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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
Claim 7, 11, 18 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. The claims will be examined as best understood.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the outer circumferential side". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites “wherein at least one opening tapers toward its side facing toward at least one signal coupling region”. Is the “at least one opening” the same opening as recite in the claim previously or a different opening? Further, not clear what part is referred to by the term “its”.
Claim 18 recites “emitting the electromagnetic scanning signals in a dispersed manner”. The phrase "dispersed manner" renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "manner"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 1-8, 13-18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Musick et al (US 20200389611) in view of Meylan (US 20210199769).
In regards to claim 1, Musick discloses a detection device of a vehicle ([0008]), for monitoring at least one monitoring region by means of electromagnetic scanning signals (abstract), the detection device comprising
at least one emitting unit for emitting electromagnetic scanning signals into the at least one monitoring region ([0024] “the sensor system is combined with an emitter array”), and
at least one receiving unit for receiving electromagnetic echo signals, which originate from scanning signals reflected in the at least one monitoring region ([0050], Figs. 9 and 10 discloses detectors/receiving unit which receive emitted reflected signals from monitoring region or object),
while Musick discloses [0024] “The sensor system and the emitter array may consist of individual elements or the sensor system and the emitter array form a combined transceiver system” Musick does not expressly disclose: wherein the at least one emitting unit comprises at least one signal source for generating electromagnetic scanning signals.
Meylan teaches a lidar system for a vehicle comprising a least one laser emitter coupled with a detector (Figs. 6-9, ref. 10, 20).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Musick with Meylan by providing the detection device of a Musick with at least one emitting unit which comprises at least one signal source for generating electromagnetic scanning signals in order to provide a compact unit for emission and detection.
Muscik as combined further discloses:
and at least one signal dispersion unit (Musick Fig. 4 ref. 40 or ref. 10) for dispersing electromagnetic scanning signals generated using the at least one signal source (Musick [0024] discloses emitter for sensor system) into at least one monitoring region surrounding an imaginary axis (Musick vertical axis, best seen in Fig. 1, not referenced, vertical axis seen in figure below, [0014] discloses imaging regions),
wherein the at least one signal dispersion unit comprises at least one signal wave guide body for guiding electromagnetic scanning signals (Musick Fig. 4 ref. 40), and
wherein the at least one signal wave guide body comprises at least one signal coupling region (Musick Fig. 4 central concave section, seen in figure below, similar to that seen in instant application figure 2) for scanning signals coming from at least one signal source (Musick [0024]) and at least one signal emergence section (Musick Fig. 4 ref. 40 outer surface of cylinder, seen in figure below), which extends circumferentially contiguously on a radially outer circumferential side of the at least one signal wave guide body (Musick as seen at least in Fig. 4, lead lines indicate path of signals as “circumferentially contiguously on a radially outer circumferential side”), with respect to the imaginary axis and in which electromagnetic scanning signals, which are guided in the at least one signal wave guide body, are able to emerge from the at least one signal wave guide body (Musick as seen at least in Fig. 4, imaginary axis through center of system of ref. 10, lead lines indicate path of signals as “circumferentially contiguously on a radially outer circumferential side”).
PNG
media_image1.png
718
776
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 2, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one signal coupling region is arranged inside the at least one circumferential signal emergence section (Musick as seen in figure above from Fig. 4).
In regards to claim 3, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one dispersion means for dispersing electromagnetic scanning signals is implemented at least partially in at least one signal coupling region of the at least one signal wave guide body (Musick seen in figure above, concave region, not referenced from Fig. 4),
or wherein at least one dispersion means for dispersing electromagnetic scanning signals is implemented at least partially using at least one signal entry surface in at least one signal coupling region of the at least one signal wave guide body, which has different directions at least in some sections,
or wherein at least one dispersion means for dispersing electromagnetic scanning signals is implemented at least partially using multiple signal entry surfaces in at least one signal coupling region of the at least one signal wave guide body, which have different directions,
or wherein at least one dispersion means for dispersing electromagnetic scanning signals is implemented at least partially using at least one surface of the at least one signal wave guide body which is at least partially reflective for electromagnetic scanning signals (Musick as seen in Fig. 4 and figure above, dispersion using at least one surface of the at least one signal wave guide body).
In regards to claim 4, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1 wherein at least one signal emergence surface of at least one signal emergence section at least in some sections implements a structure at least partially reflective for electromagnetic scanning signals (as seen in Fig. 4 of Muscik, surface of ref. 40), or
wherein at least one dispersion means for dispersing electromagnetic scanning signals is implemented using at least one part of at least one signal emergence surface of at least one of at least one signal emergence section, which has different directions at least in some sections, or
wherein at least one signal emergence surface of at least one signal emergence section is concavely curved at least in some sections viewed from the imaginary axis, or
wherein at least one signal emergence surface of at least one signal emergence section at least in some sections implements a structure at least partially reflective for electromagnetic scanning signals (Musick).
In regards to claim 5, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one signal emergence section, viewed in the direction of the imaginary axis, extends at least in some sections along a flat shape (Musick as seen in figure above, flat shape when view in the direction of axis), or
wherein at least one signal emergence surface of at least one signal emergence section is directed from radially inside to radially outside at least in some sections with respect to the imaginary axis.
In regards to claim 6, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the detection device is an underbody LiDAR system, a 360° LiDAR system (Musick [0004] disclose 360-degree FOV, [0006] discloses lidar, Meylan abstract), or a 360° underbody LiDAR system.
In regards to claim 7, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1, but does not expressly disclose: wherein at least one signal wave guide body comprises at least one plate or ring made of medium conducting signal waves of scanning signals. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to provide the at least one signal wave guide body with a shape of at least one plate or ring made of medium conducting signal waves of scanning signals in order to provide more compact device, as a change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Musick further discloses: the outer circumferential side of which forms a signal emergence section (Muscik as seen in Fig. 4 for ref. 40).
In regards to claim 8, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1, wherein two end faces axially opposite with respect to the imaginary axis (Musick Fig. 4 ref. 40 top and bottom surface/face), of the at least one signal wave guide body have reflective properties for the scanning signals (Musick Fig. 4 ref. 40 top and bottom surfaces reflect beams as seen with change in direction of lead lines).
In regards to claim 13, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one receiving unit comprises at least one receiver for converting electromagnetic echo signals into electrical receiving signals and
at least one receiving signal deflection unit (Musick Fig. 10, ref. 20, Fig. 4 lower lens at ref. 14 deflect signal) for deflecting echo signals onto at least one receiver (Musick ref. 20).
In regards to claim 14, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 13, wherein at least one receiver and at least one receiving signal deflection unit are arranged on the same side of at least one signal wave guide body of the at least one emitting unit Musick as seen in Fig. 10 ref. 20 on lower side, Fig. 4 lower lens on same side as ref. 20),
or wherein at least one receiver and at least one receiving signal deflection unit are arranged on opposite sides of at least one signal wave guide body, wherein the receiving signal path between the at least one receiver and the at least one receiving signal deflection unit leads through an opening, which is implemented inside the at least one signal wave guide body.
In regards to claim 15, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one emitting unit [[(22)]] and at least one receiving unit [[(24)]] are arranged on the same side or opposite sides of a circuit board, of the detection device (Musick as combined, Meylan Figs. 6-8 emitter and detector on same side of circuit board).
In regards to claim 16, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1, Musick does not expressly disclose: wherein the detection device comprises at least one control unit, using which the emitting unit and the receiving unit able to be controlled,
Meylan teaches a controller for a lidar system ([0148]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Musick with Meylan by providing the detection device comprises at least one control unit through which the emitting unit and the receiving unit are controlled as is well known in the art.
Musick as combined further discloses:
wherein the detection device has comprises at least one evaluation unit, using which information about the at least one monitoring region is able to be determined from electrical receiving signals (Musick “an evaluation electronics 30, adapted to analyze the electronic image signal and to output resulting environmental information”).
In regards to claim 17, Musick discloses a vehicle comprising at least one detection device for monitoring at least one monitoring region by means of electromagnetic scanning signals (Musick abstract, vehicle [0008]), wherein the at least one detection device comprises:
at least one emitting unit for emitting electromagnetic scanning signals into the at least one monitoring region (Musick [0024]), and
at least one receiving unit for receiving electromagnetic echo signals (Musick [0021]), which originate from scanning signals reflected in the at least one monitoring region (Musick discloses TOF system/Lidar system accordingly signals reflected from objects in monitored region),
while Musick discloses [0024] “The sensor system and the emitter array may consist of individual elements or the sensor system and the emitter array form a combined transceiver system” Musick does not expressly disclose: wherein the at least one emitting unit comprises at least one signal source for generating electromagnetic scanning signals.
Meylan teaches a lidar system for a vehicle comprising a least one laser emitter coupled with a detector (Figs. 6-9, ref. 10, 20).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Musick with Meylan by providing the detection device of a Musick with at least one emitting unit which comprises at least one signal source for generating electromagnetic scanning signals in order to provide a compact unit for emission and detection.
Muscik as combined further discloses:
and at least one signal dispersion unit (Musick Fig. 4 ref. 40 or ref. 10) for dispersing electromagnetic scanning signals generated using the at least one signal source into at least one monitoring region surrounding an imaginary axis (Musick signal path and axis seen in figure above, abstract),
wherein the at least one signal dispersion unit comprises at least one signal wave guide body for guiding electromagnetic scanning signals (Musick Fig. 4 ref. 40), wherein the at least one signal wave guide body comprises: at least one signal coupling region [[(42)]] for scanning signals [[(28)]] coming from at least one signal source (indicated in figure above),and at least one signal emergence section (indicated in figure above), which extends circumferentially contiguously on a radially outer circumferential side of the at least one signal wave guide body with respect to the imaginary axis (seen in figure above, detailed in claim 1 rejection) and in which electromagnetic scanning signals, which are guided in the at least one signal wave guide body, are able to emerge from the at least one signal wave guide body (Musick as seen at least in Fig. 4, imaginary axis through center of system of ref. 10, lead lines indicate path of signals as “circumferentially contiguously on a radially outer circumferential side”).
In regards to claim 18, Musick discloses a method for operating a detection device of a vehicle, the method comprising, in at least one monitoring region;
Generating electromagnetic scanning signals using at least one signal source (Muscik [0024] emitter),
dispersing the electromagnetic scanning signals using at least one signal dispersion unit (Musick Fig. 4 ref. or ref. 10), and
Muscik discloses emitter, imaginary axis (figure above), Muscik does not expressly disclose: emitting the electromagnetic scanning signals into at least one monitoring region surrounding an imaginary axis,
Meylan teaches a lidar system for a vehicle comprising a least one laser emitter coupled with a detector (Figs. 6-9, ref. 10, 20) which scans/emits a beam into a region (Fig. 1b).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Musick with Meylan by providing the means for emitting the electromagnetic scanning signals into at least one monitoring region surrounding an imaginary axis in order to provide both an emitter and detector unit within the system providing a more compact unit for lidar scanning.
Muscik as combined further discloses:
receiving echo signals, which originate from scanning signals reflected in the at least one monitoring region (Muscik discloses TOF system/Lidar system accordingly signals reflected from objects in monitored region),
the method further comprising:
coupling the electromagnetic scanning signals into at least one signal wave guide body (Musick ref. 10, 40),
guiding the electromagnetic scanning signals in the at least one signal wave guide body in at least one signal emergence section (seen in figure above), which extends circumferentially contiguously around the body (as seen in figure above at ref. 40), and
emitting the electromagnetic scanning signals in a dispersed manner into the monitoring region from the at least one signal emergence section (Muscik as seen in figure above and Fig. 4, hashed lines indicate signal path from emergence section to monitored region, Meylan Fig. 1 at least).
Claim 9-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Musick, Meylan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Togino (US 7800826).
In regards to claim 9, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 1, but does not expressly disclose: wherein the at least one signal wave guide body implements at least one opening,
Togino teaches a signal eave guide body comprising one opening (as seen in Fig. 1, cross sectional view of ref. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Musick with Togino by providing the at least one signal wave guide body implements at least one opening in order to allow for greater surface area of the body.
Musick as combined further discloses: through which at least one receiving signal path of at least one receiving unit leads (Musik signal path seen a hashed lines).
In regards to claim 10, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 9, wherein an inside of the at least one signal wave guide body surrounding the at least one opening comprises a reflection surface, for scanning signals which are guided in the signal wave guide body (Musick as combined, as suggested in Fig. 1 of Togino, inner surface reflects signal lines).
In regards to claim 11, Musick as combined discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 9, wherein at least one opening tapers toward its side facing toward at least one signal coupling region of the at least one signal wave guide body (as seen in Fig. 1 of Togino lower side tapers),
Musick does not expressly disclose: and wherein at least one opening has an oval shape viewed in the direction of the imaginary axis. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the claimed invention was effectively filed to provide the at least one opening has an oval shape viewed in the direction of the imaginary axis in order to provide greater illumination of the signal, as a change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Claim 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Musick, Meylan, Togino as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Doi (US 6646818).
In regards to claim 12, Musick discloses the detection device as claimed in claim 9, but does not expressly disclose: wherein, radially outside the at least one opening, at least one at least partially reflective embedding or a notch, is arranged, which forms at least one outer reflection surface, which faces toward the reflection surface around the at least one opening.
Doi teaches a radial notch, Fig. 4 ref. 38, when viewed in cross sectional view, formed on outer reflective surface, ref. 22, with an end which faces to an opening, ref. 34.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Musick with Doi by providing at least one at least partially reflective embedding or a notch, is arranged, which forms at least one outer reflection surface which faces toward the reflection surface around the at least one opening in order to provide a further surface for mounting the device within a scanning device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure cited on PTO 892. The cited references display lidar systems using scanning dispersion lenses and lens devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICENTE RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4798. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 7-5.
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, JOSHUA HUSON can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
/V.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3642
/ASSRES H WOLDEMARYAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights