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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-16 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Keilaf et al., US 20190271767 A1 (“Keilaf”).
Regarding claim 1, Keilaf teaches a time-of-flight sensing system (Fig. 1A and [0052], The Lidar system 100. The system may process detection results of a sensor which creates temporal information indicative of a period of time between the emission of a light signal and the time of its detection by the sensor. The period of time is occasionally referred to as “time of flight” of the light signal [...] the information regarding the time of flight of the light signal can be processed to provide the distance the light signal traveled between emission and detection), comprising:
a laser scanning module, configured to sequentially and respectively provide a plurality of first laser beams to a plurality of first sub-areas of a sensing target (Fig. 1A and [0067], Scanning unit 104. During a scanning cycle, each instantaneous position of at least one light deflector 114 may be associated with a particular portion 122 of field of view 120);
a sensing device, configured to receive the first laser beams respectively reflected from the first sub-areas of the sensing target (Fig. 1A and [0069], Sensing unit 106 may receive reflections from the surroundings of vehicle 110, and transfer reflections signals indicative of light reflected from objects in field of view 120 to processing unit 108); and
a control circuit, electrically coupled to the laser scanning module and the sensing device, and configured to calculate first depth signals of the first sub-areas of the sensing target according to the first laser beams sequentially and respectively reflected from the first sub-areas of the sensing target and received by the sensing device (Fig. 1A and [0067], Processing unit 108 may include at least one processor 118. [0076] LIDAR system 100 may also include a bus 212 (or other communication mechanisms) that interconnect subsystems and components for transferring information within LIDAR system 100 [...] Processing unit 108 includes two processors 118 to regulate the operation of projecting unit 102, scanning unit 104, and sensing unit 106 in a coordinated manner. [131] In one embodiment, LIDAR system 100 may be operable to generate depth maps of one or more different types, such as any one or more of the following types: point cloud model, polygon mesh, depth image (holding depth information for each pixel of an image or of a 2D array), or any other type of 3D model of a scene).
Claim 10 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 1. Claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 2, Keilaf teaches the time-of-flight sensing system as claimed in claim 1. Keilaf further teaches wherein the first laser beams are modulated continuous-waves (Fig. 2A and [0074], light source 112 may emit its light in different formats, such as light pulses, frequency modulated, continuous wave (CW), quasi-CW, or any other form corresponding to the particular light source employed).
Regarding claim 3, Keilaf teaches the time-of-flight sensing system as claimed in claim 1. Keilaf further teaches wherein the laser scanning module comprises a scanning mirror (Fig. 1A and [0067], Scanning unit 104, light deflector 114. [0061] The term “light deflector” broadly includes any mechanism or module which is configured to make light deviate from its original path; for example, a mirror).
Regarding claim 5, Keilaf teaches the time-of-flight sensing system as claimed in claim 1. Keilaf further teaches wherein the control circuit is also configured to generate a depth map of the sensing target according to the first depth signals and a distribution of the first sub-areas of the sensing target ([131] In one embodiment, LIDAR system 100 may be operable to generate depth maps of one or more different types, such as any one or more of the following types: point cloud model, polygon mesh, depth image (holding depth information for each pixel of an image or of a 2D array), or any other type of 3D model of a scene. [0292] one function of a LIDAR system may be to generate three-dimensional depth maps of an environment surrounding of the LIDAR system by projecting light to the environment and then collecting and analyzing light reflections from objects in the environment).
Claim 15 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 5. Claim 15 is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 6, Keilaf teaches the time-of-flight sensing system as claimed in claim 1. Keilaf further teaches wherein the laser scanning module is also configured to sequentially and respectively provide a plurality of second laser beams to a plurality of second sub-areas of the sensing target, the second sub-areas do not overlap the first sub-areas, the sensing device is also configured to receive the second laser beams reflected from the second sub-areas of the sensing target, and the control circuit is also configured to calculate second depth signals of the second sub-areas of the sensing target according to the second laser beams reflected from the second sub-areas of the sensing target and received by the sensing device (Fig. 2B and [0080], In one embodiment, the plurality of light sources 112 (including two or more light sources) may project light with substantially the same wavelength and each light source 112 is generally associated with a differing area of the field of view (denoted in the figure as 120A, 120B, and 120C). [131] In one embodiment, LIDAR system 100 may be operable to generate depth maps of one or more different types, such as any one or more of the following types: point cloud model, polygon mesh, depth image (holding depth information for each pixel of an image or of a 2D array), or any other type of 3D model of a scene).
Claim 11 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 6. Claim 11 is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 7, Keilaf teaches the time-of-flight sensing system as claimed in claim 6. Keilaf further teaches wherein the emission of each of the first laser beams is synchronized with the emission of one of the second laser beams ([128] Consistent with embodiments of the present disclosure, processing unit 108 may control at least one light source 112 and light deflector 114 (or coordinate the operation of at least one light source 112 and at least one light deflector 114) in a manner enabling light flux to vary over a scan of field of view 120. Consistent with other embodiments, processing unit 108 may control only at least one light source 112 and light deflector 114 may be moved or pivoted in a fixed predefined pattern).
Claim 12 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 7. Claim 12 is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 8, Keilaf teaches the time-of-flight sensing system as claimed in claim 6. Keilaf further teaches wherein the control circuit is also configured to generate a depth map of the sensing target according to the first depth signals, the second depth signals and a distribution of the first sub-areas and the second sub-areas of the sensing target ([131] In one embodiment, LIDAR system 100 may be operable to generate depth maps of one or more different types, such as any one or more of the following types: point cloud model, polygon mesh, depth image (holding depth information for each pixel of an image or of a 2D array), or any other type of 3D model of a scene. [0292] one function of a LIDAR system may be to generate three-dimensional depth maps of an environment surrounding of the LIDAR system by projecting light to the environment and then collecting and analyzing light reflections from objects in the environment. In general, the usefulness of a LIDAR system and its depth maps may increase with the level of information that can be gleaned from the collected light and with the resolution of the generated depth maps).
Claim 13 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 8. Claim 13 is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 9, Keilaf teaches the time-of-flight sensing system as claimed in claim 1. Keilaf further teaches wherein the sensing target includes a first plane and a second plane facing each other and intersecting each other, and the control circuit is also configured to divide the first plane and the second plane into the plurality of first sub-areas ([0058] LIDAR system may be configured to scan scene in the environment in which the LIDAR system is operating […] For example, the scene may include ground elements (e.g., earth, roads, grass, sidewalks, road surface marking), sky, man-made objects (e.g., vehicles, buildings, signs), vegetation, people, animals, light projecting elements (e.g., flashlights, sun, other LIDAR systems), and so on. It should be noted that such scene elements, especially man-made objects (buildings and vehicles) are usually comprised of planar surfaces that face and intersect each other).
Claim 16 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 9. Claim 16 is rejected for the same reasons.
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 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keilaf et al., US 20190271767 A1 (“Keilaf”) in view of Zheng et al., US 11,675,076 B2 (“Zheng”).
Regarding claim 4, Keilaf teaches the time-of-flight sensing system as claimed in claim 1. However, Keilaf does not expressly disclose: wherein the laser scanning module comprises a beam expander configured to expand a beam width of each of the first laser beams.
Zheng teaches a laser scanning module comprises a beam expander configured to expand a beam width of each of the first laser beams (Fig.2 and [37], In accordance with various embodiments, the sensor system 210 can take advantage of an optical process, such as a laser beam expansion process (e.g. with a laser expander 202), to obtain a uniform (or evenly distributed) light field).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the time-of- flight LIDAR system disclosed by Keilaf, such that a laser expander is incorporated after the laser source to expand the laser beam, as taught by Zheng. This is simply an obvious variation in the system design that is known and predictable in the art. “Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art” (MPEP 2141.III KSR Rationale F).
Claim 14 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 4. Claim 14 is rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHALIL ALI AHMAD whose telephone number is (571)270-0954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7am-4:30pm, Fridays 8am-12pm.
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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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.
/KHALIL ALI AHMAD/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights