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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement (PTO-1449) filed 02/27/2026, 03/28/2024 and 02/15/2024. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 5-6, 16, 21, 32-34 and 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Droz et al (US 10578718 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Droz discloses in at least figure 1, a light-scanning device (polygonal mirror assembly 100 fig. 1) comprising:
a rotatable polygon-shaped structure (polygonal mirror assembly 100 is enabled to rotate col. 3 lines 44-46) comprising a frame (housing 101 fig. 1), a plurality of mirror bonding plates configured to reflect light (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side surface of the polygon-shaped structure 700” in the current application paragraph [0103]), and one or more flexures (springs 109 fig. 4A), wherein at least some mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) are adjustably attached (the two springs 109 are disposed between the housing 101 and the reflective surface 105 col. 4 lines 16-18 and may be accomplished by adjusting the coupling location on the housing 101 col. 10 lines 20-22) to the frame (housing 101 fig. 1) based on corresponding flexures (springs 109 fig. 4A) of the one or more flexures (springs 109 fig. 4A); and
a plurality of adjustment mechanisms (female coupling parts 106 fig. 1) inserted between (the female coupling parts 106 is attached to the housing to receive the male coupling part 110 of the reflective surface 105 col. 8 lines 48-51) the frame (housing 101 fig. 1) and corresponding mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side), wherein the plurality of adjustment mechanisms (female coupling parts 106 fig. 1) is configured to adjust tilt angles (the differing angles of the reflective surfaces 105 may be accomplished by female coupling parts 106 moving closer to the center of the housing col. 10 lines 19-24) of the corresponding mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side).
Regarding claim 5, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses, wherein at least one of the plurality of adjustment mechanisms (female coupling parts 106 fig. 1) is configured to adjust a tilt angle (the differing angles of the reflective surfaces 105 may be accomplished by female coupling parts 106 moving closer to the center of the housing col. 10 lines 19-24) of the corresponding mirror bonding plate (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) by increasing a gap between (the gap between the housing 101 and reflective surface 105 is increased when the reflective surface 105 connected to the frame 101 by female coupling parts 106 moves from a position at -8.7° as shown below in fig. 8B to a position at -2.7° as shown below in fig. 8A) the frame (housing 101 fig. 1) and the corresponding mirror bonding plate (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side).
PNG
media_image1.png
433
766
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 5 and further discloses, wherein the increasing of the gap (the gap between the housing 101 and reflective surface 105 is increased when the reflective surface 105 connected to the frame 101 by female coupling parts 106 moves from a position at -8.7° as shown below in fig. 8B to a position at -2.7° as shown below in fig. 8A) between the frame (housing 101 fig. 1) and the corresponding mirror bonding plate (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) is unidirectional (the gap changes in the x direction as shown below in figs. 8A-B).
PNG
media_image2.png
433
766
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses, wherein each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) comprises a reflective surface forming a side surface (each reflective surface 105 corresponds to a side of the triangle col. 2 lines 29-30) of the polygon-shaped structure (polygon mirror assembly 100 fig. 1).
Regarding claim 21, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses, wherein each mirror bonding plate (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) has a tilt angle that is different from tilt angles (the tilt angle of the reflective surface 105 is -2.7° in fig. 8A, -8.7° in fig. 8B and 3.3° in fig. 8C) of other mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side).
Regarding claim 32, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses, a light ranging and detection (LiDAR) system (Lidar 112 fig. 9A) comprising the light-scanning device (polygonal mirror assembly 100 fig. 9A) of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above).
Regarding claim 33, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses, a vehicle (the example polygonal mirror assemblies described herein may be exposed to varying ambient temperatures, for instance, when implemented in an example LIDAR system of an autonomous vehicle col. 3 lines 59-61) comprising a light ranging and detection (LiDAR) system (Lidar 112 fig. 9A), the LiDAR system (Lidar 112 fig. 9A) comprising the light-scanning device (polygonal mirror assembly 100 fig. 9A) of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above).
Regarding claim 34, Droz discloses in at least figure 1, a method of fabricating a light-scanning device (polygonal mirror assembly 100 fig. 1), the method comprising:
obtaining tilt angle requirements (each of three reflective surfaces 105 are coupled to the housing 101 such that the plane defined by each reflective surface 105 is positioned at a different angle to the longitudinal axis 104 col. 10 lines 16-19) of a plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side);
obtaining a rotatable polygon-shaped structure (polygonal mirror assembly 100 is enabled to rotate col. 3 lines 44-46) comprising a frame (housing 101 fig. 1), a plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side), and one or more flexures (springs 109 fig. 4A),
wherein tilt angles (the tilt angle of the reflective surfaces 105 are -2.7° in fig. 8A and -8.7° in fig. 8B) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) are configured to be less than (the angles of the reflective surfaces -2.7° and -8.7° are less than the longitudinal axis 104 figs. 8A-8B) the corresponding tilt angle requirements (each of three reflective surfaces 105 are coupled to the housing 101 such that the plane defined by each reflective surface 105 is positioned at a different angle to the longitudinal axis 104 col. 10 lines 16-19); and
inserting a plurality of adjustment mechanisms (female coupling parts 106 fig. 1) between (the female coupling parts 106 is attached to the housing to receive the male coupling part 110 of the reflective surface 105 col. 8 lines 48-51) the frame (housing 101 fig. 1) and corresponding mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) to adjust the tilt angles (the differing angles of the reflective surfaces 105 may be accomplished by female coupling parts 106 moving closer to the center of the housing col. 10 lines 19-24) according to the corresponding tilt angle requirements (each of three reflective surfaces 105 are coupled to the housing 101 such that the plane defined by each reflective surface 105 is positioned at a different angle to the longitudinal axis 104 col. 10 lines 16-19).
Regarding claim 36, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 34 and further discloses, wherein the tilt angle requirements (each of three reflective surfaces 105 are coupled to the housing 101 such that the plane defined by each reflective surface 105 is positioned at a different angle to the longitudinal axis 104 col. 10 lines 16-19) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) are different (the tilt angle of the reflective surface 105 are -2.7° in fig. 8A and -8.7° in fig. 8B) for different mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side).
Regarding claim 37, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 34 and further discloses, wherein inserting the plurality of adjustment mechanisms (female coupling parts 106 fig. 1) unidirectionally increases gaps (the gap increases in the x direction as shown below in figs. 8A-B) between (the gap is between the housing 101 and reflective surface 105 as shown below in figs. 8A-B) the frame (housing 101 fig. 1) and corresponding mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 1 and are configured to reflect emitted light 111 fig. 8, shown has 720A-D in current application fig. 7, and described as “each of the plurality of mirror bonding plates 720A-D may comprise a reflective surface forming a side).
PNG
media_image2.png
433
766
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 2-3 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) as applied to claims 1 and 16 above and in view of Zhu (WO 2022227733 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Droz does not disclose, wherein a first mirror bonding plate of the plurality of mirror bonding plates is rigidly connected to, or forms an integral part of, the frame, such that a tilt angle of the first mirror bonding plate is not adjustable.
However Zhu discloses in at least figure 21, wherein a first mirror bonding plate (right reflective surface 211 as shown below in fig. 21) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (two reflective surfaces 211 fig. 21) is rigidly connected to (the right reflective surface 211 is rigidly connected to the mirror frame 230 as shown below in fig. 21), or forms an integral part of (not required by claim), the frame (mirror frame 230 fig. 1), such that a tilt angle (the mirror angle of the left reflective surface is adjusted by the eccentric bolt 233 paragraph [0214] of translation) of the first mirror bonding plate (right reflective surface 211 as shown below in fig. 21) is not adjustable (the right reflective surface 211 does not have an eccentric bolt 233 to adjust the mirror angle fig. 21).
PNG
media_image3.png
757
760
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a rigidly connected reflective surface that does not change mirror angle as taught by Zhu in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The reflective surfaces will have different angles resulting in a different scan patter for each mirror as the system rotates.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Droz and Zhu discloses all the limitations of claim 2 and Droz further discloses, wherein tilt angles (the tilt angle of reflective surface 105 can be -2.7° in fig. 8A, -8.7° in fig. 8B or 3.3° in fig. 8C ) of one or more other mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 figs. A-C) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 figs. 8A-8C) are adjustable (the differing angles of the reflective surfaces 105 may be accomplished by female coupling parts 106 moving closer to the center of the housing col. 10 lines 19-24).
Regarding claim 18, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 16 and further discloses, wherein the reflective surface comprises a mirror.
However Zhu discloses in at least figure 21, the reflective surface (reflective surface 211 fig. 21) comprises a mirror (the multi-faceted rotating mirror 210 includes two reflective surfaces 211 paragraph [0214]).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a mirror as the reflective surface as taught by Zhu in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The two mirrors provide rotational symmetry paragraph [0214] of translation).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1 in view of Zhu (WO 22022227733 A1) as applied to claim 3 above and in further view of Dybdahl et al. (US 5742068 A).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Droz and Zhu discloses all the limitations of claim 3 and Droz further discloses, wherein the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig.1) comprises three mirror bonding plates (there are three reflective surfaces 105 that correspond to the sides of the triangle col. 7 lines 29-30),
Droz does not disclose, in addition to the first mirror bonding plates, and wherein tilt angles of the three mirror bonding plates are adjustable with respect to the tilt angle of the first mirror bonding plate.
However Dybdahl discloses in at least fig. 11, in addition to the first mirror bonding plates (first mirror 40 as shown below in fig. 11, is supported at one point by a flexible metal plate 54 col. 6 lines 48-50), and wherein tilt angles (angle of the mirrors col. 6 line 39) of the three mirror bonding plates (second, third and fourth mirrors 40 as shown below in fig. 11 are supported at one point by a flexible metal plate 54 col. 6 lines 48-50) are adjustable with respect to (the mirrors can be adjusted by tightening or loosening the screw connection 57 on each plate 54 col. 6 lines 56-61) the tilt angle (angle of the mirrors col. 6 line 39) of the first mirror bonding plate (first mirror 40 as shown below in fig. 11, is supported at one point by a flexible metal plate 54 col. 6 lines 48-50).
PNG
media_image4.png
357
668
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have at least four mirrors where the angle can be adjusted as taught by Dybdahl in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The mirror surfaces will, in this way, be displaced from the center of rotation and this will give rise to a fan-shaped scan where the center of rotation will, in reality, move during rotation (col. 7 lines 31-34).
Claims 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) as applied to claim 1 above and in view of Dybdahl et al. (US 5742068 A).
Regarding claim 7, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Droz does not disclose, further comprising one or more slots formed between the frame and one or more corresponding mirror bonding plates of the plurality of mirror bonding.
However Dybdahl discloses in at least fig. 11, further comprising one or more slots (slot as shown below in fig. 11) formed between (the slot is formed between the holder 51 and the plate 54 as shown below in fig. 11) the frame (holder 51 fig. 11) and one or more corresponding mirror bonding plates (the mirrors 40 are supported at one point by a flexible metal plate 54 col. 6 lines 48-50) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (the mirrors 40 are supported at one point by a flexible metal plate 54 col. 6 lines 48-50).
PNG
media_image5.png
357
668
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have slots between the holder and plate as taught by Dybdahl in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The slots provide room for the screw 57 to tighten the two punched-out tongues 55 and 56 and adjust the angle of the mirror.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Droz and Dybdahl discloses all the limitations of claim 7.
Droz does not disclose, wherein at least one flexure of the one or more flexures is connected to a first end of a first slot of the one or more slots.
However Dybdahl further discloses wherein at least one flexure (two punched-out tongues 55 and 56 fig. 11) of the one or more flexures (two punched-out tongues 55 and 56 fig. 11) is connected to a first end (the two punched-out tongues 55 and 56 are connected to the first end of the slot as shown below in fig. 11) of a first slot (slot as shown below in fig. 11) of the one or more slots (slot as shown below in fig. 11).
PNG
media_image6.png
357
668
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have slots between the holder and plate as taught by Dybdahl in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The slots provide room for the screw 57 to tighten the two punched-out tongues 55 and 56 and adjust the angle of the mirror.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Droz and Dybdahl discloses all the limitations of claim 8.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the at least one flexure is positioned toward a bottom of the rotatable polygon-shaped structure.
However Dybdahl further discloses, wherein the at least one flexure (two punched-out tongues 55 and 56 fig. 11) is positioned toward (the punched-out tongue 56 is toward the bottom of polygonal unit 32 as shown below in fig. 11) a bottom (bottom as shown below in fig. 11) of the rotatable polygon-shaped structure (polygonal unit 32 fig. 11).
PNG
media_image7.png
357
668
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have slots between the holder and plate as taught by Dybdahl in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The slots provide room for the screw 57 to tighten the two punched-out tongues 55 and 56 and adjust the angle of the mirror.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Droz and Dybdahl discloses all the limitations of claim 8.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the first slot is configured to have a dimension that allows tilt angle adjustment of a corresponding mirror bonding plate of the plurality of mirror bonding plates.
However Dybdahl further discloses, wherein the first slot (slot as shown below in fig. 11) is configured to have a dimension (x direction as shown below in fig. 11) that allows tilt angle adjustment (the mirrors can be adjusted by tightening or loosening the screw connection 57 on each plate 54 col. 6 lines 56-61) of a corresponding mirror bonding plate (the mirrors 40 are supported at one point by a flexible metal plate 54 col. 6 lines 48-50) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (the mirrors 40 are supported at one point by a flexible metal plate 54 col. 6 lines 48-50).
PNG
media_image8.png
357
668
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have slots between the holder and plate as taught by Dybdahl in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The slots provide room for the screw 57 to tighten the two punched-out tongues 55 and 56 and adjust the angle of the mirror.
Regarding claim 11, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Droz does not disclose, further comprising a plurality of holes disposed between the frame and corresponding mirror bonding plates of the plurality of mirror bonding plates, wherein at least one adjustment mechanism of the plurality of adjustment mechanisms is inserted at least partially into at least one corresponding hole of the plurality of holes.
However Dybdahl discloses in at least fig. 12, further comprising a plurality of holes (first and second holes as shown below in fig. 12) disposed between (the first and second holes are between the frame 51 and the plates 54 as shown below in fig. 12) the frame (holder 51 fig. 12) and corresponding mirror bonding plates of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (the mirrors 40 are supported at one point by a flexible metal plate 54 col. 6 lines 48-50), wherein at least one adjustment mechanism (screw connection 57 fig. 12) of the plurality of adjustment mechanisms (screw connections 57 fig. 12) is inserted at least partially into (screw connections 57 is inserted into the first and second holes as shown below in fig. 12) at least one corresponding hole (first and second holes as shown below in fig. 12) of the plurality of holes (first and second holes as shown below in fig. 12).
PNG
media_image9.png
373
802
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have holes between the holder and plate as taught by Dybdahl in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The holes support for the screw 57 to tighten the two punched-out tongues 55 and 56 and adjust the angle of the mirror.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Droz and Dybdahl discloses all the limitations of claim 11.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the plurality of holes comprises threaded holes and the plurality of adjustment mechanisms comprises tapered jack / drive screws.
However Dybdahl further discloses, wherein the plurality of holes (first and second holes as shown below in fig. 12) comprises threaded holes (the holes need to be threaded for a screw to be tightened col. 6 lines 55-56) and the plurality of adjustment mechanisms (screw connections 57 fig. 12) comprises tapered jack/drive screws (the screw connections 57 are tightened to hold the holder 51 and the and plate 54 together to draw the mirror to the mid-point col. 6 lines 54-59).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use screws as taught by Dybdahl in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The screw 57 tightens the two punched-out tongues 55 and 56 and adjusts the angle of the mirror.
Claims 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) as applied to claim 1 above and in view of Ishii et al. (US 6427916 B1).
Regarding claim 13, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the polygon-shaped structure further comprises:
a plurality of grooves; and
one or more adjustment-stopping mechanisms at least partially disposed in corresponding grooves of the plurality of grooves, wherein the one or more adjustment-stopping mechanisms are configured to stop corresponding mirror bonding plates from retracting such that the tilt angles of the corresponding mirror bonding plates are maintained after adjustment.
However Ishii discloses in at least figures 2A-B, wherein the polygon-shaped structure (polygonal mirror unit 1 fig. 2A) further comprises:
a plurality of grooves (grooves 9 and 10 fig. 2B); and
one or more adjustment-stopping mechanisms (stoppers 11 and 12 fig. 2B) at least partially disposed in (stoppers 11 and 12 are in groove 9 fig. 2B) corresponding grooves (groove 9 fig. 2B) of the plurality of grooves (grooves 9 and 10 fig. 2B), wherein the one or more adjustment-stopping mechanisms (stoppers 11 and 12 fig. 2B) are configured to stop (the inclination angles of the reflection mirrors 2 through 5 are maintained approximately to the respective desired inclination angles col. 9 lines 6-8) corresponding mirror bonding plates (reflection mirrors 2 and 4 fig. 2B) from retracting such that the tilt angles (inclination angle col. 6 line 44) of the corresponding mirror bonding plates (reflection mirrors 2 and 4 fig. 2B) are maintained after adjustment (the inclination of the reflection mirrors is set by the upper base part 6 fitting on to the lower base part 7 and the stoppers 11 and 12 guiding the mirrors into the grooves col.9 lines 9-22).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use grooves and stoppers as taught by Ishii in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The inclination angle of each of the other reflection mirrors 3 through 5 are similarly determined by the corresponding grooves 10 and 9 and stoppers 11 and 12 and can all be different col. 6 lines 27-48).
Claims 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) in view of Ishii et al. (US 6427916 B1) as applied to claim 13 above and in further view of Epner (US 4768861 A).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Droz and Ishii discloses all the limitations of claim 13.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the one or more adjustment-stopping mechanisms comprise dowel pins.
However Epner discloses in at least figure 2, wherein the one or more adjustment-stopping mechanisms comprise dowel pins (dowel pins may also be used for accurately positioning the mirror on its mounting col. 3 lines 61-64).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use dowel pins as taught by Epner in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The dowel pins provide a way to mount the mirror to the ring to be rotated (col. 3 lines 58-68).
Claims 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) in view of Ishii et al. (US 6427916 B1) as applied to claim 13 above and in further view of Behrens (DE 3106914 C2).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Droz and Ishii discloses all the limitations of claim 13.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the plurality of grooves comprises V-shaped grooves.
However Behrens discloses in at least figure 2, wherein the plurality of grooves comprises V-shaped grooves (v shaped grooves 10 fig. 2).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use v shaped grooves as taught by Behrens in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The V shaped groove holds the bolt 9 which turns the hexagon 17 rotates the mirror 2 (paragraph [0020] of translation).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) as applied to claim 1 in view of Xu (WO 2022012148 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 16.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the reflective surface comprises a semiconductor wafer based reflective surface.
However Xu discloses in at least figure 1, wherein the reflective surface (reflector 10 fig. 1) comprises a semiconductor wafer based reflective surface (a first reflective material film on a first surface of a silicon wafer, and then processing the silicon wafer and the first reflective material film to obtain at least one reflector paragraph [0016] of translation).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a silicon wafer as a reflector as taught by Xu in the in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The cost of reflectors is decreased by manufacturing them by processing a silicon wafer (paragraph [0017] of translation.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) in view of Lee (US 6386719 B1) .
Regarding claim 19, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 16 and further discloses,
Droz does not disclose, wherein the side surface of the polygon-shaped structure has a trapezoidal shape.
However Lee discloses in at least fig. 6D, wherein the side surface (front surface mirror 210 fig. 6D) of the polygon-shaped structure (base structure 230 fig. 6D) has a trapezoidal shape (front surface mirror 210 is trapezoidal rather than rectangular col. 6 lines 50-51).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a trapezoidal shape as taught by Xu in the in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. Any of the retaining structures used with rectangular mirrors can be adapted for use with mirrors of other shapes (col. 6 lines 54-55).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1 in view of Engberg et al. (US 10324170 B1).
Regarding claim 20, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 16.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the side surface has one or more chamfered corners.
However Engberg discloses in at least figure 21, wherein the side surface (the polygon mirror 300 includes a block with adjacent reflective surfaces joined to one another col. 25 lines 19-20) has one or more chamfered corners (chamfers 302 fig. 21).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to used chamfered corners on the side surfaces as taught by Engberg in the polygonal mirror assembly of Droz. The chamfered corners promote aerodynamic efficiency and reduce acoustic noise (col. 25 lines 21-25).
Claims 22-25 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) in view of Long (WO 2022141534 A1).
Regarding claim 22, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses, wherein the polygon-shaped structure (polygonal mirror assembly 100 fig. 1) is configured to scan light to a field-of-view (FOV) (the polygonal mirror assembly 100 rotates, steering the redirected light 112(a) through a field of view col. 12 lines 38-39).
Droz does not disclose, comprising a plurality of sub-FOVs, and wherein each mirror bonding plate of the plurality of mirror bonding plates is configured to form a scan pattern by scanning light to a sub-FOV of the plurality of sub-FOVs.
However Long discloses in at least figures 9-10, comprising a plurality of sub-FOVs (sub fovs f1, f2 and f3 of total fov f0 fig. 10), and wherein each mirror bonding plate (reflecting surfaces 312, 313 and 314 fig. 9) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflecting surfaces 312, 313 and 314 fig. 9) is configured to form a scan pattern by scanning light to a sub-FOV (the vertical field of view corresponding to the first reflecting surface 312 is the first sub-field of view f1, the vertical field of view corresponding to the second reflecting surface 313 is the second sub-field of view f2, and the vertical field of view corresponding to the third reflecting surface 314 is the third sub-field of view f3 paragraph [0157] of translation) of the plurality of sub-FOVs (sub fovs f1, f2 and f3 of total fov f0 fig. 10).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use each mirror for a sub fov as taught by Long in the polygonal mirror of Droz. the vertical distribution of the emitted beam can be adjusted by adjusting the angle between each reflective surface in the reflective module and the rotation axis, thereby obtaining a higher beam density in the central region (paragraph [0160] of translation).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Droz and Long discloses all the limitations of claim 22.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the FOV is a vertical FOV.
However Long further discloses, wherein the FOV (total fov f0 fig. 10) is a vertical FOV (the vertical field of view corresponding to the reflection module 31 is the total field of view f0 paragraph [0157] of translation).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use a vertical fov as taught by Long in the polygonal mirror of Droz. the vertical distribution of the emitted beam can be adjusted by adjusting the angle between each reflective surface in the reflective module and the rotation axis, thereby obtaining a higher beam density in the central region (paragraph [0160] of translation).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Droz and Long discloses all the limitations of claim 22 and Droz further discloses, wherein degrees of insertion (female coupling parts 106 on either the top or bottom ends 102, 103 of the housing 101 may be moved closer to the center of the housing 101 col. 10 lines 22-24) of the plurality of adjustment mechanisms (female coupling parts 106 fig. 1) are configured to be different (the different position of the adjustment mechanism results in different angles of the reflective surface 105 figs. 8A-C) such that the tilt angles (the differing angles of the reflective surfaces 105 col. 10 lines 19-24) of different mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 105 fig. 8A-C) are different the tilt angle of the reflective surface 105 is -2.7° in fig. 8A, -8.7° in fig. 8B and 3.3° in fig. 8C).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Droz and Long discloses all the limitations of claim 24.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the tilt angles of the different mirror bonding plates are configured such that the scan patterns formed by using reflective facets of the different mirror bonding plates correspond to different sub-FOVs of the FOV.
However Long further discloses, wherein the tilt angles (the angle between each reflective surface 311 of the reflective module 31 and the rotation axis of the reflective module 31 can be designed to any suitable angle according to actual needs paragraph [0148] of translation) of the different mirror bonding plates (reflecting surfaces 312, 313 and 314 fig. 9) are configured such that the scan patterns (the angles between the reflecting surfaces and the rotation axis result in different sub field of views when the light is emitted from the scanning module 20 paragraphs [0153-0155]) formed by using reflective facets of the different mirror bonding plates (reflecting surfaces 312, 313 and 314 fig. 9) correspond to different sub-FOVs of the FOV (sub fovs f1, f2 and f3 of total fov f0 fig. 10).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use each mirror for a sub fov as taught by Long in the polygonal mirror of Droz. the vertical distribution of the emitted beam can be adjusted by adjusting the angle between each reflective surface in the reflective module and the rotation axis, thereby obtaining a higher beam density in the central region (paragraph [0160] of translation).
Regarding claim 27, the combination of Droz and Long discloses all the limitations of claim 25.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the scan patterns formed by using the reflective facets of two adjacent mirror bonding plates of the plurality of mirror bonding plates are continuous without skipped scanlines.
However Long further discloses, wherein the scan patterns (the angles between the reflecting surfaces and the rotation axis result in different sub field of views when the light is emitted from the scanning module 20 paragraphs [0153-0155]) formed by using the reflective facets of two adjacent mirror bonding plates (reflecting surface 312 is adjacent to surfaces 313 and 314 fig. 9) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflecting surfaces 312, 313 and 314 fig. 9) are continuous without skipped scanlines (the adjacent sub fovs f1, f2 and f3 are continuous fig. 10).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use each mirror for a sub fov as taught by Long in the polygonal mirror of Droz. the vertical distribution of the emitted beam can be adjusted by adjusting the angle between each reflective surface in the reflective module and the rotation axis, thereby obtaining a higher beam density in the central region (paragraph [0160] of translation).
Regarding claim 28, the combination of Droz and Long discloses all the limitations of claim 25.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the scan patterns formed by using the reflective facets of at least two different mirror bonding plates of the plurality of mirror bonding plates are overlapping.
However Long further discloses, wherein the scan patterns (the angles between the reflecting surfaces and the rotation axis result in different sub field of views when the light is emitted from the scanning module 20 paragraphs [0153-0155]) formed by using the reflective facets of at least two different mirror bonding plates (reflecting surfaces 312, 313 and 314 are on different sides of reflective module 31 fig. 9) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflecting surfaces 312, 313 and 314 fig. 9) are overlapping (the sub fovs f1, f2 and f3 are overlapping fig. 10).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use each mirror for a sub fov as taught by Long in the polygonal mirror of Droz. The vertical distribution of the emitted beam can be adjusted by adjusting the angle between each reflective surface in the reflective module and the rotation axis, thereby obtaining a higher beam density in the central region (paragraph [0160] of translation).
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1 in view of Long (WO 2022141534 A1) as applied to claim 25 above and in further view of Gates (US 20220099813 A1).
Regarding claim 26, the combination of Droz and Long discloses all the limitations of claim 25.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the scan patterns formed by using the reflective facets of the different mirror bonding plates of the plurality of mirror bonding plates are non-overlapping.
However Gates discloses in at least figures 3 and 5, wherein the scan patterns (scan lines 230 A-D fig. 5) formed by using the reflective facets of the different mirror bonding plates (reflective surface 320a produces scan line 230A paragraph [0097]) of the plurality of mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 320 A-D fig. 3) are non-overlapping (the scan lines 230 do not overlap fig. 5).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use non-overlapping scan patterns as taught by x in the polygonal mirror of Droz. Each revolution of the polygon mirror results in a different scan line for each side of the mirror paragraph [0097]).
Claims 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) as applied to claim 1 above in view of Gassend (US 20200142156 A1).
Regarding claim 29, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Droz does not disclose, wherein at least a part of the polygon-shaped structure comprises a material that has a coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) matching with a CTE of reflective facets of the mirror bonding plates.
However Gassend discloses in at least figure 9, wherein at least a part (first ends 912 are part of multi-sided structure 130 fig. 9) of the polygon-shaped structure (multi-sided structure 130 has a polygonal shape fig. 9) comprises a material (the two first ends 912 could be formed from a first material including titanium paragraph [0081]) that has a coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) matching (the two first ends and reflective surfaces would have a matching CTE when both are made from titanium) with a CTE of reflective facets (the reflective surfaces 138 could include a reflective material, such as titanium paragraph [0035]) of the mirror bonding plates (reflective surfaces 138a, 138b, 138c and 138d fig. 9).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use the same material for a part of the polygonal structure and the reflective surface as taught by Gassend in the polygonal mirror of Droz. Mismatches in the coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) between the mirror body (e.g., plastic) and the shaft (e.g., steel) could introduce undesirable temperature-dependent deformations that could change dynamically (paragraph [0026]).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Droz and Gassend discloses all the limitations of claim 29.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the material is titanium.
However Gassend further discloses, wherein the material is titanium (the two first ends 912 could be formed from a first material including titanium paragraph [0081]).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use titanium for a part of the polygonal structure and the reflective surface as taught by Gassend in the polygonal mirror of Droz. Mismatches in the coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) between the mirror body (e.g., plastic) and the shaft (e.g., steel) could introduce undesirable temperature-dependent deformations that could change dynamically (paragraph [0026]).
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) as applied to claim 1 above in view of Fukutomi (JP 5235521 B2).
Regarding claim 29, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Droz does not disclose, wherein the polygon-shaped structure further comprises one or more cutouts configured to reduce weight imbalance when rotating.
However Fukutomi discloses in at least figure 4, wherein the polygon-shaped structure (polygon mirror 3 fig. 4) further comprises one or more cutouts (concave annular recesses 15 and 16 fig. 4) configured to reduce weight imbalance when rotating (concave annular recesses 15 and 16 are formed for balance correction paragraph [0029] of translation and hold balance weights 17 and 18 fig. 4).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use cutouts to reduce weight imbalance as taught by Fukutomi in the polygonal mirror of Droz. The balance weights 17 and 18 correct the balance of the mass of the rotating body (paragraph [0030] of translation).
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Droz et al (US 10578718 B1) as applied to claim 34 above in view of Li (WO 2017215569 A1).
Regarding claim 35, Droz discloses all the limitations of claim 34.
Droz does not disclose, further comprising:
maintaining the required tilt angles using adjustment stopping mechanisms; and
dispensing adhesives to hold the tilt angles in position.
However Li discloses in at least figure 1, maintaining the required tilt angles (the reflector 2 is adjusted to the required angle pg. 20 para. 1 of translation) using adjustment stopping mechanisms (the UV adhesive pg. 20 para. 1); and
dispensing adhesives to hold the tilt angles in position (the UV adhesive between
the mounting feet 22 of the reflector bracket 3 and the top cover of the hollow motor 9 is
quickly cured, thereby ensuring that the reflector angle is accurately fixed during the
equipment assembly process pg. 20 para. 1 of translation).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use adhesive to fix the adjustment of the reflector as taught by LI in the polygonal mirror of Droz. The adhesive is quickly cured by UV light to hold the tilt angle of the reflector (pg. 20 para. 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Steinberg et al. (US 20180113200 A1) discloses a variable flux allocation within a LIDAR fov with a rotatable mirror.
Lim et al. (US 20120127252 A1) discloses a polygon mirror assembly with adhesive.
Takino (US 20030058555 A1) discloses a multifurcated reflecting mirror with a semiconductor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW R WRIGHT whose telephone number is (703)756-5822. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7:30-5 Friday 8-12.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached at 1-571-270-1284. 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.
/ANDREW R WRIGHT/Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/PINPING SUN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872