DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 3/28/2024 is 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 1-14 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, the claim recites:
“the housing portion being in heat-transferring connection with the at least one environment sensor, allowing exhaust heat emitted by the environment sensor and/or introduced into the sensor module from outside to be discharged via the at least one housing portion.” (emphasis added)
The Examiner notes that the above “and/or” language opens the claim to an interpretation such that the limitation “allowing exhaust heat introduced into the sensor module from outside to be discharged” may be effectively omitted in place of “allowing exhaust heat emitted by the environment sensor…to be discharged”.
Dependent claim 7 then reintroduces the limitation “to reduce the heat introduced into the sensor module from outside”. Since this limitation is instantiated as part of an “and/or” statement in independent claim 1 and may be omitted/disregarded, there is functionally insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In other words, the “and/or” statement bifurcates the meaning of the claim in such a way that confuses the incorporation of dependent claim elements.
Claims 2-14 are rejected based on their dependence from claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 10, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Muller (US 20170070652 A1) (hereinafter Muller).
Regarding claim 1, Muller discloses:
A sensor module for being disposed on a motor vehicle, the sensor module having at least one environment sensor configured to send and/or receive electromagnetic signals for detecting a vehicle environment and [See Muller, ¶ 0028-0030, 0032-0034, Figs. 1-2 disclose an “assistance system” 2 of a vehicle comprising a camera 4, which is discussed as detecting traffic signs (detecting a vehicle environment).]
a sensor housing at least partially surrounding and/or enclosing and/or encasing the at least one environment sensor, [See Muller, Fig. 2 illustrates a housing (elements 12/20/22) which visibly “at least partially” surrounds/encloses/encases the sensor.]
wherein the sensor housing has at least one housing portion made of a metallic material, [See Muller, ¶ 0009, 0010 discloses the camera housing comprises a first cooling body with first cooling fins. The first cooling body is advantageously produced from a thermally conductive material, in particular a metal.]
the housing portion being in heat-transferring connection with the at least one environment sensor, allowing exhaust heat emitted by the environment sensor and/or introduced into the sensor module from outside to be discharged via the at least one housing portion. [See Muller, ¶ 0009, 0010 discloses the camera housing comprises a first cooling body with first cooling fins. Each of the first cooling fins comprises a right-angled profile, for example, which is connected by means of a plate, so that the cooling body essentially has a comb-shaped profile. Here, the cooling fins preferably point outwards, so that they at least partially form an outer boundary of the camera housing. The first cooling body is advantageously produced from a thermally conductive material, in particular a metal.]
Regarding claim 2, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Muller discloses:
wherein the at least one housing portion has at least one side wall made of a metallic material, the at least one side wall being in heat-transferring contact with the at least one environment sensor. [See Muller, ¶ 0030-0034, Fig. 2 illustrates cooling body (34); See Muller, ¶ 0009, 0010, 0014 discloses the camera housing comprises a first cooling body with first cooling fins. Each of the first cooling fins comprises a right-angled profile, for example, which is connected by means of a plate, so that the cooling body essentially has a comb-shaped profile. Here, the cooling fins preferably point outwards, so that they at least partially form an outer boundary of the camera housing. The first cooling body is advantageously produced from a thermally conductive material, in particular a metal.]
Regarding claim 3, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Muller discloses:
wherein the at least one housing portion has multiple cooling fins and/or is provided with multiple cooling fins. [See Muller, Fig. 2 illustrates the housing with multiple cooling fins.]
Regarding claim 4, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 3.
Muller discloses:
wherein the multiple cooling fins extend essentially parallel to a direction of travel or longitudinally extend at an acute angle relative to the direction of travel, allowing headwind to flow along the cooling fins. [See Muller, Fig. 2 illustrates a vehicle camera capturing images corresponding with a front/forward direction of travel of a vehicle, wherein observably the fins extend parallel to the direction of travel.]
Regarding claim 5, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Muller discloses:
wherein the at least one housing portion fully surrounds and/or encloses the at least one environment sensor. [See Muller, Fig. 2 illustrates the housing (elements 12/20/22) fully surrounds the sensor.]
Regarding claim 6, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Muller discloses:
wherein the sensor housing has at least one cover externally covering and/or canopying and/or capping the at least one environment sensor. [See Muller, Figs. 1 and 2 illustrate the sensor housing 22 at least covering/canopying/capping the sensor.]
Regarding claim 8, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 6.
Muller discloses:
wherein the at least one cover comprises plastic, preferably polycarbonate. [See Muller, ¶ 0009 discloses the first cooling body is advantageously produced from a thermally conductive material, in particular a metal or a thermally conductive plastic – further, a second cooling body consisting of a plastic which suitably has a comparatively high absorption coefficient. Muller thus suggests a choice of plastic, and one of ordinary skill would recognize the particular choice of plastic as both a matter of design preference and as being routine and conventional in the art.]
Regarding claim 10, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Muller discloses:
wherein the at least one environment sensor comprises a lidar sensor and/or a radar sensor and/or a camera sensor and/or a multi-camera sensor and/or an ultrasonic sensor. [See Muller, ¶ 0006-0009 discloses a camera sensor.]
Regarding claim 13, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 2.
Muller discloses:
wherein the at least one side wall is in flat and/or direct heat-transferring contact with the at least one environment sensor. [See Muller, ¶ 0028-0034, Fig. 2 illustrates sidewalls of the housing 12/20/22 in heat-transferring contact with the sensor.]
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 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.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muller in view of Bruce-Wen et al. (US 20210293932 A1) (hereinafter Bruce-Wen).
Regarding claim 7, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 6.
Muller does not disclose:
wherein the at least one cover has an infrared reflection layer configured to reduce the heat introduced into the sensor module from outside.
However, Bruce-Wen discloses:
wherein the at least one cover has an infrared reflection layer configured to reduce the heat introduced into the sensor module from outside. [See Bruce-Wen, ¶ 0054 discloses that a thermal coating may be applied to certain surfaces to minimize the thermal load on sensors adjacent to that portion of the housing. Furthermore, thermal coatings to achieve a lower thermal load may be applied to some or all of the horizontal surfaces or other surfaces that tend to have direct or more extended exposure to sunlight. Thus, in some instances infrared (IR) reflective paint may be used, while in other instances IR absorbing paint may be used.]
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Muller to add the teachings of Bruce-Wen in order to thermally treat a surface of a vehicle mounted camera to reduce a thermal load on sensitive electronic components.
Claim(s) 9, 11, 12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muller in view of Rakoczi et al. (DE102020202696B4; machine translation provided) (hereinafter Rakoczi).
Regarding claim 9, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Muller does not disclose:
wherein the at least one environment sensor is configured to be moved between a retracted position and a deployed position, heat being discharged via the at least one housing portion in the deployed position.
However, Rakoczi discloses:
wherein the at least one environment sensor is configured to be moved between a retracted position and a deployed position, heat being discharged via the at least one housing portion in the deployed position. [See Rakoczi, ¶ 0009, 0010, 0014 discloses electronic component, such as control units, communication units, or computing units. It is noted that other components, such as batteries or drive components, can also be considered as "components" within the meaning of the invention; in principle, any vehicle component that heats up; See Rakoczi, Figs. 1 and 2 illustrates an electronic component moved between a retracted position (Fig. 1) and a deployed position (Fig. 2), wherein when the component is in a deployed position, heat is at least discharged along line (9).]
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Muller to add the teachings of Rakoczi in order to selectively open and close a channel to provide heat dissipation and cooling to sensitive vehicle-mounted electronic components.
Regarding claim 11, Rakoczi discloses:
A roof module for forming a vehicle roof on a motor vehicle, the roof module having a panel component, which at least partly forms a roof skin of the vehicle roof, the roof skin serving as an outer sealing surface, [See Rakoczi, Fig. 2 illustrates a roof (2) along with a flap (4), which together forms a roof and roof skin.] and at least one sensor module according to claim 1, the sensor module being disposed on the panel component and/or comprised by the panel component. [See Rakoczi, Fig. 2 illustrates an electronic component (7) disposed on the panel.]
Regarding claim 12, Muller in view of Rakoczi discloses all the limitations of claim 11.
Rakoczi discloses:
the roof module being disposed on a vehicle body of the motor vehicle as a structural unit. [See Rakoczi, ¶ 0038 discloses a cooling device integrated into a roof of a vehicle.]
The reasons to combine the cited prior art are applicable to those presented for previously rejected claim 11.
Regarding claim 14, Muller discloses all the limitations of claim 5.
Rakoczi discloses:
wherein the at least one housing portion fully surrounds and/or encloses the at least one environment sensor in a flush manner. [See Rakoczi, ¶ 0038 discloses a flap 4 flush with the surface of a roof and a sensor.]
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK E DEMOSKY whose telephone number is (571)272-8799. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7-4 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, Jamie Atala can be reached at 5712727384. 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.
/PATRICK E DEMOSKY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights