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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 9-12, 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hu (US 20230266451 A1).
Claim 1: Hu teaches a process for calibrating a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) system comprising:
physically aligning a body on a calibration structure [0061] - using lane marking to find x axis),
wherein a LiDAR system is mounted on the body and centering the body using the calibration structure [0061] - using lane marking to find x axis);
generating a LiDAR point cloud using the LiDAR system ([0058]);
detecting a first linear structure and a ground plane using the LiDAR point cloud and determining a first vector aligned with the first linear structure, identifying a first plane normal to the first vector ([0052], [0061] - using lane marking to find x axis [0062] - ground plane);
identifying a second vector normal to the ground plane and in the first plane ([0064]),
and identifying a second plane normal to the second vector ([0061]);
identifying a third vector at an intersection of the first plane and the second plane; identifying a third plane normal to the third vector ([0061], [0064]);
and calibrating an orientation of the LiDAR system relative to the body using the first plane, the second plane, the third plane, the first vector, the second vector, and the third vector ([0036]).
Claim 2: Hu teaches the process of Claim 1, wherein the first linear structure is a line disposed on the ground plane and extends from a front edge of the calibration structure ([0061] – lane markings extend past vehicle).
Claim 7: Hu teaches the process of claim 1, wherein the first linear structure is contrasted with a surrounding environment ([0058] - identifying lane markings via intensity).
Claim 9: Hu teaches the process of claim 1, wherein the body is a vehicle body and wherein the process is performed using a vehicle controller within the vehicle body ([0037]).
Claim 10: Hu teaches the process of claim 1, wherein centering the body using the calibration structure comprises physically moving the body using the calibration structure ([0055] - collected during driving).
Claim 11: Claim 11 is a system claim corresponding to claim 1. Thus, see rejection above.
Claim 12: Claim 12 is a system claim corresponding to claim 2. Thus, see rejection above.
Claim 17: Claim 17 is a system claim corresponding to claim 7. Thus, see rejection above.
Claim 19: Hu teaches the LiDAR calibration system of claim 11, wherein the body is a vehicle body ([0037]).
Claim 20: Claim 20 is a vehicle claim corresponding to Claim 1. Thus, see rejection above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3, 4, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu in view of Okuyama (US 20220120910 A1).
Claim 3: Hu teaches the process of Claim 1. Hu does not teach, but Okuyama does teach wherein the first linear structure is a first line disposed in the ground plane within a range of the LiDAR system and wherein the line is approximately parallel to a front edge of the calibration structure (Fig. 4 and [0122], using wheel stopper as reference).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the configuration, as taught by Okuyama, in the process as taught by Hu, because this is simply a rearrangement of parts (See MPEP 2144.04). Moving the reference structure would yield predictable results as it would simply change the orientation of the first vector, and the rest of the process would be able to go on as claimed.
Claim 4: Hu, as modified, teaches the process of Claim 3. Hu, as modified, does not teach, but Okuyama does teach, wherein the first linear structure further comprises a second line disposed in the ground plane and extending perpendicular from the first line to a front edge of the calibration structure, and wherein the first vector is aligned with the second line (Fig. 4 and [0122], using parking line62 (perpendicular to wheel stopper 63) as reference).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the configuration, as taught by Okuyama, in the process as taught by Hu, because this is simply a rearrangement of parts (See MPEP 2144.04). Moving the reference structure would yield predictable results as it would simply change the orientation of the first vector, and the rest of the process would be able to go on as claimed.
Claims 13 and 14: Claims 13 and 14 are system claims corresponding to claims 3 and 4. Thus, see rejections above.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu in view of Weissman (US 20190080612 A1).
Claim 5: Hu teaches the process of Claim , […] and wherein the first vector is normal to the planar surface, the second vector is normal to the ground plane, and the third vector is a cross product of the first vector and the second vector ([0061], [0064] – orientation of vectors).
Hu does not teach, but Kim does teach, wherein the first linear structure is a planar surface normal to the ground plane ([0046] – reflective plates on a pole – Fig. 18A – would be normal to ground plane).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the configuration as taught by Weissman in the process as taught by Hu, because this is simply a rearrangement of parts (See MPEP 2144.04). Moving the reference structure would yield predictable results as it would simply change the orientation of the first vector, and the rest of the process would be able to go on as claimed.
Claim 15: Claim 15 is a system claim corresponding to claim 15. Thus, see rejection above.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu in view of Abari (US 11415683 B2).
Claim 6: Hu teaches the process of Claim 1. Hu does not teach, but Abari does teach, wherein the first linear structure is a linear bar suspended above, and parallel to, the ground plane (Fig. 3B, calibration target 102).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the configuration as taught by Abari in the process as taught by Hu, because this is simply a rearrangement of parts (See MPEP 2144.04). Moving the reference structure would yield predictable results as it would simply change the orientation of the first vector, and the rest of the process would be able to go on as claimed.
Claim 16: Claim 16 is a system claim corresponding to claim 16. Thus, see rejection above.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu in view of Stroila (US 20100217529 A1).
Claim 8: Hu teaches the process of claim 7. Hu does not teach, but Stroila does teach, wherein at least a portion of the first linear structure is one of a retroreflective paint and a retroreflective coating ([0037] – lane markings are retroreflective).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the retroreflective lane markings, as taught by Stroila, in the process as taught by Hu, because lane markings being retroreflective is well known (as evidenced by most lane markings being on real roads being retroreflective).
Claim 18: Claim 18 is a system claim corresponding to claim 8. Thus, see rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLARA CHILTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6-2 MT.
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, Helal Algahaim can be reached at 571-270-5227. 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.
/CLARA G CHILTON/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/ SPE , Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights