Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/897,325

METHOD TO IMPROVE MEASUREMENT ACCURACY FOR BEAM SCANNING APPLICATION

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 26, 2024
Priority
Aug 01, 2024 — provisional 63/678,305
Examiner
HELLNER, MARK
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Lumentum Operations LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allowance Rate
1367 granted / 1513 resolved
+38.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+8.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
1561
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§103
44.0%
+4.0% vs TC avg
§102
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
§112
13.6%
-26.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1513 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Drawings The drawings filed 9/26/2024 are approved by the examiner. 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. Claims 1 and 4-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Akselrod et al (United States Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0251496). With respect to claim 1, Akselrod et al disclose: A beam scanning system [ taught by the tunable metasurface (897) in the context of figure 8 ], comprising: a light transmitter configured to transmit a light beam [ taught by laser assembly (896) ]; a beam scanner configured to direct the light beam over a range of angles based on a scanning pattern [ taught by metasurface (897); paragraph [0069] states, “…a tunable optical metasurface 897 to selectively steer the optical radiation at various steering angles toward distant surfaces…” ]; a detector comprising one or more acquisition elements configured to acquire measurements of a reflected light beam, corresponding to the light beam [ taught by detector array (892) ], based on a temporal acquisition scheme, during which the one or more acquisition elements are configured to acquire the measurements at regular time intervals [ taught by paragraph [0054] ], or based on an angular acquisition scheme, during which the one or more acquisition elements are configured to acquire the measurements at regular angular intervals of the beam scanner [ taught by paragraph [0033] ], wherein the detector comprises a signal processor configured to, based on the measurements, calculate distances to a target from which the reflected light beam is reflected [ paragraph [0054] states, “…For example, in a software-defined lidar device, the first scan line 488 at the first steering angle, φ1, illuminates objects in the far field of the region 495 that reflect or rebound at least some of the transmitted optical radiation to be received by a receiver subsystem (not shown). A lidar controller (not pictured) may perform time-of-flight calculations (e.g., indirect and/or direct time-of-flight calculations) based on the time the first scan line 488 is transmitted and when reflected/rebounded optical radiation is received by a sensor of the receiver system. The lidar controller uses the time-of-flight calculations to calculate or otherwise determine lidar detection data (e.g., in the form of point cloud data), such as distance and ranging information…” ]; and a control system comprising a main processor and an acquisition engine coupled to the main processor [ taught by processor (830) and computer-readable storage medium (870) ], wherein the main processor is configured to read a processor instruction set comprising a plurality of program instructions and a plurality of first acquisition instructions, wherein the main processor is configured to execute the plurality of program instructions during a scanning operation [ paragraph [0070] states, “…The processor 830 may execute the instructions stored within the computer-readable storage medium 870 to implement the various modules or subsystems, including the virtualization subsystem 880, a scan table database 882, an ROI definitions database 884, a raw to depth pipelining subsystem 886, a scan entry selection subsystem 888, and an ROI scan parameters database 889…” ; paragraph [0032] sets forth a first ROI ];, wherein the main processor is configured to generate a plurality of second acquisition instructions based on the plurality of first acquisition instructions and provide the plurality of second acquisition instructions to the acquisition engine [ figure 15 shows a second ROI (1520) with scan parameters resulting from the detection of an object (1550) within another ROI (1530) ], and wherein the acquisition engine is configured to execute the second plurality of acquisition instructions during the scanning operation [ figure 15 shows both ROI regions being scanned ]. Claim 22 is anticipated by the subject matter of Akselrod et al, as applied to claim 1. With regard to claim 4, figure 5 shows the data for scanning a particular ROI is stored in the scan table database (882), ROI definitions database (884) and ROI scan parameters database (889); thus, meeting a configuration prior to being provided to the acquisition engine. Claims 5-10, 12-15 and 23 are taught by paragraphs [0032]-[0034]. Figure 15 shows a second ROI (1520) with scan parameters resulting from the detection of an object (1550) within another ROI (1530); thus, teaching claims 16 and 17. With respect to claim 18, Akselrod et al disclose: A beam scanning system [ taught by the tunable metasurface (897) in the context of figure 8 ], comprising: a light transmitter configured to transmit a light beam [ taught by laser assembly (896); a beam scanner configured to direct the light beam over a range of angles based on a scanning pattern [ taught by metasurface (897); paragraph [0069] states, “…a tunable optical metasurface 897 to selectively steer the optical radiation at various steering angles toward distant surfaces…” ]; a detector comprising one or more acquisition elements configured to acquire measurements of a reflected light beam, corresponding to the light beam [ taught by detector array (892) ], based on a temporal acquisition scheme, during which the one or more acquisition elements are configured to acquire the measurements at regular time intervals [ taught by paragraph [0054] ], or based on an angular acquisition scheme, during which the one or more acquisition elements are configured to acquire the measurements at regular angular intervals of the beam scanner [ taught by paragraph [0033] ], wherein the detector comprises a signal processor configured to, based on the measurements, calculate distances to a target from which the reflected light beam is reflected [ paragraph [0054] states, “…For example, in a software-defined lidar device, the first scan line 488 at the first steering angle, φ1, illuminates objects in the far field of the region 495 that reflect or rebound at least some of the transmitted optical radiation to be received by a receiver subsystem (not shown). A lidar controller (not pictured) may perform time-of-flight calculations (e.g., indirect and/or direct time-of-flight calculations) based on the time the first scan line 488 is transmitted and when reflected/rebounded optical radiation is received by a sensor of the receiver system. The lidar controller uses the time-of-flight calculations to calculate or otherwise determine lidar detection data (e.g., in the form of point cloud data), such as distance and ranging information…” ]; and a control system comprising a main processor and an acquisition engine coupled to the main processor, wherein the main processor is configured to read a processor instruction set comprising a plurality of program instructions and a plurality of acquisition instructions [ taught by processor (830) and computer-readable storage medium (870) ], wherein the main processor is configured to execute the plurality of program instructions during a scanning operation [ paragraph [0070] states, “…The processor 830 may execute the instructions stored within the computer-readable storage medium 870 to implement the various modules or subsystems, including the virtualization subsystem 880, a scan table database 882, an ROI definitions database 884, a raw to depth pipelining subsystem 886, a scan entry selection subsystem 888, and an ROI scan parameters database 889…” ], wherein the main processor is configured to preconfigure the acquisition engine with the plurality of acquisition instructions [ paragraph [0064] teaches creating a scan table meeting ROIs based on user defined fields-of-view (FOV); thus meeting preconfigured ], and wherein the acquisition engine is configured to execute the plurality of acquisition instructions during the scanning operation [ shown by scanning the FOVs in figure 15 ]. Claims 19-21 are taught by paragraphs [0032]-[0034]. 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 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akselrod et al (United States Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0251496). Claims 2 and 3 would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have had a reasonable expectation of success in enabling because it was well-known in computer systems that sub-elements such as the disclosed processor (830), controller (899) and storage medium (870) could operate independently or asynchronously in order to more efficiently process data and memory. Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to MARK HELLNER at telephone number (571)272-6981. Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. /MARK HELLNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 26, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12768997
MONITORING SYSTEM, METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM STORING PROGRAM
3y 7m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12768955
LiDAR APPARATUS HAVING WIDE SCANNING ANGLE RANGE
3y 3m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12768959
TIME-OF-FLIGHT DEMODULATION CIRCUITRY, TIME-OF-FLIGHT DEMODULATION METHOD, TIME-OF-FLIGHT IMAGING APPARATUS, TIME-OF-FLIGHT IMAGING APPARATUS CONTROL METHOD
3y 3m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12769000
RANGE IMAGING DEVICE AND RANGE IMAGING METHOD
3y 2m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12772791
Semiconductor Manufacturing Tool Alignment Device And Method
2y 8m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+8.6%)
2y 8m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1513 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month