DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, line 13, “…a distance to the object…” should read “…the distance to the object”.
Regarding claim 1, line 23, “…a scanning movement of the measuring light” should read “… the scanning movement of the measuring light”.
Regarding claim 6, line 11, “determining a distance to the object…” should read “determining the distance to the object…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-6 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.
Regarding claim 1, line 1, the limitation of “… the distance to an object…” lacks antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 3, line 1, the limitation of “…the cut-off device…” lacks antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 3, line 2, the limitation of “…the power supply…” lacks antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 6, line 1, the limitation of “… the distance to an object…” lacks antecedent basis.
Other claims are rejected due to claim dependency.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 -6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michaels et al. (US 20220146645 A1, hereinafter “Michaels”), modified in view of Mushimoto et al. (US 20160018256 A1, hereinafter “Mushimoto”), in view of Takagawa et al. (US 20200033452 A1, hereinafter “Takagawa”).
Regarding claim 1, Michaels teaches a device for scanning measurement of the distance to an object, comprising
a light source configured to generate an optical signal having a varying frequency (Michaels; Fig. 2, [0029], 204 and 206; Fig. 9, [0041]-[0042], 902 fed by frequency modulated light source),
a scanning device configured to direct measuring light in different directions, the measuring light being formed by a first part of the optical signal generated by the light source (Michaels; Fig. 2, [0029], the diffraction grating DGS 200 (equivalent to deflection optics) takes input from the CPA 201 which may optionally employ an optical element 202 to correct an output beam angle; [0004], the DGS also collimates the light emitted from the CPs of the CPA. Each of the one or more light beam is emitted at a specific output angle is unique for each CP, such light from each CP is output by the DGS as a light beam at an angle unique to the CP. Example of DGS includes Fig. 1 (DGS 110, [0025]-[0026]), Fig. 3 (DGS 310, [0031]), Fig. 4 (DGS 410, [0033]),
a detector configured to detect a superposition of reference light and reflected light (Michaels; Figs. 10a-10d, [0043], LO 1006 or 1014; Photodiodes 1007 and 1008), wherein
the reference light is formed by a second part of the optical signal generated by the light source which is not supplied to the scanning device (Michaels; Figs. 10a-10d, [0043], splitter 1002 splits the light into 2 output ports ( TX signal 1005 and LO 1006), and wherein
the reflected light is formed by the measuring light after it has been at least partially reflected by the object (Michaels; Figs. 10a-10d, [0043], the received signal 1004 or 1013),
an evaluation device which is configured to determine a distance to the object based on the superposition detected by the detector (Michaels; Fig. 2, [0029]-[0030], [0042], microcomputer 209 processes data (depth information [0020], [0023]) coming from the FPA system),
Michaels does not teach,
a monitoring device comprising
a light sensor which is arranged in the light path of the emitted measuring light behind the scanning device and is configured to detect a scanning movement of the emitted measuring light, the light sensor being arranged such that it is exposed to the measuring light only once per scanning cycle, and
a switch-off device which is connected to the light sensor and is configured to switch off the light source or otherwise prevent emission of measuring light if the light sensor does not detect a scanning movement of the measuring light.
Mushimoto teaches,
a monitoring device (Mushimoto; Fig. 1, Fig. 3, [0043], [0054], the laser scanner 2 includes light source 10, scanning mirror 14, a detector 18, a controller 40, a light source driver 22) comprising
a light sensor which is arranged in the light path of the emitted measuring light behind the scanning device and is configured to detect a scanning movement of the emitted measuring light, the light sensor being (Mushimoto; Fig. 1, [0048], [0051], the detector 18 includes a photodetector, and receives the laser light scanned by the scanning mirror 14. The detector 18 is disposed near the edge of the opening 4 and generates a detection signal with an increase in intensity of the received laser light; Fig. 3, [0069], when the controller 40 cannot detect the oscillation frequency calculated by the detector 18 at the time of startup of the laser scanner, the controller 40 determines that the laser scanner 2 is in a defective state and outputs an error signal (equivalent to the light sensor is configured to detect a scanning movement of the emitted measuring light)), and
a switch-off device which is connected to the light sensor and is configured to switch off the light source or otherwise prevent emission of measuring light if the light sensor does not detect a scanning movement of the measuring light (Mushimoto; same as above; [0081], disclosed how the controller 40 determines that laser scanner 2 is in a defective state (S26-S27), if so, stops emission of the laser light (S28-S29) and then output an error signal (S31); Since the controller 40 can control the laser light to turn on and off, it implies there is a switch to interrupt the power supply to the light source in response to a control signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the device taught by Michaels to include a monitoring device comprising a light sensor to detect a scanning movement of the emitted measuring light and a switch-off device if the light sensor does not detect a scanning movement of the measuring light taught by Mushimoto with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is monitoring the movement of the laser scanner and determines whether the scanner is in a defective state. If the scanner is in a defective state, the controller will turn off the laser light and output an error signal (Mushimoto; [0048], [0069], [0081]).
However, Michaels modified in view of Mushimoto still not teach,
arranged such that it is exposed to the measuring light only once per scanning cycle.
Takagawa disclosed in Fig. 1, paragraph [0040], the reflecting member 101 cover a part of the scan region; Fig. 10A, the reflecting member 101 is positioned on the edge of the scanning region and is scanned only once per scanning cycle as can be seen.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the device taught by Michaels to include a monitoring device comprising a light sensor to detect a scanning movement of the emitted measuring light and a switch-off device if the light sensor does not detect a scanning movement of the measuring light taught by Mushimoto, include arranged such that it is exposed to the measuring light only once per scanning cycle taught by Takagawa with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is positioned the reflecting member on the lower right corner so as to correspond to the scan end position (Takagawa; [0050]).
Regarding claim 3, Michaels as modified above teaches the device as recited in claim 1.
Michaels does not teach, wherein the cut-off device comprises a switching relay or a safe semiconductor switch configured to interrupt the power supply to the light source in response to a control signal.
Mushimoto disclosed in Fig. 3, paragraph [0069], when the controller 40 cannot detect the oscillation frequency calculated by the detector 18 at the time of startup of the laser scanner, the controller 40 determines that the laser scanner 2 is in a defective state and outputs an error signal; [0081], further disclosed how the controller 40 determines that laser scanner 2 is in a defective state (S26-S27), if so, stops emission of the laser light (S28-S29) and then output an error signal (S31). Since the controller 40 can control the laser light to turn on and off, it implies there is a switch to interrupt the power supply to the light source in response to a control signal.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the device taught by Michaels to include a monitoring device comprising a light sensor to detect a scanning movement of the emitted measuring light and a switch-off device if the light sensor does not detect a scanning movement of the measuring light; wherein the cut-off device comprises a switching relay or a safe semiconductor switch configured to interrupt the power supply to the light source in response to a control signal taught by Mushimoto, include arranged such that it is exposed to the measuring light only once per scanning cycle taught by Takagawa with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is monitoring the movement of the laser scanner and determines whether the scanner is in a defective state. If the scanner is in a defective state, the controller will turn off the laser light and output an error signal (Mushimoto; [0048], [0069], [0081]).
Regarding claim 4, Michaels as modified above teaches the device as recited in claim 1, wherein the scanning device comprises
an optical distribution matrix comprising a plurality of optical switches and/or optical splitters and configured to distribute the measurement light simultaneously or successively to a plurality of optical output waveguides (Michaels; Fig. 2, paragraph [0029], a Lidar system containing an focal plane array (FPA) system includes coherent pixel array CPA 201, optical element 202 and diffraction grating DGS 200; Fig. 9, [0041]-[0043], shows a switchable coherent pixel array (SCPA) FMCW Lidar chip 911. Optical switch networks 904 (equivalent to distribution matrix) selectively supply signal to coherent pixels 905 in Fig. 9 with connecting waveguide 1003 in Figs. 10a-10d (light from the optical switch network 904 is provided to an optical input port 1003 of the coherent pixel)), and
deflection optics which are configured to deflect the measuring light emerging from the optical output waveguides in such a way that it is emitted in different directions (Michaels; Fig. 2, paragraph [0029], the diffraction grating DGS 200 (equivalent to deflection optics) takes input from the CPA 201 which may optionally employ an optical element 202 to correct an output beam angle; [0004], the DGS also collimates the light emitted from the CPs of the CPA. Each of the one or more light beam is emitted at a specific output angle is unique for each CP, such light from each CP is output by the DGS as a light beam at an angle unique to the CP. Example of DGS includes Fig. 1 (DGS 110, [0025]-[0026]), Fig. 3 (DGS 310, [0031]), Fig. 4 (DGS 410, [0033]).
Regarding claim 5, Michaels as modified above teaches the device as recited in claim 1.
Michaels does not teach, wherein the scanning device comprises a rotatably mounted optical element comprising a reflective surface.
Mushimoto disclosed in Fig. 1, paragraph [0043], a scanning mirror 14; [0046], the scanning mirror 14 is a MEMS mirror including a mirror which is a miniscule mechanical component, disposed on a silicon substrate having an electric circuit. The scanning mirror 14 scans laser light emitted from the light source toward the target object 20 in one axis direction by oscillating about the axis C and reflects part of the laser light reflected from the target object 20, toward the reflective surface of the mirror with the aperture 12.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the device taught by Michaels to include a monitoring device comprising a light sensor to detect a scanning movement of the emitted measuring light and a switch-off device if the light sensor does not detect a scanning movement of the measuring light; wherein the cut-off device comprises a switching relay or a safe semiconductor switch configured to interrupt the power supply to the light source in response to a control signal; wherein the scanning device comprises a rotatably mounted optical element comprising a reflective surface taught by Mushimoto, include arranged such that it is exposed to the measuring light only once per scanning cycle taught by Takagawa with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is using scanning mirror 14 scans laser light emitted from the light source toward the target object 20 in one axis direction by oscillating about the axis C and reflects part of the laser light reflected from the target object 20, toward the reflective surface of the mirror with the aperture 12 and received by the photodetector 16 (Mushimoto; [0043], [0051], [0052]).
Claim 6 is the method claim possesses nearly identical limitation to those of claim 1 and are thus rejected for the same reasoning.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Michaels, modified in view of Mushimoto, in view of Takagawa, in view of Yamamoto et al. (US 20200393546 A1, hereinafter “Yamamoto”).
Regarding claim 2, Michaels as modified above teaches the device as recited in claim 1.
Michaels does not teach, wherein a plurality of light sensors are arranged around a field which is swept by the measuring light during a scanning cycle.
Yamamoto disclosed in Fig. 1, paragraph [0040], sensors 40 (detects the intensity of light incident on it [0049]) are disposed behind the movable reflection unit 20 in the traveling direction of the electromagnetic waves; Fig. 2, [0050], illustrating an irradiated range of light of the movable reflection unit 20 and a position of sensors 40. Cleanly seen the sensors 40 is arranged around an area which is swept by measuring light during a scanning cycle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of this invention to modify the device taught by Michaels to include a monitoring device comprising a light sensor to detect a scanning movement of the emitted measuring light and a switch-off device if the light sensor does not detect a scanning movement of the measuring light taught by Mushimoto, include arranged such that it is exposed to the measuring light only once per scanning cycle taught by Takagawa, include a plurality of light sensors are arranged around a field which is swept by the measuring light during a scanning cycle taught by Yamamoto with a reasonable expectation of success. The reasoning for this is disposed a plurality of light sensors around the edge of the scanning filed such that to monitor a movement of the electromagnetic wave of the sensor, predictably to improve the detection accurately.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sakai (US 20160096474 A1) disclosed in paragraph [0077], the object information acquisition unit 203 switches on and switches off the light source 21, and controls the driving of the first rotating mirror 24 and the second rotating mirror 26.
Hoashi (US 20190025410 A1) disclosed in paragraph [0028], the control unit 9 transmits to the light-emission trigger generation unit 22 a control signal to switch the light source 3 on and off, and also transmits to the derive unit 23 a controlling signal to switch the optical scanning unit 4 on and off, and a control signal for setting a scanning angle of the optical scanning unit 4.
Frederiksen et al. (US 20200049824 A1) disclosed in Fig. 2, paragraphs [0034]-[0035], light sensors 15 are situated at the corners of disk or lens 13 to detect the misalignment of the laser beams. Light sensors may be situated not only at the corners, but also around the entire edge of disk or lens 13.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIA-LING CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1047. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8-5 ET.
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)270-3630. 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.
/CHIA-LING CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights