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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the relationship between the attachment and mating features as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
The configuration of the attachment and mating features shown in Fig. 3, 4, and 5 are not consistent with each other, the specification, or the claims. The specification discloses that “the plurality of attachment features 208 … may be a protrusion or an extension” (paragraph [0044]) and that “the plurality of mating features 214 may … indent from a surface (not shown) of the bracket 212.” (paragraph [0049]). However, Fig. 3, Section B-B and Section C-C, which are intended to display cross-sections of the primary and a secondary attachment feature, 302 and 304 respectively, indicate that element 308 (the first taper-shaped portion) is a double-pronged structure with a tapered trough that accepts a non-tapered pin labeled element 212 (the bracket). Thus, Fig. 3 does not show an extensional attachment feature or indented mating feature.
Like Fig. 3, Fig. 4 shows a configuration of the attachment and mating features where a pin is inserted into a tapered trough. However, unlike in Fig. 3, Fig. 4 labels the taper-shaped indents as mating features and the protruding pins as attachment features. Thus, Fig. 3 and 4 show the same arrangement of parts but with inverse labels. Fig. 5 is described as showing the excess cutting area of the first taper-shaped portion of the attachment features (Section B-B and Section C-C) and the adjustable area of the second taper-shaped portion of the mating features (Section X-X and Section Y-Y). However, none of the cross-sections in Fig. 5 show a protruding or extending element, which the specification discloses as the first taper-shaped portion of the attachment features. In order to accurately portray the attachment features as disclosed and claimed, as well as to be consistent with the dotted portions shown in Fig. 3 and 4, the cross sections in Fig. 5 that depict the attachment features should show an extensional element attached to the excess cutting area.
Based on the Examiner’s best understanding of the claimed invention as disclosed in the specification, claims, and Fig. 2 and 6, the Examiner believes that Fig. 4 is accurately drawn and labeled, while Section B-B and Section C-C in Fig. 3 and 5 incorrectly label the mating features as attachment features. In order to adequately show all elements of the claimed invention, the Examiner recommends changing the drawings of Fig. 3 to show the attachment feature in the solid line and matting features in dotted lines (with the appropriate corresponding labels).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0030]: “ The sensor 210 may include a suitable circuitry, logic, and network interfaces” should be changed to either “include suitable … interfaces” or “include a suitable … interface”.
Paragraph [0033]: “In an embodiment, the first portion 208B may be disposed at a first height” includes reference character “208B”, which does not appear in any of the drawings. The Examiner believes “208B” to be a typo that should be changed to “212A” to match the other instances of “the first portion” within the paragraph.
Paragraph [0036]: “The second direction ‘S’ may be substantially same as the first direction ‘F’” should be changed to “… may be substantially the same as the first …”
Paragraph [0042]: “…wind dust or any debris that may be enter the vehicle 102” should be changed to “…that may enter the vehicle”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informality: “wherein a second portion the bracket having a plurality of mating features receive a plurality of attachment features…” (lines 7-8) should be changed to “wherein a second portion of the bracket having a plurality of mating features receives a plurality of attachment features”. 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.
Claims 3, 9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites an “excess cutting area” (line 2) intended to “secure the plurality of attachment features with the brackets” (lines 2-3). As written, the meaning of an “excess cutting area” is not immediately clear. The specification further discloses: “the excess cutting area of the first taper-shaped portion may be an extension … [and] may be used to tune or adjust dimensions of the first taper-shaped portion to secure the plurality of attachment features of varied sizes with the plurality of mating features” (paragraph [0053]). This description would suggest to the Examiner that the excess cutting area constitutes extra material on the first taper-shaped portion that can be cut off so that the attachment feature can fit in a smaller mating feature. Conversely, Fig. 5 seems to indicate that the excess cutting area 502 could make the first taper-shaped portion 308 either smaller or larger (in Section B-B, the dotted lines of 502 are within solid lines of 308, while in Section C-C the dotted lines of 502 are outside of the solid lines of 308). Thus, claim 3 is rendered indefinite, as it is unclear how the excess cutting area is structured and arranged such that it can either increase or decrease the diameter of the first taper-shaped portion.
For the purposes of examination, based on the disclosure as a whole and the Examiner’s best understanding of the claimed invention, the Examiner interpreted “the excess cutting area” as a region that could irreversibly increase or decrease the circumference of the first taper-shaped region.
Claim 9 recites an “adjustable area” (line 2) that is configured to “receive the first taper-shaped portion of each … attachment feature” (lines 3-4) and ”secure the cover to the bracket” (line 4). The specification further discloses that the “adjustable area 504 … may extend from the second taper-shaped portion 406 … [and] be used to tune or adjust dimensions of the second taper-shaped portion to secure the plurality of attachment feature” (paragraph [0054]). However, the specification and drawings do not elucidate what the adjustable area is made of, or how it is used. For example, is the adjustable area intended to be removed permanently or simply manipulated while remaining attached to the second taper-shaped portion? Does the adjustable material extend circumferentially around the mating feature or from the bottom? Is the adjustable area adjustable because of the way it is used (e.g., removing some of it) or the material out of which it is made (e.g., rubber than can be compressed)? Given the lack of a specific definition within the disclosure, the metes and bounds set forth by “an adjustable area” are unclear, rendering claim 9 indefinite. For the purposes of examination, based on the disclosure as a whole and the Examiner’s best understanding of the claimed invention, the Examiner interpreted “the adjustable area” as a region that could be temporarily modified to increase or decrease the size of indent of the mating feature to accept a variety of sizes of attachment feature.
Claim 12 recites the limitations “the primary attachment feature” in line 2 and “each secondary attachment feature" in line 5. Claim 12 is dependent upon claim 10, and thereby further dependent upon claim 1. However, the primary and secondary attachment features are introduced in claim 4, which is outside of the chain of dependency of claim 12. Thus, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in claim 12 as written. For the purposes of examination, the Examiner has interpreted claim 10 as if it were dependent upon claim 4, which would provide the necessary bases for the limitations recited in claim 12.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 13, 16, 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams et al. (US 10,071,773 B2) in view of Frank et al. (US 2018/0015886 A1). For clarity, bolded text indicates claim language.
[Claim 1] Williams et al. teaches: A sensor mounting assembly (Williams et al., Abstract), comprising:
a cover (Williams et al., Fig. 1-4, element 150) having a first end segment (Williams et al., Fig. 1-4, element 154), wherein the first end segment is coupled to a glass roof (Williams et al., col. 3, lines 39-42) of a vehicle (Williams et al., col. 5, lines 21-24), and the cover (Williams et al., Fig. 1 and 4, element 150) is configured to enclose a sensor (Williams et al., Fig. 1 and 4, element 200) that is disposed proximally to the glass roof (Williams et al., col. 4, lines 18-22); and
a bracket (Williams et al., Fig. 4, elements 130 and 180) coupled to a roof rail (Williams et al., Fig. 1 element 115) that is located beneath the glass roof of the vehicle (Williams et al., col. 3, lines 47-54), wherein the bracket has a first portion (Williams et al., Fig. 3 and 4, element 130) and a second portion (Williams et al., Fig. 3, element 180),
the first portion is configured to secure the sensor (Williams et al., Fig. 4, element 200) proximally to the glass roof of the vehicle (Williams et al., Fig. 4, elements 120, 130, and 134).
Williams et al. does not teach that the cover has a plurality of attachment features nor that the bracket has a plurality of mating features to receive the plurality of attachment features. Frank et al. teaches “A mount for a roof-mounted autonomous vehicle sensor assembly” (Frank et al., Abstract) that includes a cover (Frank et al., Fig. 1, 4, and 10, element 26), bracket (Frank et al., Fig. 5-7, and 10, elements 36, 44, and 46), roof rail (Frank et al., Fig. 6 and 10, element 54), and sensor (Frank et al., Fig. 1 and 4, element 28). Specifically, Frank et al. teaches a cover (Frank et al., Fig. 1, 4 and 10, element 26) having a plurality of attachment features (Frank et al., Fig. 4, 5, and 10, element 40). Additionally, Frank et al. teaches a bracket (Frank et al., Fig. 5-7, and 10, elements 36, 44, and 46) configured to secure the sensor proximally to the glass roof of the vehicle (Frank et al., paragraph [0027]) and having a second portion (Frank et al., element 36), wherein the second portion includes a plurality of mating features (Frank et al., Fig. 4, 5, and 10, element 38) to receive the plurality of attachment features (Frank et al., Fig. 4, 5 and 10,
PNG
media_image1.png
504
698
media_image1.png
Greyscale
element 40) that is configured to align the cover with the bracket (Frank et al., paragraph [0031]).
Williams et al. and Frank et al. are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of a sensor mounting assembly for a vehicle. Thus, 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 cover and bracket of the sensor mounting assembly of Williams et al. to include the plurality of attachment and mating features of Frank et al. This modification would be advantageous as matching attachment and mating features would decrease the difficulty of correctly lining up the cover and bracket during mounting. Further, the plurality of the attachment and mating features would improve the strength of the connection between the cover and bracket, decreasing the likelihood of the two parts decoupling during vehicle motion.
[Claim 13] Williams et al. in view of Frank et al. teaches the sensor mounting assembly according to claim 1, but does not specifically teach that a portion of the bracket is disposed on the roof rail at a first or second datum level. Frank et al., however, teaches that a portion (Frank et al., Fig. 7, 9 and 10, elements 44, 48, and 78) of the bracket is disposed on the roof rail (Frank et al., Fig. 9-10, element 54) at a first datum level from a base of the roof rail (Frank et al., annotated in Fig. 10 above), and the portion of the bracket (Frank et al., Fig. 7, 9 and 10, elements 44, 48, and 78) is inserted in an opening of the roof rail (Frank et al. Fig. 9-10, element 78 is inserted in a hole in the roof rail), such that the portion of the bracket (Frank et al., Fig. 7, 9, and 10, elements 44, 48, and 78) reaches a second datum level from the base of the roof rail (Frank et al., annotated in Fig. 10 above). 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 bracket of Williams et al. to include the portion of the bracket of Frank et al. This modification would be beneficial as it would further ensure that the sensor mounting assembly was securely connected to the vehicle.
[Claim 16] Williams et al. in view of Frank et al. teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 1, wherein the cover (Williams et al. Fig. 1-4, element 150) has a viewing window (Williams et al., Fig. 1 and 3, element 160) to allow at least one of a horizontal field-of-view (Williams et al., col. 6, lines 27-31) and a vertical field-of-view for the sensor.
[Claim 17] Williams et al. in view of Frank et al. teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 16, wherein the viewing window (Williams et al., Fig. 1 and 3, element 160) has a second end segment (Williams et al., Fig. 1 and 3, element 152; col. 7, lines 1-4), which is secured to a portion of a front windshield of the vehicle (Williams et al., col. 4, lines 42-47).
[Claim 19] Williams et al. teaches: A sensor mounting assembly (Williams et al., Abstract), comprising:
a cover (Williams et al., Fig. 1-4, element 150) having a first end segment (Williams et al., Fig. 1-4, element 154), wherein the first end segment is coupled to a glass roof (Williams et al., col. 3, lines 39-42) of a vehicle (Williams et al., col. 5, lines 21-24), and the cover is configured to enclose a sensor (Williams et al., Fig. 1 and 4, elements 120, 150, and 200) that is disposed proximally to the glass roof (Williams et al., col. 4, lines 18-22); and
a bracket (Williams et al., Fig. 4, elements 130 and 180) coupled to a roof rail (Williams et al., Fig. 1 element 115) that is located beneath the glass roof of the vehicle (Williams et al., col. 3, lines 47-54), wherein the bracket has a first portion (Williams et al., Fig. 3 and 4, element 130) and a second portion (Williams et al., Fig. 3, element 180),
the first portion is configured to secure the sensor (Williams et al., Fig. 4, element 200) proximally to the glass roof of the vehicle (Williams et al., Fig. 4, elements 120, 130, and 134).
Williams et al. does not teach that the cover has a plurality of attachment features nor that the bracket has a plurality of mating features to receive the plurality of attachment features and that a portion of the bracket is disposed on the roof rail at a first or second datum level. Frank et al. teaches “A mount for a roof-mounted autonomous vehicle sensor assembly” (Frank et al., Abstract) that includes a cover (Frank et al., Fig. 1, 4, and 10, element 26), bracket (Frank et al., Fig. 5-7, and 10, elements 36, 44 and 46), roof rail (Frank et al., Fig. 6 and 10, element 54), and sensor (Frank et al., Fig. 1 and 4, element 28). Specifically, Frank et al. teaches a cover (Frank et al., Fig. 1, 4 and 10, element 26) having a plurality of attachment features (Frank et al., Fig. 4, 5, and 10, element 40).
Additionally, Frank et al. further teaches a bracket (Frank et al., Fig. 5-7, and 10, elements 36, 44, and 46) configured to secure the sensor proximally to the glass roof of the vehicle (Frank et al., paragraph [0027]) and having a second portion (Frank et al., element 36), wherein the second portion includes a plurality of mating features (Frank et al., Fig. 4, 5, and 10, element 38) to receive the plurality of attachment features (Frank et al., Fig. 4, 5 and 10, element 40) that is configured to align the cover with the bracket (Frank et al., paragraph [0031]).
In addition to the second portion, Frank et al. further teaches that a portion (Frank et al., Fig. 7, 9 and 10, elements 44, 48, and 78) of the bracket is disposed on the roof rail (Frank et al., Fig. 9-10, element 54) at a first datum level from a base of the roof rail (Frank et al., annotated in Fig. 10 below), and the portion of the bracket (Frank et al., Fig. 7, 9 and 10, elements 44, 48, and 78) is inserted in an opening of the roof rail (Frank et al. Fig. 9-10, element 78 is inserted in a hole in the roof rail), such that the portion of the bracket (Frank et al., Fig. 7, 9, and 10, elements 44, 48, and 78) reaches a second datum level from the base of the roof rail (Frank et al., annotated in Fig. 10 above).
Williams et al. and Frank et al. are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of a sensor mounting assembly for a vehicle. Thus, 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 cover and bracket of the sensor mounting assembly of Williams et al. to include the plurality of attachment and mating features and portion of the bracket that connects and enters the roof rail of Frank et al. These modifications would be advantageous as the matching attachment and mating features would decrease the difficulty of correctly lining up the cover and bracket during mounting while the portion of the bracket disposed on the roof rail would ensure that the sensor mounting assembly was securely connected to the vehicle.
[Claim 20] Williams et al. teaches: A method for assembling a sensor mounting assembly (Williams et al., Fig. 3), comprising:
coupling (Williams et al., col. 7, lines 5-6) a first end segment (Williams et al., Fig. 1-4, element 154) of a cover (Williams et al., Fig. 1-4, element 150) to a glass (Williams et al., col. 3, lines 39-42) roof of a vehicle (Williams et al., Fig. 1-4, element 120), wherein the cover is configured to enclose a sensor (Williams et al., Fig. 3 and 4, elements 150 and 200; col. 4, lines 18-22) that is disposed proximally to the glass roof of the vehicle (Williams et al., Fig. 4 shows element 200 directly adjacent to element 120);
securing the sensor (Williams et al., Fig. 3 and 4, elements 130, 134, and 200; col. 7, lines 60-62) to a first portion of a bracket (Williams et al., Fig. 3 and 4, element 130); and
coupling (Williams et al., col. 3, lines 47-54) the bracket (Williams et al., Fig. 4, element 180) to a roof rail (Williams et al., Fig. 1-3, element 115) that is located beneath (Williams et al., col. 3, lines 51-54) the glass roof of the vehicle (Williams et al., Fig. 1-4, element 120; col. 3, lines 39-42).
Williams et al. does not teach that a second portion of the bracket having a plurality of mating features receives a plurality of attachment features of the cover that are configured to align the cover with the bracket.
Frank et al. teaches “A mount for a roof-mounted autonomous vehicle sensor assembly” (Frank et al., Abstract) that includes a cover (Frank et al., Fig. 1, 4, and 10, element 26), bracket (Frank et al., Fig. 5-7, and 10, elements 36, 44 and 46), roof rail (Frank et al., Fig. 6 and 10, element 54), and sensor (Frank et al., Fig. 1 and 4, element 28). Specifically, Frank et al. teaches a bracket (Frank et al., Fig. 5-7, and 10, elements 36, 44, and 46) having a second portion (Frank et al., element 36), wherein the second portion of the bracket having a plurality of mating features (Frank et al., Fig. 4, 5, and 10, element 38) receives a plurality of attachment features (Frank et al., Fig. 4, 5 and 10, element 40) of the cover (Frank et al., Fig. 1, 4, and 10, element 26) that are configured to align the cover with the bracket (Frank et al., paragraph [0031]).
Williams et al. and Frank et al. are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of a sensor mounting assembly for a vehicle. Thus, 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 cover and bracket of the sensor mounting assembly of Williams et al. to include the plurality of attachment and mating features of Frank et al. It would have been further obvious to assemble the sensor mounting assembly so that the plurality of attachment and mating features were configured so as to align the cover with the bracket. This modification would be advantageous as aligning the attachment and mating features would decrease the difficulty of correctly lining up the cover and bracket during mounting. Further, attaching the cover and bracket by a plurality of the attachment and mating features would improve the strength of the connection between the cover and bracket, decreasing the likelihood of the two parts decoupling during vehicle motion.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams et al. (US 10,071,773 B2) in view Carlson (US 2016/0216595 A1). For clarity, bolded text indicates claim language. As discussed in the claim 12 112(b) rejection above, claim 10 is being examined as if it is dependent upon claim 4, as doing so provides the necessary antecedent bases for the elements recited in claim 12. The following rejection does not change if claim 10 remains dependent on claim 1.
[Claim 1] Williams et al. teaches: A sensor mounting assembly (Williams et al., Abstract), comprising:
a cover (Williams et al., Fig. 1-4, element 150) having a first end segment (Williams et al., Fig. 1-4, element 154), wherein the first end segment is coupled to a glass roof (Williams et al., col. 3, lines 39-42) of a vehicle (Williams et al., col. 5, lines 21-24), and the cover (Williams et al., Fig. 1 and 4, element 150) is configured to enclose a sensor (Williams et al., Fig. 1 and 4, element 200) that is disposed proximally to the glass roof (Williams et al., col. 4, lines 18-22); and
a bracket (Williams et al., Fig. 4, elements 130 and 180) coupled to a roof rail (Williams et al., Fig. 1 element 115) that is located beneath the glass roof of the vehicle (Williams et al., col. 3, lines 47-54), wherein the bracket has a first portion (Williams et al., Fig. 3 and 4, element 130) and a second portion (Williams et al., Fig. 3, element 180),
the first portion is configured to secure the sensor (Williams et al., Fig. 4, element 200) proximally to the glass roof of the vehicle (Williams et al., Fig. 4, elements 120, 130, and 134).
Williams et al. does not teach that the cover has a plurality of attachment features nor that the bracket has a plurality of mating features to receive the plurality of attachment features. Carlson teaches “a camera mounting assembly [that] includes a bracket mountable to a vehicle windshield” (Carlson, paragraph [0005]). Specifically, a housing (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 100) surrounds the camera (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 130) and is connected to the bracket (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 20) by a plurality of attachment features (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, elements 140 and 144) that align the housing with a plurality of mating features (Carlson, Fig. 1, elements 72 and 91) located on a second portion of the bracket (Carlson, Fig. 1, element 90)
Carlson is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of sensor mounting assemblies for use with a vehicle. Thus, 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 cover and bracket of the sensor mounting assembly of Williams et al. to include the plurality of attachment and mating features of Carlson such that the second portion of the bracket included a plurality of mating features configured to receive the plurality of attachment features, and, thereby, align the cover with the bracket. This modification would be advantageous as aligning the attachment and mating features would decrease the difficulty of correctly lining up the cover and bracket during mounting. Further, attaching the cover and bracket by a plurality of the attachment and mating features would improve the strength of the connection between the cover and bracket, decreasing the likelihood of the two parts decoupling during vehicle motion.
[Claim 2] Williams et al. in view of Carlson teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 1, wherein there are a plurality of attachment features (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, elements 140 and 144). Carlson further teaches that each of the plurality of attachment features includes a first taper-shaped portion (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 140 or 144) that extends from a section of the housing (Carlson, Fig. 1-4, element 104) and the first taper-shaped portion is configured to guide the housing in the bracket (Carlson, Fig. 5A-C; paragraphs [0032-0033]). 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 cover of Williams et al. to include the plurality of attachment features including a first taper-shaped portion of Carlson. This modification would be beneficial as it would simplify the mounting process by providing a physical and visual guide indicative of proper alignment of the cover and bracket of the sensor mounting assembly.
[Claim 4] Williams et al. in view of Carlson teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 1, wherein there are a plurality of attachment features (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, elements 140 and 144). Carlson further teaches that the plurality of attachment features comprises a primary attachment feature (Carlson, Fig.1 and 4, element 144) and a plurality of secondary attachment features (Carlson Fig. 1 and 4, element 140). Thus, 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 cover of the sensor mounting assembly of Williams et al. to comprise a primary attachment features and a plurality of secondary attachment features, as taught by Carlson. This modification would be advantageous as it would ensure proper directional alignment of the cover with respect to the bracket, as well as ensure that the cover fully and securely enclosed the sensor.
[Claim 5] Williams et al. in view of Carlson teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 4, wherein there is a plurality of attachment features comprising primary and secondary attachment features (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, elements 140 and 144). Carlson further teaches that the primary attachment feature (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 144) is located on a rear side (Carlson, Fig. 1, 4, 5, and 7, element 106) of the sensor (Carlson, Fig. 1, 4, 5, and 7, element 130), and each secondary attachment features (Carlson, Fig. 1-3 and 5, element 140) of the plurality of secondary attachment features is located around other sides of the sensor (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4 shows element 140 to the front right and left of the camera 130).
[Claim 6] Williams et al. in view of Carlson teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 4. Carlson further teaches that the primary attachment feature (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 144) is larger than each secondary attachment feature (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 140) of the plurality of attachment features (Carlson, Fig. 1, element 144 spans a wider distance than element 140).
[Claim 7] Williams et al. in view of Carlson teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 4. Carlson further teaches that the primary attachment features (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, elements 144) configured to lock datum levels (Carlson, Fig. 5C; paragraph [0042]) of the bracket (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 20) on a rear side (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 106) of the sensor (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 130), and each secondary attachment feature (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 140) of the plurality of secondary attachment features are configured to guide the housing into the bracket (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 20) around other sides of the sensor (Carlson, paragraphs [0032-0033]).
[Claim 8] Williams et al. in view of Carlson teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 1, wherein there are a plurality of mating features (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, elements 72 and 91). Carlson further teaches that each of the plurality of mating features (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, elements 72) includes a second taper-shaped portion (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 74) that indents from a surface of the bracket (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 32) and the second taper-shaped portion is configured to receive a first taper-shaped portion of the plurality of attachment features (Carlson, Fig. 5A-C; paragraphs [0032-0033]). 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 bracket of the sensor mounting assembly of Williams et al. to include a plurality of mating features that have second taper-shaped portions, as taught by Carlson. This modification would be beneficial as it would simplify the mounting process by providing a physical and visual guide indicative of alignment of the cover and bracket of the sensor mounting assembly.
[Claim 10] Williams et al. in view of Carlson teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 4, wherein there are a plurality of mating features (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, elements 72 and 91). Carlson further teaches that the plurality of mating features comprises a primary mating feature (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 91) and a plurality of secondary mating features (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 72). Thus, 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 bracket of the sensor mounting assembly of Williams et al. to comprise a primary mating feature and a plurality of secondary mating features, as taught by Carlson. This modification would be advantageous as it would ensure proper directional alignment of the cover with respect to the bracket, as well as ensure that the cover fully and securely enclosed the sensor.
[Claim 11] Williams et al. in view of Carlson teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 10, wherein there is a plurality of mating features comprising primary and secondary mating features (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, elements 72 and 91 respectively). Carlson further teaches that the primary mating feature (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 91) is located on a rear side (Carlson, Fig. 1, 4, 5, and 7, element 106) of the sensor (Carlson, Fig. 1, 4, 5, and 7, element 130), and each secondary mating features (Carlson, Fig. 1-3 and 5, element 72) of the plurality of secondary attachment features is located around other sides of the sensor (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 5 shows element 72 to the front right and left of the camera 130).
[Claim 12] Williams et al. in view of Carlson teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 10, wherein there is a plurality of attachment features comprising primary and secondary attachment features (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, elements 140 and 144 respectively) and a plurality of mating features comprising primary and secondary mating features (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, elements 72 and 91 respectively). Carlson further teaches that the primary mating feature (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 91) receives the primary attachment feature (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 144) that is configured to lock datum levels (Carlson, Fig. 5C; paragraph [0042]) of the bracket (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 20) on a rear side (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 106) of the sensor (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 130), and each secondary mating feature (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 72) of the plurality of secondary mating features receives each secondary attachment feature (Carlson, Fig. 1 and 4, element 140) of the plurality of secondary attachment features are configured to guide the housing into the bracket (Carlson, Fig. 1-3, element 20) around other sides of the sensor (Carlson, paragraphs [0032-0033]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams et al. (US 10,071,773 B2) in view of Frank et al. (US 2018/0015886 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of the Livox LiDAR Mid-360 (referred to hereafter as the Mid-360). For clarity, bolded text indicates claim language. A copy of the Livox webpage where one could purchase the Mid-360 is included in this Office action.
[Claim 15] Williams et al. in view of Frank et al. teaches: The sensor mounting assembly according to claim 1, wherein the sensor (Williams et al., Fig. 3 and 4, element 200) is a LiDAR sensor (Williams et al., col. 6, lines 7-11). Neither Williams et al. or Frank et al. teaches specific horizontal or vertical field-of-view (FOV) ranges for the LiDAR sensor.
The Mid-360 is a compact LiDAR sensor that has been “optimized based on the navigation and obstacle avoidance requirements of mobile robots” (Mid-360, page 1 of attached document), of which autonomous vehicles is one example. Specifically, the Mid-360 is a LiDAR sensor that has a horizontal field-of-view between 1-360 degrees (Mid-360, page 1 of attached document) and a vertical field-of-view between 1-45 degrees (Mid-360, page 1 of attached document states that the vertical FOV is 59°, which would cover the range of 1-45°).
The Mid-360 is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of mountable sensors used on vehicles. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to mount the Mid-360 within the sensor mounting assembly of Williams et al. in view of Frank et al. This combination would be beneficial as the wide FOV of the LiDAR sensor would increase the amount of data collected, as well as the versatility of the data set.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 9, 14, and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to be both: amended to overcome the above 112(b) rejections; and in independent form, including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. For clarity, bolded text indicates claim language.
[Claim 3] Using the examiner’s best understanding of the claim limitations, described in the 112(b) rejection above, the prior art made of record does not teach a sensor assembly wherein the first taper-shaped portion of an attachment feature has an excess cutting area configured to secure the plurality of attachment features within the bracket.
[Claim 9] Using the examiner’s best understanding of the claim limitations, described in the 112(b) rejection above, the prior art made of record does not teach a sensor assembly wherein the second taper-shaped portion of a mating feature includes an adjustable area that is configured to secure the cover to the bracket.
[Claim 14] The prior art made of record does not teach or disclose a sensor mounting assembly wherein the bracket includes a portion that is disposed on the roof rail, inserted into an opening in the roof rail, and is located substantially perpendicular to the base portion of the bracket.
[Claim 18] Although the prior art made of record does teach a sensor mounting assembly wherein the front windshield of a vehicle is secured to a first surface of a roof rail and a bracket is secured to a second surface of a roof rail, the prior art made of record does not teach or disclose that the second surface is substantially planar to the first surface.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Hänsel (DE 10 2006 035 991 A1) teaches a sensor mounting assembly that includes a primary and secondary attachment and mating features
Moore et al. (US 10,189,506 B2) teaches a sensor mounting assembly with a cover and a bracket that runs longitudinally along a vehicle’s roof.
Taylor et al. (US 10,800,346 B2) teaches a roof panel that has a cavity for containing sensors that is mounted below the top of the vehicle.
Petniunas et al. (US 2022/0397645 A1) teaches a sensor mounting with a sensor cover that fits into grooves circumferentially around the base.
D’Antonio et al. (US 2022/0075030 A1) teaches a multi-sensor mounting structure that forms an elevated bridge connected to side rails on the roof of a vehicle.
Sakabe et al. (US 2016/0297482 A1) teaches a sensor mounting system wherein a sensor is connected to a sideways bar under a sunroof.
Espinal et al. (US 11,710,894 B1) teaches a sensor mounting system where the cover connects to the base via aligned holes that can receive a threaded element.
Long et al. (CN 218558734 U) teaches a sensor mounting system that inserts into the top of a windshield.
Chen et al. (US 226/0056293 A1) teaches a LiDAR mounting assembly located in the interior of the vehicle, under the top of the windshield.
Maeda et al. (US 2024/0140325 A1) teaches a housing for a sensor that is connected to the roof of a vehicle and is mounted using bolts.
Zhang (US 12,510,382 B2) teaches a sensor mount with a base plate that attaches to the roof rack of a vehicle.
Hart (US 2018/0069993 A1) teaches a sensor mount with clips connecting to a bracket.
Cywinski et al. (US 11,906,883 B2) teaches a camera mounting system with latching attachment and mating features.
Sviberg et al. (US 2023/0399057) teaches a sensor mount and windshield that connect to a roof rail.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Emily M Culley whose telephone number is 571-270-0560. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, Terrell McKinnon can be reached at 571-272-4797. 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.
/EMC/
Examiner
Art Unit 3632
/TERRELL L MCKINNON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3632
Prosecution Insights