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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 12/17/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed 1/19/2024 are approved by the examiner.
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, 2, 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (United States Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0003870) in view of Hanada et al (EP 2905817 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Chen et al disclose: A three-dimensional ranging module [ paragraph [0006] disclosed a depth information camera utilizing time-of-flight (TOF) ] comprising: a light source that emits a laser beam [ paragraph [0077] states, “…The projection assembly 20 projects a laser. After the laser is projected onto a spatial object, reflection occurs, and the reflected laser is received by the receiving assembly 30…” ]; a lens module that includes: a lens that collects light resulting from the laser beam emitted being reflected off an object [ taught by lens assembly (33) ]; an imaging element that receives the light collected by the lens [ taught by photosensitive element (31) ]; and a lens tube that surrounds a space between the lens and the imaging element and supports the lens [ element 33B in figure 19 defines a lens tube ]; and a lens cover positioned between the lens module and the object and transparent to a wavelength range of the laser beam, wherein in a cross section obtained when the lens tube is cut along a plane that includes an optical axis of the lens, a first surface of the lens tube includes a first slope portion that slopes away from the lens cover with an increase in distance from the optical axis, the first surface facing the object [ the outer top edge of element 33B has an edge that slope away from the optical axis ].
Chen et al does not explicitly disclose a lens cover positioned between the lens module and the object and transparent to a wavelength range of the laser beam.
Figure 1 of Hanada et al teaches that it was known to provide a cover (CP) between the transmission/reception components of a laser range finder and an object.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the device of Chen et al to have included a cover, as shown by Hanada et al, when seeking to protect the components from the external environment.
Claims 2 and 5 are met by the outer top edge of element 33B, thus being met by the combination of Chen et al and Hanada et al, as applied to claim 1.
With respect to claim 20, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the combination of Chen et al and Hanada et al, as applied to claim 1, to have included means to calculate distance via time-of-flight because the device of Chen et al was disclosed as a depth camera using time-of-flight.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (United States Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0003870) in view of Hanada et al (EP 2905817 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pacala et al (United States Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0239065).
Figure 15 and paragraph [0150] of Pacala et al teach that it was known before the effective filing date of the present application to have mounted the reception optics of a LIDAR behind a cover (1508) wherein the slope of the cover is away from the optical axis, as seen in the direction towards the transmission optics.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the combination of Chen et al and Hanada et al to have meet claim 10 when using a curved cover, as taught by Pacala et al.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (United States Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0003870) in view of Pacala et al (United States Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0239065).
With respect to claim 14, Chen et al disclose: A three-dimensional ranging module [ paragraph [0006] disclosed a depth information camera utilizing time-of-flight (TOF) ] comprising: a light source that emits a laser beam [ paragraph [0077] states, “…The projection assembly 20 projects a laser. After the laser is projected onto a spatial object, reflection occurs, and the reflected laser is received by the receiving assembly 30…” ]; a lens module that includes: a lens that collects light resulting from the laser beam emitted being reflected off an object [ taught by lens assembly (33) ]; an imaging element that receives the light collected by the lens [ taught by photosensitive element (31) ]; and a lens tube that surrounds a space between the lens and the imaging element and supports the lens [ element 33B in figure 19 defines a lens tube ]; and a lens cover positioned between the lens module and the object and transparent to a wavelength range of the laser beam, wherein a third surface of the lens cover includes a third slope portion that slopes away from the lens module with an increase in distance from an optical axis of the lens, the third surface facing the lens module.
Chen et al does not disclose a lens cover positioned between the lens module and the object and transparent to a wavelength range of the laser beam, wherein a third surface of the lens cover includes a third slope portion that slopes away from the lens module with an increase in distance from an optical axis of the lens, the third surface facing the lens module.
Figure 15A and paragraph [0150] of Pacala et al teach that it was known before the effective filing date of the present application to have mounted the reception optics of a LIDAR behind a cover (1508) wherein the slope of the cover is away from the optical axis, as seen in the direction towards the transmission optics.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the device of Chen et al to have met claim 14, when using a curved cover to protect the components, as taught by Pacala et al.
Claim 15 is shown by the arrangement of the cover (1508) in figure 15A of Pacala et al, thus being met by the combination of Chen et al and Pacala et al, as applied to claim 14.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 6-9 and 16-19 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.
Claims 11-13 are allowed.
With regard to claim 11, the cited prior art does not teach or suggest “…wherein a relation of (H1+H2) tan(theta) ≤ B is satisfied, where in a cross section obtained when the lens is cut along a plane that includes the optical axis, B denotes a distance between an outer edge of the lens and an outer edge of the opening, H1 denotes a distance between the lens cover and a center of the lens, H2 denotes a distance between the lens cover and a second surface of the member, the second surface facing the lens cover, and (theta) denotes an angle between the optical axis and a line that connects the center of the lens and an outer edge of the imaging element…” - as this subject matter is presented in entire context.
Claims 12 and 13 depend on claim 11.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to MARK HELLNER at telephone number (571)272-6981.
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
/MARK HELLNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights