Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/430,592

INTEGRATION OF LIDAR SYSTEM COMPONENTS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 01, 2024
Examiner
NASER, SANJIDA IFFAT
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
SiLC Technologies Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allowance Rate
82 granted / 111 resolved
+21.9% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+27.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
7 currently pending
Career history
120
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
58.4%
+18.4% vs TC avg
§102
27.7%
-12.3% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 111 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. 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. Claim(s) 1-3,18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230089758 A1 (Tu et al.) in view of US 20190346568 A1 (Feng et al.). Claim 1. Tu teaches a system, comprising: a […] system having a semiconductor chip with a lateral side between a top side and a bottom side, the lateral side including a curved portion (see figure 16A para 72-75, note The output facet 1612 is recessed relative to the lateral side surface 1610,); and the semiconductor chip including a slab waveguide with a facet defined by the curved portion of the lateral side of the semiconductor chip (para 74 note The output waveguide 1616 may pass light 1624 into the slab waveguide 1622, in which the light 1624 diverges as it approaches the output facet 1612. ), the semiconductor chip being configured to direct outgoing […] signals through the slab waveguide such that the outgoing […] signal exits the slab waveguide through the curved portion of the lateral side (see figure 16A,B and note curved facet, para 71-75,note The output facet 1612 is recessed relative to the lateral side surface 1610, such that light exiting the photonic integrated circuit 1600 from the output facet 1612 may travel past the lateral side surface 1610 ). Tu teaches an optical system but fails to explicitly teach a Lidar system. However, Feng teaches a similar optical sensor that is used as a Lidar system (Fen para 15-18). It is well known in the art that such optical systems are used as Lidar. It would have been obvious to have combined the references of Tu and Feng and modify the system such that the optical chip integrates full optical LIDAR functionality onto a single optical chip. The motivation to do so would be to control the frequency and intensity of the outgoing LIDAR signal transmitted from the chip and save power (Feng para 15-18). Claim 2. Tu as modified in view of Feng teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the lateral side is curved in a plane that is parallel to the bottom of the semiconductor chip (Tu see figure 16A para 72-75 note the substrate 1602 and also note the output facet 1612 is recessed relative to the lateral side surface 1610). Claim 3. Tu as modified in view of Feng teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the semiconductor chip includes a substrate and is configured such that the lateral side of the semiconductor chip includes a lateral side of the substrate, the curved portion of the lateral side being positioned above the lateral side of the substrate with the curved portion of the lateral side being spaced back from the lateral side of the substrate (Tu see figure 16A para 72-75). Claim 18. Tu as modified in view of Feng teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the curved portion of the lateral side has a shape that increases collimation (Tu para 86 note collimate) of the outgoing LIDAR signal (Feng para 15-18). Tu teaches an optical system with optical signal but fails to explicitly teach a Lidar system with Lidar signal. However, Feng teaches a similar optical sensor that is used as a Lidar system (Feng para 15-18). It is well known in the art that such optical systems are used as Lidar. It would have been obvious to have combined the references of Tu and Feng and modify the system such that the optical chip integrates full optical LIDAR functionality onto a single optical chip. The motivation to do so would be to control the frequency and intensity of the outgoing LIDAR signal transmitted from the chip and save power (Feng para 15-18). Claim 19. Tu as modified in view of Feng teaches the system of claim 1. Tu teaches light going out through the curved portion of lateral side of the semiconductor chip (para 71-75, note The output facet 1612 is recessed relative to the lateral side surface 1610, such that light exiting the photonic integrated circuit 1600 from the output facet 1612 may travel past the lateral side surface 1610). Tu teaches an optical system for guiding light and fails to explicitly teach a lidar system with an incoming signal entering the semiconductor chip through the curved portion of the lateral side, the incoming LIDAR signal including light from the outgoing LIDAR signals. However, Feng teaches an incoming LIDAR signal enters the semiconductor chip through the facet, the incoming LIDAR signal including light from the outgoing LIDAR signals (Feng Para 21). It would have been obvious to have combined the references of Tu and Feng and modify the system such that an incoming LIDAR signal enters the semiconductor chip through the curved portion of the lateral side, the incoming LIDAR signal including light from the outgoing LIDAR signals. The motivation to do so would be to control the frequency and intensity of the outgoing LIDAR signal transmitted from the chip and save power (Feng para 15-18). Therefore, Tu as modified in view of Feng teaches an incoming LIDAR signal enters the semiconductor chip through the curved portion of the lateral side, the incoming LIDAR signal including light from the outgoing LIDAR signals. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-17 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. Regarding claim 4, the closest prior art, neither alone nor in combination, sufficiently discloses the claimed invention in such a way that the combination of limitations would be rendered anticipatory or obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. The closest prior art Tu, Feng fails to teach the semiconductor chip includes a reflective optical grating configured to reflect the outgoing LIDAR signal such that the outgoing LIDAR signal travels through the slab waveguide and exits the slab waveguide through the curved portion of the lateral side. However, the prior art, when taken alone, or, in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant, nor would there exist a reasonable motivation to combine prior art with similar components in such a way that does not render the original invention inoperable for its intended purpose. Claims 5-17 are dependent claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANJIDA NASER whose telephone number is (571)272-5233. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST. 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 at (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. /SANJIDA NASER/Examiner, Art Unit 3645 /ISAM A ALSOMIRI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 01, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12761366
Lidar System with Scene Dependent Focus Intensity
3y 11m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12699186
INTERFEROMETRIC IMAGER AND METHOD
5y 1m to grant Granted Aug 04, 2026
Patent 12693726
Integrated optoelectronic module
5y 11m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12659586
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR STABILIZING IMAGING SENSOR DATA
3y 2m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12638559
Optical Coupler for LIDAR Sensor
2y 4m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
74%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+27.5%)
3y 6m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 111 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month