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 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) 1-7, 9-17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirai (US-20140184800-A1).
Regarding Claim 1: Hirai discloses a controller comprising at least one processor and at least one memory (208), wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute instructions stored in the at least one memory so as to carry out operations, the operations comprising:
receiving information detected by at least one infrared detector that is indicative of infrared light corresponding to a target object (Fig. 31, S1);
determining, based on the received information, a ratio between two polarizations corresponding to the target object ([0210]: Polarization ratio H; equation 3); and
determining, based on the determined ratio, that the infrared light corresponding to the target object comprises direct light or reflected light. ([0211]: “If the polarization ratio H obtained in the abovementioned manner is exceeding a predetermined threshold value, then it is determined that the road surface is wet; and if the polarization ratio H is equal to or smaller than the predetermined threshold value, then it is determined that the road surface is dry.”).
Regarding Claim 2: The controller of claim 1, wherein determining the ratio comprises dividing a first polarization intensity by a second polarization intensity (Equation 3), wherein the first polarization intensity comprises an intensity of the infrared light having a first polarization, and wherein the second polarization intensity comprises an intensity of the infrared light having a second polarization ([0210]: “The polarization ratio H can be obtained as the average value of the ratio (S/P) calculated between the vertical polarization component P of white light (non-dispersive light) and the horizontal polarization component S of white light (non-dispersive light)”).
Regarding Claim 3: The controller of claim 2, wherein the first polarization and the second polarization are different linear light polarizations ([0210]: “The polarization ratio H can be obtained as the average value of the ratio (S/P) calculated between the vertical polarization component P of white light (non-dispersive light) and the horizontal polarization component S of white light (non-dispersive light)”).
Regarding Claim 4: The controller of claim 2, wherein the first polarization and the second polarization are perpendicular linear light polarizations ([0210]: “The polarization ratio H can be obtained as the average value of the ratio (S/P) calculated between the vertical polarization component P of white light (non-dispersive light) and the horizontal polarization component S of white light (non-dispersive light)”).
Regarding Claim 6: The controller of claim 1, wherein the at least one infrared detector comprises:
a first infrared detector configured to detect infrared light having a first linear polarization; and
a second infrared detector configured to detect infrared light having a second linear polarization, wherein the first linear polarization and the second linear polarization are perpendicular with respect to one another ([0115]: “…the first type area of the polarization filter layer 222 is a vertical polarization area that selectively transmits only the vertical polarization components which oscillate parallel to columns of the imaging pixels of the image sensor 206 (i.e., oscillate in the vertical direction). The Second type area of the polarization filter layer 222 is a horizontal polarization area that selectively transmits only the horizontal polarization components which oscillate parallel to rows of the imaging pixels of the image sensor 206 (i.e., oscillate in the horizontal direction)”).
Regarding Claim 7: The controller of claim 1, wherein determining that the infrared light comprises direct light or reflected light comprises at least one of:
determining that the infrared light comprises direct light if the determined ratio is within a direct light polarization range; or
determining that the infrared light comprises reflected light if the determined ratio is within a reflected light polarization range ([0211]: “If the polarization ratio H obtained in the abovementioned manner is exceeding a predetermined threshold value, then it is determined that the road surface is wet; and if the polarization ratio H is equal to or smaller than the predetermined threshold value, then it is determined that the road surface is dry.”).
Regarding Claim 9: The controller of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise:
determining, based on the received information, a target object type, wherein the target object type comprises at least one of: an obstacle, a pedestrian, a vehicle, a roadway, a sign, or a traffic light ([0332]: “The detection target object includes an oncoming motor vehicle travelling in the opposite direction of the own motor vehicle 100”).
Regarding Claim 10: The controller of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: determining, based on the received information and the determined ratio, a target object location [0180].
Regarding Claim 11: The controller of claim 10, wherein the operations further comprise:
receiving at least one of: LIDAR data, radar data, or camera data indicative of a reflective surface, wherein determining the target object location is further based on a location of the reflective surface [0180].
Regarding Claim 12: The controller of claim 11, wherein determining that the infrared light corresponding to the target object comprises reflected light is further based on the LIDAR data, radar data, or camera data indicative of the reflective surface ([0332]: “…the object detection operation unit detects an oncoming motor vehicle either based on output signals of the light receiving element (imaging pixel "b") of the image sensor 206 which received the transmitted light from the first type area of the polarization filter layer 222 and from the fourth type area of the spectral filter layer 223 or based on output signals of low signal level from among the output signals of the light receiving element (imaging pixel "e") of the image sensor 206 which received the transmitted light from the second type area of the polarization filter layer 222 and from the fourth type area of the spectral filter layer 223.”).
Regarding Claim 13: A vehicle (Fig. 1) comprising:
a controller comprising at least one processor and at least one memory (208), wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute instructions stored in the at least one memory so as to carry out operations, the operations comprising:
receiving information detected by at least one infrared detector that is indicative of infrared light corresponding to a target object (Fig. 31, S1);
determining, based on the received information, a ratio between two polarizations corresponding to the target object ([0210]: Polarization ratio H; equation 3); and
determining, based on the determined ratio, that the infrared light corresponding to the target object comprises direct light or reflected light ([0211]: “If the polarization ratio H obtained in the abovementioned manner is exceeding a predetermined threshold value, then it is determined that the road surface is wet; and if the polarization ratio H is equal to or smaller than the predetermined threshold value, then it is determined that the road surface is dry.”).
Regarding Claim 14: The vehicle of claim 13, wherein determining the ratio comprises dividing a first polarization intensity by a second polarization intensity ([0210]: Polarization ratio H; equation 3).
Regarding Claim 15: A method comprising:
receiving information detected by at least one infrared detector that is indicative of infrared light corresponding to a target object (Fig. 31, S1);
determining, based on the received information, a ratio between two polarizations corresponding to the target object ([0210]: Polarization ratio H; equation 3); and
determining, based on the determined ratio, that the infrared light corresponding to the target object comprises direct light or reflected light ([0211]: “If the polarization ratio H obtained in the abovementioned manner is exceeding a predetermined threshold value, then it is determined that the road surface is wet; and if the polarization ratio H is equal to or smaller than the predetermined threshold value, then it is determined that the road surface is dry.”).
Regarding Claim 16: The method of claim 15, wherein determining the ratio comprises dividing a first polarization intensity by a second polarization intensity ([0210]: Polarization ratio H; equation 3), wherein the first polarization intensity comprises an intensity of the infrared light having a first polarization, and wherein the second polarization intensity comprises an intensity of the infrared light having a second polarization, wherein the first polarization and the second polarization are different linear light polarizations (Fig. 33).
Regarding Claim 17: The method of claim 15, wherein determining that the infrared light comprises direct light or reflected light comprises at least one of:
determining that the infrared light comprises direct light if the determined ratio is within a direct light polarization range; or
determining that the infrared light comprises reflected light if the determined ratio is within a reflected light polarization range ([0115]: “…the first type area of the polarization filter layer 222 is a vertical polarization area that selectively transmits only the vertical polarization components which oscillate parallel to columns of the imaging pixels of the image sensor 206 (i.e., oscillate in the vertical direction). The Second type area of the polarization filter layer 222 is a horizontal polarization area that selectively transmits only the horizontal polarization components which oscillate parallel to rows of the imaging pixels of the image sensor 206 (i.e., oscillate in the horizontal direction)”).
Regarding Claim 19: The method of claim 15, further comprising:
determining, based on the received information, a target object type, wherein the target object type comprises at least one of: an obstacle, a pedestrian, a vehicle, a roadway, a sign, or a traffic light ([0332]: “The detection target object includes an oncoming motor vehicle travelling in the opposite direction of the own motor vehicle 100”).
Regarding Claim 20: The method of claim 15, further comprising:
receiving at least one of: LIDAR data, radar data, or camera data indicative of a location of a reflective surface; and
determining a target object location based on the received information, the determined ratio, and the location of the reflective surface [0180].
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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirai in view of Pisano (US-20150035110-A1).
Regarding Claim 5: Hirai discloses the controller of claim 1, but Hirai fails to teach wherein the at least one infrared detector comprises at least one micro-electromechanical system (MEMS) infrared detector.
However, it is known in the art of infrared detection to use MEMS sensors as shown by Pisano (US 20150035110 A1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the image sensor of Hirai for a MEMS sensor. One would be motivated on the basis of making a substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (See MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 8 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirai.
Regarding Claim 8: Hirai discloses the controller of claim 7, but Hirai fails to teach wherein the direct light polarization range is 0.4 to 0.6, and wherein the reflected light polarization range is 0 to 0.4 and 0.6 to 1.
However, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art to have selected such thresholds as part of a routine calibration or optimization. One would have been motivated to choose such thresholds because the polarization ratio is known to be closer to the extremes for reflection and diffuse light to produce ratios near the middle of the scale of 0 to 1 (See MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 18: Hirai discloses method of claim 17, but Hirai fails to teach wherein the direct light polarization range is 0.4 to 0.6, and wherein the reflected light polarization range is 0 to 0.4 and 0.6 to 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIYA DOWNING whose telephone number is (703)756-1840. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM ET.
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, David Makiya can be reached at (571) 272-2273. 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.
/MIYA DOWNING/Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/DAVID J MAKIYA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884