx portion of the lidar. However moving these to a waveguide portion by the laser and before Chriqui’s splitter, similar to Piggott, or including these in addition to Chriqui’s components, would have the predictable result of helping control the transmitted optical signal without directly manipulating the returned light.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chriqui to include an amplifier fabricated on the PIC chip positioned between the light source and the optical splitter similar to Piggott with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of helping identify the transmitted light after it is reflected and received.
Regarding claim 7, Chriqui as modified above teaches the LiDAR system of claim 5
Chriqui does not explicitly teach further comprising an amplifier fabricated on the PIC chip positioned between the light source and the encoder.
Piggott teaches an amplifier (beam preparation stage 210) between modulator (220) and light source (202, Fig. 2A, [0041-48])
Additionally, Chriqui teaches an amplifier (28) before an encoder (phase shifter 18, Figs. 1,3, [0035]) on a tx/rx portion of the lidar. However moving these to a waveguide portion by the laser and before Chriqui’s splitter, similar to Piggott, or including these in addition to Chriqui’s components, would have the predictable result of helping control the transmitted optical signal without directly manipulating the returned light.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chriqui to include an amplifier fabricated on the PIC chip positioned between the light source and the encoder similar to Piggott with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of helping identify the transmitted light after it is reflected and received.
Regarding claim 9, the reasoning of above rejection to claim 1 applies, mutatis mutandis¸ to the subject matter of claim 9, which therefore is also considered obvious in view of Chriqui, Dunn, and Piggott.
Regarding claim 10, see rejection to claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 11, see rejection to claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 12, see rejection to claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 13, see rejection to claim 5 above.
Regarding claim 14, see rejection to claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 15, see rejection to claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 17, the reasoning of above rejection to claim 1 applies, mutatis mutandis¸ to the subject matter of claim 17, which therefore is also considered obvious in view of Chriqui, Dunn, and Piggott.
Regarding claim 18, see rejection to claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 19, see rejection to claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 20, see rejection to claim 4 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 16 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior art of record does not explicitly teach nor render obvious: The system of claim 8 or method of claim 16, specifically including:
wherein each of the additional free space couplers is lithographically aligned with the first free space coupler and spaced apart from the first free space coupler at varying distances falling within a calculated extent of positional offset of the returning light resulting from angular lag corresponding to rotation of the scanning mirror
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH C FRITCHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5533. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached on 571-272-6970. 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.
/J.C.F./Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ISAM A ALSOMIRI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights