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 (IDS) submitted on 11/27/2023, 7/8/2024 and 7/14/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5 - 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 5 states “the signal processor analyzes transfer function characteristics of the target that is in the same range from the frequency dependence of the signal-to-noise ratios” It is unclear what the limitation “transfer function characteristics of the target that is in the same range from the frequency dependence of the signal-to-noise ratios” means. It is unclear what “the same range” refers to. Further, it is unclear what “frequency dependence of the signal to noise ratios” means. Applicant’s specification does not provide clarification of this limitation. Claims 6-12 depend on claim 5 and therefore inherit the same lack of clarity.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
7. Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Streicher et al (DE 10001015 A1), hereinafter Streicher in view of Kappeler (DE 4141468 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Streicher discloses:
A laser radar device comprising (Streicher, Abstract: The invention provides a method for improving the range resolution of Lindar or laser radar signals, in which for each individual pulse both the emitted pulse shape and the reflected or backscattered signal are digitized and which is characterized in that the cross-correlation function of the reflected or backscattered signal with the transmitted laser pulse signal is inversely filtered in such a way that the cross-correlation function appears as a result of Gaussian pulses of defined width. The method according to the invention can be used for distance measurement of z. B. hard targets, atmospheric diffuse scatterers such. B. clouds, but also used for the determination of defects in glass fibers):
a telescope to transmit the plurality of intensity modulation pulses to a target and to receive reflected light from the target as reception light (Streicher, p. 2, lines 20-25: A lidar system, as shown in Fig. 1, has three main components, a transmitter 1 which emits laser light, a receiver 2 which detects the backscattered radiation, and a conversion electronics 3 which produces an evaluable signal from the quantity of light received , The transmitter 1 emits short light pulses 4 on the order of a few hanoseconds obliquely upward. The height from the ground is denoted by h and the distance by R. The packet-like light pulses 4 are scattered back along their way through the Atmosphä re of particles (dust, water droplets, etc.) and meet remitted after a certain time again at the receiver 2) Examiner interprets receiver 2 as the telescope that collects backscatter light from the target;
a light receiver to generate a reception electrical signal by photoelectrically converting the reception light (Streicher, p. 2, lines 20-25) Examiner interprets the conversion electronics 3 as photoelectric conversion of the reception light;
and a signal processor to calculate a distance and an extinction coefficient of the target on a basis of the reception electrical signal (Streicher, p. 3, lines 6-8: The Rückstreuphasenfunktion thus describes the nature of Scattering (for example, preferred direction) as well as the Kon concentration (number of particles in the air mixture). The local Extinction contributes to the attenuation due to turbidity as well as Intensity Increase in productivity by backscatter at)
Kappeler discloses:
a light source circuit to output a plurality of intensity modulation pulses by periodically intensity-modulating laser light using intensity modulation signals having different frequencies (Kappeler, col. 4, lines 37-45: In the multiplier 12 , a signal is generated which contains signal components of the sum and difference frequencies of the two signals present at its inputs. Since both signals have the same frequency and the received signal, depending on the presence of an object in the monitoring area, differs only in its amplitude from the further signal supplied to the second input of the multiplier, the difference frequency component of the output signal of the multiplier is concerned 12 to a DC signal, the amplitude of which provides information about the presence of an object in the monitored area. In order to filter this DC component from the output signal of the multiplier 12 , this is followed by a low-pass filter 13 ) and further reference (col. 2, line 32- col. 3, line 6)
It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Streicher with Kappeler to incorporate the features of: a light source circuit to output a plurality of intensity modulation pulses by periodically intensity-modulating laser light using intensity modulation signals having different frequencies. Both arts disclose pulsed light signals; however, Streicher does not disclose a light source circuit to output a plurality of intensity modulation pulses by periodically intensity-modulating laser light using intensity modulation signals having different frequencies. The modification would render the predictable results of improved detection accuracy from modulating the emission signal with different frequencies.
Regarding claim 2, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 1 (Streicher, Abstract),
Kappeler discloses:
wherein the light source circuit generates the plurality of intensity modulation pulses by generating a plurality of intensity modulation signals having different frequencies over time or simultaneously generating and mixing a plurality of intensity modulation signals having different frequencies (Kappler, col. 2, line 32 – col.3, line 6: a) The pulse repetition frequency of the individual successive the light signals will be transmitted after each light signal changed. Since it can be excluded that the Interference signal frequency here in exactly the same way changes like the pulse repetition frequency, the above be effectively record the faults described by this method does. b) The change in the pulse repetition frequency according to a) is only then made when in the breaks between the lights Signal transmissions an interference signal, especially an interference signal with the frequency of the last light emitted signals is determined. c) The pulse repetition frequency within a light signal successive impulses are not kept constant, but in particular continuously increased or below. By "wobbling" the individual light. At most, a periodic disturbance can still signal in a very small area of a single light signals effect, but thereby a received light signal can be distorted only minimally, so that no mistake occur. d) When an interference signal is detected after a light signal becomes the emission of the next light signals shifted until the amplitude of the determined Interference signal has dropped below a predetermined threshold is. e) Even before and / or after emitting a light signal. The light receiver will present any interference signal summarizes and approximates the information obtained thereby the determination of the interference signal curve during the light signal transmission and for the extraction of the useful signal the received, composed of useful and interference signal setting overall light signal)
It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Streicher with Kappeler to incorporate the features of: wherein the light source circuit generates the plurality of intensity modulation pulses by generating a plurality of intensity modulation signals having different frequencies over time or simultaneously generating and mixing a plurality of intensity modulation signals having different frequencies. Both arts disclose pulsed light signals; however, Streicher does not disclose a light source circuit to output a plurality of intensity modulation pulses by periodically intensity-modulating laser light using intensity modulation signals having different frequencies. The modification would render the predictable results of improved detection accuracy from modulating the emission signal with different frequencies.
Regarding claim 3, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 2 (Streicher, Abstract),
and the signal processor generates a spectrum signal by performing frequency analysis on the reception electrical signal using information of a frequency used for generation of any one of the plurality of intensity modulation pulses (Streicher, p. 4, lines 51-57: Fig. 4 shows the flow chart for the procedure for inverse filtering in the method according to the invention. From the digitized output pulse, the auto energy spectrum is first calculated using FFT (Fast Fourier Transformation). In the relevant spectral range, a Gaussian function is set, whose width is adjusted so that a good approximation to the available data is achieved ( FIG. 8). For each discrete spectral value, a correction factor is now calculated which documents the deviation of the measured data from the course of the mathematical function. The Gaussian energy spectrum forms a Fourier pair with a Gaussian autocorrelation function (AKF), the width of which is now clearly defined ( FIG. 7)),
and detects a frequency and a signal-to-noise ratio of the spectrum signal (Streicher, p. 5, lines 45-46: The evaluable phase spectrum is additionally limited to spectral range in which an acceptable signal-to-noise ratio Ratio exists).
Kappeler discloses:
wherein the light source circuit outputs the intensity modulation signals having different frequencies to the signal processor (Kappeler, col. 4, lines 37-45)
It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Streicher with Kappeler to incorporate the features of: wherein the light source circuit outputs the intensity modulation signals having different frequencies to the signal processor. Both arts disclose pulsed light signals; however, Streicher does not disclose a light source circuit to output a plurality of intensity modulation pulses by periodically intensity-modulating laser light using intensity modulation signals having different frequencies. The modification would render the predictable results of improved detection accuracy from modulating the emission signal with different frequencies.
Regarding claim 4, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 3 (Streicher, Abstract),
wherein the signal processor performs frequency analysis on the reception electrical signal using information of frequencies used for generation of two or more types of intensity modulation pulses out of the plurality of intensity modulation pulses (Streicher, p. 4, lines 51-57: Fig. 4 shows the flow chart for the procedure for inverse filtering in the method according to the invention. From the digitized output pulse, the auto energy spectrum is first calculated using FFT (Fast Fourier Transformation). In the relevant spectral range, a Gaussian function is set, whose width is adjusted so that a good approximation to the available data is achieved ( FIG. 8). For each discrete spectral value, a correction factor is now calculated which documents the deviation of the measured data from the course of the mathematical function. The Gaussian energy spectrum forms a Fourier pair with a Gaussian autocorrelation function (AKF), the width of which is now clearly defined ( FIG. 7)),
generates a plurality of spectra related to reception light reflected from the target that is in the same range (Streicher, p. 4, lines 51-57),
and analyzes frequency dependence of the signal-to-noise ratios of the plurality of spectra (Streicher, p. 5, lines 45-46).
Regarding claim 5, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 4 (Streicher, Abstract),
wherein the signal processor analyzes transfer function characteristics of the target that is in the same range from the frequency dependence of the signal-to-noise ratios (Streicher, p. 5, lines 38-50: All information about the position of the hard target lies in the phase spectrum of the cross-energy spectrum. In the Spek In this way, the position of a single hard Targets by adjusting an original line to the Pha sensory spectrum origin line with the slope m determine. The position .DELTA.t of the hard target results over the line slope m: Δt = m / 2π. When calculating the Phase spectrum from the complex-valued cross-energy spectrum make sure that the phase values are initially limited to the Range -π ≦ φ ≦ + π are limited, since the tan function is ambiguous. For this reason, before the evaluation, a continuous phase function ("phase unwrapping").
The evaluable phase spectrum is additionally limited to spectral range in which an acceptable signal-to-noise ratio Ratio exists. The adaptation of an original line the processed, discrete phase spectrum now provides one Shift value .DELTA.t, which on a large number of Meßda based. The uncertainty of the shift value is therefore significantly below the sampling interval of the digitalization. If there are several hard targets, the phase spectrum a relatively complicated course and is therefore a simple evaluation no longer accessible. In this Case the evaluation in the time domain appears more advantageous) Examiner interprets spectral response (phase spectrum) as transfer functions characteristics of a target.
Regarding claim 6, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 5 (Streicher, Abstract),
wherein an extinction coefficient of the target that is in the same range is evaluated on a basis of the transfer function characteristics (Streicher, p. 3, lines 6-8).
Regarding claim 7, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 6 (Streicher, Abstract),
wherein the light source circuit outputs an intensity modulation pulse having a first wavelength and an intensity modulation pulse having a second wavelength different from the first wavelength (Streicher, p. 8, lines 55-60: Many prerequisites are necessary to determine the exact gas concentration:
-The molecular absorption on the two wavelengths in the measurement interval must be known (or the same), - The aerosol absorption on the two wavelengths in the measurement interval must be known (or the same), - the backscatter on the two wavelengths must be known or the same, and - the signal strength on the two wavelengths must be adapted),
and the signal processor calculates an absorption wavelength and a concentration of the target from a reception signal intensity ratio between reception light having the first wavelength and reception light having the second wavelength (Streicher, p. 8, lines 55-60).
Regarding claim 8, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 6 (Streicher, Abstract),
wherein the light source circuit outputs an intensity modulation pulse having two orthogonal polarization states (Streicher, p. 2, lines 20-25) Examiner interprets the oblique upward and associated backscatter as two orthogonal polarization states,
and the signal processor evaluates a particle shape of the target from a reception signal intensity ratio by the two polarizations (Streicher, Abstract).
Regarding claim 9, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 6, further comprising (Streicher, Abstract):
a light pulse monitor to photoelectrically convert the intensity modulation pulse generated by the light source circuit (Streicher, p. 2, lines 20-25);
and a light pulse corrector to output a feedback signal for controlling pulse power and a modulation intensity of a transmission pulse on a basis of an electrical signal from the light pulse monitor (Streicher, p. 6, lines 42-59: In order to eliminate the interference components in the upper spectral range, the two-sided energy spectrum is reduced by a factor of 8. In this case, the first 33 values (0 ≦ k ≦ 32) of the energy spectrum, and the last 31 values (480 ≦ k ≦ 512) the energy spectrum to a shortened energy spectrum. After the back transformation into the time domain, a Gaussian-shaped AKF with N = 64 values is obtained with a clear reduction of the noise component ( FIG. 6, dotted line). This procedure corresponds to sub-sampling using an ideal low-pass filter. The real-valued "correction function"
now forms the basis for the inverse filtering of the even if reduced to N = 64 values cross correlation function Φ .sub.ar (k).
The amount of reduced cross-energy spectrum | W .sub.ar (k) | is now multiplied by the "correction function" Z (f). From the "corrected" magnitude spectrum and the unchanged, also reduced phase spectrum φ .sub.ar (k), the modified complex-valued cross-energy spectrum can be calculated:
W .sub.ar, inv (f) = Z (k). | W .sub.ar (k) | .exp (i φ .sub.ar (k))) .
Regarding claim 10, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 9 (Streicher, Abstract),
wherein the light pulse corrector holds an ideal intensity modulation pulse waveform (Streicher, p. 6, lines 42-59),
calculates a deviation by comparing a waveform of an electrical signal from the light pulse monitor with the ideal intensity modulation pulse waveform (Streicher, p. 4, lines 51-57),
and outputs a feedback signal to the light source circuit so as to suppress the deviation (Streicher, p. 4, lines 51-57).
Regarding claim 11, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 6 (Streicher, Abstract),
further comprising a light pulse monitor to photoelectrically convert the intensity modulation pulse generated by the light source circuit (Streicher, p. 2, lines 20-25),
wherein the signal processor is connected to the light pulse monitor to perform correction on a basis of an electrical signal from the light pulse monitor (Streicher, p. 2, lines 26-30: Due to the elapsed time, the distance vo lumen, in which the scattering took place, to a half (back and forth Return path) pulse length of the light exactly located who the. The received in the respective distance interval, re inflected amount of light is then a measure of the number of Particles responsible for clouding the atmosphere are. The received intensity is received by the detector electrical signal converted, which digi after amplification talised. The digital values are in a computer in which the further evaluation takes place).
Regarding claim 12, Streicher discloses:
the laser radar device according to claim 11 (Streicher, Abstract),
wherein the signal processor holds, in advance, information regarding such an optimum driving condition of an intensity modulation pulse that a spectral characteristic of a reception signal from another target having a uniform frequency response characteristic of the reception signal is uniform (Streicher, p. 8, lines 55-60),
and corrects uncertainty of the reception signal generated by the intensity modulation transmission pulse by comparing the information with an electrical signal from the light pulse monitor (Streicher, p. 2, lines 26-30) and (p. 5, lines 46-50: The adaptation of an original line the processed, discrete phase spectrum now provides one Shift value .DELTA.t, which on a large number of Meßda based. The uncertainty of the shift value is therefore significantly below the sampling interval of the digitalization. If there are several hard targets, the phase spectrum a relatively complicated course and is therefore a simple evaluation no longer accessible. In this Case the evaluation in the time domain appears more advantageous)
References Cited But Not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as thus:
Imaki et al US 20200309950 A1 discloses a laser radar device with pulse modulation (paras [0052-0056])
Weidmann US 20150014543 A1 discloses a pulsed Lidar heterodyne detection system and method (para [0004])
Degnan et al US 20070279615 A1 discloses a scanning lidar system (para [0003])
Tamada et al US 20150369742 A1 discloses a pulsed laser light having modulated intensity (Abstract)
Harris et al US20110149363A1 discloses monostatic and bistatic lidar systems
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY JENKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-0404. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8a-5p 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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at 517.270.5144. 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.
/KIMBERLY JENKINS/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights