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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted by the applicant and listed below have been considered and are included in the file.
16 July 2024
23 April 2025
The information disclosure statement filed 16 July 2024 includes multiple references which have been marked with a strikethrough as they fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.56 and MPEP § 609 because they fail to be material to patentability of the current application. These references have not been considered.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Mahara (US 20210356589 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Mahara anticipates a measurement device comprising:
a light emitting unit configured to emit light to each of a plurality of measurement areas at different heights ([0043], [0121] - [0122]; Fig. 4, where light source section (2) emits into the environment and may be scanned to illuminate different portions of the environment at different times, and the scanning may be in a vertical direction);
an exposure unit having a plurality of exposure areas respectively corresponding to the measurement areas at different heights ([0049], [0076] - [0079]; Figs. 4, 8, pixel array section (100) includes plural pixels (10) which match in row or columns to illuminated portions of the field of view during different times of frames of scanning), and exposed to reflected light from the measurement areas by a plurality of light receiving elements respectively provided for the exposure areas ([0044]; Fig. 3 where optical system (5) directs light incident from outside the device to the light reception components);
and a distance calculation unit configured to calculate a distance to a target in the measurement areas based on an exposure result of the exposure unit ([0050] - [0056]; Fig. 4, distance measurement processing section (101) includes signal processing section (110) to determine distances from histogram information).
Regarding claim 2, Mahara anticipates the measurement device according to claim 1, wherein
the light emitting unit has a plurality of light emitting areas, and emits light to the measurement areas respectively corresponding to the light emitting areas ([0043]; where the light source section (2) may include an array of diodes aligned in a 1-D array/line which is situated in a perpendicular direction to the scanning direction).
Regarding claim 3, Mahara anticipates the measurement device according to claim 1, wherein
the light emitting unit and the exposure unit are arranged at the same height (Fig. 1, where emitter section (301) and light receiving section (302) are situated at a same height with respect to the target (303)).
Regarding claim 4, Mahara anticipates the measurement device according to claim 1, wherein
the measurement area to be irradiated with light is sequentially switched, and the exposure area to be exposed with the reflected light is sequentially switched ([0126] - [0131]; where scanning of the light source section (2) causes illumination of changing portions of the object in the environment, and the readout of rows of the pixel array section (100) are sequentially switched to match the scanning of illumination.)
Regarding claim 5, Mahara anticipates the measurement device according to claim 4, wherein
the measurement area to be irradiated with light is sequentially switched such that two measurement areas before and after switching are not adjacent to each other,
and the exposure area to be exposed to the reflected light is sequentially switched such that two exposure areas before and after switching are not adjacent to each other ([0128] - [0131]; Fig. 14B, where scanning of the source section (2) causes illumination of the face (500), and the readout of rows of the pixel array section (100), may be done in a way which follows an interlaces scheme such as line 1 followed by line 3 and finally line 5, for example).
Regarding claim 6, Mahara anticipates the measurement device according to claim 4, wherein
the measurement area to be irradiated with light is sequentially switched such that the measurement area is sequentially switched from a lower side to an upper side, and the exposure area to be exposed to the reflected light is sequentially switched ([0126] - [0127]; Fig. 14A, where scanning of the source section (2) causes illumination of the face (500), and the readout of rows of the pixel array section (100), are done in a rolling fashion from the bottom of the face (line 1) to the top (line 5)).
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(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mahara (US 20210356589 A1) in view of Steinberg et al. (hereinafter Steinberg, US 20180113200 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Mahara teaches the measurement device according to claim 1, but does not explicitly mention illuminating the environment based on a target at a predetermined distance.
Steinberg teaches a LIDAR system which scans over a field of view with variable light flux where the illumination is detected by a plurality of detectors and scanning parameters may be dependent on the distance of a portion of the field such that when measuring the target at a predetermined distance, only a specific area among the plurality of measurement areas is measured ([0255] - [0258], [0265]; Figs. 11-12, where the LIDAR system may control the light source and detector to allow for dynamic illumination of portions of an FOV based on object detection or for a region of the field-of-view (FOV) at a particular distance or range of distances) .
Therefore, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious prima facie to modify Mahara to incorporate the teachings of Steinberg to illuminate and scan a specific portion of the field of view based on a predetermined distance with a reasonable expectation of success. As Steinberg notes, different ranges from a distance measurement system like LIDAR may require different scanning parameters to compensate for loss of intensity in far-field regions, to reduce power consumption or to make sure a system is eye-safe in a near-field region ([0621] – [0622]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mahara (US 20210356589 A1) in view of Kirillov et al. (hereinafter Kirillov, US 20200103507 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Mahara teaches the measurement device according to claim 1, but does not explicitly mention controlling the output timing for a first light exposure area to occur while a second light exposure area is being illuminated.
Kirillov teaches a LIDAR system which includes a scanning system which collects reflecting light in a photodetector array according to the illumination pattern with a readout circuit, where while outputting an exposure result in a certain light exposure area, the exposure unit is exposed to the reflected light in another exposure area ([0057] - [0063], [0112] - [0115]; where the collected signal from a group of pixels are read out at a time after expected incident light is collected, and the readout rates are synchronized with the pulse rate such that specific readouts of subsequent pulses are set to a timing such as a half or full readout cycle based on need).
Therefore, to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious prima facie to modify Mahara to incorporate the teachings of Kirillov to readout a signal from a first exposure area while a second exposure area is collecting signals with a reasonable expectation of success. Kirillov notes that for scanning systems which use synchronized emission and readout, readout schemes may be chosen and variable to increase the flexibility of the system in terms of signal to noise (SNR) and readout time ([0065] – [0066]). Incorporation of a readout timing where subsequent columns/rows of a detector are readout at timings such as half a readout cycle (allowing for overlap of readout of a first row while a second row is illuminated) into the system of Mahara would have predictable results, then, of reducing the timing required to complete a full scanning cycle.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kobayashi et al. (US 20230168346 A1) teaches an optical module used for distance measurements, where a plurality of emitters illuminate a 2D field of view and reflected beams are detected by a receiver in a sequential fashion.
Hofbauer et al. (US 20230168349 A1) teaches a light scanning system where light is scanned across an environment sequentially based on a horizontal and/or vertical field of view, and where scanning is also utilized for the receiver.
Eschel (US 20220276348 A1) teaches a LIDAR system which incorporates sequentially scanning and illuminating a portion of a field of view, where the illumination is not necessarily contiguous, for object detection.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kara Richter whose telephone number is (571)272-2763. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8A-5P EST, Fridays are variable.
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.
/K.M.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/SPE , Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights