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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “setting module”and ”emitting module” in claim 9.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 9 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.
Claim limitation “setting module” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure is devoid of any structure that performs the function in the claim. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yeh et al. (US 2022/0003841 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yeh discloses a method for emitting a laser signal, comprising:
setting an emission power of an emitting unit based on a measurement range of a LiDAR or a strength of an echo signal corresponding to the emitting unit that has been obtained, wherein there are at least two different levels of emission power of the emitting unit corresponding to different measurement ranges, and each level corresponds to a kind of strength of emission power (See [0045] [0052] based on detection distance the power determination unit may calculate an appropriate emitting power level output by laser emitter. The emitted power may be proportional to a square of the respective detection distances. A first detection measurement range may be read on the maximum detection distance using the maximum available output power level. A second detection range may be read on a shorter than maximum detection distance with corresponding reduced emitting power level which is smaller but sufficient, see [0045] and [0052] and Fig 4, Fig 6 ); and
emitting a laser signal via the emitting unit based on the emission power, wherein the laser signal is used for measuring a target detection object (See [0022] measuring the distance to the target by measuring the reflected pulses).
Regarding claim 2, Yeh the method according to claim 1, further comprising: setting an emission order of laser signals corresponding to different emission powers based on detection requirements, wherein emitting a laser signal via the emitting unit based on the emission power comprises: emitting the laser signals corresponding to the different emission powers via the emitting unit according to the emission order (See Fig 4 and [0056] the power level is determined for the next scanning angle).
Regarding claim 3, Yeh further discloses the method according to claim 2, wherein the emission order comprises: emitting a plurality of laser signals corresponding to different emission powers of a first level (See [001] [0025] [0052] scan at a first vertical angle) before emitting a plurality of laser signals corresponding to different emission powers of a second level, wherein the emission power of the second level is greater than the emission power of the first level; or emitting the laser signals corresponding to the different emission powers of the first level and the laser signals corresponding to the different emission powers of the second level (See [0025] [0052] scan at a second vertical angle having a different detection distance and corresponding power level, see also Fig 6).
Regarding claim 8, Yeh further discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising: setting levels of the emission power based on detection requirements (See [0045] [0052]).
Regarding claim 9, Yeh discloses laser signal emitting device, comprising: a setting module, configured to set emission power of a LiDAR based on a measurement range of an emitting unit of the LiDAR or a strength of an echo signal corresponding to the emitting unit that has been obtained, wherein there are at least two different levels of emission power of the LiDAR corresponding to different measurement ranges, and each level corresponds to a kind of strength of emission power (See [0045] [0052] based on detection distance the power determination unit may calculate an appropriate emitting power level output by laser emitter. The emitted power may be proportional to a square of the respective detection distances. A first detection measurement range may be read on the maximum detection distance using the maximum available output power level. A second detection range may be read on a shorter than maximum detection distance with corresponding reduced emitting power level which is smaller but sufficient, see [0045] and [0052] and Fig 4, Fig 6 ); and
an emitting module, configured to emit a laser signal via the emitting unit based on the emission power, wherein the laser signal is used for measuring a target detection object (See [0022] measuring the distance to the target by measuring the reflected pulses).
Regarding claim 10, Yeh discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, storing a computer program, when the computer program is executed by a processor, causes the processor to perform operations comprising: setting an emission power of an emitting unit based on a measurement range of a LiDAR or a strength of an echo signal corresponding to the emitting unit that has been obtained, wherein there are at least two different levels of emission power of the emitting unit corresponding to different measurement ranges, and each level corresponds to a kind of strength of emission power (See [0045] [0052] based on detection distance the power determination unit may calculate an appropriate emitting power level output by laser emitter. The emitted power may be proportional to a square of the respective detection distances. A first detection measurement range may be read on the maximum detection distance using the maximum available output power level. A second detection range may be read on a shorter than maximum detection distance with corresponding reduced emitting power level which is smaller but sufficient, see [0045] and [0052] and Fig 4, Fig 6 ); and
emitting a laser signal via the emitting unit based on the emission power, wherein the laser signal is used for measuring a target detection object(See [0022] measuring the distance to the target by measuring the reflected pulses).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of records fails to disclose or fairly suggest, alone or in combination, all of the features of dependent claims 4-7.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FERNANDO ALCON whose telephone number is (571)270-5668. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00am-7:00pm.
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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at (571)272-7527. 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.
FERNANDO . ALCON
Examiner
Art Unit 2425
/FERNANDO ALCON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights