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 § 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.
Claims 10, 11 are 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.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, it is unclear what the term “data sheet” means. The conventional meaning of data sheet is a document providing the specifications for a particular product. However, as used in the claim, the calibration information (which is not a product) is stored as a data sheet. Therefore, it is unclear what Applicant intends for the terms “data sheet” to mean. For examination purposes, Examiner interprets “data sheet” to mean table or lookup table as demonstrated in Figs. 16 and 17 of the disclosure.
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)(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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Mcloed et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2022/0187431).
Regarding claims 1, 7, Mcloed et al. disclose (Figs.) a ranging device comprising: a light emitting element array (102) that includes light emitting elements that project light to a subject and are disposed in a one-dimensional or two-dimensional array form; a light receiving element array (104) that includes light receiving elements that receive reflected light from the subject and are disposed in a one-dimensional or two-dimensional array form; a control circuit (112, 126) that controls a light emitting timing of the light emitting element and an exposure timing ([0046]) of the light receiving element; a histogram generation circuit (126) that generates a histogram relating to information concerning light reception by the light receiving element; a processing circuit (126) that measures a distance to the subject in reference to the histogram; and a storage circuit ([0059] “storing a normalized histogram…”; [0061]) that stores calibration information ([0059]), wherein the histogram generation circuit generates, in reference to the calibration information, the histogram obtained by calibrating ([0059]) the information concerning light reception, for each (“for each region”) light receiving element of the light receiving element array. The calibration information ([0059] of Mcloed et al.is set in advanced in reference to information through use (Fig. 4) of the light emitting array and light receiving array as claimed.
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) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mcloed et al. in view of Zhang et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2023/0333220).
Regarding claim 4, Mcloed et al. disclose the claimed invention as set forth above. Mcloed et al. do not disclose taking into account parallax as claimed. Zhang et al. teach ([0010]) distance calculation using histograms according to parallax as claimed. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the invention to provide distance calculations with histograms according to parallax in the apparatus of Mcloed et al. in view of Zhang et al. to provide more precise depth measurements as taught ([0010]), known and predictable.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mcloed et al.
Regarding claim 10, Mcloed et al. disclose the claimed invention as set forth above. Mcloed et al. do not disclose how the calibration information is stored. However, data sheets or lookup tables to store data are well known. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the invention to provide lookup tables to store data in the apparatus of Mcloed et al. to conventionally and easily access data as known and predictable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 would be allowed once the 112 rejection is overcome.
Claims 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH LUU whose telephone number is (571)272-2441. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5:30PM.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/THANH LUU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights