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 § 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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 11, 14, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oguro et al. (US 2016/0202471).
Regarding Claim 1, Oguro discloses an actuator for a scanning mirror (Fig. 1), comprising:
a drive motor (Fig. 1, stepping motor 41, Paragraph 0031) having an output shaft (Fig. 1, rotational shaft 41a, Paragraph 0031) configured to rotate during operation; and
a movement adjustment component (Fig. 1, cam mechanism 42 is connected to the reflector 20 by way of 30, 30a, 30b, 30c, and 30d, Paragraph 0032) comprising a driving member (Fig. 1, shaft 42a, Paragraph 0032) and a driven member (Fig. 1, curved edge of cam mechanism 42, Paragraph 0032), the driving member being connected to the output shaft of the drive motor (Fig. 1, shaft 42a is connected to the output shaft 41a by way of gear 42b, Paragraph 0033) and driven by the output shaft to rotate around an axis of the output shaft (Fig. 1, shaft 42a rotates around the output shaft 41a, as shown in annotated Fig. 1, below), the driven member cooperating with the driving member and being driven by the driving member to perform a reciprocating movement in a first predetermined direction (Fig. 1, curved edge of cam mechanism 42 moves back and forth along the plane of the paper, as shown in annotated Fig. 1, below), and the driven member being configured to be connected to a to-be-driven scanning mirror (Fig. 1, curved edge of cam mechanism 42 is connected to the reflector 20 by way of 30a, 30b, 30c, and 30d, Paragraph 0026), to drive the to-be-driven scanning mirror to perform a reciprocating movement in the first predetermined direction (Fig. 1, reflector 20 moves back and forth along the plane of the paper, as shown in annotated Fig. 1, below).
PNG
media_image1.png
484
420
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Oguro discloses as is set forth above and further discloses wherein the movement adjustment component further comprises an output rod, the output rod having a first end connected to the driven member and a second end directly connected to the to-be-driven scanning mirror (Fig. 1, lever 30b is connected to the reflector holder 30 and the curved edge of cam mechanism 42).
Regarding Claims 4 and 16, Oguro discloses as is set forth above and further discloses wherein the reciprocating movement in the first predetermined direction comprises a swing reciprocating movement within a radius angle, the driven member being a driven swing member (Fig. 1, driven swing member 30, 30b, 30c, and 30d together is the driven swing member, with a radius swing angle as indicated in the annotated Fig. 1, below).
PNG
media_image2.png
484
420
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 5 and 17, Oguro discloses as is set forth above and further discloses wherein the movement adjustment component is a cam structure (Fig. 1, cam mechanism 42, Paragraph 0032) or a four-bar linkage structure.
Regarding Claim 8, Oguro discloses as is set forth above and further discloses wherein the cam structure comprises a cam (Fig. 1, cam mechanism 42) and a driven swing member (Fig. 1, driven swing member 30, 30b, 30c, and 30d) cooperating with the cam, the cam having a rotation shaft coaxially arranged with the output shaft of the drive motor (Fig. 1, 42a and 41a are coaxial), and the driven swing member being configured to drive the to-be-driven scanning mirror to perform a swing reciprocating movement within a radius angle (Fig. 1, driven swing member 30, 30b, 30c, and 30d together is the driven swing member, 30 being connected to reflector 20, with a radius swing angle as indicated in the annotated Fig. 1, above).
Regarding Claim 11, Oguro discloses an optical scanning system, comprising:
an actuator for a scanning mirror (Fig. 1), wherein the actuator for the scanning mirror comprises:
a drive motor (Fig. 1, stepping motor 41, Paragraph 0031) having an output shaft (Fig. 1, rotational shaft 41a, Paragraph 0031) configured to rotate during operation; and
a movement adjustment component (Fig. 1, cam mechanism 42 is connected to the reflector 20 by way of 30, 30a, 30b, 30c, and 30d, Paragraph 0032) comprising a driving member (Fig. 1, shaft 42a, Paragraph 0032) and a driven member (Fig. 1, curved edge of cam mechanism 42, Paragraph 0032), the driving member being connected to the output shaft of the drive motor (Fig. 1, shaft 42a is connected to the output shaft 41a by way of gear 42b, Paragraph 0033) and driven by the output shaft to rotate around an axis of the output shaft (Fig. 1, shaft 42a rotates around the output shaft 41a, as shown in annotated Fig. 1, above), the driven member cooperating with the driving member and driven by the driving member to perform a reciprocating movement in a first predetermined direction (Fig. 1, curved edge of cam mechanism 42 moves back and forth along the plane of the paper, as shown in annotated Fig. 1, above), and a scanning mirror connected to the driven member (Fig. 1, curved edge of cam mechanism 42 is connected to the reflector 20 by way of 30a, 30b, 30c, and 30d, Paragraph 0026).
Regarding Claim 14, Oguro discloses as is set forth above and further discloses wherein the movement adjustment component further comprises an output rod, the output rod having a first end connected to the driven member and a second end directly connected to the scanning mirror (Fig. 1, lever 30b is connected to the reflector holder 30 and the curved edge of cam mechanism 42).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oguro et al. (US 2016/0202471) in view of Konno et al. (US 2011/0141441).
Regarding Claim 12, Oguro discloses as is set forth above but does not specifically disclose wherein: the scanning mirror is arranged on a MEMS; and the actuator for the scanning mirror is configured to drive the MEMS to perform a reciprocating movement in a first predetermined direction, to enable the scanning mirror to perform the reciprocating movement in the first predetermined direction.
However, Konno, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein: the scanning mirror is arranged on a MEMS (Paragraph 0058, reciprocatingly MEMS mirror that is rotated around orthogonal axes); and the actuator (Fig. 2, piezoelectric elements 51, 52, 53, and 54) for the scanning mirror is configured to drive the MEMS to perform a reciprocating movement in a first predetermined direction, to enable the scanning mirror to perform the reciprocating movement in the first predetermined direction (Fig. 2, Paragraph 0058, reciprocatingly MEMS mirror 10 that is rotated around orthogonal axes, a-axis and b-axis), for the purpose of providing a scanning beam for image projection.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the optical scanning system of Oguro with the wherein: the scanning mirror is arranged on a MEMS; and the actuator for the scanning mirror is configured to drive the MEMS to perform a reciprocating movement in a first predetermined direction, to enable the scanning mirror to perform the reciprocating movement in the first predetermined direction, of Konno, for the purpose of providing a scanning beam for image projection.
Regarding Claim 13, Oguro in view of Konno discloses as is set forth above and Konno further discloses wherein the MEMS comprises a drive component (Fig. 2, piezoelectric elements 51, 52, 53, and 54) configured to drive the scanning mirror to perform a reciprocating movement in a second predetermined direction (Fig. 2, Paragraph 0058, reciprocatingly MEMS mirror 10 that is rotated around orthogonal axes, a-axis and b-axis), for the purpose of providing a scanning beam for image projection.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oguro et al. (US 2016/0202471) in view of Hetzl et al. (US 2024/0272281).
Regarding Claim 20, Oguro discloses the optical scanning system according to claim 11 (see rejection of claim 11 over Oguro as above) but does not specifically disclose a LiDAR system, comprising: a light source; a photodetector; a processor; and wherein: a laser beam emitted by the light source is reflected to a target region by the optical scanning system; the photodetector is configured to receive at least part of reflected light from the target region and convert the at least part of the reflected light into an electrical signal; and the processor is configured to obtain a laser point cloud from the target region based on the electrical signal.
However, Hetzl, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a LiDAR system, comprising: a light source (Fig. 1, laser 10); a photodetector (Fig. 1, optical sensors 31 and 32); a processor (Fig. 1, measurement circuit 35); and wherein: a laser beam emitted by the light source is reflected to a target region (Fig. 1, distant object (tree) Paragraph 0042) by the optical scanning system (Fig. 1, scanning mirror 13); the photodetector (Fig. 1, optical sensors 31 and 32) is configured to receive at least part of reflected light from the target region and convert the at least part of the reflected light into an electrical signal (Fig. 1, measurement circuit 35); and the processor is configured to obtain a laser point cloud from the target region based on the electrical signal (Fig. 1, abstract), for the purpose of measuring the distance to a target object.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have the optical scanning system of Oguro with a LiDAR system, comprising: a light source; a photodetector; a processor; and wherein: a laser beam emitted by the light source is reflected to a target region by the optical scanning system; the photodetector is configured to receive at least part of reflected light from the target region and convert the at least part of the reflected light into an electrical signal; and the processor is configured to obtain a laser point cloud from the target region based on the electrical signal, of Hetzl, for the purpose of measuring the distance to a target object.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 6-7, 9, 10, 15, and 18-19 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: with respect to the allowable subject matter, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach of the claimed combination of limitations to warrant a rejection under 35 USC 102 or 103.
Specifically, with respect to claims 3 and 15, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach an(a) actuator/system including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein the reciprocating movement in the first predetermined direction comprises a rectilinear reciprocating movement along a straight segment, the driven member being a driven rectilinear movement member.
Specifically, with respect to claim 6, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach an actuator including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein the cam structure comprises a cam and a driven rectilinear movement member cooperating with the cam, the cam having a rotation shaft coaxially arranged with the output shaft of the drive motor, and the driven rectilinear movement member being configured to drive the to-be-driven scanning mirror to perform a rectilinear reciprocating movement along a straight segment.
Specifically, with respect to claim 9, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach an actuator including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein the four-bar linkage structure comprises a crank, a rocker, and a movement connection rod, wherein: the crank has a rotation shaft coaxially arranged with the output shaft of the drive motor; the movement connection rod has a first end connected to a circumferential movement end of the crank and a second end connected to a swing end of the rocker; the rotation shaft of the crank is fixed to a fixed end of the rocker; and the rocker is configured to drive the to-be-driven scanning mirror to perform a swing reciprocating movement within a radius angle.
Specifically, with respect to claim 10, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach an actuator including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein the four-bar linkage structure comprises a crank, a movement connection rod, a slider, and a fixed rod, wherein: the crank has a rotation shaft coaxially arranged with the output shaft of the drive motor; the movement connection rod has a first end connected to a circumferential movement end of the crank and a second end connected to the slider; and the slider is sleeved on the fixed rod, and the slider is configured to drive the to-be-driven scanning mirror to perform a rectilinear reciprocating movement along a straight segment.
Specifically, with respect to claim 18, none of the prior art either alone or in combination disclose or teach a system including, as the distinguishing feature(s) in combination with the other limitations, wherein the cam structure comprises a cam and a driven rectilinear movement member cooperating with the cam, the cam having a rotation shaft coaxially arranged with the output shaft of the drive motor, and the driven rectilinear movement member being configured to drive the scanning mirror to perform the reciprocating movement along a straight segment.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sachkov (US 2022/0196809), Takahashi et al. (US 2024/0022154), Fujishima et al. (US 2022/0397677), Kitamura et al. (US 2023/0096114), and Masamoto et al. (US 2024/0019684), are cited to show similar actuators, light scanners, and LiDAR systems but do not meet the claim limitations detailed in the allowable subject matter above.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM R ALEXANDER whose telephone number is (571)270-7656. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM- 4:00 PM.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached on (571) 270-1284. 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.
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights