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
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.
(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 18, 21-26, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Klinke et al.(US 20240418835 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Klinke teaches
A light detection and ranging (LiDAR) system, comprising: (The invention respectively relates to a multiplane scanner and to a method for detecting objects in a monitored zone having a plurality of planes arranged above one another. (paragraph 0001))
an emitter configured to emit probe light, wherein the probe light is reflected by a target to-be-measured to form echo light; (A light transmitter 12, for example a laser diode or an LED, generates a light beam 16 (paragraph 0050))
a scanner comprising a rotating mirror and a galvanometer mirror, wherein: (The beam deflection unit 18 in the present embodiment is designed as a rotating mirror 36, for example as a galvanometer mirror whose axis of rotation 34 is aligned perpendicular to the first axis of rotation 19 of the polygonal mirror wheel 20. (paragraph 0055))
both the rotating mirror and the galvanometer mirror are configured to direct the probe light and the echo light, (FIG. 1 shows a block diagram of a multiplane scanner 10. A light transmitter 12, for example a laser diode or an LED, generates a light beam 16 with the aid of a transmission optics 14 that is deflected a first time via a beam deflection unit 18 and a second time via a polygonal mirror wheel 20 rotating about a first axis of rotation 19 and is then transmitted into a monitored zone 22. (paragraph 0050) If the light beam 16 is incident on an object in the monitored zone 22, a reflected light beam 24 returns to the multiplane scanner, is again deflected at the polygonal mirror wheel 20 and the beam deflection unit 28, (paragraph 0051))
the rotating mirror is configured to scan in a first direction of the LiDAR system, ((fig.1) Figure 1 shows the rotating mirror (20) scanning in a first direction.)
the galvanometer mirror is configured to scan in a second direction of the LiDAR system different from the first direction, ((fig. 1) Figure 1 shows the galvanometer (36) scanning in different direction from the rotating mirror (20).)
and the galvanometer mirror and the rotating mirror are at least partially located in a same plane; ((fig. 1) Figure 1 shows the galvanometer(36) and rotating mirror (20) in the same plane.)
and a receiver configured to receive the echo light. (A received signal generated by the light receiver 28 (paragraph 0052))
Regarding claim 21, Klinke teaches
The LiDAR system according to claim 18, wherein the emitter is disposed axially at an angle to the receiver. ((fig. 1) As seen in figure 1 the emitter is disposed axially to the receiver at an angle of 90 degrees.)
Regarding claim 22, Klinke teaches
The LiDAR system according to claim 21, wherein: the LiDAR system further comprises a reflecting mirror, (The beam splitter 25 is configured either as a beam splitter or as an aperture mirror. (paragraph 0051))
the probe light of the emitter is directed to the galvanometer mirror and the rotating mirror through the reflecting mirror, and the echo light is sequentially directed to the receiver through the rotating mirror and the galvanometer mirror. (FIG. 1 shows a block diagram of a multiplane scanner 10. A light transmitter 12, for example a laser diode or an LED, generates a light beam 16 with the aid of a transmission optics 14 that is deflected a first time via a beam deflection unit 18 and a second time via a polygonal mirror wheel 20 rotating about a first axis of rotation 19 and is then transmitted into a monitored zone 22. (paragraph 0050) If the light beam 16 is incident on an object in the monitored zone 22, a reflected light beam 24 returns to the multiplane scanner, is again deflected at the polygonal mirror wheel 20 and the beam deflection unit 28,and is then imaged on a light receiver 28 via a beam splitter 25 and a reception optics 26. (paragraph 0051))
Regarding claim 23, Klinke teaches
The LiDAR system according to claim 21, wherein: the LiDAR system further comprises a reflecting mirror, (The beam splitter 25 is configured either as a beam splitter or as an aperture mirror. (paragraph 0051)
the probe light of the emitter is directed to the galvanometer mirror and the rotating mirror through the reflecting mirror, and the echo light is sequentially directed to the receiver through the rotating mirror, the galvanometer mirror, and the reflecting mirror. (FIG. 1 shows a block diagram of a multiplane scanner 10. A light transmitter 12, for example a laser diode or an LED, generates a light beam 16 with the aid of a transmission optics 14 that is deflected a first time via a beam deflection unit 18 and a second time via a polygonal mirror wheel 20 rotating about a first axis of rotation 19 and is then transmitted into a monitored zone 22. (paragraph 0050) If the light beam 16 is incident on an object in the monitored zone 22, a reflected light beam 24 returns to the multiplane scanner, is again deflected at the polygonal mirror wheel 20 and the beam deflection unit 28,and is then imaged on a light receiver 28 via a beam splitter 25 and a reception optics 26. (paragraph 0051))
Regarding claim 24, Klinke teaches
The LiDAR system according to claim 23, wherein: the reflecting mirror is provided with a reflecting region and a transmission region, the reflecting region is configured to reflect the echo light to the receiver, and the transmission region is configured to transmit the probe light of the emitter. (The transmission path and reception path can thus also be differently separated than by the shown beam splitter 25 (paragraph 0060 and fig. 1))
Regarding claim 25, Klinke teaches
The LiDAR system according to claim 24, wherein the reflecting region is disposed surrounding the transmission region, and the transmission region is disposed correspondingly to the emitter. ((fig. 1) It can be seen in figure 1 that the reflecting region surrounds the transmission region and disposed towards the emitter.)
Regarding claim 26, Klinke teaches
The LiDAR system according to claim 24, wherein the transmission region is a through hole. (As seen in figure 1 the transmission region of the reflecting mirror is a through hole. (fig. 1))
Regarding claim 33, Klinke teaches
A vehicle system, comprising a LiDAR system comprising: (The sensor in accordance with the invention can be used in a plurality of systems and applications, for example in the initially named automated guided vehicles (AGVs) (paragraph 0042))
an emitter configured to emit probe light, wherein the probe light is reflected by a target to-be-measured to form echo light; (A light transmitter 12, for example a laser diode or an LED, generates a light beam 16 (paragraph 0050))
a scanner comprising a rotating mirror and a galvanometer mirror, wherein: (The beam deflection unit 18 in the present embodiment is designed as a rotating mirror 36, for example as a galvanometer mirror whose axis of rotation 34 is aligned perpendicular to the first axis of rotation 19 of the polygonal mirror wheel 20. (paragraph 0055))
both the rotating mirror and the galvanometer mirror are configured to direct the probe light and the echo light, (FIG. 1 shows a block diagram of a multiplane scanner 10. A light transmitter 12, for example a laser diode or an LED, generates a light beam 16 with the aid of a transmission optics 14 that is deflected a first time via a beam deflection unit 18 and a second time via a polygonal mirror wheel 20 rotating about a first axis of rotation 19 and is then transmitted into a monitored zone 22. (paragraph 0050) If the light beam 16 is incident on an object in the monitored zone 22, a reflected light beam 24 returns to the multiplane scanner, is again deflected at the polygonal mirror wheel 20 and the beam deflection unit 28, (paragraph 0051))
the rotating mirror is configured to scan in a first direction of the LiDAR system, ((fig.1) Figure 1 shows the rotating mirror (20) scanning in a first direction.)
the galvanometer mirror is configured to scan in a second direction of the LiDAR system different from the first direction, ((fig. 1) Figure 1 shows the galvanometer (36) scanning in different direction from the rotating mirror (20).)
and the galvanometer mirror and the rotating mirror are at least partially located in a same plane; ((fig. 1) Figure 1 shows the galvanometer(36) and rotating mirror (20) in the same plane.)
and a receiver configured to receive the echo light. (A received signal generated by the light receiver 28 (paragraph 0052))
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 19 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klinke et al.(US 20240418835 A1) in view of Wang et al.(US 20230266443 A1).
Regarding claim 19, Klinke teaches all of the elements of claim 18 as previously stated, however Klinke fails to teach wherein the rotating mirror and the galvanometer mirror are arranged such that a horizontal field of view formed by the probe light is greater than 120°; and/or a vertical field of view formed by the probe light is greater than 25°.
In the same field of endeavor, Wang teaches wherein the rotating mirror and the galvanometer mirror are arranged such that a horizontal field of view formed by the probe light is greater than 120°; (In one example, the compact LiDAR device can provide a horizontal FOV of about 120 degrees or more (paragraph 0004)) and/or a vertical field of view formed by the probe light is greater than 25°. (the compact LiDAR device can provide a horizontal FOV of about 120 degrees or more (about 240 degrees for using two such LiDAR devices) and a vertical FOV of about 90 degrees or more. (paragraph 0004))
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Wang into the invention of Klinke. Both references relate to the claimed invention as they both disclose LiDAR devices for object detection. The combination of Klinke and Wang would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to increase coverage of a scanned area.
Regarding claim 34, Klinke teaches all of the elements of claim 34 as previously stated, however Klinke fails to teach wherein the vehicle system is a vehicle, and the LiDAR system is mounted on a front portion of the vehicle and/or on a side of the vehicle.
In the same field of endeavor, Wang teaches wherein the vehicle system is a vehicle, and the LiDAR system is mounted on a front portion of the vehicle and/or on a side of the vehicle. (For example, LiDAR system 120A is attached to vehicle 100 at the front right corner; LiDAR system 120B is attached to vehicle 100 at the front center; LiDAR system 120C is attached to vehicle 100 at the front left corner; (paragraph 0042))
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Wang into the invention of Klinke. Both references relate to the claimed invention as they both disclose LiDAR devices for object detection. The combination of Klinke and Wang would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to be used in vehicle applications.
Claims 20, 28-30, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klinke et al.(US 20240418835 A1) in view of Tanaka et al.(US 20090002678 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Klinke teaches all of the elements of claim 18 as previously stated, however Klinke fails to teach wherein the emitter is disposed axially coinciding with or parallel to the receiver.
In the same field of endeavor, Tanaka teaches wherein the emitter is disposed axially coinciding with or parallel to the receiver. (Further, as illustrated in FIG. 5, on the central axis 342a of the rotating deflection mechanism 340, the laser diode 10 and the photodiode 20 are arranged to be faced to each other (paragraph 0110))
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Tanaka into the invention of Klinke. Both references relate to the claimed invention as they both disclose LiDAR devices for object detection. The combination of Klinke and Tanaka would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to create a LiDAR that is compact.
Regarding claim 28, Klinke additionally teaches wherein: the emitter is provided with an emitting lens assembly, (a laser diode or an LED, generates a light beam 16 with the aid of a transmission optics 14 (paragraph 0050)) the receiver is provided with a receiving lens assembly, (a reflected light beam 24 returns to the multiplane scanner, is again deflected at the polygonal mirror wheel 20 and the beam deflection unit 28, and is then imaged on a light receiver 28 via a beam splitter 25 and a reception optics 26. (paragraph 0051)) the echo light passes through the receiving lens assembly to converge the echo light, (a reflected light beam 24 returns to the multiplane scanner, is again deflected at the polygonal mirror wheel 20 and the beam deflection unit 28, and is then imaged on a light receiver 28 via a beam splitter 25 and a reception optics 26. (paragraph 0051)) Klinke fails to teach and the receiving lens assembly is disposed axially coinciding with or parallel to the emitting lens assembly.
In the same field of endeavor, Tanaka teaches and the receiving lens assembly is disposed axially coinciding with or parallel to the emitting lens assembly. (Further, as illustrated in FIG. 5, on the central axis 342a of the rotating deflection mechanism 340, the laser diode 10 and the photodiode 20 are arranged to be faced to each other (paragraph 0110))
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Tanaka into the invention of Klinke. Both references relate to the claimed invention as they both disclose LiDAR devices for object detection. The combination of Klinke and Tanaka would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to create a LiDAR that is compact.
Regarding claim 29, Klinke fails to teach wherein the emitting lens assembly is disposed spaced apart from the receiving lens assembly.
In the same field of endeavor, Tanaka teaches wherein the emitting lens assembly is disposed spaced apart from the receiving lens assembly. ((fig. 5) As seen in figure 5 the emitting lens assembly (60) is spaced apart from the receiving lens assembly (62).)
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Tanaka into the invention of Klinke. Both references relate to the claimed invention as they both disclose LiDAR devices for object detection. The combination of Klinke and Tanaka would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to improve optical performance.
Regarding claim 30, Klinke fails to teach wherein the emitting lens assembly is located between a light source of the emitter and the receiving lens assembly.
In the same field of endeavor, Tanka teaches wherein the emitting lens assembly is located between a light source of the emitter and the receiving lens assembly. ((fig.5) As seen in figure 5 the emitting lens assembly is located between the emitter (10) and the receiving lens assembly.)
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Tanaka into the invention of Klinke. Both references relate to the claimed invention as they both disclose LiDAR devices for object detection. The combination of Klinke and Tanaka would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to improve optical performance.
Regarding claim 32, Klinke additionally teaches wherein: the emitter is provided with an emitting lens assembly, (a laser diode or an LED, generates a light beam 16 with the aid of a transmission optics 14 (paragraph 0050)) the receiver is provided with a receiving lens assembly, (a reflected light beam 24 returns to the multiplane scanner, is again deflected at the polygonal mirror wheel 20 and the beam deflection unit 28, and is then imaged on a light receiver 28 via a beam splitter 25 and a reception optics 26. (paragraph 0051)) the receiving lens assembly is provided with a hole or a slot, ((fig.1) As seen in figure 1 the beam splitter (25) is apart of both the receiving lens assembly and the emitting lens assembly and has a hole.) a projection of the emitting lens assembly is at least partially located within a region of the hole or the slot, ((fig.1) As seen in figure 1 the beam splitter (25) is apart of both the receiving lens assembly and the emitting lens assembly and has a hole.) Klinke fails to teach and the emitting lens assembly is disposed axially coinciding with or parallel to the receiving lens assembly.
In the same field of endeavor, Tanka teaches and the emitting lens assembly is disposed axially coinciding with or parallel to the receiving lens assembly. (Further, as illustrated in FIG. 5, on the central axis 342a of the rotating deflection mechanism 340, the laser diode 10 and the photodiode 20 are arranged to be faced to each other (paragraph 0110))
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Tanaka into the invention of Klinke. Both references relate to the claimed invention as they both disclose LiDAR devices for object detection. The combination of Klinke and Tanaka would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to create a LiDAR that is compact.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klinke et al.(US 20240418835 A1) in view of Honda et al.(US 20240310519 A1).
Regarding claim 27, Klinke teaches all of the elements of claim 24 as previously stated, however Klinke fails to teach wherein the reflecting mirror is provided with a partition coating, and the partition coating forms the transmission region and the reflecting region.
In the same field of endeavor, Honda teaches wherein the reflecting mirror is provided with a partition coating, and the partition coating forms the transmission region and the reflecting region. (The transmitting portion 40b transmits the return light L20 reflected off the scanning mirror 20 and directs the return light L20 to the light receiver 30. The optical splitter 40 is formed, for example, by coating transparent glass with a reflecting film as the reflecting portion 40a. (paragraph 0031))
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Honda into the invention of Klinke. Both references relate to the claimed invention as they both disclose LiDAR devices for object detection. The combination of Klinke and Honda would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to increase structural stability of the reflecting mirror.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Klinke et al.(US 20240418835 A1) in view of Tanaka et al.(US 20090002678 A1) in further view of Fang et al.(CN 110716192 A).
Regarding claim 31, modified Klinke teaches all of the elements of claim 28 as previously stated, however modified Klinke fails to teach wherein the emitting lens assembly is fixedly connected to the receiving lens assembly.
In the same field of endeavor, Fang teaches wherein the emitting lens assembly is fixedly connected to the receiving lens assembly. (In a first aspect, the embodiment of the invention claims a buffing machine rotor, for laser radar, comprising: emitting lens, receiving lens and a light insulating sheet, wherein the transmitting lens and the receiving lens fixedly connected with the buffing machine rotor through the lens assembly, (page 3))
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features disclosed in Fang into the invention of modified Klinke. Both references relate to the claimed invention as they both disclose LiDAR devices for object detection. The combination of modified Klinke and Fang would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to create a LiDAR that is compact.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ETHAN J SLAUGHTER whose telephone number is (571)388-3021. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571) 270-5144. 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.
/ETHAN JAKOB SLAUGHTER/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
