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 submitted on 10/04/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.81. Accordingly, the drawings are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The specification submitted on 10/04/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.71. Accordingly, the specification is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-5, 7-8, 12-14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Licht et al. (DE102019112324A1 "Licht") in view of Kamradt et al (DE102013215470A1, "Kamradt”).
Regarding claim 1, Licht teaches a sensor comprising (Licht, Para, [0028], Fig 1, where the sensor comprises Lidar module 12 arranged in housing 4 measures a time of flight measurement of the reflection of object 14 from an emission of Lidar module 12 and infrared emitter 18 emitting radiation 20):
(Licht, Para, [0028], Fig 1, where Lidar module 12 comprises a transmitting unit 12a emitting infrared radiation. Additionally infrared emitter 18 emits infrared radiation 20 where the emitted radiation passes through cover disk 6 acting as a window):
reduce an obscurant on the window through optical absorption by the obscurant of at least a portion of the emitted optical signal (Licht, Para [0028]-[0030] with [0006], Fig 1, where the frost of cover plate 6 can be partially defrosted by the infrared light emitted by Lidar module 12 according to Para [0006], and there reducing the obscurant through heat absorption of transmitting unit 12a's infrared radiation); and
scatter from a target located a distance from the sensor (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where the reflected radiation from object travels along reception path 12d to be received by Lidar module 12 after being reflected by object 14 and therefore scattered from object 14);
a receiver configured to detect a received optical signal, the received optical signal comprising a portion of the emitted optical signal scattered from the target and transmitted through the window (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where the receiving unit 12b receives infrared radiation from transmitting unit 12a after being emitted through cover disk 6 and is reflected from object 14); and
a controller configured to determine a characteristic of the target based on the received optical signal (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where an optical distance measurement is determined via time of flight where distance is the determined characteristic. To obtain said distance measurement from reflected radiation received by Lidar module 12 a controller must be present to read the time of flight of emitted and reflected radiation).
However, Licht does not teach a light source .
On the other hand, Kamradt teaches a single light source that emits light for defrosting a window using multiple wavelengths, rather than multiple emitters at different wavelengths (Kamradt, Para [0042]-[0045], Fig 1, where one infrared emitter 34 emits infrared radiation 36 comprising of infrared rays L4 and L5, which have different infrared wavelengths for thawing ice. When considered with the Lidar module 12 and infrared emitter 18 of Licht, a Lidar sensor emitting two infrared wavelengths for defrosting a window is taught).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the sensor of Licht in view of Kamradt, by combining the dual wavelength emitter of Kamradt with the two infrared emitters of Licht to have a more demand oriented and energy efficient single light source (Kamradt, Para [0045]).
Regarding claim 2, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1, wherein reducing the obscurant comprises melting, sublimating, or evaporating the obscurant (Licht, Para [0028]-[0030] and [0006], Fig 1, where the emitted infrared radiation from Lidar module 12 and infrared radiation 20 from infrared emitter 18 defrost ice on cover plate 6 via heating up the plate 6, causing condensation 22 indicating the melting or evaporation of water vapor, hoarfrost, snow, ice, or water droplets).
Regarding claim 3, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1, wherein the obscurant comprises ice and reducing the obscurant comprises melting the ice (Licht, Para [0028]-[0030] and [0006], Fig 1, where the emitted infrared radiation from Lidar module 12 and infrared radiation 20 from infrared emitter 18 defrost ice on cover plate 6 via heating up the plate 6, causing condensation 22 indicating the melting of hoarfrost, snow, or ice).
Regarding claim 4, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1, wherein the window is (1) part of a windshield of a vehicle that the sensor is part of, or (2) part of an enclosure of the sensor (Licht, Para [0027], Fig 1, where the housing 4 contains the Lidar module 12 and infrared emitter 18 enclosed via transparent cover 6).
Regarding claim 5, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1, wherein the characteristic of the target is a distance to the target and determining the distance is based on a time-of-arrival for the received optical signal (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where an optical distance measurement is determined via time of flight where distance is the determined characteristic. To obtain said distance measurement of object 14 from reflected radiation received by Lidar module 12 a controller must be present to read the time of flight of emitted and reflected radiation).
Regarding claim 7, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1, wherein the sensor includes only one light source (Kamradt, Para [0042]-[0045], Fig 1, where one infrared emitter 34 emits infrared radiation 36 comprising of infrared rays L4 and L5, which have different infrared wavelengths for thawing ice. When considered with the Lidar module 12 and infrared emitter 18 of Licht, a Lidar sensor emitting two infrared wavelengths for defrosting a window is taught).
Regarding claim 8, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1, wherein the emitted optical signal is configured to have a wavelength between about 1400 nanometers and about 1700 nanometers (Licht, Para [0034] and [0019], Fig 1 and 2, where Lidar module 12 may emit at 1540 nm and infrared emitter 18 may emit especially at 1450 nm to better allow for absorption by water).
Regarding claim 12, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1, further comprising a scanner configured to scan the emitted optical signal across a field of regard of the sensor thereby scanning the emitted optical signal across a region of the window (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where the Lidar module 12 emits radiation to cover a first surface area 6b of the cover disk 6).
Regarding claim 13, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1, wherein the sensor is a lidar system and the emitted optical signal comprises an emitted pulse of light (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where the emitted infrared radiation from the Lidar module 12 is pulsed radiation).
Regarding claim 14, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1, wherein the obscurant comprises water, frost, ice, dew, mist, or fog (Licht, Para [0030], Fig 1, where the emitted infrared radiation from Lidar module 12 and infrared radiation 20 from infrared emitter 18 defrost ice on cover plate 6 via heating up the plate 6, causing condensation 22 indicating that the obscurant is water vapor, hoarfrost, snow, ice, or water droplets).
.
Regarding claim 19, Licht teaches a lidar system comprising (Licht, Para, [0028], Fig 1, where the sensor comprises Lidar module 12 arranged in housing 4 measures a time of flight measurement of the reflection of object 14 from an emission of Lidar module 12 and infrared emitter 18 emitting radiation 20):
(Licht, Para, [0028], Fig 1, where Lidar module 12 comprises a transmitting unit 12a emitting infrared radiation. Additionally infrared emitter 18 emits infrared radiation 20 where the emitted radiation passes through cover disk 6 acting as a window):
reduce an obscurant on the window through optical absorption by the obscurant of at least a portion of the emitted optical signal (Licht, Para [0028]-[0030] with [0006], Fig 1, where the frost of cover plate 6 can be partially defrosted by the infrared light emitted by Lidar module 12 according to Para [0006], and there reducing the obscurant through heat absorption of transmitting unit 12a's infrared radiation); and
scatter from a target located a distance from the system (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where the reflected radiation from object travels along reception path 12d to be received by Lidar module 12 after being reflected by object 14 and therefore scattered from object 14);
a scanner configured to scan the optical signal across a field of regard of the system (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where the Lidar module 12 emits radiation to cover and therefore scan a first surface area 6b of the cover disk 6) ;
a receiver configured to detect a received optical signal, the received optical signal comprising a portion of the emitted optical signal scattered by the target and transmitted through the window (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where the receiving unit 12b receives infrared radiation from transmitting unit 12a after being emitted through cover disk 6 and is reflected from object 14); and
a controller configured to determine a characteristic of the target based on the received optical signal (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where an optical distance measurement is determined via time of flight where distance is the determined characteristic. To obtain said distance measurement from reflected radiation received by Lidar module 12 a controller must be present to read the time of flight of emitted and reflected radiation).
However, Licht does not teach a light source .
On the other hand, Kamradt teaches a single light source that emits light for defrosting a window using multiple wavelengths, rather than multiple emitters at different wavelengths (Kamradt, Para [0042]-[0045], Fig 1, where one infrared emitter 34 emits infrared radiation 36 comprising of infrared rays L4 and L5, which have different infrared wavelengths for thawing ice. When considered with the Lidar module 12 and infrared emitter 18 of Licht, a Lidar sensor emitting two infrared wavelengths for defrosting a window is taught).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the Lidar system of Licht in view of Kamradt, by combining the dual wavelength emitter of Kamradt with the two infrared emitters of Licht to have a more demand oriented and energy efficient single light source (Kamradt, Para [0045]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Licht in view of Kamradt and Straker et al. (DE102016116270A1, "Straker”).
Regarding claim 6, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1.
However, Licht in view of Kamradt does not teach wherein the sensor further comprises a conductive heating mechanism disposed outside a field of regard of the sensor.
On the other hand, Straker teaches a heating mechanism that is internal to the vehicle and therefore not in the field of regard of a sensor (Straker, Para [0023], Fig 1, where the window heating element 103 can be the heating, ventilation and air condition (HVAC) system of the vehicle (which is internal to the vehicle and therefore outside the field of regard) to assist with defrosting the window 105)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the sensor of Licht in view of Kamradt and Straker, by using an HVAC system as a heating element to assist in defrosting a window in cold conditions (Straker, Para [0023]).
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Licht in view of Kamradt and Gatzke (DE102011102804A1, "Gatzke”).
Regarding claim 9, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1.
However, Licht in view of Kamradt does not teach, wherein the controller is further configured to adjust a scan pattern of the sensor to reduce the obscurant on the window.
On the other hand, Gatzke teaches the adjustment of pulse frequency so as not to exceed an energy threshold (Gatzke, Para [0129], Fig 3, where the pulse frequency of de-icing beam 210b can be adjusted so as not to exceed a suitable limit for the energy input).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the sensor of Licht in view of Kamradt and Gatzke, by adjusting the pulse frequency of a de-icing laser beam to balance energy input and significant information captured when scanning (Para [0129]).
Regarding claim 10, Licht in view of Kamradt and Gatzke teaches the sensor of claim 9, wherein adjusting the scan pattern comprises slowing a rate at which the emitted optical signal is scanned in a particular region of the window (Gatzke, Para [0129], Fig 3, where the pulse frequency of de-icing beam 210b can be adjusted and therefore slowed so as not to exceed a suitable limit for the energy input).
Regarding claim 11, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1.
However, Licht in view of Kamradt does not teach wherein the controller is further configured to adjust a peak power, average power, or pulse energy of the emitted optical signal to modify the sensor’s ability to reduce the obscurant on the window.
On the other hand, Gatzke teaches the adjustment of power via pulse frequency so as not to exceed an energy threshold (Gatzke, Para [0129], Fig 3, where the pulse power via the pulse frequency of de-icing beam 210b can be adjusted and therefore slowed so as not to exceed a suitable limit for the energy input).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the sensor of Licht in view of Kamradt and Gatzke, by adjusting power via the pulse frequency of a de-icing laser beam to balance energy input and significant information captured when scanning (Para [0129]).
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Licht in view of Kamradt and Watano et al. (WO2023054078A1, “Watano”)
Regarding claim 15, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1, wherein:
the window is a first window (Licht, Para, [0028], Fig 1, where cover disk 6 serves as a covering to the housing 4 and therefore a first window);
the obscurant is located on the first or the second window (Licht, Para [0028]-[0030] with [0006], Fig 1, where the frost of cover plate 6 can be defrosted on a water based basis in the form of water vapor, hoarfrost, snow, ice, or water).
However, Licht in view of Kamradt does not teach, the emitted optical signal travels through a second window.
On the other hand, Watano teaches a second outer cover functioning as a window with a gap between it and the sensor housing (Watano, Para [0029]-[0032], Fig 1 where sensor unit 20 includes a first window via housing 21 and second window via outer cover 12 where sensor unit 20 may be a Lidar that emits electromagnetic waves through outer cover 12).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the sensor of Licht in view of Kamradt and Watano, by using an outer cover to determine the presence of noise associated with attached material and electromagnetic waves transmitted and received via the outer cover as a second window (Watano Para [0031]-[0032]).
Regarding claim 16, Licht in view of Kamradt and Watano teaches the sensor of claim 15, wherein: the first window is part of a sensor housing; the second window is part of a vehicle; and a gap exists between the first and second windows (Watano, Para [0029]-[0032], Fig 1 where sensor unit 20 includes a first window via housing 21 and second window via outer cover 12 with a gap in between as shown by the figure with housing space 13, where sensor unit 20 may be a Lidar that emits electromagnetic waves through outer cover 12).
Claims 17-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Licht in view of Kamradt and Garza et al. (DE102023200798A1, “Garza”)
Regarding claim 17, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1.
However, Licht in view of Kamradt does not teach wherein the obscurant at least partially prevents the emitted optical signal from reaching the target.
On the other hand, Garza teaches the classification of blockages by a control unit and the quantification for the prevention of measurement for an optical signal by the blockage (Garza, Para [0028]-[0032], Fig 2, where water and ice are classified as blockages that prevent outgoing light, preventing the measurement).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the sensor of Licht in view of Kamradt and Garza by determining that a blockage partially prevents the emission of an optical signal via a system that determines transmission loss, such that a safety-critical real-time system can determine impaired performance (Garza [Para [0029]).
Regarding claim 18, Licht in view of Kamradt teaches the sensor of claim 1.
However, Licht in view of Kamradt does not teach, further comprising an obstruction detection system configured to monitor a status of the obscurant on the window.
On the other hand, Garza teaches the classification of blockages by a control unit and the quantification for the prevention of measurement for an optical signal by the blockage (Garza, Para [0028]-[0032], Fig 2, where the loss of detection range due to the blockage is quantified by control unit 155 to determine whether the Lidar data is trustworthy).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the sensor of Licht in view of Kamradt and Garza by determining that a blockage partially prevents the emission of an optical signal via a system that determines transmission loss, such that a safety-critical real-time system can determine impaired performance (Garza [Para [0029]).
Regarding claim 20, Licht teaches a method comprising:
emitting, by a light source of a sensor, an output signal toward a window (Licht, Para, [0028], Fig 1, where Lidar module 12 comprises a transmitting unit 12a emitting infrared radiation. Additionally infrared emitter 18 emits infrared radiation 20 where the emitted radiation passes through cover disk 6 acting as a window);
reducing, by absorption of the output signal, an obscurant on the window (Licht, Para [0028]-[0030] with [0006], where the frost of cover plate 6 can be partially defrosted by the infrared light emitted by Lidar module 12 according to Para [0006], and there reducing the obscurant through heat absorption of transmitting unit 12a's infrared radiation); and
obtaining information about an environment of the sensor from a received signal (Licht, Para [0028], Fig 1, where an optical distance measurement is determined via time of flight where distance is the determined characteristic. To obtain said distance measurement of object 14 from reflected radiation received by Lidar module 12 a controller must be present to read the time of flight of emitted and reflected radiation).
However, Licht does not teach detecting, by the sensor, an obscurant on the window
On the other hand, Garza teaches the classification of blockages by a control unit and the quantification for the prevention of measurement for an optical signal by the blockage (Garza, Para [0026] and [0028]-[0031], Fig 2, where the loss of detection range due to the blockage is quantified by control unit 155 to determine whether the Lidar data is trustworthy).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the method of Licht in view of Kamradt and Garza by determining that a blockage partially prevents the emission of an optical signal via a system that determines transmission loss, such that a safety-critical real-time system can determine impaired performance (Garza [Para [0029]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAKI HAWKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-6595. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5pm.
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, YUQING XIAO can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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.
/ZAKI KEHINDE HAWKINS/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
