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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: in the phrase “to infrared radiation attenuates infrared radiation in”, the appears to be missing a word and that it should be amended as follows in order to improve clarity: to infrared radiation --and-- attenuates infrared radiation in.
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 27-29 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 27 recites the limitation “the plurality of apertures” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 28 recites the limitation “the LIDAR transmitter” in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 29, it is unclear what is “a ridged transformation”. Applicant’s specification [0030] does not appear to provide any additional details to describe/define this claim term. For examination purposes, it is assumed that “a ridged transformation” is a translational and/or rotational transformation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6-15, 17, 22-24, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan US20200406904 in view of Pastor US20200110259.
Regarding independent claim 1, Yan discloses, in Figures 2A, 4, and 6-7,
A calibration target (Yan; Fig. 2A; sensor calibration target 220A) for calibrating a LIDAR system (Yan; Fig. 2A, 4, and 6-7; lidar sensor system 106; [0054] lidar calibration using sensor calibration target 220A), the target comprising: a) an infrared light source having an emitting surface that emits infrared radiation (Yan; [0052] “light source may provide illumination through” a “translucent or transparent surface” on a substrate 205); and b) a mask (Yan; [0052] “translucent or transparent surface” on a substrate 205) positioned proximate to the emitting surface of the infrared light source, the mask being formed of a material that is at least to infrared radiation in some regions and defining a plurality of regions with known areas or known shapes that are at least transparent (Yan; [0052] “light source may provide illumination through” a “translucent or transparent surface” on a substrate 205) to infrared radiation (Yan; Fig. 2A; [0051] checkerboard pattern).
Yan is silent regarding the mask being formed of a material that is at least partially opaque to infrared radiation in some regions and defining a plurality of regions with known areas or known shapes that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation.
Pastor teaches an arrangement of “partly transparent reference targets 32 in a two-dimensional scanning zone 44 that form a pattern” (Pastor; [0078] “partly transparent reference targets 32 in a two-dimensional scanning zone 44 that form a pattern”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the checkerboard-patterned translucent or transparent surface as taught by Yan to comprise partially opaque regions and partially transparent regions as taught by Pastor for the purpose of providing edge-detection between regions with different light patterns.
Regarding claim 4, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 1 wherein the material is positioned directly on the emitting surface of infrared light source (Yan; [0052] “light source may provide illumination through” a “translucent or transparent surface” on a substrate 205).
Regarding claim 6, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 1 wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent (Pastor; [0078] “partly transparent reference targets 32 in a two-dimensional scanning zone 44 that form a pattern”) to infrared radiation are (Yan; Fig. 2A).
In Fig. 2A, Modified Yan does not teach wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation are circular.
In Fig. 2E and 5, Modified Yan teaches wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation are circular (Yan; Fig. 2E and 5; [0138] rings 230).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the checkboard pattern as taught by Yan in Fig. 2A to be circular patterns as taught by Yan in Fig. 2E for the purpose of providing the desired pattern for lidar calibration.
Regarding claim 7, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 6 wherein at least two of the circular regions have a same diameter (Yan; Fig. 2E; 3 of the 4 circular regions 230 have the same diameter).
Regarding claim 8, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 1 wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent (Pastor; [0078] “partly transparent reference targets 32 in a two-dimensional scanning zone 44 that form a pattern”) to infrared radiation have a same area (Yan; Fig. 2A; [0051] checkerboard pattern provides relatively lighter, white regions with the same area sizes).
Regarding claim 9, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 1 wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent (Pastor; [0078] “partly transparent reference targets 32 in a two-dimensional scanning zone 44 that form a pattern”) to infrared radiation have a area (Yan; Fig. 2A; [0051] checkerboard pattern).
In Fig. 2A, Modified Yan does not teach wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation have a different area.
In Fig. 2B, Modified Yan teaches wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation have a different area (Yan; Fig. 2B).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the checkboard pattern as taught by Yan in Fig. 2A to be ArUco pattern as taught by Yan in Fig. 2B for the purpose of providing the desired pattern for lidar calibration.
Regarding claim 10, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 1 wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent (Pastor; [0078] “partly transparent reference targets 32 in a two-dimensional scanning zone 44 that form a pattern”) to infrared radiation are regions (Yan; Fig. 2A).
In Fig. 2A, Modified Yan does not teach open regions.
In Fig. 2E and 5, Modified Yan teaches open regions (Yan; Fig. 2E and 5; [0068] apertures 225).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the checkboard pattern as taught by Yan in Fig. 2A to comprise open regions as taught by Yan in Fig. 2E for the purpose of providing the desired pattern for lidar calibration.
Regarding claim 11, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 1 wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation are formed of a material that is at least times more transmissive than the material forming the partially opaque material (Yan; [0052] a “translucent or transparent surface” on a substrate 205).
Modified Yan is silent regarding wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation are formed of a material that is at least ten times more transmissive than the material forming the partially opaque material.
Pastor teaches an arrangement of “partly transparent reference targets 32 in a two-dimensional scanning zone 44 that form a pattern” (Pastor; [0078] “partly transparent reference targets 32 in a two-dimensional scanning zone 44 that form a pattern”) and that transparency/opacity is a result-effective variable that yields the predictable result of providing the desired amount of light transmission with no unexpected results.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to select the relative transmissive behavior as taught by Modified Yan so that at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation are formed of a material that is at least ten times more transmissive than the material forming the partially opaque material since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05(II) Routine Optimization), and the purpose for making the modification is to provide the desired light output for lidar calibration.
Regarding independent claim 12, Yan discloses, in Figures 2A, 4, and 6-7,
A method (Yan; Fig. 2A, 4, and 6-7) of transforming a LIDAR sensor coordinate system to a vehicle coordinate system for calibration of a LIDAR system (Yan; Fig. 2A, 4, and 6-7; lidar sensor system 106; [0054] lidar calibration using sensor calibration target 220A), the method comprising:
a) providing a calibration target (Yan; Fig. 2A; sensor calibration target 220A) for calibrating a LIDAR system (Yan; Fig. 2A, 4, and 6-7; lidar sensor system 106; [0054] lidar calibration using sensor calibration target 220A), the target comprising: an infrared light source having an emitting surface that emits infrared radiation (Yan; [0052] “light source may provide illumination through” a “translucent or transparent surface” on a substrate 205); and a mask (Yan; [0052] “translucent or transparent surface” on a substrate 205) positioned proximate to the emitting surface of the infrared light source, the mask being formed of a material that is at least to infrared radiation in some regions and defining a plurality of regions with known areas or known shapes that are at least transparent (Yan; [0052] “light source may provide illumination through” a “translucent or transparent surface” on a substrate 205) to infrared radiation (Yan; Fig. 2A; [0051] checkerboard pattern);
b) determining a vehicle coordinate system (Yan; [0122] “vehicle pose information”);
c) positioning the calibration target in the vehicle coordinate system in a predetermined position with a predetermined orientation (Yan; Fig. 6-7; [0094] dynamic scene calibration environment 600);
d) acquiring an image of the calibration target with a LIDAR sensor (Yan; Fig. 6 and 9; [0054] lidar calibration; [0094] lidar in scene surveying system 610; Fig. 9 flowchart recites “detect targets in each sensor frame”);
e) performing image processing to determine a position and orientation of the calibration target in a coordinate system of the LIDAR sensor (Yan; Fig. 5; [0083] “perform extrinsic calibration of its range sensors”; [0085] “The translational and rotational transformations may include modifications to position, angle, roll, pitch, yaw, or combinations thereof.”; Fig. 9 flowchart);
f) determining a rotation of the LIDAR sensor around an axis of attachment of the LIDAR sensor that compensates for misalignment of the LIDAR sensor from the image processing (Yan; Fig. 10; [0094] “perform intrinsic calibration of sensors to correct for distortions, for example, and to perform extrinsic calibration of sensors to align locations within data captured by different sensors”; [0134] “For some additional context on intrinsic calibration: LIDAR intrinsic properties may include elevation, azimuth, and intensity.); and
g) adjusting the coordinate system of LIDAR sensor to match the vehicle coordinate system based on the determined rotation (Yan; Fig. 10; [0094] “perform intrinsic calibration of sensors to correct for distortions, for example, and to perform extrinsic calibration of sensors to align locations within data captured by different sensors”; [0134] “For some additional context on intrinsic calibration: LIDAR intrinsic properties may include elevation, azimuth, and intensity... All sensors' intrinsic properties (including LIDAR and camera) may include position in X, Y, and/or Z dimensions, as well as roll, pitch, and/or yaw.”).
Yan is silent regarding the mask being formed of a material that is at least partially opaque to infrared radiation in some regions and defining a plurality of regions with known areas or known shapes that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation.
Pastor teaches an arrangement of “partly transparent reference targets 32 in a two-dimensional scanning zone 44 that form a pattern” (Pastor; [0078] “partly transparent reference targets 32 in a two-dimensional scanning zone 44 that form a pattern”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the checkerboard-patterned translucent or transparent surface as taught by Yan to comprise partially opaque regions and partially transparent regions as taught by Pastor for the purpose of providing edge-detection between regions with different light patterns.
Regarding claim 13, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 further comprising leveling the calibration target in a horizontal direction (Yan; horizontal/yaw direction; Fig. 10; [0094] “perform intrinsic calibration of sensors to correct for distortions, for example, and to perform extrinsic calibration of sensors to align locations within data captured by different sensors”; [0134] “For some additional context on intrinsic calibration: LIDAR intrinsic properties may include elevation, azimuth, and intensity... All sensors' intrinsic properties (including LIDAR and camera) may include position in X, Y, and/or Z dimensions, as well as roll, pitch, and/or yaw.”).
Regarding claim 14, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 further comprising leveling the calibration target in a vertical direction (Yan; vertical/pitch direction; Fig. 10; [0094] “perform intrinsic calibration of sensors to correct for distortions, for example, and to perform extrinsic calibration of sensors to align locations within data captured by different sensors”; [0134] “For some additional context on intrinsic calibration: LIDAR intrinsic properties may include elevation, azimuth, and intensity... All sensors' intrinsic properties (including LIDAR and camera) may include position in X, Y, and/or Z dimensions, as well as roll, pitch, and/or yaw.”).
Regarding claim 15, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the image processing is performed to enhance the image (Yan; [0127] “generating high-contrast versions of the one or more images (i.e., "edge" images) that are optionally filtered to emphasize edges within the image, and by identifying features within the image comprised of one or more of those edges, the features recognizable as portions of the target”).
Regarding claim 17, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the image processing comprises locating the image in a view finder (Yan; [0127] “generating high-contrast versions of the one or more images (i.e., "edge" images) that are optionally filtered to emphasize edges within the image, and by identifying features within the image comprised of one or more of those edges, the features recognizable as portions of the target”) and storing (Yan; memory 1515).
Regarding claim 22, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the image processing comprises associating particular ones of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation to expected images (Yan; [0086] transformations are “based on known relative positions of features identified within the outputs of each sensor”).
Regarding claim 23, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the image processing comprises identifying edges of particular ones of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation and comparing to expected images (Yan; [0127] “generating high-contrast versions of the one or more images (i.e., "edge" images) that are optionally filtered to emphasize edges within the image, and by identifying features within the image comprised of one or more of those edges, the features recognizable as portions of the target”).
Regarding claim 24, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 further comprising rotating a point cloud determined by the LIDAR system based on the determined rotation around the center of the LIDAR sensor (Yan; Fig. 10; [0094] “perform intrinsic calibration of sensors to correct for distortions, for example, and to perform extrinsic calibration of sensors to align locations within data captured by different sensors”; [0134] “For some additional context on intrinsic calibration: LIDAR intrinsic properties may include elevation, azimuth, and intensity... All sensors' intrinsic properties (including LIDAR and camera) may include position in X, Y, and/or Z dimensions, as well as roll, pitch, and/or yaw.”).
Regarding claim 29, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 further comprising calculating a ridged transformation to assess a distance of the calibration target from the LIDAR sensor (Yan; [0129] “The translational and rotatonal transformations may include modifications to position, angle, roll, pitch, yaw, or combinations thereof.”).
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan in view of Pastor as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Smith US20200150238.
Regarding claim 2, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 1 wherein the infrared light source is configured to emit at nm (Yan; [0052] “light source may provide illumination through”).
Modified Yan is silent regarding emit at 940 nm.
Smith teaches emit at 940 nm (Smith; [0020] first light source 108 generates light at first wavelength of 940-nm and/or at 905-nm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to select the wavelength as taught by Modified Yan to be 940-nm as taught by Smith for the purpose of providing light for lidar detection/calibration while maintaining sufficient eye safety.
Regarding claim 3, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 1 wherein the infrared light source is configured to emit at nm (Yan; [0052] “light source may provide illumination through”).
Modified Yan is silent regarding emit at 905 nm.
Smith teaches emit at 940 nm (Smith; [0020] first light source 108 generates light at first wavelength of 940-nm and/or at 905-nm).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to select the wavelength as taught by Modified Yan to be 905-nm as taught by Smith for the purpose of providing light for lidar detection/calibration while maintaining sufficient eye safety.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan in view of Pastor as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Hart US20250020842.
Regarding claim 5, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 1 wherein the material that is at least partially opaque to infrared radiation attenuates infrared radiation in the infrared spectrum by at least dB (Yan; [0052] a “translucent or transparent surface” on a substrate 205).
Modified Yan is silent regarding attenuates infrared radiation in the infrared spectrum by at least 10 dB.
Hart teaches attenuates infrared radiation in the infrared spectrum by at least 10 dB (Hart; [0076] provide energy attenuation of at least 10-dB).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to select the attenuation as taught by Modified Yan to be at least 10-dB as taught by Hart for the purpose of providing the desired light output for lidar calibration.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan in view of Pastor as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Shatalov US20160260867.
In an alternative interpretation of Modified Yan’s teachings:
Regarding claim 11, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The calibration target of claim 1 wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation are formed of a material that is at least times more transmissive than the material forming the partially opaque material (Yan; [0052] a “translucent or transparent surface” on a substrate 205).
Modified Yan is silent regarding wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation are formed of a material that is at least ten times more transmissive than the material forming the partially opaque material.
Shatalov teaches wherein at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation are formed of a material that is at least ten times more transmissive than the material forming the partially opaque material (Shatalov; [0061] two target transparency materials in which one material is “at least ten times more transparent” than the other material).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to select the relative transmissive behavior as taught by Modified Yan so that at least some of the plurality of regions that are at least partially transparent to infrared radiation are formed of a material that is at least ten times more transmissive than the material forming the partially opaque material as taught by Shatalov for the purpose of providing the desired light output for lidar calibration.
Claim(s) 16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan in view of Pastor as applied to claim 12 above and further in view of Gyongy US20260063798.
Regarding claim 16, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the image processing (Yan; [0085, 0129]; “curvature mapping”; [0127] “generating high-contrast versions of the one or more images (i.e., "edge" images) that are optionally filtered to emphasize edges within the image, and by identifying features within the image comprised of one or more of those edges, the features recognizable as portions of the target”).
Modified Yan is silent regarding curve fitting.
Gyongy teaches wherein the image processing comprises curve fitting (Gyongy; [0065] image processing with smoothing).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the image processing as taught by Modified Yan to comprise curve fitting as taught by Gyongy for the purpose of more clearly identifying a curve trend while minimizing the effects of outliers.
Regarding claim 18, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the image processing (Yan; [0085, 0129]; “curvature mapping”; [0127] “generating high-contrast versions of the one or more images (i.e., "edge" images) that are optionally filtered to emphasize edges within the image, and by identifying features within the image comprised of one or more of those edges, the features recognizable as portions of the target”).
Modified Yan is silent regarding averaging the image.
Gyongy teaches wherein the image processing further comprises averaging the image (Gyongy; [0065] image processing with averaging).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the image processing as taught by Modified Yan to comprise averaging as taught by Gyongy for the purpose of minimizing the effects of outliers.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan in view of Pastor and Gyongy as applied to claim 18 above and further in view of Kitamura US20180045513.
Regarding claim 19, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 18 wherein the image is averaged over or more images (Gyongy; [0065] image processing with averaging).
Modified Yan is silent regarding wherein the image is averaged over 15 or more images.
Kitamura teaches wherein the image is averaged over 3 images and that averaging is a result-effective variable that yields the expected result of “significantly reduce or prevent a reduction in the accuracy of measurement of a range” with no unexpected result (Kitamura; [0077] “range images for multiple frames (for example, two or three frames) are averaged for output. Averaging of range images may significantly reduce or prevent a reduction in the accuracy of measurement of a range”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to select the value of images to be averaged as taught by Modified Yan to be 15 or more images since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art (MPEP 2144.05(II) Routine Optimization), and the purpose for making the modification is to “significantly reduce or prevent a reduction in the accuracy of measurement of a range” (Kitamura; [0077] “Averaging of range images may significantly reduce or prevent a reduction in the accuracy of measurement of a range”).
Claim(s) 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan in view of Pastor as applied to claim 12 above and further in view of Sutavani US20210208263.
Regarding claim 20, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the target is imaged at a frame rate of the LIDAR sensor that is greater than frames a second (Yan; Fig. 2A, 4, and 6-7; lidar sensor system 106).
Modified Yan is silent regarding wherein the target is imaged at a frame rate of the LIDAR sensor that is greater than 10 frames a second.
Sutavani teaches wherein the target is imaged at a frame rate of the LIDAR sensor that is greater than 10 frames a second (Sutavani; [0074] lidar system 100 generates point clouds at 500-FPS and “In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to select the frame rate as taught by Modified Yan to be greater than 10-fps as taught by Sutavani for the purpose of providing “a faster frame rate… to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds” (Sutavani; [0074] lidar system 100 generates point clouds at 500-FPS and “In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds.”).
Regarding claim 21, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the target is imaged at a frame rate of the LIDAR sensor that is greater than frames a second (Yan; Fig. 2A, 4, and 6-7; lidar sensor system 106).
Modified Yan is silent regarding wherein the target is imaged at a frame rate of the LIDAR sensor that is greater than 100 frames a second.
Sutavani teaches wherein the target is imaged at a frame rate of the LIDAR sensor that is greater than 10 frames a second (Sutavani; [0074] lidar system 100 generates point clouds at 500-FPS and “In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to select the frame rate as taught by Modified Yan to be greater than 100-fps as taught by Sutavani for the purpose of providing “a faster frame rate… to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds” (Sutavani; [0074] lidar system 100 generates point clouds at 500-FPS and “In general, the lidar system can use a slower frame rate (e.g., 1 Hz) to capture one or more high-resolution point clouds, and use a faster frame rate (e.g., 10 Hz) to rapidly capture multiple lower-resolution point clouds.”).
Claim(s) 25 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan in view of Pastor as applied to claim 12 above and further in view of Orr US20040246171.
Regarding claim 25, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the image processing comprises fitting images (Yan; [0085, 0129]; “curvature mapping”; [0127] “generating high-contrast versions of the one or more images (i.e., "edge" images) that are optionally filtered to emphasize edges within the image, and by identifying features within the image comprised of one or more of those edges, the features recognizable as portions of the target”).
Modified Yan is silent regarding wherein the image processing comprises fitting images to a plurality of high-resolution ellipses.
Orr teaches wherein the image processing comprises fitting images to a plurality of high-resolution ellipses (Orr; [0059, 0062] “feeds real time X and Y measurements to a Least Squares Elliptical Fit algorithm executed by controller 34. One paper that describes the use of a Least Squares Elliptical Fit algorithm is entitled "Numerically Stable Direct Least Squares Fitting of Ellipses" by Radim Halir and Jan Flusser”; claim 6 “wherein the curve fitting algorithm is a Least Squares algorithm that uses Fitzgibbon's Approach to fit the measurements to an ellipse”; [0058] “However, due to error in both X/Y gains and offsets, the actual result is an ellipse whose center is generally not at the origin of the X-Y plane.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the image processing as taught by Modified Yan to comprise fitting images to a plurality of high-resolution ellipses as taught by Orr for the purpose of providing a more accurate representation of errors for calibration/correction.
Regarding claim 27, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the image processing comprises fitting edges of at least some of the plurality of (Yan; [0085, 0129]; “curvature mapping”; [0127] “generating high-contrast versions of the one or more images (i.e., "edge" images) that are optionally filtered to emphasize edges within the image, and by identifying features within the image comprised of one or more of those edges, the features recognizable as portions of the target”).
Modified Yan is silent regarding wherein the image processing comprises fitting edges of at least some of the plurality of apertures to high resolution ellipses.
In Fig. 2E and 5, Modified Yan teaches a plurality of apertures (Yan; Fig. 2E and 5; [0068] apertures 225).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the checkboard pattern as taught by Yan in Fig. 2A to comprise apertures as taught by Yan in Fig. 2E for the purpose of providing the desired pattern for lidar calibration.
Modified Yan is silent regarding wherein the image processing comprises fitting edges of at least some of the plurality of apertures to high resolution ellipses.
Orr teaches wherein the image processing comprises fitting edges to high resolution ellipses (Orr; [0059, 0062] “feeds real time X and Y measurements to a Least Squares Elliptical Fit algorithm executed by controller 34. One paper that describes the use of a Least Squares Elliptical Fit algorithm is entitled "Numerically Stable Direct Least Squares Fitting of Ellipses" by Radim Halir and Jan Flusser”; claim 6 “wherein the curve fitting algorithm is a Least Squares algorithm that uses Fitzgibbon's Approach to fit the measurements to an ellipse”; [0058] “However, due to error in both X/Y gains and offsets, the actual result is an ellipse whose center is generally not at the origin of the X-Y plane.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the image processing as taught by Modified Yan to comprise fitting edges to high resolution ellipses as taught by Orr for the purpose of providing a more accurate representation of errors for calibration/correction.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan in view of Pastor as applied to claim 12 above and further in view of Conrad US20190004147.
Regarding claim 28, Modified Yan teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The method of claim 12 wherein the positioning the calibration target comprises positioning the calibration target at a distance that is less than cm from the LIDAR transmitter (Yan; Fig. 6).
Modified Yan is silent regarding positioning the calibration target at a distance that is less than 100 cm from the LIDAR transmitter.
Conrad teaches positioning the calibration target at a distance that is less than 100 cm (Conrad; [0036] “calibration distance is 24 inches”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to select the calibration distance as taught by Modified Yan to be less than 100 cm as taught by Conrad for the purpose of minimizing the footprint of the calibration environment (Yan; [0095] smaller space/footprint minimizes/avoids the need for take-down and/or setup and is thus more time-efficient).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 26 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Engstle US20230281873 teaches calibrating a portable sensor.
Wang US20210303898 teaches a combined sensor calibration target.
Bogatscher US20180284271 teaches a partially transparent element 4.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN MALIKASIM whose telephone number is (313)446-6597. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 8 am - 5 pm (CST).
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.
/JONATHAN MALIKASIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645 7/10/26
Prosecution Insights